Sexual Activity

[chrismcphee33]

Hi all, the only part of the RCMP poly I am worried about is the sexual activity part. I am a bit a of a exibitionist/voyeur at times....just minor...I have never walked around naked in public or anything, but because of the "weirdness" of it I don't want to disclose it. There is a question near the beginning of this section, it is "Have you ever engaged in any illegal sexual activity". Is this a control question? There are more specific questions after this like "Have you videotaped someone elses sexual activity without them knowing" and "Have you ever exposed yourself in public" which are relevant questions I assume. And of course there are the rape and drugging someone questions which are obviously relevant. Can anyone talk about this from experience? Thanks.

Chris

[rice80]

Hi all, the only part of the RCMP poly I am worried about is the sexual activity part. I am a bit a of a exibitionist/voyeur at times....just minor...I have never walked around naked in public or anything, but because of the "weirdness" of it I don't want to disclose it. There is a question near the beginning of this section, it is "Have you ever engaged in any illegal sexual activity". Is this a control question? There are more specific questions after this like "Have you videotaped someone elses sexual activity without them knowing" and "Have you ever exposed yourself in public" which are relevant questions I assume. And of course there are the rape and drugging someone questions which are obviously relevant. Can anyone talk about this from experience? Thanks.

Chris

Chris,

I can't tell you from a poly operators stand point but I can tell you from one who has taken several of these tests that the first sexual question you are refering to can be either/or control or relavent. I mean that in most states any sexual position other then the missionary is considered illegal. Which most if not all people are guilty of this crime.. If the PO rewords the question, which most of the time they do,  then its a good chance it may be a control. The other questions you are referring to are safe to say that they are relavent.

If you have never taken a poly I would recomend reading and fully understanding how it "works" before taken one. This site has a lot of useful information.

I must also say that without knowing the full extent of you past activities I cannot be sure whether they may exclude you from a law enforcement career. I myself am a law enforcement officer and have a general idea of what departments look for in a candidant and what they may allow.  The main thing they look for is honesty.

reguards,

rice

[chrismcphee33]

Thanks Rice80

[Jesper Paten]

Hi all, the only part of the RCMP poly I am worried about is the sexual activity part. I am a bit a of a exibitionist/voyeur at times....just minor...I have never walked around naked in public or anything, but because of the "weirdness" of it I don't want to disclose it. There is a question near the beginning of this section, it is "Have you ever engaged in any illegal sexual activity". Is this a control question? There are more specific questions after this like "Have you videotaped someone elses sexual activity without them knowing" and "Have you ever exposed yourself in public" which are relevant questions I assume. And of course there are the rape and drugging someone questions which are obviously relevant. Can anyone talk about this from experience? Thanks.
Chris

Sir,
Might you pose to the examiner, "Do you believe in The Holy Bible?"
und "Do you say that Adam committed sin by being naked?"

Even in Revelations, when the believers leave the earthly realm, they went (will go) naked.

To be naked is natural. Not sinful. The sin is in the eye of he who believes nakedness to be shameful or sinful.

Tell them your truth. They must take it for what it is.

[SanchoPanza]

I don't disagree with the part of first comment I quoted above, but you should probably still wear trousers and a shirt to your polygraph test,  because exposing ones genitalia to someone who does not want to see it, is deviant behavior as is intentionally putting yourself in situations where your nudity is likely to be exposed to anyone who does not want to see it as a means of self gratification.

The second part of the section I have quoted from your post is close to what someone taking a polygraph should do TELL THEM THE TRUTH.

Where I disagree with you is your supposition that the truth can be owned. Truth is not yours or mine, it is simply the truth. This concept of "your truth" presupposes that Your truth can be different from "the truth" and that is fallacy.

Sancho Panza

[Barry_C]

Even in Revelations, when the believers leave the earthly realm, they went (will go) naked.

I'm going to need you to cite me the chapter and verse as I must have missed that one.  Maybe we can start a new post.

Exposing oneself, as stated above, is (generally) a crime (as well as a sin).

[Jesper Paten]

Sir,
There iss universal truth. There is personal truths. Every person has his
own truth. Every person owns his own truth. You cannot own my truth and I cannot own yours. We cannot own the universal truth and neither can we denyit - it is there for all t witness.
Nature is a universal truth.
Poligrapf is an attempt to undermine and subvert mans own, personal
truths.

Respectfully,
JP

[Jesper Paten]

Even in Revelations, when the believers leave the earthly realm, they went (will go) naked.

I'm going to need you to cite me the chapter and verse as I must have missed that one.  Maybe we can start a new post.

Exposing oneself, as stated above, is (generally) a crime (as well as a sin).

