Revenge pawn and ethics
Discussion
Weird one which has been bubbling away for a while but is getting more attention.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p097pv0f
Zara McDermott (apparently an alumni of Love Island) has made a documentary about the consequence of consensual explicit pics/recordings then being shared (twice!) to the wider world after the end of a relationship: it’s called revenge porn.
In one of these cases she was fourteen at the time, so clearly that is a simple case of distributing images of a minor (tho a legal can feel free to chip in).
The other however was when she was an adult.
I am intrigued about this. Clearly (like the fappening) the non consensual distribution of personal sexual images is illegal and inappropriate but in this particular case there seems to be a learning curve issue which surely has relevance for the wider incidences? At which point do you as an adult accept that sending grot images of yourself to partners or whomever is a stupid idea even if intended for private consumption?
Surely given everything that is now known about security, the internet and frankly mass voyeurism, it isn’t the most sensible idea? And at what point does the law of fool me once, fool me twice kick in?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p097pv0f
Zara McDermott (apparently an alumni of Love Island) has made a documentary about the consequence of consensual explicit pics/recordings then being shared (twice!) to the wider world after the end of a relationship: it’s called revenge porn.
In one of these cases she was fourteen at the time, so clearly that is a simple case of distributing images of a minor (tho a legal can feel free to chip in).
The other however was when she was an adult.
I am intrigued about this. Clearly (like the fappening) the non consensual distribution of personal sexual images is illegal and inappropriate but in this particular case there seems to be a learning curve issue which surely has relevance for the wider incidences? At which point do you as an adult accept that sending grot images of yourself to partners or whomever is a stupid idea even if intended for private consumption?
Surely given everything that is now known about security, the internet and frankly mass voyeurism, it isn’t the most sensible idea? And at what point does the law of fool me once, fool me twice kick in?
Edited by Ridgemont on Tuesday 23 February 01:14
Ridgemont said:
Weird one which has been bubbling away for a while but is getting more attention.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p097pv0f
Zara McDermott (apparently an alumni of Love Island) has made a documentary about the consequence of consensual explicit pics/recordings then being shared (twice!) to the wider world after the end of a relationship: it’s called revenge porn.
In one of these cases she was fourteen at the time, so clearly that is a simple case of distributing images of a minor (tho a legal can feel free to chip in).
The other however was when she was an adult.
I am intrigued about this. Clearly (like the fappening) the distribution of personal sexual images is illegal and inappropriate but in this particular case there seems to be a learning curve issue which surely has relevance for the wider incidences? At which point do you as an adult accept that sending grot images of yourself to partners or whomever is a stupid idea even if intended for private consumption?
Surely given everything that is now known about security, the internet and frankly mass voyeurism, it isn’t the most sensible idea? And at what point does the law of fool me once, fool me twice kick in?
Nah. Too much like wearing a sexy outfit is the reason you were raped. That "law" NEVER kicks in. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p097pv0f
Zara McDermott (apparently an alumni of Love Island) has made a documentary about the consequence of consensual explicit pics/recordings then being shared (twice!) to the wider world after the end of a relationship: it’s called revenge porn.
In one of these cases she was fourteen at the time, so clearly that is a simple case of distributing images of a minor (tho a legal can feel free to chip in).
The other however was when she was an adult.
I am intrigued about this. Clearly (like the fappening) the distribution of personal sexual images is illegal and inappropriate but in this particular case there seems to be a learning curve issue which surely has relevance for the wider incidences? At which point do you as an adult accept that sending grot images of yourself to partners or whomever is a stupid idea even if intended for private consumption?
Surely given everything that is now known about security, the internet and frankly mass voyeurism, it isn’t the most sensible idea? And at what point does the law of fool me once, fool me twice kick in?
Ridgemont said:
In one of these cases she was fourteen at the time, so clearly that is a simple case of distributing images of a minor (tho a legal can feel free to chip in).
Was the person sharing it also a kid though?Ridgemont said:
The other however was when she was an adult.
Not the brightest is sheRidgemont said:
The other however was when she was an adult.
I am intrigued about this. Clearly (like the fappening) the non consensual distribution of personal sexual images is illegal and inappropriate but in this particular case there seems to be a learning curve issue which surely has relevance for the wider incidences? At which point do you as an adult accept that sending grot images of yourself to partners or whomever is a stupid idea even if intended for private consumption?
