Women try to get recourse for revenge porn photo posts

[cbdo2007]

Outrage After Exes Post Revenge Pics
By ABC NewsPosts 3 hours ago

Dozens of women are fighting back after intimate photos they sent to former romantic interests have been sent by their exes to a so-called "revenge porn" website and posted online.

Holley Toups says that she was at work one day and a friend called to tell her what she'd seen online. It's the moment that Toups, a teacher's aide in Texas, says her life became a living hell.


"She said, 'I overheard some people talking about a website. Its pictures, you know, explicit photos that people have posted,' and she said, 'you're on there,'" Toups said.

Toups found semi-nude photos she said she once sent to a former boyfriend - now posted on the porn site.

http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/womens-outrage-ex-boyfriends-post-revenge-photos-133425692--abc-news-topstories.html

[MineralMan]

1. Do not take photos or videos of yourself in sexual situations, and do not

allow others to do it either.

That is the rule. If you do not follow the rule, your photo or video will appear on the Internet at some point. That's guaranteed.

[haikugal]

2. There are times...

these things happen and no consent has been given, however, I agree completely with you MM.

[enlightenment]

3. Unfortunately true.

Yes, you should be allowed to share what you want to share - but common sense says otherwise. Sometimes, the best picture is the one we hold in memory - and when it comes to taking intimate photos and sharing them with someone else, the photos should ONLY be that memory snapshot - not a permanent image.

Intimate images are always going to be potentially compromising images. The easiest way to avoid "revenge porn" is to not allow those pictures to be taken (or take them yourself).

[Last Stand]

88. This is a classic example that what is legal and what is moral and ethical

are at odds. The law is pretty clear about the ownership of images where consent is obvious. Relationships can bring out the worst in people and you have to protect yourself while still investing in them. Unfortunately, when you give consent, you open yourself up for exploitation no matter the subject. It's wrong, but it's the way it is. Nowadays, you have to play to the lowest common denominator to not get crushed. Doesn't matter the nature of the relationship either.

Never sign real estate documents without reading and understanding the small print. You might legally lose your house.

Never buy your girl/boyfriend a car that you don't mind seeing him/her ride away in the next week.

Never get married without a pre-nup if you bring your life savings to the marriage. You might lose half of everything next year.


People are mean. It ain't right, but you have to be careful nowadays.

[Nay]

188. Totally true, Last Stand. I shudder to think of the people allowing these photos of themselves,

thinking that their latest love interest would NEVER do anything vindictive or porny with the photos -- well, people are mean and nasty, and even the ones you love can become your enemies. It's a hard lesson to learn. Even the guys that are still friendly with you will find it hard not to 'trade' your photos online so he can access other posters' girlfriends' photos. If you're a man, don't let your girlfriends take naked photos of you, either. What might happen if she gets mad and dumps you? Yep.

It's disgusting, but with the way things are never private, you can't take chances like that anymore.

[seabeyond]

190. male bonding. he can even like the girl, and it is all about male bonding. when a fellow male says

hey... she know you are sharing? what crap. knock that off. what an ass

men and boys will continue.

[gulliver]

183. "the best picture is the one we hold in memory"

So true.

[bluestate10]

225. If a person takes a picture themselves and email it or transfer it via cellphone, the

picture become available to whoever the person that received it wants to share with. People should not take intimate photos, EVER, unless they are ok with the possibility that those photos will become public.

[seabeyond]

227. we are talking about the creep, bottomfeeder that has so little character that they would actually

share it with another.

a person that gives a picture needs to not trust another. but... it is the vile creep that steps over the line that is the issue.

[redqueen]

6. Same logic as 'Don't get too drunk, or you will eventually get raped.'

It is good to be careful.

It is better to place the blame where if belongs.

[yardwork]

10. Exactly! I notice that female victims are always the ones being shamed.

Are male victims of rape lectured in this way?

Whenever a woman is sexually assaulted there is a whole chorus of people clucking their tongues and pointing out how she got herself into this situation. Male victims of crimes aren't treated this way.

[Last Stand]

107. Men who are raped or sexually abused suffer tremendous shame

and even ridicule. Their trauma, like that of women, is life-changing. I'm not sure why posters on this website perpetuate the fallacy that male rape victims have some sort of free pass.

