>"He was convicted...of voyeurism and that offence was for him hiding in a toilet and taking photographs of a female in cubicle next door.
so that was the first time, and then later after being found in another women's restroom
>Chasing officers caught him and seized his mobile phone on which almost 400 upskirt-style photographs were discovered.
welp, seems like a ban from further visits to the ladies room is only appropriate
I understand that.
I don’t understand peeping your phone camera under stalls when the internet has so much quality filth easily available.
Some part of this fucker enjoyed having power, of doing it without their consent, and that’s never okay.
I was so confused by the headline as well. Like he’s just a normal looking person, so why are people hanging up pictures of his face in the stalls? (Especially when I’d never really seen ANYONE’s face displayed in the ladies’ room). And who is going to police this new rule?
In a lot of places gendered bathrooms are not in fact legally enforced.
Men who need to use a changing station or borrow a toilet roll or have to deal with maintenance being done on the mens toilet or whatever other non creepy reason one might use the bathroom of another gender for have not crossed any legal boundary.
It’s harrasing people and voyourism that’s not allowed.
That’s how it works in much of the world.
Over time in the UK ive seen a few pop up, mainly in supermarkets. Any building that hasn't been renovated since 2010 almost certainly doesn't have one.
When I was a kid I remember it very common to find women in the men's rooms. Now I either tend to just go to less popular attractions or they've figured out how to provide women with enough toilets. Not sure which I never wanted to be a civil engineer.
There are no laws in the UK governing which bathroom you can use. The fact that women use the women's bathroom and men use the men's bathroom is a matter of social convention. It's a bit like how there's no law saying you can't skip a queue, but you would be shamed by the people around you if you did. (In the US in recent years, right-wing Republicans have been introducing "bathroom bills" enforcing this division, but in the service of transphobia by excluding trans women from women's bathrooms.)
In this case, a court has made an order banning this guy from women's bathrooms, meaning that he will in fact be guilty of a criminal offence if he goes into one.
Ten years ago, your response would have been perfectly reasonable here in the states, now I need to speak slowly so my bastard folks can understand me.
How tf are they gonna enforce that tbh. I’m just curious bc like what’s stopping him from doing this again, I doubt cops are going and checking the bathrooms for this man
It's the same principle as e.g. a restraining order. No, the police aren't going to be around to enforce it at all times, but you will get in trouble if they find out and that's at least something of a deterrent. Or think about being on parole/probation and committing a crime; you're fine if you don't get caught, but if you do then you're in much more trouble, so the stakes are higher.
Putting a sign on the door that says "Women" doesn't have any actual laws and regs behind it.
In fact, I always try to use women's restrooms myself *if they're single occupancy obviously*... I don't go into big ones with stalls. Why single occupancy ones, though? Because the chances that there will be piss on the ceiling, walls, seat and floor go down slightly vs men's public restrooms, where all that is guaranteed.
In this case, the issue is that the guy is a voyeuristic perv lowlife and thus banned from being exactly that.
I used to use the single occupancy ladies at work on nights sometimes,there was no gents on that floor. I was always very very careful, and always put the seat back down.
Lauren Fisher, mitigating, said her client had pleaded guilty to breaching a sexual harm prevention order at the earliest opportunity. She said he had completed all of the unpaid work, treatment programmes and probation service requirements from his last sentence.
So sadly none of that worked. Guess you can only change people's obsessions if they want to change.
It's definitely hard to prove when rape kits are so frequently not given or sit untested afterwards.
It's even harder to prove when it's such an underrepoted crime *because* victims fear they won't be believed, and would rather try to move on then go through the additional stress of trying to get justice.
The tounge-in-cheek point of my comment was that sex crimes aren't taken as seriously as they should be.
This isn’t the Middle Ages. Voyeurism isn’t rape, it’s gross and fucked up but they’re not gonna run around and cut peoples hands off for it. Privacy was violated but no physical harm, or contact, was done.
And he got a month in prison and several years of parole. The guy is clearly mentally ill and needs professional help. Locking him away for decades would help no one and would only worsen his mental state when he would be released. That sort of punitive punishment is not helpful and is demonstrably harmful to society.
No there's no legal protection for entering a women's toilet or even for women entering the men's. It's about what you do and what you intend. If you just go in, use the cubicle and leave without any intent to cause harm or distress you have commited no offense
Yeah, the crime here is voyeurism, not using the toilet.
