Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

First 'cyberflasher' convicted under UK's new law, gets more than 5 years prison

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 56 posts

Re: First 'cyberflasher' convicted under UK's new law, gets more than 5 years prison

#41

Post by defrost »

DontchaKnowit wrote: post #33
userbinator wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

sends a child pictures with the intent of forcing them to think about him sexually That's entirely the result of a cultural construct. about why your first instinct is to defend the guy Trying to turn this into an "us vs. them" situation? I was just pointing out the huge cultural differences that exist in the world beyond Western puritanism.

So you think sending dick pics to a 15 year old is chill in other cultures? I'll keep my western puritanism, thanks.

> So you think sending dick pics to a 15 year old is chill in other cultures?

Not what they said.

The suggestion was that they'd laugh, make a joke about stupid men, tell them to put their dick away.

The most probable response to a real life flasher in this part of the world would be a little finger wiggle and the expression "ahh, winyarn" with a lot of mocking laughter.

Needless to say, not very many actual flashers .. but you can see plenty of near and fully naked men (and women) briefly changing in and out of wetsuits down the car park at the beach. There's more on show at the various nudist beaches.

You keep your puritanism by all means, it's no skin off my western nose.

Re: First 'cyberflasher' convicted under UK's new law, gets more than 5 years prison

#42

Post by krisoft »

throwaway74432 wrote: post #38
krisoft wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> sending a photo of a steak to a vegan would get you 5 years in prison? Two issues. The question is what was your intent. Proving that it was sent with the intent of causing distress or anxiety is much harder in that case. For example I don’t know a single vegan who would react with distress or anxiety to the image of a steak. That is just nonsense. They would just say “yuck”. But if from the circumstances it is cle…

Why do you want the option to have someone arrested for offending you?

Offending someone and intentionaly causing anxiety and distress is not the same thing. I don’t know why you are mixing the two together. I hope it is not because you are not arguing from good faith.

Telling a chess player that chess is a silly game with a hodge-podge of rules crudely kludged together can be described as offending. It is a bit crass but to each their own.

The kind of communication I want people to be arrested for is way beyond that level which I would describe as “offending”.

But assuming you are asking in good faith: Why do I want people arrested for intentionally sending distressing pictures? Same reason I want anyone arrested for punching someone in the face. Because I think that behaviour should not be tolerated in civilised society and I want it to happen less often.

Re: First 'cyberflasher' convicted under UK's new law, gets more than 5 years prison

#43

Post by darreninthenet »

krisoft wrote: post #42
throwaway74432 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you want the option to have someone arrested for offending you?

Offending someone and intentionaly causing anxiety and distress is not the same thing. I don’t know why you are mixing the two together. I hope it is not because you are not arguing from good faith. Telling a chess player that chess is a silly game with a hodge-podge of rules crudely kludged together can be described as offending. It is a bit crass but to each their own. The kind of communication I want people to be…

Thank you for bothering to get into that with them so I didn't have to respond to that absurdity ... ironically I think they are just trying to be offended for the sake of it, I'm surprised they didn't have a pop at the UK knife laws whilst they were posting

Re: First 'cyberflasher' convicted under UK's new law, gets more than 5 years prison

#44

Post by krisoft »

defrost wrote: post #41
DontchaKnowit wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you think sending dick pics to a 15 year old is chill in other cultures? I'll keep my western puritanism, thanks.

> So you think sending dick pics to a 15 year old is chill in other cultures? Not what they said. The suggestion was that they'd laugh, make a joke about stupid men, tell them to put their dick away. The most probable response to a real life flasher in this part of the world would be a little finger wiggle and the expression "ahh, winyarn" with a lot of mocking laughter. Needless to say, not very many actual flashers…

I’m very curious if you have heard about the murder of Sarah Everard. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Sarah_Everard

Her murderer, Wayne Couzens, had on multiple occasions “flashed” various women before kidnapping and murdering her. These prior offenses were reported to the police but the police failed to investigate them properly. If they would have they would have recognised the escalating trend in his behaviour and perhaps could have prevented her death.

While I’m not saying that every flasher will “graduate” to become a murderer, this is the context this crime is viewed today in the UK.

In some purely academic sense you are right. What displaying any body part means is culturaly coded. It could mean anything. But in the context of the relevant culture sending someone a dick-pick like this is clearly about power, and forcing one’s self on someone against their will.

Re: First 'cyberflasher' convicted under UK's new law, gets more than 5 years prison

#45

Post by defrost »

krisoft wrote: post #44
defrost wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So you think sending dick pics to a 15 year old is chill in other cultures? Not what they said. The suggestion was that they'd laugh, make a joke about stupid men, tell them to put their dick away. The most probable response to a real life flasher in this part of the world would be a little finger wiggle and the expression "ahh, winyarn" with a lot of mocking laughter. Needless to say, not very many actual flashers…

I’m very curious if you have heard about the murder of Sarah Everard. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Sarah_Everard Her murderer, Wayne Couzens, had on multiple occasions “flashed” various women before kidnapping and murdering her. These prior offenses were reported to the police but the police failed to investigate them properly. If they would have they would have recognised the escalating trend in his beh…

No, I haven't.

In the context of a thread branch stemming from: "huge cultural differences that exist in the world" it's not clear how the evolution of a London flasher to murderer relates to sub tropical girls laughing off idiots that walk about with their dicks out.

Given specific cultural attitudes in the UK, in Saudi Arabia, in India, one could posit several different behaviours that might be expressed and evolve from fetish to committing murder.

The interesting question is how this occurs and what attitudes might prevent this.

Re: First 'cyberflasher' convicted under UK's new law, gets more than 5 years prison

#46

Post by throwaway74432 »

krisoft wrote: post #42
throwaway74432 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you want the option to have someone arrested for offending you?

