Is showering while kids are present now a crime? According to at least one interpretation of the law, it apparently is:
[U]nder Pennsylvania’s child protection laws, what Sandusky admitted to in an interview with NBC’s Bob Costas could fit the definition of indecent exposure. If children under 16 were involved, it could be a first-degree misdemeanor with a maximum punishment of five years in prison and a $10,000 fine…
Title 18, Chapter 31 of the Pennsylvania state code defines indecent exposure as when a person exposes his or her genitals “in any place where there are present other persons under circumstances in which he or she knows or should know that this conduct is likely to offend, affront or alarm.”
The law considers that exposure to be a second-degree misdemeanor. But the law also says: “If the person knows or should have known that any of the persons present are less than 16 years of age,” it’s a first-degree misdemeanor.
Wow.
That means that when I took a shower at a local public swimming pool last year, I could have gotten five years.
Should grown men now have to be intimidated by children?
Maybe I am getting old, but I think this is one form of culture war we can especially do without. Is there any way to call a halt to it? This isn’t the first time I’ve seen weirdness regarding kids in public spaces; last summer I went to a public pool to swim, and as is my normal custom, I took a shower in the men’s locker room after leaving the pool to wash the chlorine off. While I do that, I take off my swim trunks — both to wring them out in the shower, and so I can get, you know, clean. It never would have occurred to me that there is anything wrong with that, as I have been doing it all my life, but while I was showering, a boy came in wearing his trunks and angrily wrinkled his face — staring at me as if he thought that by being nude in the shower I was a complete pervert. I was taken aback. Later a friend told me that kids are raised differently than they were when I was a kid, and that boys are often not allowed to be naked in front of other boys. They shower with their trunks on, then leave and go home with them on, and I guess they regard those who don’t as “offenders.” Is it now dangerous to shower naked in front of boys in a men’s locker room?
Looks like I understated the case rather dramatically. Apparently it is not only dangerous, it is a serious crime.
Nice to live in an age of such amazing common sense.
UPDATE: I don’t know why it never occurred to me before now, but might it also be considered a crime to expose one’s genitals by peeing in a men’s room urinal if a person under sixteen is present?
No wonder men are terrified of boys.
AFTERTHOUGHT: Suppose I complied with the post-Sandusky interpretation of the law and had left my swim trunks on while showering in the interest of protecting the easily-offended. I still would have had to dry myself off and change into my clothes which were in my locker, would I not? The same boys with the same delicate sensibilities who are offended in the shower also use the locker room.
So how on earth could I accomplish that task legally? Do I have to drive home wearing wet swim trunks?
Are we becoming that insane?
MORE: A friend who is a regular swimmer says that there is a new “rule” among younger post-pubescent guys in locker room:
“[they] always shower with trunks on, and then cover themselves with a towel while changing into pants! Very weird, and stress inducing! The implication is that everyone is a pervert.”
This is nuts. Showers and locker rooms are places where nakedness has always been expected, natural, and assumed.
Is there a war against nudity? Who is behind it?
Comments
3 responses to “Has the statute run on last year’s shower?”
And by all means, never avail yourself of a sauna in Europe. (Or, at homes owned by Finns.)
.
One of my childhood memories is staring at my dad’s genitals and wondering a bit why he looked different from mom and me while sitting on a stool as she was washing my hair and he was standing in front of me talking to her. I think I was about four or five years old then, and I suppose I remember that because it was probably the first time I realized there was a difference, and got a bit curious as to why.
Yes, I’m a Finn, and that happened in sauna. My people have gotten a bit more body shy than they were back then (I’m in my early 50’s now), but most families still go to sauna all together, at least until the kids reach puberty. And often the decision when to start using the sauna in two shifts, parents and kids, is left to kids.
So, would a Finnish family who have moved to America get into trouble for doing that, or could they plead cultural differences?
Ok, let’s clarify that ‘two shifts’ a bit: those families closest to me happen to be all either one child or all siblings same sex ones :). Except the one where the older brother was almost a decade older than his sisters, and had moved out when the girls started to get old enough to think about it (and he gave up sauna altogether for a few years, as far as I know, preferring just showering).