Hmm, shame she didn't get a clearer shot of him if the aim was to publish it and humiliate him. If he's into exhibitionism, might the exposure just encourage him? posted by kumonoi at 2:56 AM on August 28, 2005
It would have been much funnier if she had a shot of him in the act.
been "flashed" a few times, long before cameraphones or digital. *sigh* posted by dabitch at 3:24 AM on August 28, 2005
Yeh, this gal got a nifty motion shot of her flasher.
And then there are those of us who like to watch people watching others doing sexual things. posted by Postroad at 5:49 AM on August 28, 2005
Sizzle. One time on the subway after exchanging a knowing smile with a young woman she stood too close to me. I was flustered for an hour afterwards. That's about the most exciting thing ever happened to me on the subway. posted by nervousfritz at 5:59 AM on August 28, 2005
"Pervert" is such an odd word for a newspaper to use, isn't it? Even if it is just the NY Daily News. posted by crunchland at 6:01 AM on August 28, 2005
Yeah, I prefer "weinie wagger."
Too bad she didn't say "That looks just like a penis, only smaller." posted by alumshubby at 6:35 AM on August 28, 2005
Here's the photo page of friendly_chic407's photo Mutant linked to above. It's worth a look for her detailed account, in my opinion; although it's the full size photo Mutant links to that has all the gruesome detail (definitely not SFW).
It took guts to take that picture. posted by nthdegx at 6:49 AM on August 28, 2005
Shouldn't this stuff be tagged with a big "NSFW"? I'm sure plenty of people would prefer to avoid looking at websites with any kind of sexual content while at work. posted by oddman at 6:56 AM on August 28, 2005
In other phone related news, dipshit steals phone takes pictures, sex vid, gets instant internet stardom. posted by Joeforking at 7:15 AM on August 28, 2005
Good for her. Same deal as with the dog poo girl. I'm totally behind nailing these anti-social people by any available means. posted by Decani at 7:18 AM on August 28, 2005
I can't help but feel that the photos of the guy who stole the cell phone, and the way the person who lost their phone dealt with it as somehow impotent and pointless. But I don't feel the same way about the people who snapped the pictures of the pervs. I don't really know what the difference is, though. posted by crunchland at 7:27 AM on August 28, 2005
I got flashed on the London tube once - before camera phones - and it was hilarious. The guy was a pro, he looked like a businessman, trench coat, tie, hat, trousers. . . that were only from his knees down and attached to his shirt with long garters. When he opened up his coat and I saw all the trouble he'd gone to I couldn't stop laughing. Somehow I don't think that's the reaction he wanted: he looked like he was actually offended and he kind of stomped off. I wish I had a picture to remember him by. Good times, good times. posted by mygothlaundry at 7:47 AM on August 28, 2005
What's the penalty for this crap back in The States?
Looks like the NYPD is sniffing around for a suspect on the subway perv flasher. I don't know that I really want to be buying raw seafood from a guy like that. Still, if it isn't the same guy they think it is, someone owes him a huge apology. posted by crunchland at 12:14 PM on August 29, 2005
posted by kumonoi at 2:56 AM on August 28, 2005