[thucythucy]

117. Thank you for posting this.

Male survivors often face the whole "no REAL man ever gets raped" BS, and homophobia, as well as much of the same victim blaming that women survivors face. And just like women and girls, most men and boys who are raped never report.

Supporting women survivors shouldn't mean dissing male survivors, just like supporting male survivors doesn't mean victim-blaming women. Dividing survivors like that only helps the rapists among us.

[Xipe Totec]

179. I would've given Anthony Weiner the same advice. nt

[yardwork]

209. I didn't realize that Anthony Weiner was raped. Link?

[Xipe Totec]

215. Cute.

[MineralMan]

12. I'm not assessing blame. Just explaining reality.

The person who posts such photos on the Internet is the asshole. It happens so frequently, though, that not ever allowing such photos or videos to be made is about the only way to prevent assholes from having them to post.

[redqueen]

15. That is exactly the same logic, though.

Girls and women are raped all the time.

We hear about what we should do to stop it constantly. (Don't go out late. Don't dress that way. Don't get drunk. Don't trust first dates. Don't act too 'easy'. Don't let him pay for everything on the date. Don't wear long hair. Don't park in certain places. Don't walk alone after a certain hour. Don't 'look like a victim'. Etc etc etc etc etc)

The fact is, not all men are fucking assholes, and women (AND MEN) should feel free to share those pictures if they want. The pictures are not the problem.

[MineralMan]

17. Well, I think I'll keep following my policy of not allowing such

photos to be taken. Revenge photos and videos are also posted of men, you know. Sexual photos and videos seem to have a destiny on the Internet, somehow. Since many relationships do not last, and often end badly, it's not a surprise. If there are no photos or videos, none can be posted. I'm not speaking only of women, you know.

[bettyellen]

102. but please also realize that when you offer such very obvious advice, that it's contributing to the

Last edited Sat Jan 26, 2013, 05:12 AM - Edit history (1)

negative discourse about women that totally contributes to them blaming themselves. And contributes to judges letting these fuckers off the hook, because everyone says the girl should have known. You are then part of that everyone, which helps nobody.

Everyone reading of the issue, if they hadn't considered sexting pics was ill advised, now know it is- or can be. And those who are going to take a risk (including your wife) and trust someone are going to disregard the advice. We have all been taken in by people we shouldn't have trusted in things both small and large. Such is life and human nature. It's tough to believe we should never ever trust someone. And so our impulse is to trust sometimes. People should not be faulted for that.

Please think next time you post "helpful advice". Is it obvious? Have we gals heard this 1000X before? If so consider it not helpful at all and instead think about women - like your ex- who make these mistakes. How everyone calls them a fuck up while at the same time remaining largely silent about what the wrong doers and their friends should stop doing. Why aren't you all talking about changing the locker room mentality out there instead of accepting it as a fait accompli?

Why aren't you trying to be part of the solution instead of being part of the culture that always looks to the victim?
Please try to consider the big picture instead of chiming in with facile advice. You make mistakes too. Your wife didn't make a mistake trusting you, nor did many other women. But you characterize it as their failing. It's not.

[redqueen]

172. Thanks. Good post. nt

[MineralMan]

189. I've been thinking about what you wrote since I read it last night.

As you may have seen in my other posts in this thread, I believe that nobody should post compromising photos of others online, and I believe that those who do should be liable in lawsuits for defamation of character and invasion of privacy.

That said, I stand by my recommendation that people avoid taking photos or videos or allowing others to take such photos or videos of nudity or sexual activity. I'm in no way victim blaming. What I'm doing is trying to make people aware of the possibility of such things having a habit of ending up on the Internet.

Any relationship can go sour and disintegrate. In addition, not everyone who is an asshole reveals that right away during a relationship. Things may change at any time, and what was a playful or exciting photo or video may well turn into something else if the relationship ends and the other party is angry or frustrated enough to let their baser instincts come out. Then, that playful or exciting video may well become fodder for distribution.

Caution is all I'm advising, and it applies to anyone, not just to women. Trust in others is a good thing, but situations change and a person you trust may not continue to be worthy of that trust at some point. I think everyone reading this thread has had that occur in their lives.

