Is it normal that men get in trouble for flashing while women don't?

The real question should be, why can men go topless and women get in trouble for it? That's not fair, at all. It's legal in some places, but not most. Anywhere that a man can be topless, a woman should be able to be too, but nooooo, they get arrested.

Yes, if women show their vaginas they get in the same trouble as a man, well, it can depend on what you're doing....I mean, sitting on a park bench masturbating is different than if your pants accidentally fall down, but it's generally called public lewdness.

You'd be surprised, women get arrested for things along this line quite often. I worked in strip clubs, and in one state you got arrested for prostitution if you so much as took your shoes off while out in the club, and there's always regulations on what type of underwear and breast coverings are required, if you're not up to code, you go to jail. When men get arrested for it, it's usually for something gross and completely uninvited, when women get arrested for it it's usually either not sexual at all or a technicality, and usually not completely uninvited or unwanted.

yep, as an aside(just adding to the excellent posts by wigsplitz and dappled):

Female sexual organs do seem less "threatening", also their owners are less likely to conduct sexual assault using force.
What i am trying to say: If i was to undress completely on the street, that would probably arouse me, but you wouldn't really know it's something sexual for me.

If a man "flashes" his goods on purpose, and with a sexual reason in mind, he is often erect or even masturbating while he does so. Which seems more "offensive", plus if that happens in a park with no one close, there's always a chance he'd do "more".

I am really sorry because after reading it through, i can't really bring my point across proper, but lets put it like this:

While male topless is ok, and female topless very questionable/illegal,
male bottomless is a lot more "threatening" and offensive than female bottomless(which is also questionable/illegal, but doesn't show sexual excitement quite as open as their male counterparts).

i had a friend who got arrested for taking a leak up the lane when she left a club, she couldnt hold on, they put the flashlight on her and waited till she finished to arrest her, there were men doing the same thing who didnt get touched, so there is inequality there, but here we go again i spose

It's something that, if argued as a man versus woman thing, doesn't appear to make sense (and is biased against men). Problem is, as ever, men and women are different. The punishment in some way has to fit the scale of the crime and the offence caused.

If a woman looks down an alleyway and there's a man with his penis out, having a slash, would it offend her more than if a man saw a woman squatting to pee in the same alley? I think it does. I've walked past an alley in town with my then-girlfriend and saw a man doing what he had to do. I didn't care, but she very much did.

Where I used to lived, I wandered past an alley and only looked down it because of the thunderous sound of water running. It was a rather drunken girl who was going off like a fire hydrant with her anatomy very much on show. Worse, she'd fallen backwards against the wall she was squatting with her back on and realised she now couldn't get back to a standing position so she asked me to help her up. Was I offended? Not really (although it was quite a job avoiding the yellow puddles).

You could quite rightly argue that you can't legislate just because some gender doesn't like something, and if it wasn't a sexual organ on display (and everything that comes along with that), I'd have to agree. If it was, say, men being punished for littering and women not being punished, then it's unfair.

In this case, it looks unfair and could easily be proved unfair, but in actuality, it's too complicated for true simple equality (and in I know in advance that you won't like that).