Virtual Flashing and Social Networking - What's the difference?

Anyone who's a member of Flickr or Facebook or Xtube (and the alternatives) like the young man above probably knows that there seem to be thousands of people who like him (and me too) 'flash' their nude bodies and genitalia for strangers whom they have designated as 'friends'. By the way, he's got a LOT of genitalia worth showing off, too. In some case, they just make their nude and/or explicit photos open to the public (Flickr usually catches up with them and deletes their accounts). The same is true for video-sharing websites which seem to be proliferating so fast I can't keep up with them all (e.g. Xtube, etc).... 

I'm not complaining -- I do the same thing myself. 

Before some religious-right morality freak goes on an anti-flashing terrorist rampage and condemns real-live dickflashing, they should just take a look at all the 'flashing' happening virtually.

 We don't categorize them as exhibitionists just because they are putting up nude photos of themselves but what's the differences if they are putting them up just SO they can be viewed (via the Internet) instead of live. The other day I was commenting on a Flickr contact's pics coincidentally while he was uploading them. He wrote back.. "please write more comments because it gives me a big hard-on knowing that people are viewing my pics. " Of course, I did -- but is that what we've all come to - vicarious 'flashing'. I guess he should set up webcam.. the feedback would be a lot quicker. 

All of this guy's pic are nudes and all are open to the public. He's a Flickr contact - but perhaps he got other reasons that just showing himself - I think he's selling himself (not for sex) but as a future partner. 

I realize defining what it really flashing and what is 'virtual flashing' is probably a matter of intent and also has something to do with the will of the audience/ viewer. A 'real' flasher (true exhibitionist fetish) seems to need to be seen by people (whether or not they want to see him). The most extreme fetishist needs to be "seen" doing sexual things (being naked or jerking) in order to get off. Just posting yourself in nude pics or even showing yourself aroused or engaged in masturbation or sexual intercourse in photographs might be exhibitionistic but it doesn't make them (us) a true flasher ... I suppose. Maybe I'm just self-talking (this post or my blog) to try to justify or rationale by own use of virtual flashing. 

I guess I'm trying to say that there seem to be a lot of people with exhibitionist tendencies -- so many that I find that my own form of peekaboo flashing and 'accidental' exhibitionism (wearing skimpy or revealing clothes, or going to nudist beaches, being naked in hostels with clothed roommates, etc ) to be not that extreme. 

Sexual preferences, fantasies and fetishes are unique and sometimes strangely so. But societies love-hate

relationship with sexuality and sexual behavior - especially male-male sex -- is even weirder.

What's your take on it?
_________________The spirit is willing but the flash is week day and weekend!