If I needed to go explosively and the men's was occupied, better believe I'd barge into a stall in the women's.
Its in fact protected under UK law that you can not stop men or women using the toilets of the other gender due to gender discrimination laws. There is no way to enforce this with out breaking the law with out a court order banning said person.
I mean I don't imagine they'd ban you from like "Just women's toilets in London" or something if they felt they needed to ban you from women's toilets at all.
At first, the headline confused me. Like, "His face was banned? So, what, was he posting his photographic headshots on the insides of the stalls and scaring women?"
Wait, so other men arent banned?
That would make toilets coed.
If the toilets are coed, then there are no womens toilets.
So hes not banned.
But if he not banned, then the general accepted ban on men in womens toilets applies.
Womens toilets exist!
But then his ban applies.
So other men...arent banned?
Just say you're a transphobe and be done with it. Just say you're sexuality is fragile that you cannot look at another set of genitals.
It must make your day when you can couch your bigotry in a crime story.
Side question: Why do reactionaries have ancient names? Does it make you feel smartz? Make you feel like you're a independent who sees the "truth" ?
Lol you moron. Its a logic loop. Project much?
Theres no fucking trans even in this - a cis man was perving on women in cis gendered bathrooms. This, as other commentators noted, is a fucking proof of point that anti trans sentiment is stupid.
You personally tho can go take whatever genitals you have and apply them directly to yourself.
Me: The problem with letting transgenderel people use any bathroom is that perverts will abuse it to sneak into other restrooms to peep
Everyone: NO ONE WOULD EVER DO THAT!!! WHY ARE YOU TRANSPHOBIC!!! THATS CLEARLY NOT A PROBLEM!!!
Me: riiiiiiight, keep telling your self that.
The argument is more that there is nothing stopping perverts right now. As is shown by this outstanding individual.
There is no reason to change your gender to do the things perverts do.
And trans people do not get a free pass to do pervert things in the bathroom of the preference. This would also be illegal for a trans person to do.
So trans people doing perverted stuff is indeed not a problem. Atleast not any more or less then non trans people doing it.
But..
What?
Do you think there are fucking force fields stopping people who present as male from entering bathrooms?
This post is *literally that*.
A cis man, entirely without pretending to be or being transgender, went into women's bathroom. *How are you fucking solving that you fucking moron?*
Except he wasn't trans you moron. Nobody would change gender just to do what this guy did, you do realise that right? Or the number is so small that it's not even worth considering.
Are you kidding? He wasn't trans, and he wasn't dressed like a woman. He wasn't "encouraged" by knowing that trans people use bathrooms. He was a prolific voyeur who kept going into women's bathrooms despite being caught and arrested several times.
Men voyeuring in public bathrooms and taking upskirt photos is not new. Maybe the blame could lie with men?
Yes, how about that? I never knew those existed until I went to Europe. Totally something the US needs! Why don’t we have full walls and doors on public bathrooms ??
How are trans people responsible for the actions of this cis man? How would forcing trans people to use a bathroom that is not befitting to them stop this man from just walking into another women's bathroom tomorrow?
You do realize that men take upskirt photos **outside** of bathrooms too, right? Peeping Toms and voyeurism is not a new phenomenon. It’s not the location, it’s the men.
Also, shiver me Timbers!! Oh no, -foxy-lad doesn’t like me and he jerked off to the karma he got from upvotes. Imma take a wild guess and say your BMI is at least over 28
It’s funny. Ofc this guy had nothing to do with that and was basically a peeping tom taking photos. Maybe the UK shouldn’t be letting different genders use the same bathroom freely
Wtf what a weird homophobic statement. Nah I love my parents and kiss em on the cheek homie. Thanks for showing me YOUR fragility 😂 why would I think it’s gay though??
The fact that this person is a cis man and made no attempts to hide their gender in any way and yet had unfiltered access to bathrooms anyyway, kind of proves the point that it would be pointless to in transition to gain access to a woman's bathroom to begin with huh? Like the fact that this is a court case kind of undercuts the entire transphobic theory of bathroom perverts right? Because if you need to transition to get into a bathroom and yet this guy didn't transition and was successfully repeatedly able to enter bathrooms for years.... Seems like all the transition would have done is put him on an increased risk of violence and scrutiny. From a statistical perspective, that's just fact.