Surely given everything that is now known about security, the internet and frankly mass voyeurism, it isn’t the most sensible idea? And at what point does the law of fool me once, fool me twice kick in?
A big part of law is to protect the stupid, as they are stupid and will get taken advantage of.I am intrigued about this. Clearly (like the fappening) the non consensual distribution of personal sexual images is illegal and inappropriate but in this particular case there seems to be a learning curve issue which surely has relevance for the wider incidences? At which point do you as an adult accept that sending grot images of yourself to partners or whomever is a stupid idea even if intended for private consumption?
Surely given everything that is now known about security, the internet and frankly mass voyeurism, it isn’t the most sensible idea? And at what point does the law of fool me once, fool me twice kick in?
Edited by Ridgemont on Tuesday 23 February 01:14
Edited by hyphen on Tuesday 23 February 01:20
hyphen said:
Ridgemont said:
In one of these cases she was fourteen at the time, so clearly that is a simple case of distributing images of a minor (tho a legal can feel free to chip in).
Was the person sharing it also a kid though?'Threat' laws are usually very hard to challenge. Look at 'threats to kill' and 'threats to damage'. Commonly done, but very rarely ever prosecuted.
Threatening to share such images could be used as evidence in the wider context of domestic abuse / cohesive control, and I imagine that's as good as it'll get prior to the offence of actually sharing the images is committed.
Threatening to share such images could be used as evidence in the wider context of domestic abuse / cohesive control, and I imagine that's as good as it'll get prior to the offence of actually sharing the images is committed.
I am not sure I get your point. Yes,sending explicit photos of yourself can go badly wrong. No, that doesn't mean distributing said photos without consent is legally or ethically right.
On the 'asking for it' point, came across a good one recently. If you walk around without a motorbike helmet on, doesn't mean smashing you over the head with a brick is OK, because you were asking for it by not being dressed defensively enough
On the 'asking for it' point, came across a good one recently. If you walk around without a motorbike helmet on, doesn't mean smashing you over the head with a brick is OK, because you were asking for it by not being dressed defensively enough
Although there is a distinction between child and adult in law I don't think there is much distinction in the way lads' (of any age) minds work. I can't believe that women don't realise that a not negligible proportion on men will at least share images/videos with their mates.
Especially the sort of men who might solicit such images.
Especially the sort of men who might solicit such images.
oddman said:
Although there is a distinction between child and adult in law I don't think there is much distinction in the way lads' (of any age) minds work. I can't believe that women don't realise that a not negligible proportion on men will at least share images/videos with their mates.
Especially the sort of men who might solicit such images.
I feel the same but would make the point for both men and women. I'm surprised anyone can be so naive.Especially the sort of men who might solicit such images.
But as has been mentioned, that's a separate thing from the law. People should take responsibility, parents should advise children, friends should help each other etc etc. But the law, government and the police should look after victims and not blame them.
Randy Winkman said:
I feel the same but would make the point for both men and women. I'm surprised anyone can be so naive.
But as has been mentioned, that's a separate thing from the law. People should take responsibility, parents should advise children, friends should help each other etc etc. But the law, government and the police should look after victims and not blame them.
It’s one of the things I’ve hammered into my (male) kids - always assume that any picture or email/text you send could appear on the front page of the Daily Mail in 10 years time. If it passes that test, it’s fine. Don’t send dick pics to anyone, even if they are bombarding you with pictures of their bits. But as has been mentioned, that's a separate thing from the law. People should take responsibility, parents should advise children, friends should help each other etc etc. But the law, government and the police should look after victims and not blame them.
Same for videoing yourself while having sex. Where the f
k did the urge to do that come from? Randy Winkman said:
I feel the same but would make the point for both men and women. I'm surprised anyone can be so naive.
But as has been mentioned, that's a separate thing from the law. People should take responsibility, parents should advise children, friends should help each other etc etc. But the law, government and the police should look after victims and not blame them.
Once a photo is taken by someone else, you've lost ownership and may as well consider it in the public domain. The boyfriend you love at the time could be your worst enemy next week. There are plenty of websites that seek out leaked photos and then other users sleuth, trawl and catfish to find the identity of the person using social media. Once they've got a confirmed link between the noodz and the person they can out them or even send the nudes to social media friends and family - Hey here is a pic of your daughter sucking my dick.But as has been mentioned, that's a separate thing from the law. People should take responsibility, parents should advise children, friends should help each other etc etc. But the law, government and the police should look after victims and not blame them.
