Naked bike ride

[Chocbuttonsandredwine]

Was in London yesterday: naked bike ride. Fine.. not my thing (or many other women). They finished the ride/protest/whatvever and then conjugated near B palace.. and just seemed to be happy wafting their micro penis’s about for kicks and giggles/

A lot of horrid middle aged naked men kicking about just felt unnecessary.

and 🤮

Bit lazy, do you have evidence that it's wrong?

So men's 'right' to be needlessly naked in front of women and children is more important? That's a dangerous concept isn't it? Should we just stay indoors in case a man decides to exercise his democratic right to be naked in public?

They could always protest without being naked. The nudity is irrelevant to their cause. So one can only infer that it's gratuitous and serves some other purpose.

@DoctorRoseReturns are you a naturist because this is the 2nd thread I've seen you defending mans rights to have their penis out?

I'm not pearl clutching, I just see you are very pro penis out.

Table 2 on the spreadsheet here shows that the latest MoJ data records 91% of people prosecuted for sex offences are men. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/datasets/sexualoffendingministryofjusticeappendixtables

Where's your evidence that SA committed by women is less likely to be reported?

No, you have to prove intent to cause alarm or distress.

Cross posted

No

What about the rights of the women taking part in the bike ride?

I don't think anyone has a 'right' to be naked in front of people who don't want them to be.

But given that it's been established that sexual offences are predominantly committed by men - male public nudity carries additional connotations that female pubic nudity does not.

We were standing on the bus stop, couple of m from them, my 11yo daughter didn't particularly enjoy it either. And yes, majority of naked ones (some people were wearing clothes) were middle aged men.

You appear to be putting words in my mouth.

This isn’t about ‘tarring all men with the pervert brush’, it’s about whether you think women and children (and other men come to think about it) should have a right to go about their day and not be faced with some blokes penis?

Do you think that men should have the right to get their penis out in public and that should negate the right of everyone else, like women and children not to have to encounter naked penises as they go about their day?

How do we guarantee that these men are not doing it for sexual gratification? (Lack of erection is not proof)

Indeed.

Naked bike rides don't bother me in the least, although I was a bit pissed off when I went into Brighton shopping one weekend and got caught in horrendous traffic because I hadn't known it was on. Approx a third of the riders I saw were female, so it's not just a male thing, and I would have said that the average age was in the 30s, so not old men as some upthread have suggested.

I'm quite surprised by the outrage at nudity on here generally. I wonder if it's a generational thing? My generation were teens in the 60s, when attitudes to nudity were far more relaxed.

I’m confused as to the point you’re making.

Is it a) it’s an obvious matter of public decency that all men should be required to cover their penis in public which negates the need to justify it on a ‘penises can cause harm’ basis? Or
b) the fact that penises can cause harm is absolutely not a justification to require men to cover them because hands can also cause harm and we don’t require men to wear gloves?
Or c) the MRA approach which says that men should be allowed to do whatever they want all the time and women have no right to not be exposed to naked penises in public?

or have I misunderstand you completely and you’ve got a different point entirely?

Ah right. I should've googled before commenting. I agree with the environmental issue but having seen the way cyclists treat pedestrians with such contempt in Bristol, they haven't got much to shout about.

"My generation were teens in the 60s, when attitudes to nudity were far more relaxed."

Not to derail the thread but the timing of the introduction of readily available birth control and the erosion of boundaries around nudity and bodily privacy is not coincidental.

I can’t see where I’ve put words in your mouth but never mind.

I believe we should all have the right to go about our lawful lives without threat or hindrance.

I don’t understand why you say about men getting their penises ‘out’. These men aren’t riding around with shorts or trousers on but with their penises hanging out of their flies. They just don’t happen to have any clothes on. Their penises aren’t ‘out’ they’re, just there, attached to the rest of their naked bodies.

They have a right to go about their lawful lives without clothes on. Our laws state this.

As long as they aren’t indulging in overtly sexual gratification why does it matter ? Do you think there aren’t any women who ‘get the hots’ for men while looking at them ? What are you going to do about that ?

Government stats show 98% of assaults are committed by men.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/natureofsexualassaultbyrapeorpenetrationenglandandwales/yearendingmarch2020

"As long as they aren’t indulging in overtly sexual gratification why does it matter ?"

The problem is how would you ever know?

The law as it stands needs to be changed. Currently it leaves a massive loophole for those with a humiliation or exhibitionism fetish to get sexual gratification by exposing themselves to non-consenting bystanders.

As a SA survivor myself, I find the idea as abhorrent as all the posters on this thread tying themselves in knots defending men's 'right' to be naked in front of women and children any time, any where.

How come you can't go to the leisure centre and be naked but you are allowed to cycle around the streets naked. Serious question.

Where is it stated that we have the right not to see a penis?

"the right of everyone else, like women and children not to have to encounter naked penises as they go about their day?"

Is there any right to not see things we don't want to see? We all have the ability to look away, turn away, and mostly we can go somewhere else.

I don't think any such right exists.

Because if it’s overt it will be seen. I repeat what I said about women ‘getting the hots’ for men, is that an issue ?

It’s not just men who have the right to nudity, women do too; do you want to take that away ?

That's a choice of the business in question, not a law.

Just as a club or pub could have a requirement that you don't wear trainers/shorts/hoodies.

Oh, that makes sense.

So most businesses know that most people like other people to cover their bits up.

I'd call a naked man on a bike 'overt'.

I don't understand what you mean by women 'getting the hots' for men. It's one thing to see someone you fancy, fully clothed on the tube. But anyone, man or woman, who gets a sexual thrill from being naked around non-participating people is a boundary-violating creep. End of.

If you are going to quote stats then you need to be able to provide the evidence for them...