Voyeurism: A Debate...
Hello January 22, 2018, 09:09:53 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
 
   Home   Help Arcade Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Voyeurism: A Debate...  (Read 8301 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
(Hidden)

« on: January 27, 2011, 03:23:17 am »

Whether the topic of Voyeurism or any other, we, of course, need to stay within the boundaries of man-made-law.  The problem occurs when it comes to morality - there is no one clear line that divides right from wrong.  One example - it's no secret that most of the world finds homosexuality inherently morally wrong.  We're all on the wrong side of someones line. 

Much of the voyeur vids I enjoy show nothing more than a beautiful prick, maybe some nuts and bush, through a peephole.  Rarely is the face shown or the individual identifiable (unless they have a very identifiable dick - and I've seen a few I think I'd recognize!).  From an ethical viewpoint and/or if you're arguing on the grounds of invasion of privacy, identification ability makes no difference - if it's "wrong" then it's wrong.  That said, I would suggest that whether standing at a public urinal or nude in an open locker room that you have no promise of privacy and so should have no expectation of it.  You might assume that the dude standing next to you will follow unsaid etiquette and not sneak a peak or even glance your schlong accidentally, but there is no promise.  True, accepting that fact is not the same as consenting to it.  Nor does it justify covert filming. 

I think the desire to look, for whatever reason, is part of what makes us human.  Do straight guys check each other out to see how they measure up? Of course. Do women? Of course.  And voyeurism as a sexual fetish is well documented.  So, most of us, given the opportunity, regardless of reason, choose to peep.  Where does one draw the line?  If a kid came up to that peephole to piss, would I look?  Nope.  Not only would that be of no interest to me, it trespasses my personal line of right and wrong.  Nor would I intentionally peep into someone's window.  Home is the one place where we should all be able to expect privacy.  But watching someone at the pisser or in the shower in person or on film, whether right or wrong, I think is harmless.  There have been a few instances where an individual discovered themselves in a hidden cam video.  Whether they suffered emotional distress, I can't say.  I can say I've never heard of anyone harming themselves because of it.  Compare these individuals to the the number of self loathing porn actors snuffing themselves daily with drugs - are we then going to forgo commercial porn? 

(I have a friend from the Philippines who felt this was a non-arguement.  Her culture, and I can't say she speaks for everyone (she comes from a very wealthy, upper class family in a class based society), simply accepts voyeurism as human nature and that's that.  Right and wrong don't come into play.  She also comes from a culture where in some major cities men piss openly in the street, so there's definitely different expectations of privacy.)

I know my argument is riddled with holes and is full of justification.  I don't have an answer, and I don't think there is one.  Ultimately, we each draw our own line in the sand separating our personal view of right from wrong.  I do think this a fascinating subject and am glad we can discuss it openly and maturely.

Am very interested and open to hearing other opinions.



Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #1 on: February 24, 2011, 04:46:48 pm »

Wow.  Not a single reply, comment or death threat.  I think apathy is probably worse than anger or repulsion.  It's hard to believe no one has a single thought to share.  C'mon men, show me your balls!
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #2 on: February 24, 2011, 05:15:32 pm »

As controversial as the subject of Voyeurism is, I personally don't hold anything against it. Although the general idea behind the concept is that the person being watched does not have any idea that they're being watched, I do not see any harm from it. I personally find the whole subject to be quite interesting because it offers a different perspective on things. It's different than your "traditional" films.
Logged



The only difference between martyrdom and suicide is press coverage!

"Education is all we have left when we have forgotten everything we learned in school." -- Albert Einstein
(Hidden)

« Reply #3 on: February 26, 2011, 05:11:54 pm »

I have loved to look/spy on guys since i was a youth, I find it very erotic. I still love to sneak peeks at urinals, love the long troughs you find sometimes.
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #4 on: March 01, 2011, 02:51:27 pm »

For every voyeur there is an exhibitionist: PASSIVE or unknowing, and ACTIVE and getting a surge of excitement himself in being watched, no?
Is the voyeur more excited by knowing the person doesn't know he's being watched, or is he just as happy watching the active exhibitionist
such as a stripper, a person on a cam, or even porn?
« Last Edit: March 01, 2011, 03:45:31 pm by (Hidden) » Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #5 on: March 01, 2011, 07:31:57 pm »