In the States they have a few strange laws. I think there was a case where a female minor sent an unsolicited pic to a male minor. Even though it was unsoilicited the male minor was charged with some offence.
There is another thread on these forums where the son of a PH member had got into trouble with the police for soliciting nudes from an underage girl (the son was underage too) then using threats when they didn't get what they want.
Apparently, according to some posters, it's what kids do these days and all perfectly normal and healthy. Nothing to see there, move along.
Apparently, according to some posters, it's what kids do these days and all perfectly normal and healthy. Nothing to see there, move along.
I struggle to see how anybody could find sharing such images ethically right in any way
I had a number of such images and videos of my ex wife, done for me when we were in a relationship
The first thing I did when we split up was delete them all. Firstly as it was the right thing to do, and secondly because I found images of her painful at the time (I didn't just delete the explicit ones, but pretty much everything, including giving the wedding pictures with her on to her parents)
I had a number of such images and videos of my ex wife, done for me when we were in a relationship
The first thing I did when we split up was delete them all. Firstly as it was the right thing to do, and secondly because I found images of her painful at the time (I didn't just delete the explicit ones, but pretty much everything, including giving the wedding pictures with her on to her parents)
The incident at the age of 14 would sadden any parent and of course the person who was knowingly photographed.
However, she's now making a living from selling pictures of herself near enough naked and selling stories to tabloids about her sex life!
Love Island is a pretty toxic playground and it's a very sad state of affairs that young folks aspire to this kind of lifestyle.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/b80a18ed-e1...
That said, I'm looking for my tiny violin right now.
However, she's now making a living from selling pictures of herself near enough naked and selling stories to tabloids about her sex life!
Love Island is a pretty toxic playground and it's a very sad state of affairs that young folks aspire to this kind of lifestyle.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/b80a18ed-e1...
That said, I'm looking for my tiny violin right now.
Of course girls( and boys) like her could perhaps set an example by not being on trash like love island, naked attraction , towie etc where the only goal is to portray a false ideal of body types, life, relationships to the young, vulnerable and stupid.
Because it’s always going to end well.
All this girl has done is raise something personal to her that I suspect no one knew about. All in a bid to claim more fame. Now it’ll have a load of people googling her pics. And the cycle of false talentless fame revolves.
It’s a bit like newspaper stories of the “offended”. No we weren’t, because we never knew about “whatever” to even bother being offended.
Because it’s always going to end well.
All this girl has done is raise something personal to her that I suspect no one knew about. All in a bid to claim more fame. Now it’ll have a load of people googling her pics. And the cycle of false talentless fame revolves.
It’s a bit like newspaper stories of the “offended”. No we weren’t, because we never knew about “whatever” to even bother being offended.
Pieman68 said:
I had a number of such images and videos of my ex wife, done for me when we were in a relationship
The first thing I did when we split up was delete them all.
This is what I do - I wouldn’t want a future gf seeing them, I’m also worried my phone could be hacked and the photos leaked and I’d get accused. Easier to just blip them. The first thing I did when we split up was delete them all.
Ridgemont said:
Pothole said:
Nah. Too much like wearing a sexy outfit is the reason you were raped. That "law" NEVER kicks in.
Fair point but judges well into the 90s were still giving dodgy sentences on that principle and is it the same?Yes, it's the same. No crime is the victim's fault.
rxe said:
It’s one of the things I’ve hammered into my (male) kids - always assume that any picture or email/text you send could appear on the front page of the Daily Mail in 10 years time.
Much the same here, except my threat was to warn them that anything they send could pop up on their grandmother's phone! So don't send anything they wouldn't be comfortable with her seeing or reading. Jawls said:
I don’t see any difficult ethical problem here at all. Rather, the answer is easy. Those who share the images without consent to third parties are behaving severely wrongly and the law should take an interest in their behaviour.
Yep, exactly this. It isn't even a grey area. I've been sent intimate images in the past and I wouldn't dream of showing them to anyone, let alone publishing them on the internet. It's about trust, decency and having a functioning moral compass and I have no problem with the law pursuing those who are unable to understand those fairly basic concepts.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff