dark ages
.
it is time to bring exhibitionism out of the dark ages
Punishment for the act is mediaeval, draconian, barbaric and archaic
and knowledge about it is just as dated
.
This dark ages mentality is typified by yet another article that has surfaced, and “exposes” exhibitionism in a flurry of meaningless generalities, half-truths and straight out error.
This article was published on healthfirst.net.au and is attributed to McKesson. I’m not sure if McKesson is a male or female, but I do know that Mckesson should discontinue putting himself or herself forward as an authority on a subject of which he or she clearly knows little. For example, in the first paragraph McKesson states that…
“Exhibitionism involves exposing one’s genitals or sexual organs to a stranger. It is a sexual disorder. While often joked about, in reality, exhibitionism is a very serious behaviour that can be frightening to the victim.”
COMMENT:
Certainly exhibitionists expose to strangers, but they also, and quite often, expose to people they know. This may be done with a warning: “I usually don’t wear clothes while at home”, or “I usually swim with no clothes on,” or something like that. The friend then usually replies that’s OK with her.
The point McKesson fails to realize is that there are many “varieties” of exhibitionists and they all have their own, different way of doing things.
McKesson continues in blissful ignorance with the statement that, “exhibitionism is a sexual disorder”. A strange statement and one wonders why McKesson makes it, as it has nothing to do with exhibitionism whatsoever.
A sexual disorder occurs when the sexual organs do not function properly. For example, premature ejaculation, erectile dysfunction, inadequate lubrication for women, pain during intercourse and so on, are sexual disorders. Exhibitionism is a behavioural problem and we would have thought that someone who poses as an expert would know the difference.
And sadly people read this dribble and conclude that there is some kind of functional disorder with exhibitionists.
McKesson continues to stumble from one blunder to another and concludes the first paragraph by saying that, “…in reality, exhibitionism is a very serious behaviour that can be frightening to the victim.”
Of course exhibitionism is a serious behaviour! And so is golf serious, and so is cooking, and so is music, so is gardening and so is….
Mckesson’s grammar is as bad as her knowledge of the subject and we’ll have to assume that what McKesson meant was that we should take exhibitionism seriously because “it can be frightening to the victim”.
That is the sort of half-truth that promulgates the myth that exhibitionists are dangerous. We might as well say that (to use McKesson’s grammar)… “Driving is a serious behaviour because some people get killed”.
Sure they do, but driving is unlikely to be banned. Not anytime soon.
Sure, some (few) drivers cross over the line and they are consequently fined and jailed. Likewise, some (few) exhibitionists cross over the line and they too should be dealt with accordingly. But to criminalize all exhibitionists, most of whom are quite harmless, because a few cross over the line, makes about as much sense as criminalizing all drivers because a few drive dangerously!
To his or her credit, McKesson does get some things right, including the fact that exhibitionists do not seek physical contact with the women they expose to, and they do not commit rape.
But the damage is done and readers remember that exhibitionism can be frightening, even though that is the exception rather than the rule, and that stigma sticks.
.