I'm not sure what your opinion is, Stealfire, when you say "one has no expectation of privacy standing nude in a locker room or at a urinal.  And then you follow up with "...but that doesn't justify covert filming."   So in essence you DO have an expectation of privacy.  No?  My personal opinion is you would have an expectation of privacy if you were dressing/undressing at your own bench and locker but not if you were wandering around the whole lockeroom, sink area and showers wearing nothing but sandals.  Although one guy cracked me up - he had this killer body and went to the scale to weigh himself, it was in a little cubby hole but not totally recessed - he dropped his towel, weighed himself and put his towel back on.  All I could see additionally (without the towel) was his buttcheeks, which I certainly looked at.  But how absurd - the dry towel might add 6 oz to his weight?  Whatever.  So to get back to the topic, all may not agree, but I think if you don't show anyone's face or other identifying details and their cock is not unusual for identification purposes, I see no harm in covert filming either.  The Greeks had the Olympics in the nude and Romans had statues with erections to "guard" their houses.  So this modesty thing seems to be cultural and that is why I say covert filming doesn't hurt anyone.  
« Last Edit: March 02, 2011, 05:26:55 am by (Hidden) » Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #6 on: March 01, 2011, 11:17:59 pm »

Fancydude makes a good point. It's cultural. Nudity has for some reason become taboo and it hasn't always been like that.
Why is it ok to watch people when they are dressed and not when they are nude?
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #7 on: March 03, 2011, 04:33:29 am »

The definition of voyeurism states that the observed is unaware of the viewer.  So, voyeurism in the locker room would only occur if the one being viewed is unaware of the attention.  I guess once someone becomes aware that they're being watched, the act shifts from voyeurism to something else.  Blatant observation?  I'm not sure but it's an interesting thought to ponder. 
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #8 on: March 03, 2011, 04:36:30 am »

I have loved to look/spy on guys since i was a youth, I find it very erotic. I still love to sneak peeks at urinals, love the long troughs you find sometimes.

Yup! I think we discover this love of looking in our youth. 

I also love piss troughs!  I wonder what it says about our society that this type of pisser is being replaced by individual urinals with shoulder high barriers; Or that many men seem to prefer to piss in the privacy of the toilet stall. 
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #9 on: March 03, 2011, 04:45:36 am »

For every voyeur there is an exhibitionist: PASSIVE or unknowing, and ACTIVE and getting a surge of excitement himself in being watched, no?
Is the voyeur more excited by knowing the person doesn't know he's being watched, or is he just as happy watching the active exhibitionist
such as a stripper, a person on a cam, or even porn?

I believe that part of the excitement experienced is due to the surreptitious nature of the act. 

Very interesting question.  What do you think?
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #10 on: March 03, 2011, 04:57:06 am »

I'm not sure what your opinion is, Stealfire, when you say "one has no expectation of privacy standing nude in a locker room or at a urinal.  And then you follow up with "...but that doesn't justify covert filming."   So in essence you DO have an expectation of privacy.  No?  My personal opinion is you would have an expectation of privacy if you were dressing/undressing at your own bench and locker but not if you were wandering around the whole lockeroom, sink area and showers wearing nothing but sandals.  Although one guy cracked me up - he had this killer body and went to the scale to weigh himself, it was in a little cubby hole but not totally recessed - he dropped his towel, weighed himself and put his towel back on.  All I could see additionally (without the towel) was his buttcheeks, which I certainly looked at.  But how absurd - the dry towel might add 6 oz to his weight?  Whatever.  So to get back to the topic, all may not agree, but I think if you don't show anyone's face or other identifying details and their cock is not unusual for identification purposes, I see no harm in covert filming either.  The Greeks had the Olympics in the nude and Romans had statues with erections to "guard" their houses.  So this modesty thing seems to be cultural and that is why I say covert filming doesn't hurt anyone.  

The contradiction in my opinion perhaps reflects that I haven't come to terms with all the many facets of the act.  Is it okay to accept that something is morally wrong and do it anyway?  Maybe.  We human beings are very complicated.  It's not possible to define our behavior in a two dimensional format.  There are overlapping layers created by desire, instinct, morality, social mores, expectations, etc. 

I do think it is a victimless "crime".  After all, there is no interaction between the two parties.  And when there is, it's no longer an act of voyeurism. 

