Someone should shut down this creepy, stalking website.

[Bonobo]

http://tubecrush.net

Don't you think?

Or am I wrong?


Date: March 14

Line: District

Submitted by: Wapping Wanderer

We have all heard the saying ‘Suns Out – Guns Out’ but this handsome man is also adding his thighs and calves to the equation. Rightly so he would keep our tube journey a pleasant one!

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. Can you tell us a bit more about what the site is actually for?

So we don't have to go there ourselves and give them traffic just to figure out how why they're creepy?

[KittyWampus]

2. Bonobo is trying to stir shit up, regarding feminist issues. It's a website devoted

to photos taken in the subways of supposedly "crush-worthy" subjects.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

6. Ah.

Well, I guess that guy in the photo has a pretty big package between his legs...(ba dum bum! Ok, I won't give up my day job...)

[SidDithers]

100. Bonobo's now on "vacation" for a month...nt

Sid

[seaglass]

105. It's more than a month. n/t

[SidDithers]

107. Oops. You're right...

June 10th at least. There's 6 hides on his transparency, not 5 like I originally thought.



Sid

[boston bean]

117. LOL

[BainsBane]

118. Among my joys on DU

is when someone says something I don't dare.

[seabeyond]

3. damn, the predictability. lmFao

have a good night bonobo.

clearly. it is just those 4 or 5 psychotics you mention that is ALL the problem.

[Bonobo]

5. Yes, it IS predictable.

Maybe "obsessed in an unhealthy manner" would have been a better way to put it.

Glad to see that this is considered LOL material because it is objectifying and sexualizing men. Whereas this below, which is entirely NON-SEXUAL is considered misogyny.

http://womenwhoeatontubes.tumblr.com

[KittyWampus]

7. Those photos, across the board, are fairly unflattering depictions of women.

I don't know the intent, but it doesn't seem to celebrate women.

As a theme or genre of photo-taking, it seems a bit quirky.

[Bonobo]

9. Hmmmm...

unflattering depictions.

So sexualizing and stalking men vs. "unflattering" photos.... Hmmm.... tough one.

[KittyWampus]

12. Tasteful photos of anyone isn't offensive. If the photos focused on their crotches

Like this:




I would find that overtly sexist, distasteful and offensive.

That photo is from tumblr's http://nycsubwayguys.tumblr.com/

Interesting that neither the NYC nor the UK site feature that many overtly sexist photos.

And quite a few have some pretty good shots.

[Bonobo]

16. You are correct about the issue of "tasteful" I think, but

the underlying nature of it is the same.

Flip the tables and imagine someone taking photos of sexy women without their knowledge and then posting where the photo was taken, the name of the train line and then a personal comment about how you "would like to do something with them".

[Bonobo]

22. How about this?

Date: 20th January 2014

Line: Jubilee

Submitted by: Zack

Quite a cute Tubecrush – clearly practicing his open leg technique. Is it the frank or the beans? #sexyfocker

[abelenkpe]

82. Like how you can see the photographer reflected in the window

[cui bono]

86. Clearly you started this OP to stir up shit with feminists.

Looks to me like it's a man taking this pic and it is submitted by "Zack".

So I don't think you are making the point you think you are making.

[blueamy66]

98. That's the way the guy is sitting.

He's not posing.

I see nothing wrong with this pics.

They are great shots of everyday guys on subways.

[seabeyond]

8. Obviously I am addressing you bonobo. Not your op. Obviously, correct?

So there really was no reason for you to take the lol to your op. That would be dishonest. And surely you don't throw the first punch

[Bonobo]

10. Wait, what?

You jump on an OP that shows stalking behavior, the kind you SUPPOSEDLY are against and your VERY FIRST POST is a personal attack about me... and you think I am the one "throwing the first punch"?

Wow, interesting world you live in.

But your dismissive and LULZ reaction was noted.

[seabeyond]

19. i think calling women on du psychotic is a personal attack. saying you are predictable? not so

much.

But your dismissive and LULZ reaction was noted.

more dishonest. i was not dismissive of your subject. i did not address it. so i could not be dismissive. and again with the lol?