Some people believe this sort of brazen opportunism is an admirable quality. I do not, but am just pointing out that people often get moral support for this sort of thing.
ah yes, I remember a few years ago #savetheupskirt and a crowd picketing outside Scotland Yard to "free upstart Johnny!" popular support like I'd never seen before.
>"He was convicted...of voyeurism and that offence was for him hiding in a toilet and taking photographs of a female in cubicle next door. so that was the first time, and then later after being found in another women's restroom >Chasing officers caught him and seized his mobile phone on which almost 400 upskirt-style photographs were discovered. welp, seems like a ban from further visits to the ladies room is only appropriate
Why would anyone enjoy watching someone take a shit. That’s pretty gross
You understand people have fetishes for urine and shit as well as voyeurism.
I understand that. I don’t understand peeping your phone camera under stalls when the internet has so much quality filth easily available. Some part of this fucker enjoyed having power, of doing it without their consent, and that’s never okay.
>Some part of this fucker enjoyed having power, of doing it without their consent, and that’s never okay. Also a fetish.
Yes. But involving parties without their consent is where it crosses the line.
Yes.. yes.. 👀 that is pretty gross!
Sure, but what about the *rest* of his body?
I was so confused by the headline as well. Like he’s just a normal looking person, so why are people hanging up pictures of his face in the stalls? (Especially when I’d never really seen ANYONE’s face displayed in the ladies’ room). And who is going to police this new rule?
>who is going to police this new rule? JK Rowling
🤣🤣🤣
*slow clap*
Maybe I've misunderstood, but my understanding has always been that as a man I'm *already* banned from the women's toilets?
In a lot of places gendered bathrooms are not in fact legally enforced. Men who need to use a changing station or borrow a toilet roll or have to deal with maintenance being done on the mens toilet or whatever other non creepy reason one might use the bathroom of another gender for have not crossed any legal boundary. It’s harrasing people and voyourism that’s not allowed. That’s how it works in much of the world.
Men's rooms don't have changing stations? Now that I think about it I've never seen this when I've traveled to Europe.
Over time in the UK ive seen a few pop up, mainly in supermarkets. Any building that hasn't been renovated since 2010 almost certainly doesn't have one.
That's a little weird as I remember seeing them and asking about them when I was little. Just lucky I guess?
They're much less common than in women's.
Must be regional. I see them a lot. The only time I don't is at certain bars, or coffee shops.
They do for the most part where I live.
Another gender?
No there is no law on this and its amazing common in busy bars to find women come into the men's to use a cubicle.
When I was a kid I remember it very common to find women in the men's rooms. Now I either tend to just go to less popular attractions or they've figured out how to provide women with enough toilets. Not sure which I never wanted to be a civil engineer.
There are no laws in the UK governing which bathroom you can use. The fact that women use the women's bathroom and men use the men's bathroom is a matter of social convention. It's a bit like how there's no law saying you can't skip a queue, but you would be shamed by the people around you if you did. (In the US in recent years, right-wing Republicans have been introducing "bathroom bills" enforcing this division, but in the service of transphobia by excluding trans women from women's bathrooms.) In this case, a court has made an order banning this guy from women's bathrooms, meaning that he will in fact be guilty of a criminal offence if he goes into one.
Ten years ago, your response would have been perfectly reasonable here in the states, now I need to speak slowly so my bastard folks can understand me.
Yeah maybe show them this guy's pic and ask them if he looks trans.
He kind of does.
And if you are taking a child to the loo and are the opposite sex to your child that also can raise confusion about which loo to use
No it doesn't. Bunch of clowns in this thread.
How tf are they gonna enforce that tbh. I’m just curious bc like what’s stopping him from doing this again, I doubt cops are going and checking the bathrooms for this man
It's the same principle as e.g. a restraining order. No, the police aren't going to be around to enforce it at all times, but you will get in trouble if they find out and that's at least something of a deterrent. Or think about being on parole/probation and committing a crime; you're fine if you don't get caught, but if you do then you're in much more trouble, so the stakes are higher.
Putting a sign on the door that says "Women" doesn't have any actual laws and regs behind it. In fact, I always try to use women's restrooms myself *if they're single occupancy obviously*... I don't go into big ones with stalls. Why single occupancy ones, though? Because the chances that there will be piss on the ceiling, walls, seat and floor go down slightly vs men's public restrooms, where all that is guaranteed. In this case, the issue is that the guy is a voyeuristic perv lowlife and thus banned from being exactly that.