Differing opinion makes for an interesting discussion.  Thanks for contributing!
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #11 on: March 03, 2011, 02:08:20 pm »

I never understood piss troughs.  I just played cards last night at a former Catholic elementary school.  They had one piss trough and four of the older small urinals on the wall.  Even with the urinals, you could still see the other guys as there are no barriers between them.   As a "grow-er not a show-er" I always found those things intimidating in my youth so I didn't use them when anyone was around.  For a culture such as ours obsessed with nudity of any kind and the fact male nudity is hardly ever shown in regular movies (presumably at least in part due to male obsession with penis-size) I would love an explanation of how piss troughs were ever acceptable.  In other words in the presumably "more modest" past when these things were manufactured.  I did use one once when four other guys were at it, though, because you could glimpse at the other guy's equipment without turning you head at all (since they are obviously standing so close to you on either side). 
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #12 on: March 04, 2011, 01:55:38 am »

I think the troughs are merely an expedient and utilitarian means of meeting the needs of as many individuals as possible.  I've seen them in the military and in Mexico and Europe.  In the U.S. they seem to exist only in older buildings.  I think our uptight culture prohibits their continued use here.  You're right, they do create great site seeing (except for those dudes that use the very ends and turn toward the walls).  One can really make the most of peripheral vision!
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #13 on: March 05, 2011, 07:37:03 pm »

I think voyeurism is partly human nature. It has very little,if anything  to do with "right or wrong". There's a part of all of us that loves to watch things happen. Watch people. Observe them, unnoticed. The "wrong" part comes when someone decides to record someone, specifically, without their knowledge(for public consumption). Nevertheless, i will admit that I am a voyeur who loves an exhibitionism. If a dude(especially a hot one) doesn't mind fucking/sucking/performing in public or being caught, then i certainly don't mind watching them. I'm not into watching people piss. Standing at a urinal watching someone piss or them watching me piss does not turn me on. I am turned on by dudes who don't mind sucking or fucking in a bathroom. I remember being in Chicago for IML and this guy was on his knees sucking and swallowing a bunch of dudes. That's the kind of scene i love. Or being in a video booth at a bookstore. Or people fucking with the shades up. LOVE that shit.
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #14 on: March 05, 2011, 11:53:51 pm »

This is always a prickly subject to discuss. I've learned over the years that guys either find voyeuristic/spycam stuff hot or they find it reprehensible. (There's not a lot of grey area.) The dislike of this type of video is usually based on the notion that somebody is being viewed/filmed (for titillation purposes) without consent. While this is often true I still can't help but enjoy this style of smut. Clearly my desire to peep outweighs any moral or "legal" implications.

If somebody were to give me a choice between say an hour of candid locker room scenes with average blokes walking around in the nude or hardcore porn -- I would always choose the locker room scenes. Because that's my version of fantasy fulfillment. My voyeuristic nature began as a kid wandering through community center locker rooms and seeing naked men. (This is pretty much what let me know that I was gay.) This nature has certainly followed me into adulthood. It's one of the reasons why if I spot a peephole in a restroom I'm going to take a quick look (if I can get away with it). It's also one of the reasons why I choose to collect the types of videos you would find at a pay site like "Spy On Guys". Which begs the question -- how does a site that offers legit hidden camera videos (and brags about it) stay in business? I think it's because the chances of somebody realizing they were in one of the videos is so slim that they take the risk.

I know that other torrent sites (one in particular) forbid that type of content though the occasional series sneaks through. Also, Xtube is now heavily policed for covert footage and they delete it almost instantly. Though other video sites don't seem to mind or care.

People do get in trouble when they get caught filming but it's usually for selling the videos. I'm sure most fans of voyeur flicks are familiar with the Franco "Straight off the Mat" locker room series (or Good Morning Marines). Well they got busted after somebody recognized themselves and their team mates in one of the videos.

This article goes further in to detail about the way it went down: hXXp://articles.chicagotribune.com/1999-04-04/sports/9904040218_1_wrestlers-tapes-camera

I find it odd that the authorities made such a stink but sites like Angry Young Man still offer videos like "Good Morning Marines" just under different names like "Pee Somu Hotto" (whatever that means). There's clearly a legal loophole somewhere that certain pay sites know about and it's used to their advantage.

Anyway, I'm starting to swerve. My main point is that I enjoy this particular sub-category of porn. (Though I'm not sure it all qualifies as pornography per se.) It can be considered controversial indeed. I liken this to the debate about bareback porn promoting unhealthy living. Many people are willing to watch others do something of a sexual nature that they personally would not. It's out there -- so why not give it a view...or two?

It's nice to have a forum to express thoughts and opinions on this subject. Though I will say I didn't even know this was here until a fellow voyeur pointed it out to me. I think once word gets around the posts will increase.
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #15 on: March 06, 2011, 03:03:40 pm »

Some interesting views here, I may as well add my 2 ha'pence worth.
When I last used a communal locker room I remember seeing a guy there who having showered and dried hiself then started dressing himself. Have you noticed how most guys get their underpants on first? well this guy put his socks and shoes on then a t-shirt that covered only to his waist. He spent ages fiddling with his watch strap whilst constantly moving around and thereby displaying his rather large dick to all present. Not only did he not mind being seen but clearly invited it by his actions. The sad truth is that the majority of men do not possess a dick big enough for their expectations and avoid open display if it can discreetly be done.

