STRANGE: Texas Throws Out Law Against Taking Pictures Up a Woman's Skirt On Grounds That the Photographer Has Freedom Of Expression To Take Them

The article says:



"A Texas court has thrown out a law prohibiting ‘up the skirt’ photography, on the grounds the previous ruling violated Texas’ citizens’ constitutional right to freedom of expression.

The Texas Court of Appeals ruled 8-1 to strike down part of a law which bans taking images of another person in public without their consent and with the intention to “arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person”, criticising the “paternalistic” intrusion into peoples’ private right to be aroused."


**********

So, basically if a pervert wishes to become sexually aroused and takes a picture up the skirt of a woman in a public place without her consent, then the photographer can do so because a person's private right to become aroused is more important than protecting the woman's right to privacy of her body that she is concealing with her skirt. Also, the photographer's right to freedom of expression in voyeuristically taking pictures of what is up underneath a woman's skirt is more important than the woman's right to NOT express her body underneath her skirt, hence the reason for wearing the skirt to conceal her body in the first place.

I wonder if it would be illegal to share these photographs online since clearly, the Judge who made this decision doesn't want to stand in the way of anyone's "private right to be aroused." And since a woman's face is exposed to the public, taking a picture of her face, as well as a picture of her body up underneath her skirt, in order to show the world whose butt is being photographed, is starting to look like it's going to be legal to do in Texas.

Wow! What a slippery slope this Judge created by striking down the law against photographing women up their skirts!

[link to www.independent.co.uk]

So that more people can know that this law that once protected women and girls is no longer in force in Texas.

I'm not in favor of men doing that, but get a life, no one is being HARMED !

Are you a feminazi ?

If a woman wanted her butt to be photographed and shared, she'd walk around naked in public. Until then, she is being harmed because she is wearing a skirt or a dress that covers up her body that she does not want to have photographed, and she has reasonable assurance that her privacy up underneath her skirt is protected.

Peoples' mothers, girlfriends, fiances, wives, sisters, daughters, grand-daughters, great-granddaughters, and friends are being harmed when a voyeuristic peeping Tom takes a cell-phone camera and sneakily puts it up underneath a woman's skirt and takes a picture without the female's consent.

If you claim that you are a woman and say that this does no harm to take a picture of another woman's butt, then I question that you are actually a woman. Women do NOT want this HARM done against them. If you are a man, then clearly you don't give a damn about the women in your family and protecting them from what THEY would say harms them. But since it DOES NOT HARM YOUR FEELINGS, then that's all that matters, right?

Go to all of the women and girls in your family and tell them that you feel that there is no harm in peeping Toms taking pictures of their butts up underneath their skirts without their permission, and possibly even taking a picture of their faces so as to tell the world whose butt just got onto the internet. Tell them that and then get back to us here at GLP with what THEY tell you.

But you won't tell that to your grand-mother, your mother, your wife or girlfriend, your daughters, your grand-daughters, your sisters, or your friends, will you? No.

Strange how you just told everyone that taking pictures of females' butts without their consent "does no harm" on GLP, and many GLP'ers are females!

And since someone out there actually doesn't give a damn if people are violated in this manner, I am going to continue to bump this thread and show all of the GLP community your opinion that this behavior doesn't harm anyone.

Clearly, more people need to be warned, so I am going to give that warning.

Follow the train to the station. I'll bet you a dollar that the Judge or Judges making this ruling were appointed by Obama to upend our laws, rules and morays and ultimately our very way of life.

So let me see if I have this right...

Photographing up women's skirts: Protected by 1st Amendment.

Photographing police: Immediate grounds for arrest and/or beating.

Yeah that sounds about right in today's America.

You are obviously OBSESSED by this issue.

No, I don't want someone filming up my wife's skirt, but does it warrant prison time for the offender ?

Of course not.

As I wrote, no harm is being done.

You don't have a life, and probably look like Rosie O'Donnell.

This is wonderful news for perverts.

So, are you saying that it shouldn't be against the law for a man to take a picture of your wife's butt, her face to show whose butt it is, and then post it on the internet for others to see? You're alright with your wife's privacy being violated, and therefore if it happened to her--or perhaps your daughter or sister--you think this should not be a crime? After all, "NO HARM DONE."

If you DO think it should be a crime for your female relatives to be violated, then what should be the punishment?

But since you suggest that "no harm is being done" by taking these pictures up women's skirts, then you really wouldn't care if your wife's face and butt are uploaded for millions of people around the world to see?

Either it causes harm because you said yourself you don't want it happening to your wife-----WHY NOT LET IT HAPPEN TO YOUR WIFE IF THERE'S "NO HARM DONE," RIGHT?