[Bonobo]

27. Women?

But that's just plural for "woman" right?

Should I have said *some" women?

[seabeyond]

39. "Should I have said *some" women?" that is not my game. it is yours and others. we are both

being consistent.

[Bonobo]

43. I am consistent in the open anyway.

I don't skulk around.

[seabeyond]

46. oh.... you got me. rollin' eyes.

really have a good night. enjoy your thread. i am outta here.

[Bonobo]

65. Yes, please. Don't say goodbye.

Just go away.

[seabeyond]

66. you are too fuggin' much fun. i have tried. a couple times.

[BainsBane]

48. Wait. I thought objectification of women didn't exist

or wasn't an issue at all? Now it's a travesty against men? Why is okay for women but not men?

[UtahLib]

89. This seems like an odd complaint

coming from someone who advocates celebrating the penis (pics and all). Surely, you're not being disingenuous.

[mercuryblues]

104. yeah

it sucks when the tables are turned, doesn't it. But stalking. There is a legal definition for stalking. Does this fit the definition?

I have seen *some* people defend sites like this as perfectly acceptable when it involves women as the subject. So it begs the question.. Are you truly offended or are you trying to stir up shit, using a penis?

[KittyWampus]

4. All the photos are fairly tasteful. Akin to NYTimes taking photos every week

of women about town wearing "X" or "Y".

If such tasteful photos of women were posted, I'd have no issue with that either.

[boston bean]

11. I'll just post this, because this is what I think you are really saying:

?16

[Bonobo]

13. Yes, I understand how the "I know what you are really saying" game is played.

Flipping it like that is, in fact, the only way to deal with the cognitive dissonance you must be feeling by pretending that the site in the OP is not the VERY SAME issue that you would call creepy and stalking and disturbing if it were done to women.

[boston bean]

15. No what I'm saying is that your posting this

is to minimize womens concern and a feminist POV regarding women and their space in public spaces.

It's not really to help with this very terrible problem of women harassing men on the subways.

[Bonobo]

20. That is a stretch.

I have said nothing about the feminist POV. You are projecting onto me.

What I am suggesting is that people have their own POV which sometimes needs to be brought to light by showing inconsistencies.

[boston bean]

21. What inconsistency?

To me it seems it is you who feels that maybe women being harassed on subways isn't something that should be discussed without having to discuss extreme minority of men it happens to.

Minimization, and derailment comes to mind. Twisted thinking is another.

[Bonobo]

29. Derailing is what YOU have done here. Along with repeated attempts to define what *I* think. nt

[boston bean]

31. I think I've got it. But do clarify some more if you feel it is needed.

[Bonobo]

32. You do? But I didn't hear your opinion on the website, did I?

Do you have an opinion about whether it should be shut down? Whether it is creepy?

That is what this OP is about. Not about me.

[boston bean]

35. I do find it creepy and I wouldn't like strangers posting pics of me on the internet.

I'm pretty consistent with this.

Seems as though with the questions you ask that you feel that you have spotted some double standard like those redditors thought they found.

[Bonobo]

37. No, I am genuinely glad that you recognize that it is creepy no matter who does it. I agree.

So what is the problem?

[boston bean]

41. Because you posted it to try to ferret out some made up inconsistency

you believe some women/feminists hold.

That is my take on it. And that comes with a healthy dose of reading many of your OP's.

[Bonobo]

45. Well I have an equally strong opinion of you having read your OPs and knowing your history.

Maybe we are both wrong. Or right.

[boston bean]

51. I'm a feminist who speaks about rape culture, street harassment

I know how you feel about those issues. It is totally transparent to anyone reading how you feel.

We disagree, ABSOLUTELY, we DO disagree.

[Bonobo]

53. Congratulations. You took an OP that we agree on and you...

Succesfully derailed it AND

Painted me as a rape defender.

You should be proud of yourself. You have created the perception that there are enemies in our midst! They must be fought and only YOU can do it!