In recommending that people not allow such photos or videos to be created, I am being part of the solution. The person who is embarrassed, dismayed, or harmed by the dissemination of such things is the victim. The person who distributes them is the bad guy. Recognizing that a partner in a relationship can turn into the bad guy is not victim blaming. It is simply recognition of what happens all to frequently. Advising caution is not victim blaming, either. It is simply advice that has a track record of being good advice.

A number of people in this thread have agreed with that advice, including a number of women. I believe you have misunderstood my intent.

[bettyellen]

194. I do understand your intent, but you seem totally unwilling to consider how your voice is part of a

chorus that puts the issue on women's laps, and leaves it there.
Aside from that, it's kind of obvious and not necessary to tell readers of the dangers of something they've just read about the dangers of. Trust me, if they learn the lesson, it'll be from reading about the girls who were hurt by this, and not from you wagging your finger.

But feel free to ignore women who are telling you that you're supporting a narrative that blames and shames women. I'm certainly far from the first woman to tell you this. Ignore all of us, and ignore the big picture. That's certainly your right. But don't be offended when we're not grateful for it, and don't fool yourself it helps anybody.

[Aerows]

171. Common sense

says don't allow pictures to be taken that you don't want everyone to see. Whether or not it's right, wrong or whatever, protecting yourself is a good idea. I wouldn't walk down the street buck naked and expect that I wouldn't get negative attention.

[HappyMe]

175. I agree.

People seem to have a blind spot when it comes to stuff like this. Don't post a tirade against your boss or co-worker on FB or tweet it and expect it to be a 'secret'. The same goes for bullying and threatening on social media.

Whatever you really don't want out there, just don't it.

[seabeyond]

180. on another thread, i would be all over the, dont give nude pictures, dont do a tirade on boss, ect..

personal responsibility. i teach my boys that. repeatedly. KNOW, anything can get on the net. look at the notre dame player with the illusionary GF.

but, that is the obvious. and like with wrongs, the wrong is putting the entrusted pictures on the net and a company allowing.

i think most everyone in this thread gets.... do a naked picture, and it could be posted.

[Exultant Democracy]

216. Nope its very different logic. A girl in a burka can be raped the same as a girl in a mini skirt.

A person who hasn't given naked pictures to their ex's can not have those pictures posted on the internet.

If the pics had been stolen or obtained illegally by a peeping tom that would be another story, but in the this situation these women did give these pictures away in the first place.

[seabeyond]

19. yes. i would like to hear what a vile piece of shit would do this. and what a vile piece of shit

company would allow it. and what a vile piece of shit company would profit to take those pictures off of women being exploited by vile piece of shit men using this as revenge and allowing it on a vile piece of shit mans site.

that is what i want to hear.

[DesMoinesDem]

37. Terrible analogy. Not the same logic at all.

There is no consent to rape. If everyone in the pictures consents to the picture being taken, there is no crime in the pictures being taken or shared. If you don't want pictures shared, don't take them.

[seabeyond]

44. so interesting how you men shift the blame from the bottomfeeders onto the women. so convenient. nt

[October]

53. Really.

Never mind that there was trust involved and it was violated.

[seabeyond]

55. THIS is what creates our rape culture. and every man defending a mans right to go against a womans

will and put these pictures on the net, is fuckin defending the rape culture.

my guess, is these men are really defending the having shared pictures that were intrusted to them, and do not want any of the shit to rub off on them.

[DesMoinesDem]

90. I'm not shifting the blame to anyone. You are.

The blame lies with the person, regardless of gender, that consents to a picture and then is mad when that picture is seen by others. Their gender has nothing to do with anything. You seem to just want to blame men because you are sexist. You understand that women are capable of sharing pictures that men don't want shared, right?

[seabeyond]

92. wrong. in every way, wrong. the woman consented to have a private moment with a man. the vile creep

you defend went against what she wanted and put it out to everyone. and it says a hell of a lot about a man, that does not get, or pretends, or refuses to see the wrong in this.

give me a link to the site where women are doing this to men. give me the company owned by women that allow such a site. give me a link to a company that then extorts money from men to get the pictures taken off the net.

and the very first wrong is blaming the woman for taking the picture. instead of the vile creep that posted it on the net.

[DesMoinesDem]

148. wrong. in every way, wrong.