Offending someone and intentionaly causing anxiety and distress is not the same thing. I don’t know why you are mixing the two together. I hope it is not because you are not arguing from good faith. Telling a chess player that chess is a silly game with a hodge-podge of rules crudely kludged together can be described as offending. It is a bit crass but to each their own. The kind of communication I want people to be…

Is showing pictures of civilian casualties who have died gruesome deaths (think: genocide), with intent to distress citizens into changing their political support, arrest worthy, or is it speech that should be protected?

Re: First 'cyberflasher' convicted under UK's new law, gets more than 5 years prison

#47

Post by [deleted] »

userbinator wrote: post #30
acdha wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Normal human anatomy” is what you say if someone’s swimsuit slips in the surf, not when a sex offender sends a child pictures with the intent of forcing them to think about him sexually. The difference is intent: he knew it was unwelcome, and he didn’t care about that lack of consent. Now might be a really good time to think about why your first instinct is to defend the guy committing mid-level sexual assault rathe…

sends a child pictures with the intent of forcing them to think about him sexually That's entirely the result of a cultural construct. about why your first instinct is to defend the guy Trying to turn this into an "us vs. them" situation? I was just pointing out the huge cultural differences that exist in the world beyond Western puritanism.

[deleted]

Re: First 'cyberflasher' convicted under UK's new law, gets more than 5 years prison

#48

Post by acdha »

defrost wrote: post #45
krisoft wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m very curious if you have heard about the murder of Sarah Everard. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Sarah_Everard Her murderer, Wayne Couzens, had on multiple occasions “flashed” various women before kidnapping and murdering her. These prior offenses were reported to the police but the police failed to investigate them properly. If they would have they would have recognised the escalating trend in his beh…

No, I haven't. In the context of a thread branch stemming from: "huge cultural differences that exist in the world" it's not clear how the evolution of a London flasher to murderer relates to sub tropical girls laughing off idiots that walk about with their dicks out. Given specific cultural attitudes in the UK, in Saudi Arabia, in India, one could posit several different behaviours that might be expressed and evolve…

Part of the problem with the cultural differences claim is that it’s only mentioned enough to function as an excuse. Even a single culture mentioned specifically would allow people to evaluate things like whether that culture has rules about unwanted attention, or whether it’s generally considered desirable. For example, the traditional Hawaiian culture certainly had a very different attitude about nudity but they also focused their sexuality on mutual pleasure, not to mention having an absolute monarchy with the death penalty for things like women eating pork - cross-cultural comparisons are always a mixed bag like that.

Re: First 'cyberflasher' convicted under UK's new law, gets more than 5 years prison

#49

Post by defrost »

acdha wrote: post #48
defrost wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I haven't. In the context of a thread branch stemming from: "huge cultural differences that exist in the world" it's not clear how the evolution of a London flasher to murderer relates to sub tropical girls laughing off idiots that walk about with their dicks out. Given specific cultural attitudes in the UK, in Saudi Arabia, in India, one could posit several different behaviours that might be expressed and evolve…

Part of the problem with the cultural differences claim is that it’s only mentioned enough to function as an excuse. Even a single culture mentioned specifically would allow people to evaluate things like whether that culture has rules about unwanted attention, or whether it’s generally considered desirable. For example, the traditional Hawaiian culture certainly had a very different attitude about nudity but they al…

The essential part of this particular cultural differences claim is that several cultures aren't intrinsically offended by "dick pics" - this results in a different reaction to flashers and people sending dick pics, near zero reaction based purely on the genital nudity aspect, almost entirely on whether it's welcome or not.

The other cultural aspect that results is incident of bothers; the UK has a much higher incidence of dirty mac flashers than either Australia or Papua New Guinea.

> Even a single culture mentioned specifically

I've just mentioned two and I heavily hinted at one of these in prior comments in a manner that many would have easily read in.

Australia has a strong beach | rural culture; few that surf or work the land would be shocked by a penis, having seen dogs, horses, bulls, and humans (getting changed outdoors) since before they could walk - the very few people that might try flashing or masterbating in public get pretty rapidly told to jog on and bugger off without causing much in the way of distress or embarrassment to their intended "victims".

PNG, of course, still has cultural groups sporting the Koteka .. why on earth would they be sending pictures of a nude, bare, undecorated penis when it's been all about the penis bling for generations?

Re: First 'cyberflasher' convicted under UK's new law, gets more than 5 years prison

#50

Post by acdha »

defrost wrote: post #49
acdha wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of the problem with the cultural differences claim is that it’s only mentioned enough to function as an excuse. Even a single culture mentioned specifically would allow people to evaluate things like whether that culture has rules about unwanted attention, or whether it’s generally considered desirable. For example, the traditional Hawaiian culture certainly had a very different attitude about nudity but they al…

The essential part of this particular cultural differences claim is that several cultures aren't intrinsically offended by "dick pics" - this results in a different reaction to flashers and people sending dick pics, near zero reaction based purely on the genital nudity aspect, almost entirely on whether it's welcome or not. The other cultural aspect that results is incident of bothers; the UK has a much higher incide…

Can you provide specific examples of cultures where targeted dick pics are shrugged off and nobody cares? That’s distinct from general nudity because it’s sexually focused and targets someone who is not a willing participant.

For example, despite your comments about Australia having tolerance for beach conditions (which as a north Southern Californian I approve of), it’s not like “laugh it off” is the government’s official position:

https://www.esafety.gov.au/young-people/receiving-unwanted-n...

I’m not sure PNG is a great example (https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/05/1117642) but a quick search confirms that their 2016 “cybercrime” law covers both harassment and child grooming so it again appears that people recognize the distinction between traditional culture and targeted harassment like the case in question.

Post reply on HN