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 🤮

Because men commit 96% of all sexual assaults? Also 100% of all rapes.

Perhaps one year they will change from riding a bike to walking instead. A walking naked protest!

Interesting that you say your child is gender non conforming and yet apparently misgender them...

Last time I looked, most people felt it entirely possible to protest an issue either their clothes on. If it’s a protest about being able to take their clothes off in more places in public, that is not a good thing.

I don’t have a problem with the ride as a special event but the fact that people are in nudist “clubs” like it’s part of their identity is just sleazy and suspicious. It’s like if someone was in a club about pooping or a showering club or something. Natural activities but you don’t start clubs about them.

They do, but linking this to male participants in long-established cycle parade is like trying to prove that male naturists are more likely to commit sex offences. Which is far as I know isn’t true.

Can you explain further? How does a girl liking non girly things mean she is anything other than a girl who likes non girly things?

Where does ‘misgendering’ fit into this? Are you saying that if she doesn’t like stereotypical feminine things she can’t be a girl? Or a daughter?

Does anyone know, for definite, wtf they’re protesting against? Because so far on this thread we’ve had about 5 different causes

Entirely possible their manifesto is indeed those 5 things, but the fact that it’s not clear and concise just further leads me to believe it’s a weird jolly where people can gratuitously get their bits out and maybe somewhere more appropriate for that would be a nudist beach.

Sorry, confused, are you saying men at this event are committing sexual assaults ?

Men who commit sexual assaults try not to show their faces.

I was asked why I singled out the men with regard to their intentions. So I answered the question with some relevant statistics. I have not accused this group of male naturists of anything.

That last sentence is just not true to say.

1. it’s absolutist
2. when my friends have been sexually assaulted, and me included, oh I’ve seen their face. I’ve even known one who did it to me.

Are you suggesting that the absence of an obvious erection or masturbating in the moment means that a man’s intentions are totally non sexual? Are you confident that no man at this event had an erection at any point?

No I was explaining indecent exposure, which this event clearly wasn't - as you were well aware IMO

I have no idea what any of the people's intentions were as I am not omnipotent, but, I assume they were mostly there to protest and/or enjoy being naked. If any of them did have the intention of causing sexual distress and then sat in an unaroused looking state within an enormous group of people dressed (or undressed) exactly like them - I'd say it rather backfired for them. I have never seen this kind of protest, but, if I did, I would not waste my time pearl clutching and imagining which ones were potential perverts.

Do you always try to belittle people/women who have a different opinion to you and don't agree with your hang-ups?

Where did I say that? I was asked why I singled out the men with regard to their intentions so I explained with some relevant statistics. Do you have any personal guarantees that none of these men have ever had any sexual intentions relating to their nudity?

No, no guarantees, but equally, you don't have any guarantees any of them do. Your stats aren't relevant to the event.

Apologies, I should have said in public.

I really do not think sexual predators would put themselves in this event.

No I was explaining indecent exposure, which this event clearly wasn't - as you were well aware IMO

Can you point to where the law says that it is only indecent exposure if there is an erection or masturbation? Afaik it’s not that clear cut which is part of the problem. It is a very odd law in that the experience of the victim is totally negated by the unverifiable claims of the perpetrators. Like “I had no sexual intentions, honest guv”

I’m not trying to b to belittle you, just pointing out that you seem to have made some rather broad assumptions about the intentions of men in general relating to sexual topics without acknowledging that there are some men that have very nefarious intentions and they don’t publicise their sexual intentions ahead of their offending.

Should we make the assumption that all men have pure and honourable intentions and therefore have no safeguarding at all or should we look at the stats and take the pragmatic view that we need safeguarding which should apply fairly to all men? Because if you create exceptions or loopholes we know they will be exploited?

Genuine question - why do you think that?

Remember how the one of the most notorious sex offenders of the 20th century operated in plain sight, with the knowledge and support of many including the BBC and police?

Because sexual arousal is very difficult to hide when naked. Shell suits hid a lot.

Yes. Lots and lots of women on this thread saying that they DO find it distressing and just as many posters telling them that the friendly, naked men don't mean any harm and there's nothing wrong with them imposing themselves on other people's surroundings with no warning or invitation.

I despair.

Plenty of crimes can be sexually motivated without sexual acts or sexual arousal taking place. There is an abundance of research and literature on this.

However, it is not the norm in the UK to wander around naked, or to cycle naked (in fact it is a criminal act to do so).

It may not be the norm but it’s not a criminal act either.

Your thought processes are really strange. How on earth would anyone know that there are no ‘sexual intentions’ to the nudity of male participants in the baked bike ride? Given that the response to them tends to be laughter, I’d imagine that to get their kicks from public cycling nudity, they’d have to have a humiliation fetishise.

I didn't think the naked bike ride was a protest. I thought it was just an "event". They have one in Bristol every year too. I suspect there is a fair bit of male entitlement and an opportunity to get their bits out in public going on.

Well you have put rather a lot of words into my mouth. This thread isn't about all men but about men taking part in a naked bike ride protest - which really should be people taking part, but OP singled them out. A protest undoubtedly with cooperation with the police.

you seem to have made some rather broad assumptions about the intentions of men in general relating to sexual topics without acknowledging that there are some men that have very nefarious intentions

And where did I say any of that? And, believe me, I am well aware that some men have nefarious intentions. But, unlike some posters on MN, I don't think a naked person = a pervert.

You seem to be making a lot of assumptions about people you don't know whose intentions you can't know.

Can you point to where the law says that it is only indecent exposure if there is an erection or masturbation?

Obviously that wouldn't be enshrined in Law - I didn't say it was - and why I used the word 'typically'. Speaking to friends and family in the police and prison service, this seems to be generally the case - but potentially there may be exceptions?

Uncle Google is your friend.Here’s a random link nbut if you don’t like clicking on random links then maybe check for yourself rather than stay in ignorance ?

https://londoncheapo.com/events/london-naked-bike-ride/