We just had a “flashing” incident on campus (Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN).
A homeless man exposed himself to a female student.
I was wondering – do “flashers” ever escalate their behavior to molestation and/or rape?
Any info would be appreciated.
Not a specialist in criminal psychology - but from my true crime readings I can cite two notorious cases of “flashers” who went on to commit rape and murder in the 1980s: Randy Woodfield (the “I-5 Killer”) and Colin Pitchfork (whose case was featured in the book “The Blooding”, and was the first criminal to be convicted on the basis of a DNA profile.
In my abnormal psych class, I studied a young man who was a flasher, and according to the Prof, he was “harmless except for as far as the sensibilities go”. But, of course, that doesn’t mean all are harmless. My WAG is that the % of flashers than become rapists is about = to that of “normal” men who become rapists.
I’m no professional either, but rape is about power and control and violence, not sex. Flashing on the other hand is kind of the opposite.
Which is oft quoted feminist rhetoric, but a little research shows that it is both completely baseless and utterly untrue.
Rape is *always *about sex. On some occasions it is also about power and control, though in the vast majority of cases there is no evidence for this and it is expressly denied by the perpetrators.
There’s a stereotype of flashers as creepy old men who just want to scare/freak out their victims but do no real harm. It’s already been established here that some criminals who started their careers with “flashing” went on to commit rape (and murder). So the remaining question is how often this occurs.
If “power and control” are unrelated to flashing, I’m not sure how to explain this guy. (note how he did not confine himself to mere “exposure”).
The majority of those who commit a non-contact sex offense like indecent exposure do not also commit contact sex offenses, but as shown above there are those who do. Having both contact and noncontact sex offenses is a risk factor for future recidvism, and offenders who have committed both tend to be statistically more dangerous. In other words, say you have sex offenders A and B who are alike in almost every way: same age, same rape, same victim type, same criminal history, etcetera, but sex offender B also has convictions for noncontact sex offenses like indecent exposure. Statistically, sex offender B is more likely to recidivate than sex offender A and is more likely to have deeper sexual deviance.
Also, some offenders resort to indecent exposure when circumstances make it impossible or imprudent to commit a contact sexual assault, for example while imprisoned. Some offenders who never had an arrest for indecent exposure in the free world get multiple disciplinary cases for masturbating in front of (or onto) female staff members because that’s the only convenient way to victimize while incarcerated.
Another famous example of a contact sex offender who also comitted indecent exposure: Jeffery Dahlmer was arrested twice for it, once for dropping his pants in front of a group of people and once for masturbating in front of two young boys.
I would think that flashing would be more about power/control than sex because the flasher isn’t actually having sex or sexual contact but is trying to creep out/frighten/disturb the flashee.
Does the number of rapes by females increase in New Orleans during Mardi Gras? I assume that females are excused from aberrant behavior as is usually the case. Flashing breasts is definitely about power and control rather than sex.