You Must Not Think Bad Thoughts

Matt Welch | April 21, 2008

Be careful what you look at, if you're sitting in a Maine public park. According to a bill that passed the Pine Tree State's House,

a person who, for the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire, intentionally engages in visual surveillance, aided or unaided by mechanical or electronic equipment, of the uncovered breasts, buttocks, genitals, anus or pubic area of another person is guilty of visual sexual aggression regardless of where the surveillance occurs. Surveillance may occur either in a public or private place.

Read more about it over at Advice Goddess Amy Alkon's blog. While you're there, watch her accuse Rebecca Solnit of "grassy-knoll feminism."

Comments

Fluffy|4.21.08 @ 12:22PM|#

Rebecca Solnit is a twit who wants to blame her social anxiety disorder on the patriarchy.

dan|4.21.08 @ 12:22PM|#

how is this possible? If surveillance can also occur in "private" then looking at a naked person in one's own home is illegal? Whaaaaaaat?

|4.21.08 @ 12:24PM|#

a person who, for the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire, intentionally engages in visual surveillance, aided or unaided by mechanical or electronic equipment, of the uncovered breasts, buttocks, genitals, anus or pubic area of another person is guilty of visual sexual aggression regardless of where the surveillance occurs. Surveillance may occur either in a public or private place.

Appreciating (ogling) a finely formed caboose could soon be illegal in Maine? WTF?

Guy Montag|4.21.08 @ 12:25PM|#

Hey Aqualung!

Guy Montag|4.21.08 @ 12:26PM|#

Appreciating (ogling) a finely formed caboose could soon be illegal in Maine? WTF?

I suspect that they are so rare as to make the offenders quite obvious.

|4.21.08 @ 12:27PM|#

If your uncovered anus is visible in a public place, you've really got not cause to complain. That takes some effort.

old dude|4.21.08 @ 12:28PM|#

Just remember, all heterosexual sex is rape.

|4.21.08 @ 12:37PM|#

crazy female thinking:

I'm going to put on a low cut shirt and an uncomfortable push up bra just to show off my goodies, but DON'T LOOK YOU PERVERT!

|4.21.08 @ 12:38PM|#

"uncovered breasts, buttocks, genitals, anus or pubic area"

So if you're indecently exposing yourself and I become aroused by it, I've committed a crime? Talk about blaming the victim!

Guy Montag|4.21.08 @ 12:41PM|#

So if you're indecently exposing yourself and I become aroused by it, I've committed a crime? Talk about blaming the victim!

I have now discovered where the FCC people who wrote all those silly scanner, cell phone and CB listening laws retired to.

Brian Sorgatz|4.21.08 @ 12:42PM|#

In the spirit of the post title inspiration, I have to ask if Maine is experimenting with cornfields to relieve prison overcrowding.

fyodor|4.21.08 @ 12:43PM|#

There's an old song, probably from the 40's or 50's, about "standing on the corner, watching all the girls go by" which includes the line, "brother, you can't go to jail for what you're thinking!"

How times change. But maybe not always in the ways Bob Dylan's fans expected.

Guy Montag|4.21.08 @ 12:46PM|#

Do they still have the lottery in Maine to ensure good crop yeilds?

|4.21.08 @ 12:53PM|#

Two words: Mirrored sunglasses

and if you have binoculars, you better also have a bird book. :-)

|4.21.08 @ 12:55PM|#

I glanced at a woman the other day and thought "she's very pretty". I mean, damn, am I sick or what? I'm a real abuser. Really, really sick. And what's worse, I saw a man and thought he was handsome. Now THAT'S sick. I mean first acknowledging that a woman can, in fact, be attractive, but then that a man can too? Lock me up because I am out of control.

|4.21.08 @ 1:05PM|#

There were lots of opportunities to offend this weekend at the park where all the college kids were boozing and running (literally) around naked (not quite so literally)

|4.21.08 @ 1:05PM|#

Do they lock up the suspects so they can be raped in jail?

|4.21.08 @ 1:08PM|#

I'd better hope that girl in the cafeteria just now didn't notice the hate crime I was committing.

javier|4.21.08 @ 1:14PM|#

oh shit. I guess i gotta retire the mirrors on the shoes.

Franklin Harris|4.21.08 @ 1:15PM|#

Rebecca Solnit is a twit who wants to blame her social anxiety disorder on the patriarchy.

That was just one letter away from being oh so patriarchal.

|4.21.08 @ 1:24PM|#

Fish. Barrel. Gun.

And guess what, if you are a woman you've had many men jerk off to you, whether you knew it or not. You can pretty much assume every single male co-worker, friend, etc. has jerked off to you before

Well, maybe not this one (same thread):

I clock in at a stocky standoffish 6'.

Abdul|4.21.08 @ 1:25PM|#

That law could be a standard peeping tom statute. The reference to "either in a public or private place" could just include dressing rooms or other public areas in which people regularly expose private parts.

Paul|4.21.08 @ 1:26PM|#

Ignorance of the law is an excuse.

|4.21.08 @ 1:28PM|#

Think of the revenue that Maine could generate from one Hooters restaurant.

|4.21.08 @ 1:33PM|#

Abdul, you have no expectation to privacy in public space regardless of what you expose. If you show it in public, people can look.

I doubt this law will survive.

