Sweden Allows Public Masturbation

[douglas]

No offense, but don't people have better things to do than judge some dude for wanking? We have serial killers, baby rapers, and bank robbers, and yet we're giving even half a speck of attention at a public masturbator? "Bigger fish to fry"

Oh, and what about the children?! How about you don't leave your children at the beach unattended. Problem solved.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Yeah, wait till you get home wankers.

Stuff like this is always hilarious, due to the fact you're going to have some right wing idiot raving about the ills of socialism, and some left wing turd trying to tie this to human rights

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

In other news: Sweden included semen in its public urination policy and upped the punishment dramatically.

So you can masturbate in public, just not climax?

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Well, I'm glad it was decided that beating off in public didn't rise to the level of assault. Here, he would've spent a few years in prison and then the rest of his natural life on the sex offender registry, which is also over the top.

depending on the context, I can't say the sex offender registry would be a bad thing.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Oh, and what about the children?! How about you don't leave your children at the beach unattended. Problem solved.

So it's ok if he masturbates in front of children and their parents?

 

[Fiddytree]

So you can masturbate in public, just not climax?

'Twas not meant to be serious.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

depending on the context, I can't say the sex offender registry would be a bad thing.

I don't think that public urinaters and public masturbators should end up on the same list as rapists and child molesters. I don't think we should have lists or registries for anyone except those who represent a danger to the public.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

I don't think that public urinaters and public masturbators should end up on the same list as rapists and child molesters.

Someone pissing in public is drastically different than some guy masturbating in public

I don't think we should have lists or registries for anyone except those who represent a danger to the public.

Well, if some guy is going around intentionally masturbating in front of children I think it's safe to call that person "a danger" to them

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

Someone pissing in public is drastically different than some guy masturbating in public

Both will get you on the sex offense registry.

Well, if some guy is going around intentionally masturbating in front of children I think it's safe to call that person "a danger" to them

I wouldn't want some dude wanking in front of my kids, but I refuse to have the alarmist reaction that I'm sure I'm supposed to have.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Both will get you on the sex offense registry.

And?

I wouldn't want some dude wanking in front of my kids, but I refuse to have the alarmist reaction that I'm sure I'm supposed to have.

ok, but I fail to see how they serves to address my point about harm and harm being your standard for registration

 

[ChrisL]

Both will get you on the sex offense registry.



I wouldn't want some dude wanking in front of my kids, but I refuse to have the alarmist reaction that I'm sure I'm supposed to have.

What if some guy drove up to your daughter and masturbated in front of her?

FYI, in the psych wards, they would refer to it as "sexually inappropriate behavior."

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

And?

And I don't think public urination should land you on the same list as rapists and molesters. I don't think it should land you on a list at all.

ok, but I fail to see how they serves to address my point about harm and harm being your standard for registration

It's inappropriate, but I don't see where it represents a danger to the public -- which was actually my standard for registration, not harm.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

What if some guy drove up to your daughter and masturbated in front of her?

FYI, in the psych wards, they would refer to it as "sexually inappropriate behavior."

See previous post.

 

[douglas]

So it's ok if he masturbates in front of children and their parents?

It's a parents responsibility to shield children from experiences such as these. It's like watching a tv show with sex and violence; is it the shows fault that your kid sees it, or your fault for letting your kid see it? If this guy was going around flashing kids, he should be put away, but it sounds like he was wanking in a corner and got caught; it's not right, but I blame people for watching more than I do him for wanking.

Maybe it's different because I live by the beach. I see people screwing on the beach almost every time I go, and it's littered with condoms. This isn't a big surprise to any except the most naive beach goers. This happens every day on every beach; I really think people are over-exaggerating the damage.

The court found him innocent of specifically assaulting others, which is the only issue I'd have with public masturbation; If you could prove that there is a reasonable expectation that children are shielded and adults can freely leave, I see no problem with public masturbation. All the same arguments apply to nudist beaches, and I don't have a problem with them, either.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

And I don't think public urination should land you on the same list as rapists and molesters.

I don't recall saying they should. What I did was point out how your equivocation of the two was misguided. So as I wrote perviously: "and?"

It's inappropriate, but I don't see where it represents a danger to the public -- which was actually my standard for registration, not harm.

1) Causing harm would be representing a danger ...

2) maybe I am wrong here, but a stranger purposely exposing himself to children, and then committing self-gratifying sexual acts, seems like it would be harmful to them

 

[ChrisL]

See previous post.

It's a parents responsibility to shield children from experiences such as these. It's like watching a tv show with sex and violence; is it the shows fault that your kid sees it, or your fault for letting your kid see it? If this guy was going around flashing kids, he should be put away, but it sounds like he was wanking in a corner and got caught; it's not right, but I blame people for watching more than I do him for wanking.

Maybe it's different because I live by the beach. I see people screwing on the beach almost every time I go, and it's littered with condoms. This isn't a big surprise to any except the most naive beach goers. This happens every day on every beach; I really think people are over-exaggerating the damage.

The court found him innocent of specifically assaulting others, which is the only issue I'd have with public masturbation; If you could prove that there is a reasonable expectation that children are shielded and adults can freely leave, I see no problem with public masturbation. All the same arguments apply to nudist beaches, and I don't have a problem with them, either.