And I have no respect for the opinions of sexists like you. Have a nice day.

[seabeyond]

149. hey, if you cant prove your statement is correct, then just admit it. no need

to get your panties in a twist.

[DesMoinesDem]

150. Google it yourself. You'll find hundreds of pictures of men if you look.

I don't know if there is a website dedicated to men, but I never claimed there was. You made that strawman. But women do post pictures and they are not hard to find if you want to. To believe that no woman has ever posted a picture of a man on the internet that he didn't want to be shared is beyond naive. It's stupid and sexist.

[seabeyond]

151. first, no one said no women post pictures willingly. second, no one said men did not have naked

pictures on the net. third, i specifically told you it is about women who do not consent, being put on a site created by men, for men, to ridicule these women, and companies owned by men and another company owned by a man to extort money from the girls and women to get the pictures off the site.

YOU told me it is happening to men. i say... prove it. you cant.

because you fabricate an argument does not make a win.

[DesMoinesDem]

157. Still arguing with the strawman you created I see.

"first, no one said no women post pictures willingly."

When you put all the blame on men your were essentially saying women didn't do it.

"second, no one said men did not have naked pictures on the net. "

Again, when you blamed only men the only logical conclusion is that it didn't happen to men.

" third, i specifically told you it is about women who do not consent, being put on a site created by men, for men, to ridicule these women, and companies owned by men and another company owned by a man to extort money from the girls and women to get the pictures off the site. "

No, you blamed men when I made a comment about blaming a person that allows a picture to be taken and then is mad when it is shared. My comment isn't about just these few women in a court case, it is about the thousands and thousands of people this happens to. And some of them are men. With your obsession on this paysite aspect your argument seems to be that the the problem isn't the pictures being shared on the internet (because there are thousands of places to share pictures freely), but that some site is charging money for them.

"YOU told me it is happening to men. i say... prove it. you cant. "

No, you created a strawman and attributed it to me. I never claimed there was a pay website dedicated to men. Prove I said it... you can't, because I didn't.

"because you fabricate an argument does not make a win."

because you are arguing with a strawman you fabricated for me makes you lose the argument.

[seabeyond]

159. this is an OP about men with a site created by men, company owned by men. so when i talk about men,

it is because i am talking about the OP that is put up for us to talk about. that is what we do on a discussion board. so NO, because i talk about men, that put photos on a site created by men and a company owned by men and another company owned by men extorting money from women, does NOT mean i have then said

no men have naked picutres.
no woman willingly put up naked pictures.

that is the stupidist damn argument i have heard.

[DesMoinesDem]

162. If you don't like the discussion taking place, don't insert yourself into!

I was arguing against an analogy to rape that someone made. It is you the interjected yourself into our conversation. If you didn't want to discuss sharing pictures as a whole on the internet you shouldn't have replied to me. I made it quite clear several times that I was discussing sharing pictures regardless of gender. It is you that stuck with blaming only men, which is why the only conclusion is that you do believe the arguments that you now say are stupid.

[seabeyond]

165. no. what you did was derail the argument. took it from the issue to nullify it with what about the

menz. gender neutral. that is what i was challenging.

that is what you created strawmen argument about.

YOU created an argument that has nothing to do with this OP to dismiss the issue. i challenged.

[seabeyond]

186. you didnt have a discussion about rape. your argument was "it happens to the menz, too". nt

[bettyellen]

152. there are hundreds of pics of men, that they happily post themselves.

there is nothing on the web comparable to this aimed at shaming men. It doesn't exist.

[DesMoinesDem]

158. I never claimed there was.

That doesn't mean there aren't pictures of guys on the internet that were shared by a women that they don't want out there. There are.

[MadrasT]

184. Great. THIS THREAD is not about those pictures.

THIS THREAD is about pictures of women that were posted without their permission, by MEN.

Apparently the topic of THIS THREAD has eluded you... or you are purposefully attempting to derail it.

[DesMoinesDem]

187. This thread will go in whatever direction people take it, like every single thread.

I didn't respond to the OP. I replied to a post about rape, even though this OP doesn't mention rape. Before chiming in with your opinions, maybe you should figure out what others are actually discussing instead of assuming that everyone is having the same discussion. It is people like you that continue to nag about the OP that are derailing this thread. Had the people that replied to my post actually argued with what I had posted instead of a strawman there would be some actually thoughtful discussion.