Syd|4.21.08 @ 1:47PM|#

"surveillance"

"uncovered breasts, buttocks, genitals, anus or pubic area"

This is a peeping Tom statute. I do wonder how many women go around topless and bottomless in public in Maine. It also prevents you videotaping women changing into their bathing suits, which was done to Jenna Bush once.

Bingo|4.21.08 @ 2:04PM|#

Note that taints were mysteriously excluded from the list...

Zeb|4.21.08 @ 2:04PM|#

The part of the law having to do with intent: "for the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire, intentionally engages in visual surveillance" is uncomfortably thought-crimey, but it seems like it sort of de-fangs the law a bit to.
"Honest, I was peeping for purely informational purposes, nothing to do with sexual desire at all".

Abdul|4.21.08 @ 2:36PM|#

Abdul, you have no expectation to privacy in public space regardless of what you expose. If you show it in public, people can look.


That's not true. the standard is a "reasonable expectation of privacy." We have a reasonable expectation that we won't be stared at in a public dressing room or bathroom. there are dresing rooms that are ill-designed to keep out determined prying eyes, and this law makes that illegal.

|4.21.08 @ 2:42PM|#

Think of the revenue that Maine could generate from one Hooters restaurant.

I can estimate those revenues precisely:

$0.00

There are no uncovered naughty bits in a Hooters. At least, not by the waitresses.

|4.21.08 @ 2:50PM|#

This is a peeping Tom statute. I do wonder how many women go around topless and bottomless in public in Maine.

Have you been to the beach lately? Like, this century? Uncovered "breasts" and "buttocks" are plentiful.

|4.21.08 @ 2:50PM|#

This bill, as written, outlaws consensual viewing of private parts of one's sexual partner, whether in public or private. It also outlaws looking at porn, since it doesn't appear to distinguish between live people and pictures or movies of live people.

Or dead people, but that's another thread.

This has the stink of "This bill is badly written and full of unintended consequences, but to vote "no" would subject me to distorting hit pieces when I'm up for reelection, so let's pass it along and hope it dies in conference committee without a vote, or maybe let the governor take the hit for vetoing it."

|4.21.08 @ 2:54PM|#

In order to drive my point into the ground, would a reasonable person sya that these are "covered"? NSFW!

|4.21.08 @ 2:58PM|#

J sub D,

That's not a bikini, that's the little seen traditional Indonesian practice of taint-binding.

jtuf|4.21.08 @ 3:08PM|#

I agree with Syd. It seems like the legislatures wanted to uphold people's privacy rights. Spy cams violate privacy wheither an officer or a private citizen holds them. If the bill has a clause allowing for consenting adults in private, then I support it. The "for the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire" clause seems to be for a defendants benifit. Otherwise security cameras at clothing stores and some doctor visits would be illegal.

|4.21.08 @ 4:20PM|#

There are no uncovered naughty bits in a Hooters.

I was gonna say that "RC you've never been to Hooters with me...but then you ruined it by adding:

At least, not by the waitresses.

|4.21.08 @ 5:06PM|#

I'm going to put on a low cut shirt and an uncomfortable push up bra just to show off my goodies, but DON'T LOOK YOU PERVERT!

Remember that the definition of pervert depends on who is looking, not in the mere fact that they're looking. A "hot guy" is never a pervert, while the unattractive or nerdy is always a pervert.

|4.21.08 @ 5:19PM|#

The war on male sexuality continues to intensify. Meanwhile, cowardly men everywhere are too afraid to speak up for fear of being thought to have perverse thoughts and feelings.

|4.21.08 @ 5:52PM|#

This is a peeping Tom statute. I do wonder how many women go around topless and bottomless in public in Maine.

Syd,

How uncovered is uncovered? Do they have to be completely covered? What if there is a little cleavage showing? How about a lot? What about thongs that don't cover the buttocks?

Get the right combination of cop, prosecutor and judge, and an admiring glance could land you in jail.

|4.21.08 @ 6:48PM|#

Perhaps, officer, I was not undressing the young lady with my eyes but rather was dressing her. She is soooo UGLY!!!!

Officer Muldoon to breastfeedi|4.21.08 @ 7:10PM|#

You have the right to remain silent. You have the right...

Zeno|4.21.08 @ 7:46PM|#

The way I read this bit, it seems like looking at your naked wife/husband/girlorboyfriend or any other whatnot (stripper, japanese gameshow contestant) would be illegal.
The quote above seems to make it up to police to find and arrest, and does not require that the person being observed report this.
Couldn't this be used against any PDA that the officer doesn't like - interracial, homosexual or just premarital?

|4.22.08 @ 2:13PM|#

"Visual Sexual Aggression"?

Wow. That's a reach-and-a-half.

And if we get the bionic eyes mentioned in another thread, will the law require a "black box" for said eyes, so that it can have evidence of one's illegal "surveillance" activities?

It would be easier to require all potential VSA victims to simply wear a burka, and would also give a shot in the arm to America's failing textile and clothing industries, or at least to the retail sector.

Michael Price|4.25.08 @ 1:46AM|#

"There's an old song, probably from the 40's or 50's, about "standing on the corner, watching all the girls go by" which includes the line, "brother, you can't go to jail for what you're thinking!"

How times change. But maybe not always in the ways Bob Dylan's fans expected."

It's the Four Lads "Standing on a corner"
http://www.lyrics007.com/Four%20Lads%20Lyrics/Standing%20on%20the%20Corner%20Lyrics.html