Or you admit that it does indeed cause harm because you don't want it happening to your wife.

The fact is, women don't want perverts taking pictures up their skirts. And if you ask most men--INCLUDING YOURSELF SINCE YOU ADMITTED TO IT----men don't want their wives or other female relatives violated in this way.

And why do they not want this to happen? Because it causes harm.

Otherwise, take back what you said about your wife and how you don't want it to happen to her. "No harm done" against her with her butt and her face to show whose butt it is uploaded online for the whole world to see, right?

Tonight, just do one thing. Ask your wife how she would feel if she was violated in this way. Ask her if she would feel harmed by it. After she tells you yes or no, then tell her that YOU SEE NO HARM IN IT.

If she said that she felt harm in it, use your wife as an example to understand why women don't want perverts to do this and why you should care enough about other women to not want it to happen to them, either.

I am not obsessed with this story. I am outraged! You would be outraged too if it finally hit home for you, and your wife was the one victimized. Finally, you would begin to understand the harm that this does.

in a sociaty werre women are seen as nothing more than sexual objects and women accept to be undressed in public as normal for sure those same womens rights are eroded , she has no value , this is not suprizing what is supizing is that women continue to accept this kind of abuse from sociaty

If I saw a man take an up skirt I would kick his ass

You do know that they make trousers for women now. Jeans, slacks, pant suits....

This is such a non-issue.

If you don't want someone taking a picture up your skirt, don't wear one. Personal responsibility is a wonderful thing.

NO NEED 2 B femianything.

this violates the 4th amendment as UNDER the skirt is PRIVATE and
one has the RIGHT TO BE SECURE ......

so someone has 2 cough up the 3 to 400 bucks TO FILE and get this bs overturned.

no one has the RIGHT .

and ONCE some jerkoff gets the shi_ kicked otta him for this invasion of privacy,it will end.

Really? Wearing a skirt is an invitation to pervert?

Guess that depends on the length of the skirt now doesn't it. Longer skirts make it harder to them to get the glory shot. But those women who wear shorter skirts are doing it to gain attention. So yes, I believe they are putting out the invitation. If you don't want them taking pictures, then don't give them the opportunity.

Lol laws...

We live in a world where dropping N's, F's, Q's in public have a more detrimental effect on your life's future than anything like arrest for filming somebody's panty-drawz

Really?

NOW YOU KNOW WHY I WEAR PANTS.

Now turn it around, give a woman a camera and send her on a mission to zoom on on men's parts, voyeuristically, in front of his wife and kids. No not really but can you understand the actual "privacy" violation?

Now the question is, is this applicable in a bathroom toilet too? How about through a ceiling vent? See how no matter how expensive the judge is, the brains, those cost extra.

Sorry but men would love for women to take pics of their junk

My take on this:

If the Texas court comes down on people taking upskirt photos without consent because it violates people's privacy, it opens a whole can of worms with regard to the NSA and other forms of photographing people without their consent.

In essence, if people cannot be legally photographed or recorded without their consent, you are saying that the citizens have some kind of right to privacy from hidden photographers, it opens up the floodgates for people to sue a whole host of individuals, private companies and public institutions for violating their right to personal privacy for taking pictures or recording video without their consent.

In this case, the government has expressly stated that no one has any right to privacy that supersedes the right of someone else to video tape them or take their photo.

In essence, they are saying don't do anything in public or within the view or potential view of others that you wouldn't be comfortable having posted on YouTube or used against you in a court of law.

It was really quite nicely done.

It covers the asses of all of the government entities that record us all the time.

It says their right to record trumps our right not to be recorded, and it was quite the blanket ruling.

It sets precedent, so people who sue for having their rights violated will find themselves being told to fuck off.

Clever.

What the Nazis did in WW2 was legal according to German law at the time. It did not work out so well at Nuremberg though.

Ever ride up an Escalator in a Shopping Mall about 4 steps behind a bunch of late teen girls in mini skirts?

Those girls KNOW that everybody riding up the escalator behind them can see right up to their THONGS ... and they love it or they wouldn't be doing it, they would be riding up on the elevator or wearing more modest clothes.

I always chuckle about a women who wears a plunging neckline with a push up bra underneath getting upset about guys looking at her chest ...

SHEESH ... if you are going to put it on public display, well EXPECT PEOPLE TO LOOK!

Victim blaming.....now if we don't want some pervert taking pictures up our skirts, don't wear one? If I catch one, they will regret it.

Victim? How are women who get upskirt photos taken of them being harmed? It's not exactly something you go to a psychologist for. Just slap the perv, job done. Stand up for yourself and start being an honest individual for once. You lie so much you believe yourself.