[boston bean]

54. No, I'm responding to what you posted and how your responses

here in this thread, do not line up with what you now say is your intent.

[seabeyond]

55. "Painted me as a rape defender." where? i guess this would be baines point to you.

[Bonobo]

62. I won't help you derail this thread further.

You have already shown that you have floating goal posts.

[seabeyond]

72. "Painted me as a rape defender." those are YOUR words. i am not floating

any goal posts, whatever that means. these are YOUR words. copy. paste. YOU accused BB of "Painted me as a rape defender." from her post. her, i will get her post for you and you can show me where she "Painted me as a rape defender."

I'm a feminist who speaks about rape culture, street harassment

I know how you feel about those issues. It is totally transparent to anyone reading how you feel.

We disagree, ABSOLUTELY, we DO disagree.

you accused her of "Painted me as a rape defender." in this post of hers.

where i ask. where did she "Painted me as a rape defender."

[cyberswede]

61. I think this thread derailed itself...

Your intent (e.g., to demonstrate that some people would feel the site in your OP is ok, while a similar site showing women being secretly photographed is not ok) was transparent, and you were called on it.

[Bonobo]

68. What was I called on?

I was called on a made up version of me.

The actual responses of opinion on the OP were few. Some agreed it was stalker-ish and some thought it was tasteful enough to squeak by.

The rest is commentary by an easily stirred up hive who wanted to make it meta.

[cyberswede]

77. I think people just recognized that your OP was an attempt...

to reveal some type of double standard that doesn't really exist (and it was recognized by people who aren't part of the "hive" to which you refer, btw).

[cui bono]

87. You feigning innocence isn't very convincing.

You know exactly why you started this, and it was not to further honest discussion of any real issues.

That much is clear.

[NCTraveler]

116. "I was called on a made up version of me."

At 23,500 + posts, it is no longer a made up version of you.

[Ron Obvious]

14. He's got narrow shoulders

I bet I could kick his arse, even if I'm more than twice his age.

[TroglodyteScholar]

33. Hahah, best post in the thread n/t

[edgineered]

17. perhaps i am missing the site's allure.

The photos are not revealing or provocative in any way. A visitor there would certainly have to have a predisposition for finding its content enticing, and also have to take a long drive down fantasy lane to arrive anywhere.

[Bonobo]

24. Really?

Date: 20th January 2014

Line: Jubilee

Submitted by: Zack

Quite a cute Tubecrush – clearly practicing his open leg technique. Is it the frank or the beans? #sexyfocker

[edgineered]

28. Yes, really. Just my own opinion though.

I don't find fault in others tastes, nor do I have their experiences, good or bad.

[Agschmid]

34. #hopefully #thefrank

#tumblr #ohgod

[cyberswede]

52. Maybe the guy who took this photo *does* have a "a predisposition for finding its content enticing"

I don't see how that refutes what edgineered said.

[laundry_queen]

92. Know what kills me?

That you post in the thread how awful it is the pictures are being posted online without the subject's knowledge and then keep trying to make your point by posting those same pictures of some poor schmuck you have never met over and over again on a message board of over 200,000 people.

[edgineered]

101. Killing you, as in dying from laughter, I hope.

Isn't it strange how one can ferret out what he claims to bother him, yet 'out' himself by repeating, repeating,,,

[Nye Bevan]

18. Public place = fair game for being photographed,

whether you're a guy or a woman. At least in the US; I believe in some countries the rules are different.

[davidpdx]

95. They are

Specifically I can tell you in South Korea it is illegal. I'm sure there are other countries as well.

[cyberswede]

23. I think it's creepy to take photos of strangers...

and even creepier to post them to websites. I don't have enough information to know if anyone is being stalked.

But what is your OP really about? I've been away today...

[Agschmid]

38. It is a bit odd, but it's quite common in society these days...

See that website "peopleofwalmart". It's usually not done to boost anyone's ego and is more often done (IMO) to make fun of someone else.

I doubt anyone not these is actually being stalked but I sure would feel uncomfortable if I noticed someone taking my picture like that.

