Wow! A catfight?! Really! No one has fought over me before! Absolutely luv it! ::)
I totally agree that the decision to create a voyeur SIG should be based on interest. Hence, the poll (which received little response). If there's not enough interest to justify the group, then that's that. We can always re-open the topic down the line when maybe there will be.
Of course we need to stay within the law. There's no question regarding that.
A problem appears when it comes to issues of 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 wrong. We're all on the wrong side of someones line.
Are there really documented "victims" of voyeur videos who have committed suicide or harmed themselves in any way - or was mention of such all just "what if?" If there's no precedence then this suggested possibility is very extreme. Did Paris Hilton or Tommy Lee harm themselves when their private sex tapes became public fodder? I'm not saying it's not possible :cry2:, but come on… Anything is possible, so let's stick to the the more plausible scenario.
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.
