Hotel With Glass Windows Overlooking A Park Markets Itself To Exhibitionists
The High Line in NYC is a former railroad line that has been converted into a park, but visitors are getting a little more of a view than they bargained for. The Standard Hotel overlooks the park and according to the New York Post, they've been marketing themselves as a good venue for exhibitionists to expose themselves to hapless park-goers.
According to the paper, people have seen everything from professional porn shoots to flashers to couples engaging in sex through the hotel's floor to ceiling windows.
From the NYP:
The Standard's Facebook page bluntly encourages the explicit behavior.
"We encourage you to exercise your inner exhibitionist. Please share your intimate, and explicit photos with us — those floor to ceiling windows aren't just for the views . . ."
The hotel Web site beckons:
"Whatever you do, just make sure the shots are HOT and that you get them to us in whichever way you can. It's all about sex all the time, and you're our star."
After The Post contacted The Standard for comment, the posting was abruptly changed.
A follow-up article says that the staff are into it, too.
After the hotel opened late last year, the bellhop said, naked and semidressed staff members were encouraged to pose in front of the windows. The point, he said, was to create a buzz with the unexpected peep show.
"One of the managers even got naked in a room, and filmed it — they were considering a live feed for the Web site," the staffer said. "She's an exhibitionist, too."
The hotel's website also features a live webcam that looks into these windows. 
The NYP also has a gallery of naked people as seen from the park.
HIGH LINE IS A LUST CAUSE [NYP]
HIGH LINE HOTEL ENCOURAGES NUDE CLIENTELE [NYP]
(Photo: NYP)
(Photo:Ed Yourdon)
Post a comment
Comments:
I used to work in a building right across from a hotel kind of like that. We'd get nekkid people standing in front of the windows all the time, and some of my coworkers even kept binoculars in their desks for better views.
Until both the pope and Gerald Ford were in town once, and the secret service came and took them. Ha ha!
OK, I'm done with that story. It didn't have a moral or anything.
I'd stay there.
Part of me thinks this is wrong, the other part of me think it's smart marketing. Can you get nailed for indecent exposure for flashing someone through a window?
It's smart marketing for the hotel, but if I regularly went to that park, I'd be upset. Not to mention that it's not exactly a kid-friendly park anymore.
Sounds like when the Dome in Toronto used to sell more tickets in the outfield because you could see into the hotel rooms. Sex sells and kinky sex sells more.
Why would you get upset? It doesn't effect you in anyway? Why wouldn't it be kid friendly? Did they take away the swingset? This doesn't harm ANYONE.
@pecan 3.14159265: I think it's pretty damn sick. It's a public park. If the hotel wanted to build its own park for people to gawk at the exhibitionists in the windows, but for innocent bystanders who think the High Line is just a regular old public park, they shouldn't find themselves on the unwilling receiving end of a "clever" marketing tactic.
@pecan 3.14159265: I partially disagree. Some of the people in those windows might be making a kid, so it's a little kid friendly.
=)
@pax: I left out, like, 3 words. Should have said something like, "If the hotel wants to build its own park, fine."
There was a similar problem when the hotel in Toronto's Skydome opened. I think they eventually made those with the rooms with a view of the ballpark sign something that they would engage in naked shenanigans with the curtains closed.
@dragonfire81: I want to say yes you can. I seem to remember a case where as long as it's "easily viewable" it's indecent exposure. If you need a pair of binoculars and have to be pointed to where the indecent exposure is taking place (say through blinds), then it would be legal. While IANAL, this is a pretty easy case for indecent exposure.
@joeblevins: Pretty awkward for someone with a kid or two in tow who happens to notice. I think the expectation, when you go to a public park, is that it's safe for all ages.
I'm not saying you can totally prevent this from happening, but the hotel is being irresponsible by marketing itself as such.
@dragonfire81: Technically, yes. But police rarely give out tickets.
