How come most voyeur videos are old?

[Jessica60700]

Originally Posted by Cunnijunior

Not at all LOL ! and fortunately !
a sexual assault without touching anybody LOL ...

U will have problems if you record a person who is in a private place
but in a public place, I repeat, public place, u will have no problems and it's totally logical

Logical is not legal in all countries. In the UK for example, things only need to be socially unacceptable and distressing.
Many "public" areas also aren't. The woods or bushes around a venue are private property. You may be prohibited from filming on private property.

Many counties in Europe have similar laws. It is considered a sexual offense in most of the world.
And btw, assault doesn't require touching someone, you're thinking of battery.

[Cunnijunior]

Originally Posted by Jessica60700

Logical is not legal in all countries. In the UK for example, things only need to be socially unacceptable and distressing.

Could u please develop?

Many "public" areas also aren't. The woods or bushes around a venue are private property. You may be prohibited from filming on private property.

I should have been more accurate in my words.
By private I meant "closed places" (room etc...)

If somebody pees in the garden in full view of everyone near the street, good luck in getting the recording people convicted...

a "closed" place is a very important notion in the voyeur legislation, way more than "private" one.
What is supposed to be hidden : the limit

A voyeur recording a nude girl walking on the streets : no problem
A voyeur recording an Underskirt in public place : problem

Many counties in Europe have similar laws. It is considered a sexual offense in most of the world.

Could u please bring sources for that statement? (for public urination I mean)
Because it's not what I read.
I read very often that what's made in public view can be recorded.

If many articles I read, the main concern was sharing it, not recording it.

And btw, assault doesn't require touching someone, you're thinking of battery.

U were talking about a sexual assault.
sexual assault requires touching someone, otherwise it will be other things like "violation of nudity" etc... but not "sexual assault".
But it depends from the countries.

But I really don't undersstand why you said In most European countries filming a girl peeing in public is sexual assault up to 15 years in prison.
In European countries, legislation are complex and not under a single notion of "sexual assault" including pratically everything... it' s not the reality.
There are many distinctions made and "sexual recording" have their own articles with their own sentences and I can assure you, it's not to 15 years lol.

[subbuteo]

Originally Posted by Waesserchentrueber

Oh, there is still quite a lot of (good) amateur content. It is just not publicly avaible.
When you share something on a public platform, someone will immediately reupload it to every file sharing service and every forum in existence trying to rake in some ad money off of your work. What these people don't realise is that THEY BURN THE SPOTS. They create publicity for something that is your dirty little secret.
Anything that is an ongoing spot for filming is thus usually kept very private. If the spot gets burnt for some other reason, then the authors might choose to share it publicly, but only if the vids are not traceable to them and if the heat has cooled somewhat. So, anything "new" that hits these public spheres, will be a couple of years old at best.

That's what i presumed, there are underground communities that keep the content off the web and amongst themselves only. You probably need your own original content to be invited into these circles.

[json1337]

I think more will come. In the time of Corona there weren't any festivals / public events. And I think the reason that there are so many old videos is, that those are reuploads from paid sites. Some of those sites still produce videos, but until they are reuploaded may take some time.

[Jessica60700]

Originally Posted by Cunnijunior

A voyeur recording a nude girl walking on the streets : no problem
A voyeur recording an Underskirt in public place : problem

So ya an exhibitionist spraying it all over is one thing.
But a girl trying to hide while peeing is the same as upskirt voyeurism.

You know that voyerism is a crime while insisting your particular form of voyeurism isn't.
What is the difference between going into a bathroom without a doors and going in an alcove in an alleyway?
You go pee just out of sight in both cases, the only difference is that one is inside and the other is outside. So you feel entitled to anything outside? Well then why do you recognize upskirt shots are bad?
If I don't wear anything under a skirt? Are you entitled to see my crotch anytime I'm outside?
What if I just spread my legs and leg go, then are you entitled to a glimpse?
If I go into a half squat, are you entitled then?
What if I have a friend hold a screen up to block view. Are you entitled poke your camera around it?
What if I'm in a alley, are you entitled to stand right infront of my and hold your camera inches from my crotch?

If I'm pulled over on the side of the road, are you entitled to pull up behind me, jump out of your car, run upto me, and hold your camera inches from my crotch?

Please tell me how you're entitled to see my vagina. Please explain.

[dredrickt]

Originally Posted by Jessica60700

So ya an exhibitionist spraying it all over is one thing.
But a girl trying to hide while peeing is the same as upskirt voyeurism.

You know that voyerism is a crime while insisting your particular form of voyeurism isn't.
What is the difference between going into a bathroom without a doors and going in an alcove in an alleyway?
You go pee just out of sight in both cases, the only difference is that one is inside and the other is outside. So you feel entitled to anything outside? Well then why do you recognize upskirt shots are bad?
If I don't wear anything under a skirt? Are you entitled to see my crotch anytime I'm outside?
What if I just spread my legs and leg go, then are you entitled to a glimpse?
If I go into a half squat, are you entitled then?
What if I have a friend hold a screen up to block view. Are you entitled poke your camera around it?
What if I'm in a alley, are you entitled to stand right infront of my and hold your camera inches from my crotch?

If I'm pulled over on the side of the road, are you entitled to pull up behind me, jump out of your car, run upto me, and hold your camera inches from my crotch?

Please tell me how you're entitled to see my vagina. Please explain.

No, a person urinating in public who willfully pulled their pants down is not the same as upskirt voyeurism. That's actually a crime itself, and plenty of people are ticketed or arrested for it. To be considered a voyeur, you would have to breach "a reasonable expectation of privacy." Having a camera shown up your skirt is a breach, you wear clothes to cover up. Filming in a bathroom in a breach, you expect you are alone. Pissing in an alley is NOT, there is no expectation while pulling your pants down in public, regardless of whether you are behind something or not. Otherwise, anyone operating a CCTV circuit would be violating your privacy.

Its not so much that people are "entitled" to see you so much as it is you are not "entitled" to privacy. If someone made a physical move on you, or shoved your friend out of the way, that would be considered an assault. There are also decency laws that certain jurisdictions have that would make that filming illegal, but none of it is centered around privacy while in public and willfully removing clothing.

[observer]

Originally Posted by Jessica60700

Please tell me how you're entitled to see my vagina. Please explain.

Your vagina is difenitely is your vagina and only you decides to show it to somebody other or not. Look at Muslim women. You will never see the vagina of any Muslim woman, because they follow very strict behavior rules. They do not visit nude beaches or public spa, do not wear short skirts, swimsuits, transparent clothes. They do not drink alcohol and not pee in bushes. If they don't want to show their body, they won't show it. Be same as Muslim woman and your vagina will be only your.

These anti-voyeur laws don't work because they violate the laws of nature. A men will always look at a woman, maybe some of them will take photos and videos. And we shouldn't judge men for this, just as we don't judge gays and lesbians for their sexual preferences.

[vpw]

When a woman decides to pee outdoors in a public place, any expectation of privacy becomes an oxymoron. What is expected of a man is discretion and most man till today observe that while their natural instincts make them get a sneak peek at the exposed privates of the peeing woman while making her feel comfortable. Of course there are assholes who harass women during their relief and these jerks are the ones that are basically enabling these foolish laws.

The recent ruling in Spain with regards to taking videos of the peeing ladies basically outlines that if the woman decides to pee outdoors in a public place, she has rights to prevent someone from taking pictures or videos.

The best part being that many young ladies were asked if they had any objections to being filmed while they peed and to no surprise most took the mature attitude of not being concerned if their privates are filmed during their pee. They are fully aware of the implications of peeing in public.

[georgewt]

Originally Posted by observer

Your vagina is difenitely is your vagina and only you decides to show it to somebody other or not. Look at Muslim women. You will never see the vagina of any Muslim woman, because they follow very strict behavior rules. They do not visit nude beaches or public spa, do not wear short skirts, swimsuits, transparent clothes. They do not drink alcohol and not pee in bushes. If they don't want to show their body, they won't show it. Be same as Muslim woman and your vagina will be only your.

These anti-voyeur laws don't work because they violate the laws of nature. A men will always look at a woman, maybe some of them will take photos and videos. And we shouldn't judge men for this, just as we don't judge gays and lesbians for their sexual preferences.

This is a weird take bro. There is absolutely no correlation btwn voyeurism and lgbt rights lol.

[observer]

Originally Posted by georgewt

This is a weird take bro. There is absolutely no correlation btwn voyeurism and lgbt rights lol.

I do not agree, the voyeurists ( and exhibitionists ) is a sexual minority and they always under pressure of different laws. I see no big difference between voyeurists and gay/lesbians who was under pressure of laws is like 15-20 years ago. There is one difference, gay/lesbians won back their rights, but not voyeurists who still under big pressure of descrimination laws and still not have a right to watch...