Cyberbullying and sharing intimate images without consent

[FraserB]

Originally posted by zipdoa
Do we tell people who are involved in serious not-at-fault collisions that they should not have been driving because "if you don't want to get into a crash, don't drive a car". That's fucking stupid - We educate drivers on safety, and we promote better habits. We need to change the culture of using sex as an excuse to discriminate just because we think we own our partners.

It's more of a case of "if you don't want those compromising pictures of yourself potentially leaked, don't take them in the first place". Instead, people want a free pass to put themselves into bad situations or make poor decisions and then complain to the cops when it bites them in the ass or they regret those drunken pics they took.

It's a knee jerk reaction to cases that were already covered by existing legislation, the only difference is that police will now have an easier time getting access to your electronic communications, seizing whatever the deem "associated" with the act and lets them into more than just electronics if they can find some tenuous link.

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by FraserB


Instead, people want a free pass to put themselves into bad situations or make poor decisions and then complain to the cops when it bites them in the ass or they regret those drunken pics they took.

You are asking women not to trust men. Something that would make life harder for the majority of us.

The law would protect children also. I don't know why anyone would want child porn to continue to be posted on the net.

[EM2FTL]

Originally posted by FraserB


It's more of a case of "if you don't want those compromising pictures of yourself potentially leaked, don't take them in the first place". Instead, people want a free pass to put themselves into bad situations or make poor decisions and then complain to the cops when it bites them in the ass or they regret those drunken pics they took.

It's a knee jerk reaction to cases that were already covered by existing legislation, the only difference is that police will now have an easier time getting access to your electronic communications, seizing whatever the deem "associated" with the act and lets them into more than just electronics if they can find some tenuous link.

What happens when an individual is passed out or just asleep, and their 'partner' at the time takes pictures of them then distributes said pictures? Should they simply have chosen a more trustworthy partner? It is a free pass to blame the person who took the picture?

When we talk about applicable legislation, are we referring to leg that was drafted prior to the introduction of the internet, and a complete paradigm shift in photography/distribution etc?

Can I write anything today without turning it into a question?

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by EM2FTL

It is a free pass to blame the person who took the picture?

Can I write anything today without turning it into a question?

This thread is interesting. It reveals the people who think this law restricts them, versus the people who are worried about the protection of others.

[DeleriousZ]

Originally posted by Thales of Miletus


This thread is interesting. It reveals the people who think this law restricts them, versus the people who are worried about the protection of others.

Yes. Shit. You got me. I hate it when someone tries to jail me for sharing noodz.

[Mista Bob]

When it comes to certain pictures, as long as the individuals are over 18 this is something that should just never involve the law.

I mean FFS, is no one growing up beyond the kindergarten school yard now?
Tax dollars/resources should never be wasted just to have the hands held of all these people who are too stupid to go through their own lives without constant supervision.

I can just picture it now, crying to 911 when their ex releases pictures that they took themselves and gave out to them. Totally a great use of resources.

Don't want them put out, don't take them. People need to grow the fuck up and accept responsibility for their own actions.

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by Mista Bob
People need to grow the fuck up and accept responsibility for their own actions.

Isn't morality part of personal responsibility?

[A790]

Originally posted by Mista Bob
When it comes to certain pictures, as long as the individuals are over 18 this is something that should just never involve the law.

I mean FFS, is no one growing up beyond the kindergarten school yard now?
Tax dollars/resources should never be wasted just to have the hands held of all these people who are too stupid to go through their own lives without constant supervision.

I can just picture it now, crying to 911 when their ex releases pictures that they took themselves and gave out to them. Totally a great use of resources.

Don't want them put out, don't take them. People need to grow the fuck up and accept responsibility for their own actions.

That's an incredibly short-sighted way of looking at it.

This law would make enforcing and prosecuting those types of cases much easier. It establishes clear legal language regarding how offenses of this nature would be handled. What's the issue here?

It's not as if the police are going to get inundated with calls from people over it. If anything, it will serve to streamline the burden placed on the court system with cases of this nature.

And you know what? If my ex decides to release my nudes, fuck yes I'm going after her legally. Your sentiments regarding the issue are flat-out irrelevant.

Sending nudes doesn't mean that someone needs to "grow the fuck up", especially if they were sent to a spouse/partner. Releasing someone else's nudes without consent does mean that, though. Your anger is hilariously misplaced.

[codetrap]

Originally posted by zipdoa
Yeah, also, if you don't want to get raped, don't dress don't dress provocatively <and walk into a men's prison and say I want to get fucked hard>

/You drank too much and passed out <in a men's prison after saying you wanted to get fucked hard>, so you deserve to be raped.
/Don't piss off your boyfriend <and punch him in the face> if you don't want to get hit
/Don't become a victim of anything because it's the victims fault that it happened to them <when they did stupid things and put themselves into stupid situations where they become the victims>

In relationships, people like to have fun. That might include sharing pictures. Most people have the moral capacity to realize it's a shitty thing to share these pictures after the relationship ends, as some pathetic method of revenge. This law is probably a result of shitty human beings being shitty.

Do we tell people who are involved in serious not-at-fault collisions that they should not have been driving because &quot;if you don't want to get into a crash, don't drive a car&quot;. That's fucking stupid - We educate drivers on safety, and we promote better habits. We need to change the culture of using sex as an excuse to discriminate just because we think we own our partners.

There's some pretty false analogies here.... corrected them for you. There's also a difference between initiating a situation where you're essentially inviting abuse to something like the risk assessment like driving where you always maintain some kind of control. I think in your car example, it would be your example, except she was driving with her eyes closed.

[sexualbanana]

I can't say that I've read the language in the law, but just from reactions and my very superficial knowledge of the legislation, I think this is simply a reaction to the speed with which information spreads now.

Intimate photos/subject matter has been around for a long time. Only now, it spreads like fucking wildfire.

20 years ago, if my girlfriend/wife/husband/boyfriend/booty call wanted to send me a photos of themselves, it would take 5-10 business days. Now it takes 5 seconds. The biggest change is the speed with which that photo multiplies.

20 years ago, if I wanted to show that photo to my friends, I'd show it to them in person. More than likely because there's only one copy, and unless people felt inclined to, they'd have to pay me to make copies or photocopies. Which just takes too much time and effort. Now, I simply hit re-send. And not only do I have a copy of that photo, but so do my friends! Instead of 1 copy, now there's 4 out there!

That's where my impression of the intent of the legislation is heading. From the sounds of it, it may not be perfect, but I think the intent is to catch up to technology.

Having said that, if you are sent an intimate photo by a partner and you in turn send it out to your friends, that just makes you a shitty person.

[Thales of Miletus]

Laws keep the immoral from doing their thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQUr2RkjykU

[Mista Bob]

Originally posted by A790

That's an incredibly short-sighted way of looking at it.

This law would make enforcing and prosecuting those types of cases much easier. It establishes clear legal language regarding how offenses of this nature would be handled. What's the issue here?

It's not as if the police are going to get inundated with calls from people over it. If anything, it will serve to streamline the burden placed on the court system with cases of this nature.

And you know what? If my ex decides to release my nudes, fuck yes I'm going after her legally. Your sentiments regarding the issue are flat-out irrelevant.

Sending nudes doesn't mean that someone needs to &quot;grow the fuck up&quot;, especially if they were sent to a spouse/partner. Releasing someone else's nudes without consent does mean that, though. Your anger is hilariously misplaced.

What is incredibly short sighted is taking these types of photos and sending them to anyone, doesn't matter who or how many people, with the expectation that nothing can possibly go wrong.

Shit happens and there is an incredibly easy way to avoid this, don't take them.
There are risks with everything you do in your life, you either accept those risks or avoid it. Pretty simple.

So why should resources that cost tax dollars be wasted processing cases over something as pathetic as this.
I'm annoyed not because of this specific thing but rather how everything in society now is all about refusing to take any responsibility over ones owns actions. Like I said, people need to grow up.

[Xtrema]

Post a chopped picture of Harper without consent, go to jail.

At least that's how this law will be used in my mind.

[sputnik]

Originally posted by zipdoa
Yeah, also, if you don't want to get raped, don't dress provocatively.

