- cross-posted to:
- europe@feddit.org
- cross-posted to:
- europe@feddit.org
You must log in or # to comment.
People ITT not getting that women might be fine with the risk of some people they might already know seeing whats beneath their skirts for a moment during a pretty fast amusement ride, but wouldnt consent to getting filmed during this and uploaded to the internet for creeps to watch and nudify.
Oh brother that’s getting ridiculous if a woman is doing something that makes her skirt fly up and does not want her undies (or worse, trying to be considerate to other cultures and situations) shown she should wear pants underneath, that should be obvious or is obvious. no offense to any women or anyone intended.
Maybe read the article. Its about men trying to film under womens skirts/dresses, uploading it for other men to goon and also using AI to alter the videos for further sexualization like removing clothing. Nobody deserves this, no matter how one dresses. The other reply is correct. This is victim blaming.
Did you read the article because it seems like you didn’t and how am I victim blaming I am calling out something that is common sense for the situation.
The issue is recording someone without consent and posting it on the internet for profit, not what the women are wearing. You saying they should have worn something else is blaming the victim for the act of the person that did the actual thing that is wrong. Again, classic victim blaming. And before you say “They should have known that is what the ride does,” yes, hopefully they knew that and consented to riding it with that information. That is still not consent to be recorded without their knowledge and have it be posted on the internet.
Wow, classic victim blaming. How embarrassing for you
How would I be victim blaming im just calling out something that is obvious for the situation.
Because they did not do the thing that is wrong. The person who filmed them did. Blame that person for doing the harm, not the people who did nothing wrong. Saying they should be wearing shorts takes the focus off the perpetrator and puts the burden on the victim. Hence, victim blaming
Yeah because walking around in public women should always expect men to stick cameras under their skirts, right. I mean, some cultures don’t even allow or at least discourage women wearing pants. What are those women supposed to do? I guess just being a woman in public means you should expect sexual assault, right? Stay at home if you don’t want men to film up your skirt, right?
You do realize in some cultures or at least in the 1800s and before women did not wear any underwear or wore something that was like a pathetic excuse for underwear, right. And it seems like you didn’t read the story being talked about here at all.
I think you are the one who didn’t read the article. The ride was only mentioned in the beginning as the thing that started the cycling shorts use trend.
It goes on to describe how widespread the practice of upskirting is at Oktoberfest in general, and how many workers are having to wear them to avoid being filmed and how patrons are concerned the law doesn’t protect sharing film of the wind picking up a skirt and briefly revealing something.
And you got my point exactly. Why are we blamed for people taking upskirt pictures of our underwear or bare bottoms. Just because our skirt wasn’t down to our ankles and so tight around our legs we could barely walk or we wore sexy underwear, doesn’t mean we were to blame for tempting them as is often the excuse in cultures that don’t strictly criminalize and enforce punishment of the practice.
I agree it seems like common sense. Going on a ride that makes your skirt fly up is an informed decision. There are days when my SO goes out in a dress and she puts short shorts underneath just in case. You never know when there might be a rogue breeze. That’s just common sense.
I agree that personal protection measures must always be the last line of defense, but this feels like the sensible measure. What other thing do you want to do to alleviate this?
You literally sit on a spinning wheel. Your legs are going to point to the spectators at some point. Short of prohibiting pantless people there is nothing that can be done except prohibiting this now apparently well known attraction. And it seems like a harmless fun that’s maybe a bit lewd. Also recordings would be a secondary concern here, no?
Should you be forced to wear something underneath is a legitimate question too, so some scot doesn’t flash “innocent” bavarians. ;)
How is non-consenual recordings that are being used on the internet for profit, again without consent, a secondary concern?
I would be more concerned with the onlookers at first. Someone filming seems like an uncomfortable afterthought. Let’s be honest though: this thing is build to enable this and does advertise this lewdness. Bavarians are weird.
There is a difference to consenting to the ride and consenting to be recorded and those videos being sold. Like a huge difference.
Yes
That is literally what the article is about and is not a secondary concern. The people on the ride consented to that. They may not even have thought videos of them doing it would end up on the internet.
I feel like they try to frame this ride offering pants to protect from onlookers somewhat unrelated to up skirting. I guess both are enabled by ubiquity of smart phones, but one angle is expected and one isn’t.
The current law by the way:
