Concerned woman.
Get a fucking life.
That is all.
Manchester cops swooped on a city centre tram stop on Tuesday after a concerned woman reported a man sporting both Lycra cycling shorts and an erection, the Manchester Evening News reports. In a nail-biting blow-by-blow account on Twitter, Greater Manchester Police first confirmed they were moving to investigate... Call from …
> near young people.
Note the implicit accusation of paedophilia.
Here's an another possible scenario that might not immediately have occurred to her:
The guy might have seen an attractive woman (or man of course) and is extremely embarassed aboit what ensued. To top it all some strange woman calls the cops to exacerbate the situation.
It's also possible that he was really busting for the loo.
@skelband
My cousin's are young people to me, but the are pushing 30.
"It's also possible that he was really busting for the loo."
I only get that at night at my age ;-/
And finally:
How many guys call the cop shop complaining that some women's nipples were totally aroused, popping through her blouse because of the rain and possibly the sheer fabric of her blouse and causing a nuisance?
Welcome to the Double Standard World in which we live in...
How many guys call the cop shop complaining that some women's nipples were totally aroused, popping through her blouse because of the rain and possibly the sheer fabric of her blouse and causing a nuisance?
Well.. maybe we should. If it happens often enough maybe things will change like "political correctness" and "Oh.. I'm offended, pass a law, quick!". Or, we'll all get a "morality police" like Sauds have.
@Blitterbug
1. Erect nipples generate the same attention as an erect penis in lycra, probably more, help me out here guys. Maybe this guy was one of the recipients of an helping of manhood, and the lycra was at maximum capacity?
2. Proudly or ignorantly? I have to guess whether some women wouldn't notice if their pants were on fire...
About 40 years ago, people started selling flowers at intersections in Denver and its suburbs. One day, a call went out to police stating that a topless woman was selling flowers at a west-side intersection. Many officers showed up, not all from the jurisdiction that included the intersection. The poor chunky guy who was selling flowers was said to be much embarrassed--I hope that the dozen or twenty officers were.
So no, don't call the cop shop for such matters: you could tie up traffic with all the responses.
"How many guys call the cop shop complaining that some women's nipples were totally aroused, popping through her blouse because of the rain and possibly the sheer fabric of her blouse and causing a nuisance?"
Or about public displays of cameltoe.
GMP should know better than to play to implied accusations of paedophilia, especially when the biggest risk to young people is the immediate family or their circle of friends.
Men are presumed to be rapists and child molesters until proven otherwise. Didn't you know that? Witness the articles we've seen about airlines that have secret rules against allowing children flying alone to sit next to an unknown man... or, rather, it's the other way around, as the man is the one who is subject to the humiliation of getting up and changing seats when that happens. In other stories, there have been signs noted at playgrounds that single men not accompanied by a child are not permitted there.
In this world where we're told of "male privilege," typical behaviors for male children have been turned into criminal acts that require police intervention. Boys have ended up being arrested for such heinous crimes as biting a pop tart into the shape of a gun or drawing a picture showing a scene of war. It used to be that "boys will be boys", but now, apparently, it's "boys had better not be boys, or they will be inmates."
When raising the child, it has usually been the mother who wants to protect the child from everything and the father who wants the child to learn from his bumps and bruises. Hopefully, they'd arrive at a relatively happy medium somewhere in the middle. Now, though, the mother's way of looking at things seems to be mandatory: Things that were commonplace and normal in my childhood during the 70s and 80s, like letting an eight year old walk to school alone or allowing play outside without constant direct supervision or riding a bicycle with no helmet, would be neglectful or abusive now. Children are just about mummified in bubble wrap before being allowed outside now.
At present, we have considerably more women in colleges and universities than men, and the disparity is increasing. Perhaps it's not surprising that today's college students expect to never be offended by anything, and that they nearly have a panic attack if they hear an opinion other than their own. Campaign propaganda for candidates other than the one they like sends them running for their safe zones, and the university will gladly offer them counseling services to get over the trauma. I wish I was kidding!
No matter what the circumstances in divorce, the woman is almost always going to get the stuff, and the man is going to get the bills. The woman could be a drug-addicted criminal with a history of child abuse and will probably still get custody of the kids even if the husband is a clean, responsible member of the community. If she accuses him of something violent... or if any "she" accuses any "him" of something, it's apt to be believed without question, because everyone knows that men are just like that. (Just ask the Rolling Stone editors.)
So yeah, male privilege. Check yours today!
This post has been deleted by its author
I don't think a 50 year old man on a bicycle on a wet winter evening could achieve that condition without pharmaceutical assistance.