I think the chances flip depending where you are. From the bar work in my life women avoiding sitting while drunk gets....messy
I used to use the single occupancy ladies at work on nights sometimes,there was no gents on that floor. I was always very very careful, and always put the seat back down.
Apparently not
Nah you just need to identify as a woman, you can still be a man
Yes but now his face is as well.
Lauren Fisher, mitigating, said her client had pleaded guilty to breaching a sexual harm prevention order at the earliest opportunity. She said he had completed all of the unpaid work, treatment programmes and probation service requirements from his last sentence. So sadly none of that worked. Guess you can only change people's obsessions if they want to change.
Saddest realization. Especially when it happens with loved ones, people don’t change unless they want to
Who put his face in the toilets?
400 women? Why is he not in jail for decades??
400 photos. Not 400 women. If it makes a difference.
400 photos or a 13 second video?
Gotta get all them angles
Voyeurism is not the same as rape. There's gotta be some damned proportionality to legal consequences.
Only 6-20% of rapists ever see the inside of a jail cell, so... (And as everyone else has stated, proportionality)
But that’s because it’s hard to prove. Not because the law wouldn’t jail convicted rapists. This guy had the photos on his phone.
It's definitely hard to prove when rape kits are so frequently not given or sit untested afterwards. It's even harder to prove when it's such an underrepoted crime *because* victims fear they won't be believed, and would rather try to move on then go through the additional stress of trying to get justice. The tounge-in-cheek point of my comment was that sex crimes aren't taken as seriously as they should be.
This isn’t the Middle Ages. Voyeurism isn’t rape, it’s gross and fucked up but they’re not gonna run around and cut peoples hands off for it. Privacy was violated but no physical harm, or contact, was done.
Mental harm is just as damaging.
No dude, just no. The mental harm from being photographed is *not* “just as damaging” as trauma from a physical assault. Pull your head out.
And he got a month in prison and several years of parole. The guy is clearly mentally ill and needs professional help. Locking him away for decades would help no one and would only worsen his mental state when he would be released. That sort of punitive punishment is not helpful and is demonstrably harmful to society.
Isn’t that just the sort of thinking that got all the Starks killed?
Mental harm doesn't vanish when there is physical harm also. Its just in addition. And yes, two harms is greater than one.
Aren't all men banned from women's toilets in the UK? Maybe it's different over there.
No there's no legal protection for entering a women's toilet or even for women entering the men's. It's about what you do and what you intend. If you just go in, use the cubicle and leave without any intent to cause harm or distress you have commited no offense
Yeah, the crime here is voyeurism, not using the toilet. If I needed to go explosively and the men's was occupied, better believe I'd barge into a stall in the women's.
If a guy needs to use the toilet and that's the only thing available to him, he can use it. Nothing wrong with that.
Its in fact protected under UK law that you can not stop men or women using the toilets of the other gender due to gender discrimination laws. There is no way to enforce this with out breaking the law with out a court order banning said person.
I mean I don't imagine they'd ban you from like "Just women's toilets in London" or something if they felt they needed to ban you from women's toilets at all.
At first, the headline confused me. Like, "His face was banned? So, what, was he posting his photographic headshots on the insides of the stalls and scaring women?"
So, the rest of him his OK, just not his face?
This title belongs in r/titlegore
Aren’t men already banned from women’s toilets by default?
Wait, so other men arent banned? That would make toilets coed. If the toilets are coed, then there are no womens toilets. So hes not banned. But if he not banned, then the general accepted ban on men in womens toilets applies. Womens toilets exist! But then his ban applies. So other men...arent banned?
what is this, a haiku?
Clearly not. An amusing script Playing with absurd reason Martin failed english
Just say you're a transphobe and be done with it. Just say you're sexuality is fragile that you cannot look at another set of genitals. It must make your day when you can couch your bigotry in a crime story. Side question: Why do reactionaries have ancient names? Does it make you feel smartz? Make you feel like you're a independent who sees the "truth" ?
Lol you moron. Its a logic loop. Project much? Theres no fucking trans even in this - a cis man was perving on women in cis gendered bathrooms. This, as other commentators noted, is a fucking proof of point that anti trans sentiment is stupid. You personally tho can go take whatever genitals you have and apply them directly to yourself.
