Paraphilias, Cyberflashing and the Online Safety Bill

[ArabellaScott]

Article on 'cyberflashing' (I think what is often known as 'unsolicited dick pics') and considering the potential adding of this as a crime to the OSB.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-59615944

'Cyber-flashing has become increasingly common during the pandemic as people spend more time online, campaigners have said.

On Tuesday, a joint committee of MPs will publish its report on the UK government's draft Online Safety Bill, aimed at introducing tougher regulations for social media firms.

Cyber-flashing is not included in the bill, but campaigners and MPs backing the change hope it will be added and Prime Minister Boris Johnson has said it should be illegal.'

I have the feeling we really need to talk about sex crimes like flashing (Sarah Everard's case showed the potential seriousness of the crime), exhibitionism and coercing women into being witness to sexual fetishism, etc.

Here's a (very basic) article on various 'paraphilias'.

www.webmd.com/sexual-conditions/guide/paraphilias-overview

'abnormal sexual behaviors or impulses characterized by intense sexual fantasies and urges that keep coming back. '

'Most paraphilias are rare and are about 20 times more common among males than among females. However, the reason for this disparity is not clearly understood. While several of these disorders are associated with aggressive behavior, others are not aggressive or harmful. Some paraphilias such as pedophilia, exhibitionism, voyeurism, sadism, and frotteurism are criminal offenses.'

Article doesn't go into detail about the potential for paraphilias to escalate, which is a concern I have.

Thanks for the link, I didn’t know that about Scotland- so we need a new law for the rest of the UK and a UK wide public campaign against this harassment and intimidation then.

Even if "cyberflashing" isn't already a crime per se, wouldn't it be covered under existing laws? eg if someone was sending sexual images to you without consent that would be sexual harassment wouldn't it?

It has to be a concerted campaign of repeatedly sending someone pictures of your erection, after they've been told by the recipient not to do that, for the police to take it seriously as harassment.

The campaign is to specifically add cyberflashing to the list of offenses under the online safety bill.
This would put the onus on social media platforms to do something about it or face fines.

Currently social media platforms don't care if unwanted pictures of erections are flying in the face of women, because it's between two adults.

It's up to us to report it to the police, provide evidence it was unwanted and the sender knew it was unwanted, it's a whole load of faff basically and the police won't be bothered.

The bill is a great idea because social media platforms won't want fines.

I share your concern, OP. And I agree with Artichokeleaves - We absolutely need to talk about where the lines are about non consenting people being coerced into becoming part of someone else's sexual experience. Particularly when public spaces are used to gain access to those people and their presence (and reactions and discomfort) may be an active part of the desired experience.

This is all so terrifyingly out of hand.

I agree op.

I don't consent to being part of anyone's fetish. I don't believe anyone should be allowed to dress up in an official uniform to perform a sexual imaginary scenario (or indeed for any reason, if it makes the public question whether the person is in an official police/fire/ambulance/medical/whatever role.

Twitter is a cesspit of people (men actually, are we allowed to say that?) pushing boundaries. The old "you don't have to look" trope is wheeled out regularly, but to me that's no better than the old "you don't have to look" at people having sex in car parks, waving their dicks around while "being naturists" or just generally pushing the boundaries of what is ok.

Kink shaming should be celebrated not quashed. Kink in real life, in front on unconsenting adults and unable-to-consent children should never be ok.

"Currently social media platforms don't care if unwanted pictures of erections are flying in the face of women, because it's between two adults"

Are you sure about that? Because I've seen people get 30 day Facebook bans for posting sexual material less severe than an erection image. I'm pretty sure PMing an erect penis image to someone who result in a permanent ban if the recipient reported it to FB.

FB also has various ways to control your privacy and who you receive messages from, eg you can set it so only your friends can PM you if you want.

What more can they do?

I'm sure 30 day Facebook suspensions are as arbitrarily applied as they are on Twitter, who don't seem to know where they stand on dick picks.

mashable.com/article/unsolicited-dick-pics-twitter-abusive-behavior

What more can they do than a 30 day ban? Really?

There needs to be a government public awareness scheme on paraphilias. They affect about 1 in 20 men, and men with a paraphilia will go to extreme lengths to fulfil their sexual "needs" including design their entire lives and careers around it. They're masters of manipulation and pretence. This would be why there seems to be so much backing for trans rights. A cause which will lead to removal of safeguarding will benefit those 1 in 20 and if you then take the numbers in the US and then around the world, there is a big cohort working against us. Added to this, the strategy of transwomen in places of significant influence is giving us a perfect storm.

The good news is, it's now in the open in the UK and stealth no longer works.

Article on this in today's Times:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/online-safety-bill-to-outlaw-financial-scams-and-cyberflashing-6td72pvsh

@MargaritaPie

"Currently social media platforms don't care if unwanted pictures of erections are flying in the face of women, because it's between two adults"

Are you sure about that? Because I've seen people get 30 day Facebook bans for posting sexual material less severe than an erection image. I'm pretty sure PMing an erect penis image to someone who result in a permanent ban if the recipient reported it to FB.

FB also has various ways to control your privacy and who you receive messages from, eg you can set it so only your friends can PM you if you want.

What more can they do?

Perhaps respond with the same enthusiasm to keep the world a safer place as they do in deleting and banning any female mentioning biology?

Because the zero tolerance efficiency for one group and the oh well what can you do, we're just helpless and its in the hands of the users for another is a bit - well. Sex based. In an interesting way.

BBC article on the same subject

BBC News - Online Safety Bill: New offences and tighter rules
www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-59638569

I wonder what the likelihood is of making
" promoting or stirring up violence against women" a criminal offence and how much attention Twitter et al would pay to that if it happened.