That's possible (there is that advert where the old bloke loses his last Viagra tablet and goes off bicycling to get more) but it's a bit of a waste.
Also "young people" would be anyone under 40.
I suspect she misidentified his multi tool or rapid inflater, or possibly a spare pair of socks.
Here's what the law says:
* * * * *
Sexual Offences Act 2003:
66 Exposure:
(1) A person commits an offence if—
(a) he intentionally exposes his genitals, and
(b) he intends that someone will see them and be caused alarm or distress.
* * * * *
So unless he was waving it around and shouting "Get a load of this, darling!" no offence was committed.
(PS for pedants: Although it says "he", that's simply for convenience and brevity and it includes women too)
@BebopWeBop
"Camel toe? I shouldn't ask - but I have to WTF is that?"
TBH, if a friend of mine hadn't used the term, then explained when I didn't laugh or check the woman out, I would not know it either.
I keep saying El Reg needs the "rock" icon, as in the one some of us live under. Some sort of rock with a pair of eyes peeking out from beneath?
(Trench) Coat for obvious reasons...
The Lycra was not for posing and he was on his way out of The City, Plod could not find him, then he probably lost the woody due to the numb middle bit of his nuts 10 miles down the road prior to arriving at the intended field of sheep who called Plod on their Bahbiles to complain about not getting a good Rodgering because Farmer Giles had not fitted their back legs with clip-ons and, after he had struggled with them, the bottle holders were not a good substitute for a pair of wellies and he could not get it up anyway.
Christ on a bike...
Overt - done or shown openly; plainly apparent.
Overly Overt. How can you overly show something openly? Using the definition it's already shown openly so unless he was running around shouting look at my massive inner tube I really don't see how that works.
The interesting question is why was she looking in the first place?
Also, what gives her the right to deem what is suitable and what is not for someone else's children? Have people been brainwashed through claims by the government about the internet that everyone is peadofile until proven innocent? It's a good job there were no muslims with back packs or all hell would have broken loose.
You will have to be careful how you carry your mobile phone in your trouser pocket. My M&S chinos came with a little sub-pocket designed to keep it upright against the inside of my leg.
We are becoming a nation of over-sensitised people who see "offence" in every way they can imagine with their febrile minds.
FFS, a lot of decent quality cycling shorts have heavily padded crotches to stop the cyclist suffering from terminal knob bruising and galloping crutch rot......think of it as a padded cross between a cricketers box and a cod piece.
Naturally they tend to show a fair bulge........interestingly some women cyclists wear similar padding as well. What would our Manchester complainant have done if faced with a girl with an apparent oversized clitoral erection? Insist on female genital mutilation to save little girls from horny lesbians?
Being a somewhat hirsute, fifty-something male, I can assure you that if I were to don Lycra and attempt to cycle off the Christmas food frenzy, the police would be inundated with calls...
... about an escaped, multi-coloured walrus.
"... not only that it's riding a bike, officer."
...that it might have been flacid, but just well proportioned and well contained?
IMHO it would be very difficult to tell in properly padded cycle shorts.
Not that there is any danger of me offending in that manner.......
Anyway, even if they arrested him it probably wouldn't stand up in court.
I actually own a penis, and I can tell you that when I was younger, spontaneous tumescence was occasionally a problem. It didn't need a reason, if it wanted to, it would. Now that I'm nearly 50, thankfully those days are but a limp memory.
Don't the Manchester police force have any penis-owners who can testify that that's how they work: They get big. The go small. They go big again. Totally normal. No need to investigate.
Maybe the sight of a 'camel toe' sent a surge to his nether regions & ditto for her when she saw the outline of male organs.
An old joke, two male mice, one said to the other,"There's Harmonica,lets go play with her".The other said,"No, lets play with our 'mouse organs',lol".
In the UK today,men have become effeminate thanks to the PC brigade in the 'Labour Party' when in power & women have lost touch with the biological imperative.
Not surprising really when every other male of the younger generation sounds female & thinks another male's anus is perceived as a vagina.
At least this woman was able to distinguish the sexual difference even if her experience of it was somewhat limited by her observation,or so it seems.
Personally,when I was young, the mere sight of many a young filly was enough to send the blood pumping ferociously through a certain organ giving frequent embarrassment to myself in public.
Nature is nature,that woman is a healthy woman,it's just that her mind is affected by irrational 'morally' repugnant political-religious puritanism,that's unconsciously conditioning her responses.
I wonder how she's sure he had an erection versus just being well endowed with a vertical orientation.
I don't know who is more stupid, the lady for reporting it or the police who continued to make an issue of it. Meanwhile murderers, terrorists and other criminals run loose.