Either way it seems the OP isn't actually about what the OP seemed to be about.

[boston bean]

25. And from the Reddit Mens Right Group, you can read their opinion of it.

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1628vp/why_is_tubecrushnet_okay_but_rcreepshots_isnt/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[seabeyond]

26. OMG... it works. by jove. wow. nt

[Bonobo]

30. So what?

No you don't use the "MRA" thing to try to shut down conversation at all.

[boston bean]

36. Well, I did read your subject line.

[Bonobo]

40. We agree and yet you seem to feel that merely by bringing this to light...

that I am derailing feminist issues.

I find that to be a very paranoid position, I also find it ironic that you cannot see how their are repeated attempts here to get ME to shut up.

Is silencing people only bad if it is done to the side you feel you are on?

[boston bean]

42. I'm just shedding some light on it.

[Bonobo]

44. You are derailing. nt

[boston bean]

47. Your questions to me upthread seem to make my case.

Like you've made some gotcha. As in, you danged feminists see nothing wrong with this... how dare you complain about men doing this to women.

That is twisted. And it speaks volumes and I'm not the only one you've done that to in this thread.

[seabeyond]

60. "rape apologist scum" again, where? you know, we do have some responsibility when we put words

in others mouth.

[boston bean]

64. Well, I came here to give my opinion and interact with you, which I don't do often.

We do disagree, because I didn't take your posting of this to be an affront to all women.

Whereas, you have on multiple, many, occasions decried that discussing this type of thing happening to women was an affront to all men. The mere frickin discussion of it. The derailment. The MRA talking points. I understand you don't call yourself one, but the points and tactics are on in the same.

[Bonobo]

70. Your opinion of the OP was welcome.

Your making it personal and suited to how you would like to portray me in a meta way was not.

[boston bean]

73. It wasn't personal. It was and is the truth of the matter. nt

[BainsBane]

49. Know what else?

I heard they don't even have a men's history week. Men are totally left out of history books. It's runaway misandry.

[seabeyond]

63. you "lol'ed" in this thread. ahhhhhhhm. lol.

oh bonobo

really. now maybe i really am off.

you are a hoot

[CreekDog]

78. sounds like it was past his bedtime

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
Mail Message
On Mon Apr 14, 2014, 12:03 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

LOL
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4818844

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Telling a poster she us like a child in rude, hurtful, and over the top. I don't even like the poster he is insulting, but it's demeaning to condescend to her this way.

JURY RESULTS

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Apr 14, 2014, 12:11 AM, and the Jury voted 4-3 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Personal attack.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: this poster seems to have a problem with female posters. referring to them as "like a child" doesn't indicate he's improving.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: This whole thread was started as bait. See no reason to allow the op to continue this game.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[seabeyond]

79. call us women psychopath, cool. but no no to a "child". i tease. thanks creek. nt

[BainsBane]

80. Wow. It didn't occur to me to alert on that

As you said, the other comment was far worse. Interesting.

[seabeyond]

81. lol. ya. nt

[JI7]

88. maybe because it was directed at you personally

i didn't see the other post but this person's threads always remind me of racists who always bring up something bad done by a black person or other minority anytime we are discussing some issue concerning racism.

[whathehell]

106. "Men's History Week"?!...OMG, I guess that's like "White History Month"

Poor, underrepresented minorities, both.

[BainsBane]

56. About the First Amendment

Does that only apply to rape porn?

[Bonobo]

59. Derailing he thread is the only way to deal with the inconsistency, I guess. nt

[BainsBane]

69. You talk about shutting down a website

and consider a mention of the First Amendment to be derailing? Wow.

If your OP isn't about shutting down a website, what is your point?

[Bonobo]

71. No, your mention of rape was odd (and creepy). nt

[BainsBane]

75. Oh, right

I keep forgetting that you insist I behave like each day is Groundhog day so that everything you've said in the past should have absolutely no bearing on what you say now. I just have this bad habit of wondering how people's ideas fit together. In the future, I'll try to remember to forget. It's just that with my being a psychopath and all it's kinda hard.

