I don't think it's right to send unsolicited pics of erect penises to women

Are there really that many people on DU who have done this and think it's ok?

twitter feeds, weren't there?

anthony weiner.

People need to get over it and focus on what is important.

Welcome to DU.

Sorry you had to show up during this ridiculousness

man. After he sent a pic of his penis - she never saw him again.

j/k!:)

they were solicited and the women aren't innocent in all of this..

back and forth before said pics ever get sent.

But from the posts here, apparently that wasn't the case (I'm not keeping up with the story)

They can't stand their team losing even if the politician who committed the acts is someone who would be endlessly ridiculed if he/she was on the other side of a political fence. It shows just how effective propaganda is on everyone and how badly people need to stop following and believing it.

no particular reason....

intrigue.

In Pompeii, erect penises were a sign of good fortune and good living. The better houses often had a statue with a large erect weiner at the entrance. Without clothing. Unfortunately for Anthony, size did matter in Pompeii, as well, but on a different scale. They preferred smaller erect penises, thinking they were cute. The largest ones were considered an embarrassment.

Sorry Tony.

:rofl:

Where was the picture of an erect penis? I missed that one.

.

do not like judgmental people acting like vultures
piling on one person.

Since there is not perfect person and we all make mistakes
I get no joy out of beating up on one person.

I hope every body now knows if you are on Twitter, Facebook
social networking you are fair game I suppose.

I am not excusing Weiner. His public stoning by the Media
yesterday was a sight to behold and some punishment.

In perspective, why do we make something pertaining
to sex the only thing punishable.

We have Banksters who put the country in ruins, and
they celebrate with bonuses. We have Insurance Companies
who raise Premiums simply to meet Wall Streets demand,
thus harming the country. We give them more customers.
The list goes on. Governors cut the vulnerable from Medicaid.

To me this is more immoral than a Congressmen sending a
suggestive picture of himself in his underpants. Is this
my business?????

Where are our values. Sexual Sins are the ones to take
people to court. Sexual Sins are the ones to try to end
a person's career????


Wha

and if he should decide to resign and a republican wins, will the pearl clutchers then be happy?.....just sayin'

Who would do such a thing?

penis was visible. Do an image search on Google for briefs. You'll see lots of outlines of penises. Was the photo unsolicited? I do not know the answer to that question, in reality.

he said she had nothing to do with it.

she said she never had dm's with him other than the welcome DM when she first joined his twitter feed.

and you made a distinction in your reply to me. Do you feel that distinction makes it ok?

It's a rude thing to do, and I can't imagine doing such a thing. You may have seen my post condemning Weiner for his behavior in this whole incident. Or, perhaps you did not see it.

As for what Weiner said, I no longer take his word on much of anything. Go figure...

And yet, his penis was not visible. Only an outline of in through those briefs. There is a distinction there, you know - a real one.

If I received an email like that unsolicited, it wouldn't really make much of a difference.

or am i some sort of prude?

I interested in finding out. Such a photo is certainly rude. I would not take such a photo, much less send it to someone. That's not my sort of thing.

I do suspect, however, that your reaction to it would be different than to a photo of a fully-exposed erect penis. Mine certainly would be. The photo that was sent has appeared in all sorts of publications, both online and other, without alteration. That would not be the case had the briefs not been in place. Yes, there is a distinct difference.

I do not characterize people as prudes for taking offense at offensive things. That would be impolite.

is less offensive and prolly OK in your mind.

I'm really not sure where you are coming from and making that kind of distinction and then denying it would matter at all.

:eyes:

Please don't attempt to read my mind when you have my words in front of you.

You appear to be merely skimming over what I write, rather than actually reading it. I believe I'll stop writing in this thread.

If you agree with me that it is not OK, then that should be the end of it.

May I ask again, why the need for the distinction in this context?

Had the photo been of a naked, erect penis, outrage would have been universal, and this all would have ended much earlier. As it was, the photograph was simply rude, not obscene. Had Weiner not lied about the situation, it would have blown over and he would not be in the ugly situation in which he currently finds himself.

That the actual photo can be printed and displayed in open journalism is an indication of the distinction. Had it been an image of a naked, erect penis, I can assure you that it would not have appeared in so many places. Weiner would have been forced to resign immediately if that had been the case.

I'm sorry you do not see the difference. Perhaps the mere outline of a penis is shocking enough to you. I find it far less offensive, as apparently do most people.

Different strokes, as we were wont to say in the late 1960s, for different folks.

How many times must I write that before you see it and understand it? It's just that it is more not OK to send a photo of a naked erect penis.

What he sent was rude. Had he sent the other, it would be more than rude. Had he not lied, and had sent the photo he sent, he would not be forced to resign. Had he sent the other photo, sans briefs, the demand for his resignation would have been instantaneous, whether he lied or not.

There is a difference between being rude and being obscene. The consequences are different, too, for each.

Many things are not OK to do, but doing them will not necessarily mean the end of your career. There are other things that will mean the end of your career on their own.

The world is not binary, Ms. Bean. It has an infinite number of levels of gray. Not OK does not mean what you seem to think it means. Not OK is not OK. There are much worse things that one can do beyond simply not OK. The world is not binary.

So my questioning your distinction makes perfect sense.

I was making a point and you were making some distinctions which have nothing to do with what I posted.

We both agree it is not OK. That is all.

How amusing...

with the latest.

I guess that's what I get for going off half-cocked.

Bryant

...
Because sometimes IT WORKS!!!

/me ducks!

but men have been sending photos of naked women for decades.

Totally worked.

How do YOU know what they "solicited"?

What nonsense.

Women who don't send them back are even bigger assholes!!!! :evilgrin: :sarcasm:

Not really.