Man on green/yellow line sexually harassment

Submitted by carlyslayjedsen t3_10qaszq in washingtondc

There’s a man I’ve seen several times on the green/yellow line since last summer who wears leggings and has a constant erection that is VERY visible - it’s clear he’s doing it on purpose but trying to have some sort of plausible deniability. Hell stand directly in front of women and just stare at them for minutes at a time before walking to another car.

I’ve attempted contacting metro PD because it’s recurring (I take the green/yellow line maybe twice a week and yet I’ve seen him a dozen times since last summer). Keep seeing him so obviously not working. Anyone have any advice to get this situation sorted out? Last straw was today when I saw him near a girl who looked like she was still in middle school.

276

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

scotch_please t1_j6p55u5 wrote

It's possible he's been confronted, or even charged with something, but he's not going to be locked up or banned from the metro for this behavior. If he doesn't care about his record, he'll keep coming back to do this.

Are you texting MTP when you see him on the train or after the fact? I don't know if you can attach photos to the text line but at least provide a description of what he's wearing, what stop you're at, which direction the train is headed, and car number if visible. I've had luck with MTP getting officers on the train within a stop or two.

172

monstermashedstrwbry t1_j6p0nwm wrote

Wow these comments are incredible, guess we know who sexually harasses women on the metro

120

carlyslayjedsen OP t1_j6p1mjj wrote

I get it; it’s just that if these people actually saw it in person they would understand. You can see EVERYTHING. I’m talking outlines of veins and glans. Flexing and moving it around. Imagine a hard dick covered in tight Lycra and nothing else. Graphic I know but he is clearly an exhibitionist. Technically always clothed which is a clear attempt at plausible deniability… clearly effective for some people in this thread.

121

c0dyb t1_j6p2pct wrote

id suggest you take a video of it next time, post to insta and twitter and tag all the metro socials

42

carlyslayjedsen OP t1_j6p2vil wrote

I’ve thought about that but I’m worried it would be like taking and posting a video of someone naked without their consent. Not sure where the line is drawn

17

CriticalMembership31 t1_j6p55tw wrote

If they’re in public you don’t need their consent. The camera can go wherever the public eye can go

86

scotch_please t1_j6pcq8p wrote

washingtonianprobs on Instagram would probably be happy to post it for you.

46

c0dyb t1_j6p35wh wrote

send me the video ill post it idgf, if i had a daughter i wouldnt want her to be subjected to that on the metro ( or a child of any gender for that matter)

37

IcyWillow1193 t1_j6p3o5j wrote

Some would argue that on most men, leggings are a crime. But beyond that I'd say trying to get a guy in trouble for having a boner while fully clothed is going to be an uphill battle.

−13

Tom-Ado t1_j6p700l wrote

Maybe, but you’re losing fidelity by leaving out the part where he gets close to people and poses in such a way that seeing it is unavoidable. That’s distinct from him just picking a seat and chilling there. In a workplace scenario this assuredly would be sexual harassment.

34

walkallover1991 t1_j6pimhz wrote

Nothing is going to come from simply telling MTPD that there is a man on the train wearing tight pants with a boner because that in itself isn't illegal.

You need to take a photo/video and specifically state that he is intentionally getting close to people and posing/standing in a way that seeing his dick is unavoidable and causing unwelcome behavior.

FWIW, I can't imagine MTPD doing anything in this scenario, seeing as the agency has told people that men jacking off on the train is perfectly legal.

72

scotch_please t1_j6pjhgw wrote

From the article:

> On the ride back she filed a report online with Metro. Transit police called quickly. But the officer seemed to lose interest, she said, when she explained that the man hadn’t exposed himself. He had stuck his hand into his pants. It didn’t seem like a crime then, the officer said.

> A Metro spokesperson wouldn’t explain why police considered what the woman saw to be legal. As Express reported last year, Maryland is the only one of the areas Metro trains run through that requires genitals to be visible for something to be considered indecent exposure. D.C. and Virginia laws prohibiting public masturbation or simulated masturbation do not require visible genitals.

62

misstwinpeaks23 t1_j6p25xf wrote

Ugh. No advice but what did the metro PD say? And what stops did you see him at?

52

carlyslayjedsen OP t1_j6p2lqa wrote

Ft Totten - gallery place. But to be fair that’s the only distance I’ve traveled with him on the train.

Metro pd asks for more info/description and that’s it.

61

HauntingHarmonie t1_j6pcza6 wrote

Take a photo/video and file an actual police report - not with metro PD. Move to another car. Completely ignore it. Mace the fucker if he gets close (watch out for other passengers 😅). He is getting off on your reaction. If you don't react, he will go away. Send video to local news stations.

If all else fails. Laugh and loudly explain that you've never seen a dick so small.

22

KerPop42 t1_j6pdv7w wrote

Eh, he could possibly get off on that last part too. I'm not in the situation myself, but my first instinct as a bystander would be to verbally confront him and get him to sit down somewhere else.

Maybe tell him that there are people online he can pay to get what he wants, stop making a public space uncomfortable for everyone else.

24

gutterbrain73 t1_j6p4qob wrote

What’s NSFW about this post?

−27

bunkgrille t1_j6ox6x0 wrote

Oh that's Penis Pants Paulie, he's mostly harmless.

−31

[deleted] t1_j6oz2uv wrote

[removed]

−75

Tom-Ado t1_j6piq85 wrote

It’s always amusing to me to see this kind of argument. There’s plenty of things that are not illegal, like sexually harassing/nagging a woman verbally (without threats) for example, but is obviously ethically and socially problematic. I’m going to assume you already know that so either you mostly believe what OP is saying and know what this guy is doing is dubious at best or you find OP to be an unreliable narrator and is playing it up for points. Based on your other comment, it seems you’re just here to play the contrarian.

45

KerPop42 t1_j6pb0wb wrote

Probably indecent exposure arguably, sexual harassment if he doesn't stop when asked to? IANAL ofc, also mindset might be a requirement for some of the laws

18

[deleted] t1_j6pdmot wrote

[removed]

−31

ToooSav t1_j6pfkq7 wrote

Yeah definitely check on this guy ^ Weird hill to die on for sure.

35

AMcJV12 t1_j6pjw2f wrote

Bruh this person would be saving me too, I might be a dude but I still dislike having to deal with weirdos on my commute.

14