Hot new hobby
I read this article
www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/feb/25/women-upskirting

this morning... apparently loads and loads of dirty men are taking hundreds and thousands and millions (just going over the top, to keep in line with Guardian journalism nowadays) of photos of ladyfannies up their skirts using camera phones and posting them on the interweb.

Officially, as a female, I'm outraged and disgusted and think they should be hung and kicked in the nads. Unofficially, as a bit of a sicko, I think it's a little bit sexylicious. But disgusting. I'm confused to what I think about it. What does anyone else think? Wrong? Doesn't matter? Pervy?
(The Apeface Cherub is not a cunty-uber-cunt, Wed 25 Feb 2009, 16:11, 18 replies, latest was 16 years ago)

Dunno. Link is apparently borked.
However, I do know that in the US all digital cameras and camera phones are required by law to make a sound when they shoot a picture, to prevent just this scenario.

When camera phones were first developed in Japan, they had a problem over there with the schoolgirls taking them into the locker rooms and shooting pics of their classmates, then setting up porn sites with the pics.

Bad enough when guys do it, but when schoolgirls do it to each other... *shaking head*
( The Resident Loon Not a demographic. Do not measure., Wed 25 Feb 2009, 16:22, Reply)

Think a few woman reading that
Will now be extremely paranoid roaming the streets doing their daily tasks...
( whenanimalsattackhumans clad in global hypercolour, Wed 25 Feb 2009, 16:23, Reply)

@ Loon
I thought that was just a proposed bill? Didn't think it had become law?

Ridiculous anyway, it would just fuck me off as I hate unnecessary faux shutter noise like that. The upskirters would surely just remove the speaker altogether, it'd only take 5 minutes. Or just use an old phone. It would just unfairly penalise anyone who wanted to legitimately use their phone as a camera and a phone without it making noise!

This is a bit sick and twisted, but it's fairly harmless on the scale of weird sexual fetishes I think.
(Son of Sam-i-am We're all as mad as hatters here, Wed 25 Feb 2009, 16:26, Reply)

That's precisely my doubt
Of course it's wrong and an extreme invasion of privacy. However, the article does say that most of the "victims" are completely unaware of the happenings, and that they are of course not identifiable from the pics (being basically a blurred and semi-dark bumshot). So, I wonder if it's worth all the fuss and uproar it seems to be causing on that thread. Another point could be, that when wandering around crowded streets and places like tube stations, people should not be so oblivious to their surroundings, whether it's been peeped at with cameras or having your bag snatched. Surely that's just careless?

@loon - the Japanese schoolgirl thing is surely fucked up, sick twats. Can't believe women would do that to each other.
(The Apeface Cherub is not a cunty-uber-cunt, Wed 25 Feb 2009, 16:35, Reply)

Oh
and for the record, I'm a lady b3tan (most people seem to think I'm a man for some reason).

EDIT: just realised I wrote I was female in the original message. Silly me.
(The Apeface Cherub is not a cunty-uber-cunt, Wed 25 Feb 2009, 16:36, Reply)

"Can't believe women would do that to each other"
Really?
(bazmorningstar efil4nat3b, Wed 25 Feb 2009, 16:43, Reply)

It happens
I've done a couple of cases where people have been accused of doing such things. I wouldn't go living your life in fear though, it's nowhere near as prevalent as the media would have you believe.
( Labia Majora You keep on talking but it makes no sense at all, Wed 25 Feb 2009, 16:47, Reply)

I think you're right about it only being proposed Sam
I'd be surprised if it ever gets anywhere 'cause people will just circumvent it, use old phones or, now here's a radical idea, use a small digital camera...
( Captain V, Wed 25 Feb 2009, 17:04, Reply)

I'm just surprised people think this is something new
Because it isn't. Nothing in porn is new.

if you find something truly new and original in pron, let me know...
( flirting with badgers What? It sounded good at the time., Wed 25 Feb 2009, 17:09, Reply)

Well...
A quick Google search popped these results out:

www.davidrowan.com/2003/12/times-magazine-spies-like-us-how.html

www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/05/16/SPYPHONE.TMP

www.dvorak.org/blog/2009/01/27/congressman-wants-cell-phone-cameras-to-alert-you-to-perv-pic-takers/

www.theregister.co.uk/2006/02/28/bosnia_shower_pics/

Pay close attention to the dates- some of these are from 2003 or so.

EDIT: Oh, and fwb: I've seen a link to gas mask porn on another site. If that isn't new and original I'll be mightily surprised.
( The Resident Loon Not a demographic. Do not measure., Wed 25 Feb 2009, 17:10, Reply)

If it violates another's privacy...
...then it's wrong, surely.

The one thing that does disturb me though are the Paris Hilton / Britney brigade who are utterly blatant in getting their kebabs on camera. While whatever they want appearing in print is completely up to them, it's encouraging a gross invasion of privacy for everyone else.

As for being sexylicious - I suppose it's in the eye of the beholder.

NB - Britney if you're reading this; it wasn't your best angle, love.
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Wed 25 Feb 2009, 17:16, Reply)

Good points
I didn't think this was a new thing at all though.. I knew that "upskirt" has been around in porn for years. But I guess what the article is trying to get at is that new technologies are taking this out of studios and into the street more and more. Without people's consent.

When I said it was "sexylicious" I meant to say that the perve in me kind of likes the idea of some cheeky bloke sneaking a look up my skirt. Not that I find pics of other people sexy. Eww. Wouldn't like them to put me minge on the interweb though, of course.
(The Apeface Cherub is not a cunty-uber-cunt, Wed 25 Feb 2009, 18:13, Reply)

@bazmorningstar
Yeah, it did surprise me actually. Seen as it is women who supposedly get upset about such things usually. It takes a special kind of woman to do that to another, knowing how sensitive most of them are. Aka: a bit of a fucking bitch. Likewise a bloke who took cock shots in the changing rooms would be a total and utter tosser too.
(The Apeface Cherub is not a cunty-uber-cunt, Wed 25 Feb 2009, 18:16, Reply)

Now this is why I only wear trousers.
Ya see! It's not just because I feel like a drag queen when I wear a dress.
( girlinthehole, Wed 25 Feb 2009, 18:20, Reply)

But why would anyone care
as long as they're wearing pants?
I really don't think it would bother me at all, it's not like they'd be able to see anything :\
( Mellicious is made of candy, Wed 25 Feb 2009, 18:43, Reply)

that's all fine and well
if you like to wear pants a lot.

But I like to wear skirts and dresses a lot too.
Maybe some women don't wear trousers ever! I think that's a huge invasion of privacy. If I want to wear a pretty or short dress/skirt, then I don't think I or any other girl should have to worry about people doing that.

/skin crawling.
(Poppet some assembly required., Wed 25 Feb 2009, 20:37, Reply)

Hmmmm.
Ya know, on reflection... if someone snuck a picture of my nadgers and posted it online somewhere without my face or my name, I can't say that I would really give a shit. Why would I really care, as long as it can't be traced back to me?
( The Resident Loon Not a demographic. Do not measure., Wed 25 Feb 2009, 20:45, Reply)

VC
I meant the non-American pants (knickers) :P
I wear short skirts a lot too but if someone took a picture all they're going to have is a blurry photo of some black material and a bit of leg..
( Mellicious is made of candy, Wed 25 Feb 2009, 21:36, Reply)