There is still a lot of stigma attached to voyeurism and exhibitionism, even in what could arguably be called a sexually liberal culture (relatively speaking, anyway). And it is mostly due to the stereotypical assumption that voyeurism and exhibitionism (both) inherently involve a violation of consent - which is not true. Voyeurism isn't all hidden cameras, and exhibitionism isn't all public indecency. In fact, I would argue that something as popular and mainstream as the dissemination and consumption of pornography online (or elsewhere) depends upon the voyeuristic and exhibitionistic impulses within the majority of us. (But, of course, our critics who only want to slander us, won't give us the benefit of that point).
But even where the fantasies and desires of fetishists may sometimes wander over the border of ethics and into the land of questionable acts, as with other things, this doesn't mean the individual in question doesn't understand where the line is to be drawn, or that he doesn't have the ability to control himself. It's just that, even to admit that you can derive some pleasure from the thought of observing, or being exposed outside of the bounds of a private, committed relationship, earns you a badge of reprobation in most circles. I've felt this particularly distinctly among nudists. You'd think a community built upon the belief that covering up is the true indecency would be paradise to a person who enjoys admiring or showing off the human body. But instead, this sort of person is made to feel like a second class citizen, if not an outright criminal.
Just consider this. We are organic beings gifted with the sense of sight. We are capable of appreciating the aesthetic qualities of the things we see. We are also creatures who reproduce sexually, and are programmed to respond both physically and psychologically to the sight of the human body - especially ones we deem attractive. In an effort to civilize man, and tamp down rampant fornication (I can only assume this was the prehistoric justification), society has created a taboo on displaying one's body fully (especially the genitals, although in a lot of contexts it is not limited to only this area) in all but a very few specialized situations - always in private.
Arguments can be made - on both sides - about whether or not this is for better or worse. The argument I want to make is simply that, in a society that has put a taboo on something we are capable of and even programmed to enjoy, it is rational - nay, inevitable - for some people to develop an interest in contravening that taboo. It's not insane. It's not even necessarily antisocial. And we shouldn't stigmatize people for acknowledging the inherent potential for pleasure (erotic or otherwise) in seeing or being seen, separated from any consideration of whether everyone involved has had a pre-care session first.
Yes, consent is important - I'm not neglecting that. But it's important as a rational inquiry before choosing one's actions. It's not something that factors into the equation of the thoughts and feelings that go on inside a person's head. Tying them together just dooms the fetishist to an unlikable outcome (for all involved) - which is what the detractors want. They don't want a safe and sane outlet for these desires. They don't even want anyone to be able to conceive of such a thing. Because then they would have to live with it as an acceptable part of society, and learn to treat these people as human beings.