Sir,
I will do so when I find the inclination.
To walk naked in the desert, would that be a crime ?
To falsely accuse a persons truth as a lie, would that be a sin, or a crime?

Respectfully,
JP

[SanchoPanza]

Sir,
There iss universal truth. There is personal truths. Every person has his
own truth. Every person owns his own truth. You cannot own my truth and I cannot own yours. We cannot own the universal truth and neither can we denyit - it is there for all t witness.
Nature is a universal truth.
Poligrapf is an attempt to undermine and subvert mans own, personal
truths.

Respectfully,
JP

Mr Paten,  Since it seems that your view of "truth is somewhat philosophical I would like to direct you to.
#1 The law of excluded middle  ( Every proposition is true or false)
#2  The law of non-contradiction (No proposition is both true and false)
#3 The Correspondence Theory (The truth is the relationship that holds between a proposition and its corresponding fact)

Under these laws if I put forward the proposition that exposing ones genitalia is wrong because it is against the law, I have stated a proposition [exposing ones genitalia is wrong] and it's corresponding fact [it is against the law] because I have both a proposition and a corresponding fact I have established truth under the correspondence theory and according to the laws of the excluded middle and non-contradiction it cannot be false.

When you say "To be naked is natural. Not sinful. The sin is in the eye of he who believes nakedness to be shameful or sinful", you have offered a different proposition which in no way invalidates the truth my statement. Your proposition lacks a corresponding fact that would establish it as "Truth" under the Correspondence Theory. What you describe as YOUR TRUTH is merely a statement of values or in other words; you are just giving your opinion.

Even if you locate and include a corresponding fact that fits your proposition, you have not negated the truth of my proposition you have just established the truth of a different proposition. That does not become "your truth" it just becomes a different truth.  If you simply quote someone else's opinion or a bible story in support of your proposition all you are doing is supporting a proposition with a proposition which does not survive the application of the Correspondence Theory.


Sancho Panza

[Jesper Paten]

Under these laws if I put forward the proposition that exposing ones genitalia is wrong because it is against the law,

Sir, when you urinate in a public toilet, do you not expose your genitalia. Yes you do. But it is not unlawful to do so even though many persons in your vicinity can view your ** if they want to do so.

Now, if one is in a remote (but public place ) area and one decides to be au naturel, why should that be more or less illegal than exposing in a public toilet.

Nevermind the propositions and middle ground etc. The law is often an ass.

Dont extrapolate the naked poster's words to the nth degree. He never said or suggested that he exposes himself in busy public places. My understanding is that he is a naturist of sorts.

Try it for a time. The sun on your booty is a wholesome feeling.

Respectfully,
JP

[SanchoPanza]

Hi all, the only part of the RCMP poly I am worried about is the sexual activity part. I am a bit a of a exibitionist/voyeur at times....just minor...I have never walked around naked in public or anything, but because of the "weirdness" of it I don't want to disclose it. There is a question near the beginning of this section, it is "Have you ever engaged in any illegal sexual activity". Is this a control question? There are more specific questions after this like "Have you videotaped someone elses sexual activity without them knowing" and "Have you ever exposed yourself in public" which are relevant questions I assume. And of course there are the rape and drugging someone questions which are obviously relevant. Can anyone talk about this from experience? Thanks.

Chris

I'm sorry Jesper  When the person whose behavior you are presently defending said "  I am a bit a of a exhibitionist/voyeur at times" I took him at his word. I am not extrapolating anything. I am simply accepting that he is what he says he is.

Exhibitionism is a mental disorder characterized by a compulsion to display one's genitals to an unsuspecting stranger.

Voyeurism is a psychosexual disorder in which a person derives sexual pleasure and gratification from looking at the naked bodies and genital organs or observing the sexual acts of others


When you say "Don't extrapolate the naked poster's words to the nth degree. He never said or suggested that he exposes himself in busy public places. My understanding is that he is a naturist of sorts"  you are the one that is extrapolating from the information contained in his post.

Exhibitionists and voyeurs alike are generally condemned by the naturist movement and it would be somewhat out of character in my opinion for a naturist to refer to him ot herself using those terms.

Sancho Panza

[SanchoPanza]

Chris you stated in your original post

you stated in your original post

Hi all, the only part of the RCMP poly I am worried about is the sexual activity part. I am a bit a of a exibitionist/voyeur at times....just minor...I have never walked around naked in public or anything, but because of the "weirdness" of it I don't want to disclose it.

Exhibitionism is a mental disorder characterized by a compulsion to display one's genitals to an unsuspecting stranger.

Voyeurism is a psychosexual disorder in which a person derives sexual pleasure and gratification from looking at the naked bodies and genital organs or observing the sexual acts of others
Both of these are also criminal sexual activity in most jurisdictions.