/You drank too much and passed out, so you deserve to be raped.
/Don't piss off your boyfriend if you don't want to get hit
/Don't become a victim of anything because it's the victims fault that it happened to them

So if I leave $100,000 cash on the seat of an unlocked car in Forest Lawn, are people going to feel sorry for me when it gets stolen or are they going to tell me I was stupid?

Rape (and likewise theft) is a terrible thing and inexcusable. However if you put yourself in a vulnerable position it isn't that you _deserved_ it, but you certainly weren't protecting your assets.

So if you don't want naked pictures of you on the internet. Don't take naked pictures of yourself.

[A790]

Originally posted by Mista Bob
So why should resources that cost tax dollars be wasted processing cases over something as pathetic as this.
I'm annoyed not because of this specific thing but rather how everything in society now is all about refusing to take any responsibility over ones owns actions. Like I said, people need to grow up.

This is already happening. So you feel that building legislation that streamlines the process and clearly defines culpability and sentencing is going to wind up costing more than prosecuting on the existing vague legislation?

Can you please explain how?

[Thales of Miletus]

I think the ugliness of the internet speaks to the value of laws.

Some people will be moral, because they are moral.

Some people will be immature, because there is nothing stopping them from being immature.

[codetrap]

Originally posted by A790

That's an incredibly short-sighted way of looking at it.

This law would make enforcing and prosecuting those types of cases much easier. It establishes clear legal language regarding how offenses of this nature would be handled. What's the issue here?

It's not as if the police are going to get inundated with calls from people over it. If anything, it will serve to streamline the burden placed on the court system with cases of this nature.

And you know what? If my ex decides to release my nudes, fuck yes I'm going after her legally. Your sentiments regarding the issue are flat-out irrelevant.

Sending nudes doesn't mean that someone needs to &quot;grow the fuck up&quot;, especially if they were sent to a spouse/partner. Releasing someone else's nudes without consent does mean that, though. Your anger is hilariously misplaced.

I'm personally on the fence about this. On one hand, I think having legal culpability for the person releasing the pictures is a good thing, especially if it's done maliciously. However, that being said, the reality of the situation is that you're completely giving up control by sending them. This is really a complex issue with many variations. If I print the picture and accidentally leave it on the bus, and someone takes it and emails out, are they liable? I think the hardest big is going to be proving intent.

In your example, if she releases your nudes, do you really have a leg to stand on? You gave them to her, they're now hers. What she does with them is her business... as it would be if you gave her your old phone, and forgot to remove those images off it. It's the mixing of a moral and ethical argument where the strict legalities can have some pretty far reaching implications on the responsibility of ownership, and where property lines could potentially be redrawn to.

*shrug*.. Just my thoughts running on too little sleep..

[A790]

Originally posted by codetrap
I'm personally on the fence about this. On one hand, I think having legal culpability for the person releasing the pictures is a good thing, especially if it's done maliciously. However, that being said, the reality of the situation is that you're completely giving up control by sending them. This is really a complex issue with many variations. If I print the picture and accidentally leave it on the bus, and someone takes it and emails out, are they liable? I think the hardest big is going to be proving intent.

In your example, if she releases your nudes, do you really have a leg to stand on? You gave them to her, they're now hers. What she does with them is her business... as it would be if you gave her your old phone, and forgot to remove those images off it. It's the mixing of a moral and ethical argument where the strict legalities can have some pretty far reaching implications on the responsibility of ownership, and where property lines could potentially be redrawn to.

*shrug*.. Just my thoughts running on too little sleep..

You make valid points. I think, given the ease of creating and sending this type of content, that laws should be put in place that clearly define the legalities associated.

Leaving a photo on a bus is one thing (negligence), releasing an explicit photo of someone else without consent is something else entirely (obvious intent to cause harm).

[Thales of Miletus]

Perhaps things would quickly change on the internet, if every person had to put their name to their actions.

[EM2FTL]

Originally posted by Thales of Miletus
Perhaps things would quickly change on the internet, if every person had to put their name to their actions.

Yes, because Facebook is just great