[boston bean]

76. And he takes such an affront that anyone would recite his words and opinions

back to him.

Or that they have to be respectful 100% to him, and afford him all sorts of respect, when he calls feminists here "psychopaths".

Groundhog day... LOL

[mackerel]

67. I agree it is creepy and stalking. I wouldn't want someone to take

a photo of my boyfriend or my son and put it on the website. I wouldn't do it either because I try to have
respect for other people and their privacy.

[Blecht]

74. Ever hear of Walker Evans?

https://www.moma.org/learn/moma_learning/walker-evans-subway-portraits-1938-41

I agree that the framing of the photos on the web site is creepy, but I find it more disturbing that so many people in this thread find the act of legally photographing people in public places as somehow offensive. The whole world of street photography is based on this very act.

[KittyWampus]

83. Some good came from this misbegotten thread after all. THANKS for posting about Evans.

I had never heard of him.

The photos at the link are sublime.

On the other end of the spectrum… a guy was recently found not liable for taking photos up women's skirts. It wasn't considered illegal because the women weren't "naked" underneath their skirts.

[cyberswede]

85. Fortunately, it looks like MA will try to update the law to make it illegal.

Lawmakers and law enforcement officials in the state immediately called for updated measures that would criminalize such photos.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/06/us/court-says-massachusetts-law-doesnt-ban-photos-up-skirts.html?_r=0

[MannyGoldstein]

108. They were updated within a day. nt

[seabeyond]

109. i had heard that. nt

[davidpdx]

96. It happened a lot in South Korea which is why the laws got stricter

over the last decade. Every once in awhile when I watch the Korean news I'd see an article about someone arrested for doing that. The real irony in the whole thing is when they perp walk the guy and the TV crew is there filming they put a jacket over the guy's head. He takes nude photos of women, but when he gets arrested for it he doesn't have to show his face.

[LittleBlue]

84. Personally I don't find admiring the human form creepy

Thankfully the First Amendment protects that

[Blue_In_AK]

90. As a photographer, I kind of like it.

I myself take stealth photos.


Oops, I responded before I realized this was a flame war. Forgive me.

[nomorenomore08]

91. Invasion of privacy? Arguably, yes. Intent to humiliate? Not that I can see.

I agree the premise of the website is somewhat creepy, at least potentially, but comparing it to something like Creepshots - and upskirt photos etc. generally - is a bit of a stretch. Because in the latter case, invasion of privacy and intent to humiliate are the whole point.

[treestar]

94. Some girl thinks he is sexy

In fact, he is pretty sexy.

If you don't have his attributes, I suggest you feel bad about that and your body and spend money trying to be make yours more like his.

[MannyGoldstein]

97. Seems like objectification to me

But I'm notoriously ignorant.

[seaglass]

99. I don't like this just from a privacy perspective. Not a fan of people posting pics on line without

the subject's permission.

Is that enough? Hopefully you weren't equating this to upskirt photos or revenge porn.

In any case, enjoy your break Bonobo - I have to say I won't miss you a bit but perhaps it will give you time for some self-reflection and you will come back with a new perspective.

[brooklynite]

102. First Amendment is irrelevant in this case...

...since the website is from the UK. That said, I don't think you have an expectation of privacy when in public.

[Iggo]

103. I don't hate women.

[seabeyond]

110. I don't hate men.

[Iggo]

111. Figured I'd just cut to the chase.

[seabeyond]

112. ya. you are good at that. nt

[Blue_Adept]

113. People of Walmart site

Now there's a site that makes me uncomfortable, unlike this one. Since that's used for outright mockery, insults and degradation. But again, perfectly legal until views change some day perhaps.

[Zorra]

114. It appears to me to primarily be a gay men's website.

I've seen many photos of men posted in OP's and threads in the DU LGBT forum over the years, except most of the photos posted there were generally a bit more revealing, and staged.

[Starry Messenger]

119. You know those are men who take and post those pictures, right?

I realize you can't answer until June, but it's pretty funny you'd try to use this to try to prove some equivalent exploitation of men by women.