Pardon me and anyone else who took you at your word when you said you were both of these, but it seems you are just trying to minimize your  behavior in some feeble attempt to avoid admitting that you engaged in criminal deviant behavior to you polygrapher.

If you exposed yourself and recieved some emotional or physical gratification from the possibility or probability of some unsuspecting stranger might catch you, you have engaged in criminal exhibitionism whether or not you were caught.

But you go right ahead and lie if you think you can get away with it, but be honest with us when the polygrapher catches you and you lose a job opportunity over what might be a minor issue if simply explained before your test. Be sure and come back here and tell everyone that the truth behind the lie behind the lie detector is that the methods don't work and how by following their advice you were cheated out of a career.

Be fully prepared however for Mr. Mashke or some loyal minion to just say you didn't follow his instructions well enough.

One other thing you need to think about. No one can change their past however much they would like to.
All you can do right now is decided whether or not you are going to LIE about your mistakes. If you are completely truthful you will probably make it. If you chose to be a LIAR or attempt counter measures you probably won't make it. But even if you do, every good deed you perform from that day forward will be tainted by the fraud you chose to commit.

If you plan on working for a law enforcement agency they are entitled to inquire into your character, your suitability, your honesty and your integrity. Lying to questions about your past behavior reflects negatively on all those issues and makes you appear untrustworthy. Why would another officer trust you when lives are at stake when you cannot be trusted regarding past indiscretions?

Sancho Panza

[chrismcphee33]

"If you exposed yourself and recieved some emotional or physical gratification from the possibility or probability of some unsuspecting stranger might catch you, you have engaged in criminal exhibitionism whether or not you were caught. "

Can you please copy and paste from my previous post the part where I said anyting about exposing myself to another person? If you can't find an example of where I said I expose myself to another person, then I would like this post removed because this is slander.

"Exhibitionism is a mental disorder characterized by a compulsion to display one's genitals to an unsuspecting stranger.

Voyeurism is a psychosexual disorder in which a person derives sexual pleasure and gratification from looking at the naked bodies and genital organs or observing the sexual acts of others"

And here you decide to look up the terms in a dictionary and apply that to me...even though I clarified what I meant...which was nudity in private/public (ie no people around and sex with a girlfriend in car etc). This shows how ignorant and closed minded you are.

You people that respond like this are unbelievable...you make up stories in your head, and then write about it.

[SanchoPanza]

What you posted was" Having sex in a semi-public place with a girlfriend and outdoor private nudity makes me a sexual deviant? I would love to be a fly on your wall." That is not a declaration of your behavior that is just a "What if?" question.

And if that is to be your declaration and while engaged with sex in a semi-public place with your girlfriend OR outdoor private nudity and received some emotional or physical gratification from the possibility or probability of some unsuspecting stranger might catch you, you have engaged in criminal exhibitionism whether or not you were caught. The portion in bold establishes the Mens rea of the criminal act.

You stated that YOU thought your behavior was weird.

By the way, one of the reasons that dictionaries exist is to allow people from different points of view to achieve consensus regarding the meanings of words. While you are certainly entitled to change which words you decide to use, I don't think that anyone will agree that you are allowed to change their definitions after you have used the words.

You have yet to say that you are not an exhibitionist or a voyeur under the definitions provided.

If you haven't done anything wrong you have nothing to fear from the truth, but you don't get to change the definition of truth to accommodate your behavior.

Employers have no right to delve into legal sexual behavior any further than necessary to determine if it is indeed legal sexual behavior.

Playing games with the polygrapher for a police position could very well lead to a very rewarding Mc Job  some day.  As you get ready to lie to the polygrapher or attempt counter measures remember to repeat to yourself
"Would you like fries or a thick chocolaty shake with that sir?

[chrismcphee33]

I am fairly new here and this may be known or obvious to others...but you must be a polygrapher right? Why else would you be so invested in the validity of the polygraph. This machine is just a fancy blood pressure machine. My bp machine at home takes bp and pulse so can can I call that a "lie detector"? You count on...no...you need people to believe this machine can magically catch a lie. If you have too many people who are confident and have knowledge and aren't afraid of this machine, the more useless the machine is. That is why you say silly things like "lead to a very rewarding Mc Job  some day" and "Would you like fries or a thick chocolaty shake with that sir?"...that is your attemp at scaring uneducated people. The machine is what it is, and the polygrapher has a job to do and I don't think people who have major problems, or have committed major crimes, or have connections with shady people should be police officers, but stop insulting peoples intelligence...like I said before, it makes you look closed minded and ignorant. Why can't polygraphers be less biased and admit to how the process really works.