[seabeyond]

191. madras, quit being a nag, and i will try to quit being a sexist pig....

[uppityperson]

222. A person can consent to a picture being taken but not to it being shared. If you didn't consent to

having it shared, it is the same as rape. Non-consent=non-consent.

Yes, there can be a crime in "sharing" pictures without having express consent of all that are in the picture. Simply consenting to having a photo taken does NOT = consent to having them shared.

[truebrit71]

41. Not remotely the same logic...

...It is, however, good to be careful and not let some guy take pictures of you naked..

[Leslie Valley]

43. Placing the blame does not undo the damage

It may be useful in criminal proceedings but it's a bit like the police showing up to drape the scene in yellow tape.

It's too little too late.

[redqueen]

45. Placing the blame where it belongs means victims are less likely to be too ashamed to come forward

This is a class action lawsuit.

This is important. We can't keep desperately trying to make up reasons to blame victims. It does no good. It does do harm.

[Bake]

108. Good luck with that.

Once you give another person a picture, regardless of your intentions, that other person owns it and can do with it as he/she wishes. And very likely once that person posts it on a scuzzbucket website, that website then owns it (depending on the website's terms/conditions of service).

Bake

[Drale]

54. No I disagree because

taking a nude photo (with the exception of hidden cameras) is a conscious choice whereas getting raped is not. You can avoid seeing yourself naked on the internet by making sure you can truly trust someone before taking off your clothes around them and not allowing photos of your naked body. You can try and avoid being raped by paying attention, self defense techniques and or weapons but its still happens unfortunately.

[redqueen]

63. Women can be raped by their significant others.

Is rape ok in those circumstances... because she made the conscious choice to be around a rapist?

[uppityperson]

223. Thank you. Spousal/significant other/prior sexual partner rape happens and is rape also.

[Whisp]

121. right on! ++++++++++

I am, ahem, dissapointed in some of the responses here.

It should be assumed that intimate pictures are... intimate, and not meant to be shared. But I guess some morans aren't smart enough to figure that out and no wonder they were dumped.

[redqueen]

174. It is very disappointing, but hardly surprising. Women are always to be blamed. Always.

In matters like this, especially so.

Punishing women for not 'behaving as they should', and 'bringing these things on themselves', instead of focusing on the people doing the abusing, harassment, rape, and assorted other forms of victimizing is a time-honored tradition in the patriarchy. It ensures that women don't ever get the idea they should ever be able to expect to be treated with respect, especially not when it comes to matters of sexuality.

[Hekate]

7. Told my kids that back when it was just home videos that were getting out there!

My gods, how stupid are people?

[Bok_Tukalo]

13. Or ... don't date assholes.

One of the two.

[MineralMan]

14. Sometimes you don't know someone's an asshole

for a while. Some assholes are pretty good at hiding their assholery, but it always emerges at some point.

[Bok_Tukalo]

16. I disagree about knowing

You can figure that out rather early in the relationship. Certainly prior to the relationship becoming intimate.

[bettyellen]

23. you'd be shocked at how some people can turn asshole years later...it often doesn't manifest itself

until they are suddenly not getting their way. Then, bam... a whole other side emerges to the "nicest person in the world". Very common scenario.

[Bok_Tukalo]

27. How in the world does someone get their way for years?

There are countless interactions people have on a daily basis. Sooner or later, within a short period of time, the asshole emerges.

[bettyellen]

33. in relationships? it happens. some women are socially conditioned to "smooth things over" and

go along with their man. I know my family tried with me, LOL. Didn't work, not to say there wasn't enormous pressure put on me to be compliant, and I know quite a few women that turned their lives upside down for "love" not even noticing the dude would never bend an inch in their direction. It's not all that rare, and more common when the guy is the breadwinner.
Thank god, my father explained how bad that dynamic is for both partners.

[winter is coming]

48. ^^ This. One of my friends married a guy like this. Her family had fed her

the "you have to have a man on your arm to have status" and "go along to get along" tripe for years. I didn't know her well until after she got married, but I'd gone to school with her husband. First time I met him, I thought, "No way, Jose, not for me," even though most of my girlfriends thought he was quite a catch. He gradually became the Husband From Hell.