It's not limited to The Standard. I've seen men flashing passersby from hotel windows overlooking the entrance to the Holland Tunnel and from budget hotels around Times Square. At least The Standard is reaching out to prettier exhibitionists.
@dragonfire81: It is indecent exposure. You don't have to be in a public place, just somewhere where the public can see it relatively easily(i.e. not with binoculars looking through blinds)
@dragonfire81: In at least some jurisdictions, yes. Here's a recent Straight Dope column addressing the general subject: [www.straightdope.com]
@joeblevins: I agree wholeheartedly. Why does everything have to be kid friendly? Are kids really so fragile?
Most kids go through the "naked phase" when they're toddlers, obviously it's our hangup, not theirs.
@pax: The hotel was there first.
The hotel is also elevated way over the park walkways. I've been there multiple times and have never seen anything in The Standards' windows, and I doubt many others could without binoculars. It's just not a significant problem. Kids are going to see much more explicit sexuality on the billboards pointed at the park than in the windows of the hotel.
If parents are that concerned, they can blindfold little Schuyler-Devon-Madison-etc and walk them through the tiny vicinity of park space where this minute exposure to distant human wangs behind glass would scar them forever.
@pax:
1. New York was at it's best when it wasn't safe for all ages. Please, no more Disneyfied blanding.
2. This is not a real problem. The "explicit" views the NYPost showed are all shot through zoom lenses. Unless your kids have D90s w/ 210mm lenses attached to their eyes, they're not going to see anything explicit.
I think this item deserves a "WTF" tag! LOL
@pecan 3.14159265: The world does not revolve around people and their precious little offspring. If you are that concerned about your spawn seeing some boobies take them to Chelsea Piers or a kid friendly park. Its the meat packing district for pete's sake, are you going to scold the prostitutes as well when you walk by?
I'd like to say I understand how people can cavort around while other people watch, but honestly, I can't.
@GitEmSteveDave_♥'sRenegadeIrishman: I think you can have cheeky shenanigans like a maple syrup chugging contest in view of the sports fans in the stadium, as long as you are clothed.
@itiswhatitis: I apologize, my response was a little harsh. I just get annoyed when I see the "what about the children" comments. Kids have plenty of places to go in NYC and I for one am not a fan of banning things or closing down places because children "might see it". As a parent you should be responsible enough to know where you can and cannot take your child.
If you are a visitor of the park you don't have to look up. If you are bothered by the nudity then you are more than welcome to visit the many other parks we have in the area, including the Hudson river waterfront.
@pax: I agree with you and think the whole public sex marketing thing with that hotel is sick. I don't really care who is doing what, but there are some things that are best kept behind closed doors for the sake of good taste.
The park should have large signs stating that it's an adult park, or something along those lines, in case unfamiliar people want to bring their kids in there. For families who live near the park and don't want to risk exposing their kids to that stuff, I hope there is another park nearby without the 'view'.
@kateblack: I don't think it's okay for a hotel to invite its guests to exhibit sexual activity to a public, for-all-ages park. Whether kids can even see much is almost beside the point. They might see, and I think it's wrong and, yeah, a little sick for the hotel to be encouraging it. I'm no downy innocent and I'm well aware of the neighborhood, the clientele, etc., but there's still such a thing as being a good neighbor. It includes discretion.
Oh my god, that's horrible..It's unthinkable, really. Now where's my binoculars?
@GitEmSteveDave_♥'sRenegadeIrishman: Seriously. I don't want to watch other naked people doing *anything*, and I sure as heck don't want people to watch my wife and I.
@itiswhatitis: People with Kids vs. People without Kids battle! Last person to speak their mind about those with/without children is rendered sterile!
Appropriately in the "meatpacking" district?
@itiswhatitis: I'm hardly of the "precious little snowflake" variety of adults when it comes to my views on children, but I still think this is, at the very least, cynical and inconsiderate.