When I first went to a naturist beach in France, I walked off the 'textile' beach into the nudist part. With some hesitation I took off my beach shorts, carried them and walked amogst similar men, some of whom were probably gay but certainly not all. I did not feel uncomfortable because we were all in the same boat! and that I think is the crux of this.I suddenly realised that the stallions I had seen in porn movies are the exception not the rule.
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #16 on: March 06, 2011, 06:40:01 pm »

I think comfort with nudity is cultural; including our sense of whether or not we measure up. 
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #17 on: March 07, 2011, 02:35:15 am »

I think comfort with nudity is cultural; including our sense of whether or not we measure up. 

It's very much what you've said.

I grew up in the US and experienced the "typical" religious upbringing. That included suppression of sex/sexuality in all forms but also body shaming. I think it's one of the reasons why many children grow up with a warped perception about nudity -- lacking the ability to disassociate nakedness from titillation. I distinctly remember the first time I was forced to get naked (for showering purposes) in Physical Education. (Yes there was a time when it wasn't optional.) My brain was instantly scrambled because I was excited about seeing my peers in the buff -- but I was also clothes free and up for scrutiny. (I am by all means a grower and not a show'er.) Ultimately the nightmarish thoughts about getting an erection in that moment ended any pleasure to be found. It was strictly eyes forward, scrub, rinse, immediately get dressed.

I've noticed other cultures throughout the world don't seem to have this "problem" with nudity. There are certainly nudist beaches or camps stateside but you have to seek them out -- and these types of organizations are largely frowned upon or mocked. 

If you've ever watched any of the locker room footage of sports teams abroad (rugby teams etc) there seems to be no sense of shame. The location is crawling with reporters and cameras and there's almost a child-like joy these men exhibit when being nude together. Men of varied weight, height, age, and endowment -- all realizing they are displaying themselves for public consumption (on video even). Now contrast this with the horror and revulsion the American athletes exhibited when it was discovered their space was broadcast (Straight off the Mat). Of course these aren't identical situations but I'm wondering if the reaction would have been different if we (the US) didn't hide men's naked bodies away. (You're still hard pressed to find a penis on film if it's not porn.)
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #18 on: March 07, 2011, 04:25:21 pm »

hmmm on the one hand, if you choose to spy on someone else, maybe you shouldn't EVER poke fun at them, because you looked, anyway.  hehehe  if someone were to be turned on by seeing me, of course there's the privacy side but there's also the flattery side. hehehe
Logged



I believe in the promise of each sunrise.
(Hidden)

« Reply #19 on: March 09, 2011, 04:38:06 am »

Voyeurism has been played out in the movies, though typically portrayed in a sinister way (Sliver). but it's no secret that people have at least fantasized about it for ages, if not acted on it.  I have often fantasized about voyeurism and have tried on occasion to sneak a peak (although i'm usually too scared to get a real glimpse) at guys in the HS shower or at the urinals and i love those types of porns. But for my part, technology actually becomes a problem. I have a problem with when the fantasy becomes reality. If you take part in George McFly type of voyeurism,  by all means, my advice is just don't get caught. i find the "spying" version different from the peeking or sexual fantasy porno and i feel that filming someone is just wrong. Maybe it's the idea that someone is creating a hard copy of a moment of someone else without their consent. Just like how celebrity sex tapes "are never supposed to get out" but they always do, i don't feel it's right to copy that act of voyeurism as a savable, transferable piece of data. At a minimum, keep the experience your own, keep it in the moment, and for shit's sake, don't get caught!
Logged


Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
  Print  

* Permissions
You can't post new topics.
You can't post replies.
You can't post attachments.
You can't modify your posts.
BBCode Enabled
Smilies Enabled
[img] Enabled
HTML Disabled

 
Jump to:  

Related Topics
Subject Started by Replies Views Last post
Homosexuality debate rages in Barbados Gay News avalonmoore 2 973 Last post December 15, 2010, 02:07:40 pm
by MrMazda
Anti-gay remark in Suriname sparks debate Gay News avalonmoore 2 915 Last post July 31, 2011, 12:06:42 am
by Spintendo
A cultural debate Jokes & Funny Stuff pornofan 3 2025 Last post October 17, 2016, 04:56:38 am
by cupofass
DEBATE: Obama's Birth Certificate is FAKE. You won't debate cuz you know it. Politics & Debate mhorndisk 0 55 Last post September 06, 2017, 01:34:53 pm
by mhorndisk