posted
He denies it, but what would happen if he consented to a search of his phone and/or computer. Also, in this day and age of social media, no girl whipped out her phone to film this guy afterward--if it happened as they stated. Women are filming bird watchers, and calling the cops on them. So why are they not filming "foot predators" who are allegedly touched them without consent, and tried to perform a sexual act on them?
posted
Well, here's the thing we don't know if this true or false accusations. It's messed up if he is framed for something he didn't do. If it is true though, then it's wrong for him to be so creepy about it. As long as it is consensual it is cool. Foot fetish is fine but it needs to be consensual.
Posts: 1189 | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AceCorr: Well, here's the thing we don't know if this true or false accusations. It's messed up if he is framed for something he didn't do. If it is true though, then it's wrong for him to be so creepy about it. As long as it is consensual it is cool. Foot fetish is fine but it needs to be consensual.
There used to be photographers that did much more than him in public settings and weren't lambasted as bad. But that was also when the younger college girls weren't so offended as easily and didn't hate males as much.
quote:Originally posted by Sauvage: There used to be photographers that did much more than him in public settings and weren't lambasted as bad. But that was also when the younger college girls weren't so offended as easily and didn't hate males as much.
You can take photos of whatever you want in a public place. Once you go onto private property though, you can be told to leave, escorted off premise, etc. And if it's progressed to touching or more, I don't think people being offended more these days is really a fair assessment.
quote:Originally posted by Patrick: And if it's progressed to touching or more, I don't think people being offended more these days is really a fair assessment.
From having done years of personal analysis of foot fetish creeps in the mainstream media, I can definitely agree that things have not changed in this respect. Women are equally as appalled in the past as they are now when some random stranger comes out from nowhere and starts fondling her feet, even in cases where they guy may look like Brad Pitt (which seems as rare as unicorns in this fetish).
One thing I've also noticed is that even online many pretty women get creeped out by random dudes being excessive with their foot fetish compliments, particularly if they describe the things they would want to do with those influencers' feet. Seems like the only increase nowadays is that more of those creeps are getting blocked because more of those creeps are feeling bolder now in what they can express online.
But in real life settings, the notion still stands that women are equally creeped out nowadays just as much as in the past by non-consensual touching of their feet in public or private.
quote:Originally posted by Sauvage: There used to be photographers that did much more than him in public settings and weren't lambasted as bad. But that was also when the younger college girls weren't so offended as easily and didn't hate males as much.
You can take photos of whatever you want in a public place. Once you go onto private property though, you can be told to leave, escorted off premise, etc. And if it's progressed to touching or more, I don't think people being offended more these days is really a fair assessment.
Patrick
You misunderstood what I meant. Simply referring to photos and guys asking to take photos back in the day, women weren't as offended and bothered as they are currently. Now you are risking arrest and worse and it doesn't have to be private property, just getting in their "safe space" upsets most young females (unless they know you). Can't imagine the old cats trying to do what they did now, it doesn't work anymore.
quote:Originally posted by Sauvage: There used to be photographers that did much more than him in public settings and weren't lambasted as bad. But that was also when the younger college girls weren't so offended as easily and didn't hate males as much.
You can take photos of whatever you want in a public place. Once you go onto private property though, you can be told to leave, escorted off premise, etc. And if it's progressed to touching or more, I don't think people being offended more these days is really a fair assessment.
Patrick
You misunderstood what I meant. Simply referring to photos and guys asking to take photos back in the day, women weren't as offended and bothered as they are currently. Now you are risking arrest and worse and it doesn't have to be private property, just getting in their "safe space" upsets most young females (unless they know you). Can't imagine the old cats trying to do what they did now, it doesn't work anymore.
Yeah, not exactly true. While people can get mad at whatever they want, there are no legal issues with public photography. We had a story around here not too long ago of a guy being reported for taking photos around kids sporting events. Parents freaked out and police told them they couldn't do much of anything about it due to it being on public grounds and other than taking photos, he hadn't done anything else. Yes, creepy as hell, but still legal. Taking photos of someone's feet might get you screamed at or your ass beat, but still legal if on public grounds.
quote:Originally posted by Sauvage: There used to be photographers that did much more than him in public settings and weren't lambasted as bad. But that was also when the younger college girls weren't so offended as easily and didn't hate males as much.
You can take photos of whatever you want in a public place. Once you go onto private property though, you can be told to leave, escorted off premise, etc. And if it's progressed to touching or more, I don't think people being offended more these days is really a fair assessment.
Patrick
You misunderstood what I meant. Simply referring to photos and guys asking to take photos back in the day, women weren't as offended and bothered as they are currently. Now you are risking arrest and worse and it doesn't have to be private property, just getting in their "safe space" upsets most young females (unless they know you). Can't imagine the old cats trying to do what they did now, it doesn't work anymore.
Yeah, not exactly true. While people can get mad at whatever they want, there are no legal issues with public photography. We had a story around here not too long ago of a guy being reported for taking photos around kids sporting events. Parents freaked out and police told them they couldn't do much of anything about it due to it being on public grounds and other than taking photos, he hadn't done anything else. Yes, creepy as hell, but still legal. Taking photos of someone's feet might get you screamed at or your ass beat, but still legal if on public grounds.
Patrick
You're still misunderstanding everything. I'm not talking about "legality". I'm talking about socially, which then turns to legality because young women nowadays can turn your proposition around for foot photos into harassment (private property or not) and (legal or not). And you can still be detained and/or charged with any number of offenses if they push it far enough.
posted
i mean shit man i used to go into malls at 16 years old, hustling sales women to let me smell their feet. at the end of the day though, who cares imho.
posted
Unless he has a twin, sounds guilty to me. I could see if it was one incident. But its several.
I did the same thing while at college and at work, but always had consent. You never want to be labeled that "weird creepy foot guy". Even though with consent you still could get labeled that years ago. lol
Now. The same girl that saying foot fetish is creepy, is now the same girl that selling foot pics. smdh.
Posts: 194 | Registered: Oct 2016
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Hump]](graemlins/hump.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