@itiswhatitis: While I lack many motherly instincts that usually go along with being a female, I have to say that my stance on this isn't a "what about the children" type of comment. It's a "WTF is wrong with you people" comment. I think the hotel is clever in what it's doing to attract customers, but it's also crude and tasteless. Forget the kids - I don't even want to venture near that park.
Not to mention the hotel is really ugly.
@GitEmSteveDave_♥'sRenegadeIrishman: Yes, it sure is horrifying to think that at any point people could be looking at you... maybe even naked... 24/7.... in any room in your house.
I don't understand the appeal of exposing yourself to strangers.
And the people on the ground; what's so great about watching a naked person in a window so far away that you can't even make out his/her face? Don't any of these folks have the Internet? Plenty of nakedness going on there and you don't need the Hubble Telescope to view it.
@pattiesmart: Since I don't live in NYC, that won't be so hard. The point is, this hotel exists and people may not know the nature of its desired purpose. The park has the right to be there as much as the hotel does. The park is owned by the city, the state, and some private citizens - it's not joe's backyard property.
Yes, people have the responsibility to be informed - well, I also have the right to be upset when something that is supposed to be open to everyone gets restricted because of a hotel's crude and inconsiderate actions. Just because you're an adult doesn't mean you want to see strangers naked in the window of a hotel.
So... in barely over 12 Hours, A reference to public masturbation... AND a story about exhibitionists.
Can we have a bingo card for the actual stories themselves?
@pattiesmart: That's a fine point of view if it's a store, or a television show, or a movie. It's not fine when my tax dollars, as a citizen of New York City, are paying for that park to exist and I should have the right to go there and take children there and not be exposed to public lewdness and indecency. If I don't like a particular store (e.g., I hate Abercrombie and Fitch), I don't have to spend my money there. If I think a movie is terrible, I don't have to pay to see it. But I can't exactly opt out of paying my taxes.
Out of respect for TAXPAYERS and tourists alike, the hotel should, at minimum, not be encouraging this behavior.
@HiPwr: Most people do not see the appeal in trolling either. But that certainly does not stop people.
A lot of people do not see the appeal in commenting on consumer rights blogs either :D
@coren: And by that I meant nothing more than some people simply don't ever want to have kids, not that anyone should be prevented from reproducing.
@pax: So if kids can see the nudity or not is beside the point? Does that mean you just like looking for reasons to be offended?
Jo Weldon once said to me, "I'll keep my porn away from your kids. Now keep your kids away from my porn!" I think this is on the same page. They're doing their thing, have an adults-only business, and the parent crowd comes after the fact and throws a hissy.
Have you been there? I've been a dozen times and haven't seen anything like what people are in an uproar over. I wasn't looking for it. You'd REALLY have to be seeking it out to see anything. As I said in another comment, anyone who wants to see explicit window views is going to need a zoom lens. If your kids don't have them, it's a non-issue. (Which is more than I can say for billboards in the city, including some pointed at the park.)
@kateblack: I think you're missing my point. If this were a case of a few isolated exhibitionists going wild in the windows, well, not much to be done. Ignore them and they'll go away. But the HOTEL is ENCOURAGING its guests to do this stuff in view of a PUBLIC, TAXPAYER SUPPORTED park. It's a no-brainer to me.
Many restaurants, bars, even strip clubs in NYC encourage their patrons to be "good neighbors" by avoiding littering, loud talking, etc. in their environs. Why is this hotel exempt?
@kateblack: On the record, I don't have kids and if I did, I wouldn't send them out to get into Jo Weldon's porn.
Toronto's Skydome (now Rogers Centre) is a huge multi-purpose stadium that opened in 1989 has a 348-room Renaissance Hotel built into it. There is one wall of rooms overlooking the field and bleachers. When it first opened, there would be people having sex up against the windows in the middle of games. The hotel quickly moved to convert the windows to tinted so you couldn't see what was going on inside.
But please, no "T" shirts in the Starbucks, people. We have some standards.