Totally depends on the situation though. I think that men who approach children and do this maybe should be put on a list. What if your 12-year-old daughter is walking home from school with her friend and some guy approaches them in his car and starts whacking it in front them and smiling at them? (true story) Then how would you feel? It might not be a big deal to you, but crap like that scares little girls.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

It's a parents responsibility to shield children from experiences such as these. It's like watching a tv show with sex and violence; is it the shows fault that your kid sees it, or your fault for letting your kid see it?

A shared public setting is not the same as a tv channel I can simply turn off or not turn on to begin with

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

I don't recall saying they should. What I did was point out how your equivocation of the two was misguided. So as I wrote perviously: "and?"

They both land you on the registry and I don't think either of them should. Ergo I linked them together.

1) Causing harm would be representing a danger ...

2) maybe I am wrong here, but a stranger purposely exposing himself to children, and then committing self-gratifying sexual acts, seems like it would be harmful to them

It depends on the circumstances. If you isolate a child or back them into a corner, that's one thing. If you're just doing it in public, it's something totally different.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

Totally depends on the situation though. I think that men who approach children and do this maybe should be put on a list. What if your 12-year-old daughter is walking home from school with her friend and some guy approaches them in his car and starts whacking it in front them and smiling at them? (true story) Then how would you feel? It might not be a big deal to you, but crap like that scares little girls.

Personally, I think children (little girls especially) should be trained in martial arts so that when someone makes them feel unsafe they can beat said someone within an inch of their lives.

At any rate, I think it's disgusting but I don't think it represents a threat to the public sufficient to warrant inclusion in a public registry.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

They both land you on the registry and I don't think either of them should. Ergo I linked them together.

Dan, I just pointed out how your equivocation between the two was faulty. Your response to that was to imply I supported registering people for pissing in public.


basically, you're not making much sense. hence, the "and?"

It depends on the circumstances.

Oh, so you mean "context"? Funny that, because it's exactly what I said in the beginning and what caused you to go into the pointlessly unrelated tangent about public urination ...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/sex-a...ows-public-masturbation-4.html#post1062342887

If you isolate a child or back them into a corner, that's one thing. If you're just doing it in public, it's something totally different.

No, I think it's safe to say intentionally exposing yourself, in such a manner, would be intentionally causing them harm and considered "dangerous"

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Personally, I think children (little girls especially) should be trained in martial arts so that when someone makes them feel unsafe they can beat said someone within an inch of their lives.

Dan, are you intentionally trolling this thread?

 

[douglas]

Totally depends on the situation though. I think that men who approach children and do this maybe should be put on a list. What if your 12-year-old daughter is walking home from school with her friend and some guy approaches them in his car and starts whacking it in front them and smiling at them? (true story) Then how would you feel? It might not be a big deal to you, but crap like that scares little girls.

It would bother the hell out of me, and I'd do my best to get him put behind bars. The difference is the intention and setting involved; someone who isn't trying to wank in front of kids shouldn't be judged as if they were. I consider this no different to someone going around and flashing their junk at people on the street; it's wrong and should be punished. But, I have nothing against nudist beaches, where that's exactly what they're doing. The difference is intention and setting. A nudist isn't intending to harm others and is in a setting that is reasonably shielded from children.

A shared public setting is not the same as a tv channel I can simply turn off or not turn on to begin with

But it is, as long as nobody is forced to be there. If you don't like a parade going down your street, you go home; you don't spend all your effort trying to ban the parade for offending you. For adults, life is very much like a tv channel; if you don't like it, you can change it.

It's different when children are involved, because they don't know how to moderate their experiences or to leave when it's inappropriate. Setting matters, which is why we have legal nudist beaches; you can have a public setting, but a reasonable expectation that children aren't present. On any given beach, this is somewhat more ambiguous, but that's why we also need to rely on parents to control the setting on their end, by controlling their children. If children saw this guy, I'd blame the parents about the same as I'd blame the wanker.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

Dan, I just pointed out how your equivocation between the two was faulty. Your response to that was to imply I supported registering people for pissing in public.

basically, you're not making much sense. hence, the "and?"

Oh, then let me clarify. I don't think you support registering public urinators, I have no idea how you feel about public urination. They're linked together in my mind because they both get you on the list and I don't think either them should.

Oh, so you mean "context"? Funny that, because it's exactly what I said in the beginning and what caused you to go into the pointlessly unrelated tangent about public urination ...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/sex-a...ows-public-masturbation-4.html#post1062342887




No, I think it's safe to say intentionally exposing yourself, in such a manner, would be intentionally causing them harm and considered "dangerous"

I'm a pretty specific guy, and I'm having trouble understanding the specifics of your position. So. Let's say a dude is hanging out at the beach and he whips it out and rubs one out, and children happen to be nearby. Is that dangerous or no?

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

Dan, are you intentionally trolling this thread?

No, I'm not.

 

[CRUE CAB]

Calling masturbation assault is over the top which is why he was acquited. They should have charged him with public indecency.

Oh, do it around my kid. And there will be an assault.