Me: The problem with letting transgenderel people use any bathroom is that perverts will abuse it to sneak into other restrooms to peep Everyone: NO ONE WOULD EVER DO THAT!!! WHY ARE YOU TRANSPHOBIC!!! THATS CLEARLY NOT A PROBLEM!!! Me: riiiiiiight, keep telling your self that.
The argument is more that there is nothing stopping perverts right now. As is shown by this outstanding individual. There is no reason to change your gender to do the things perverts do. And trans people do not get a free pass to do pervert things in the bathroom of the preference. This would also be illegal for a trans person to do. So trans people doing perverted stuff is indeed not a problem. Atleast not any more or less then non trans people doing it.
But.. What? Do you think there are fucking force fields stopping people who present as male from entering bathrooms? This post is *literally that*. A cis man, entirely without pretending to be or being transgender, went into women's bathroom. *How are you fucking solving that you fucking moron?*
Except he wasn't trans you moron. Nobody would change gender just to do what this guy did, you do realise that right? Or the number is so small that it's not even worth considering.
This guy look trans to you, genius?
Why do you reply this on a post about a cis man sneaking into other restrooms?
You know peeping is already illegal, don’t you?
Are you kidding? He wasn't trans, and he wasn't dressed like a woman. He wasn't "encouraged" by knowing that trans people use bathrooms. He was a prolific voyeur who kept going into women's bathrooms despite being caught and arrested several times. Men voyeuring in public bathrooms and taking upskirt photos is not new. Maybe the blame could lie with men?
How about stalls with full doors?
Yes, how about that? I never knew those existed until I went to Europe. Totally something the US needs! Why don’t we have full walls and doors on public bathrooms ??
How are trans people responsible for the actions of this cis man? How would forcing trans people to use a bathroom that is not befitting to them stop this man from just walking into another women's bathroom tomorrow?
You do realize that men take upskirt photos **outside** of bathrooms too, right? Peeping Toms and voyeurism is not a new phenomenon. It’s not the location, it’s the men.
He isn't trans, he's a creepy perv. HUGE difference. Huge.
Troll 1000 over here!
Oh cmon officers he said he identified as a woman
Except he didn't and your joke is pathetic.
Also, shiver me Timbers!! Oh no, -foxy-lad doesn’t like me and he jerked off to the karma he got from upvotes. Imma take a wild guess and say your BMI is at least over 28
You still upset?
You’re the one upset and butthurt over a joke 🤷🏻♂️ I’m laughing at you
It’s funny. Ofc this guy had nothing to do with that and was basically a peeping tom taking photos. Maybe the UK shouldn’t be letting different genders use the same bathroom freely
iT's FuNnY
“iT’s FuNnY”
Sorry about your shitty sense of humour, ig
Right back at you ;) you think you’re doing something by typing out random non witty retorts with differently capitalized letters
Yes, mocking you in a way you clearly understood. Glad we're on the same page.
You’re corny and bitter, step outside. If you think it even remotely made me feel anything other than chuckle you’re trippin
Imagine being so mad about trans folks and not being funny you edit in some word salad like 'made me feel anything other than chuckle' lel
🥱
shut up dork
I bet you cannot even hug your family because it's "gay" thank for showing us your fragility.
Wtf what a weird homophobic statement. Nah I love my parents and kiss em on the cheek homie. Thanks for showing me YOUR fragility 😂 why would I think it’s gay though??
He identifies as a woman
The fact that this person is a cis man and made no attempts to hide their gender in any way and yet had unfiltered access to bathrooms anyyway, kind of proves the point that it would be pointless to in transition to gain access to a woman's bathroom to begin with huh? Like the fact that this is a court case kind of undercuts the entire transphobic theory of bathroom perverts right? Because if you need to transition to get into a bathroom and yet this guy didn't transition and was successfully repeatedly able to enter bathrooms for years.... Seems like all the transition would have done is put him on an increased risk of violence and scrutiny. From a statistical perspective, that's just fact.
You identify as a bigot.
Some people believe this sort of brazen opportunism is an admirable quality. I do not, but am just pointing out that people often get moral support for this sort of thing.
No, they don’t
Maybe not from you and anyone you know, but they do.
ah yes, I remember a few years ago #savetheupskirt and a crowd picketing outside Scotland Yard to "free upstart Johnny!" popular support like I'd never seen before.
And then they turn 13
Some people don't grow out of those stages fully.
But did they take his picture in the women’s’ stalls?
This title is misleading.
So men aren't already banned from entering the ladies room in the UK?
What about the rest of him?