[bettyellen]

64. two of my closest friends. really strong, opinionated gals... were just completely "taken"

swept away, head over heels, etc. Society has always romanticized this notion, and they did too!
And then realized a few years later they had no shred of their own life left, no firends, no freedom, and everything was subject to husbands approval.
And yes, it happens to men. My poor brother is in a similar boat.

[winter is coming]

65. Books, TV, and movies constantly peddle unrealistic and fucked-up relationships

and people are foolish enough to think that's how things are supposed to be. I knew a woman, totally perplexed by her wreck of a marriage, lament that she thought "things would be like they are in Heinlein novels". I shit you not.

Just think about how many "romantic comedies" there are where the couple begins their relationship by fighting and hating each other's guts, but then they can't resist that magnetic attraction of luuuuuuv. Never does it occur to them, "Geez, we fight all the time, maybe we aren't suited for each other," or "Geez, we fight all the time, maybe we don't have the first clue about how to have a good relationship." In the movies, they paper over the cracks with sex, and we're supposed to assume that will work, long-term, in real life.

[coalition_unwilling]

164. Well put. I find it telling that most romantic comedies stop at the point

of unification\consummation and do not depict the actual workings\dynamics of an ongoing relationship. "They got married and lived happily ever after" pretty much says it all . . . NOT.

[haikugal]

93. You'd be wrong on that...

[bluestate10]

226. I disagree. If a person pays attention to conduct, a second person's true character will shine

through at a time and in a way that person can't hide. A person that is considerate and respectful and behaves appropriately is unlikely to take revenge actions. A person that behaves inappropriately when he or she has a choice is prone to behave badly when rejected after getting personal information or intimate photos.

[ismnotwasm]

20. It may be the 'rule'

But I hope these women sue the shit out of these asswipes and win. Because unless you personally are into your own posting of sexual situations, nobody else had the right to to do it.

It's fucking creepy man. It's reminds me pedophiles who photoshop pictures of kids off of someone else's Facebook so they can have enough pictures to join one of the many disgusting pedo groups. (Yes this exists)

[MineralMan]

22. Revenge photos get posted of both men and women.

It seems to be a popular hobby when relationships end badly, as they so often do. One of the parties involved posts embarrassing or disgusting photos of the other. There are a number of websites dedicated to such photos, as you can find by searching Google and including terms like "revenge" or "My ex" I advise not searching Google images with the filtering off, either.

[ismnotwasm]

24. Oh I'm aware

Since its sensitive and potentially life options affecting behavior, I still hope they sue and win.

The problem being if we want the Internet to be more or less free from government intrusion and censorship---I think this is a can of worms situation-- I would want some sort of legal recourse with images posted without my permission.

I've been telling people for some time to not post pictures of their kids on Facebook or the Internet and why. Do they listen? No.

[MineralMan]

26. Yes, I think such lawsuits should result in hefty awards to the

people whose photos were posted. If I were on such a jury, I'd help make that happen.

[ismnotwasm]

28. Me too

[Gormy Cuss]

98. So you're OK with this behavior and think the responsibility lies solely on the person photographed?

The class action lawsuit is an attempt to change that burden to the ones who post the images without permission.

This is not a novel idea. If I post photographs of you on my commercial website you can sue me --and probably prevail-- because I don't have a release form from you.

[MineralMan]

125. You also haveno

Compromising photos of me and never will.

[Gormy Cuss]

135. What if you had a wardrobe malfunction at the beach

and someone snapped a full frontal shot with your face clearly identifiable then plastered that shot all over the internet? Feeling the potential to be compromised yet?

I'm not arguing that it's a smart idea to share photos that you wouldn't want on the internet some day, only that the person in the photo should have the right to limit the use.

[MineralMan]

192. I agree with you. At no point did I say anything else.

Those who distribute such photos or videos are wrong to do so, and should be liable for the harm done. Yes, the person who is harmed should have control of the images or videos. The facts are that they do not and that there are assholes in the world. Protecting oneself from those assholes is just good sense. Prevention is far better than punishment after the fact in such cases. Once such material is online, it may well always be online. Removing it can be almost impossible.

Of course it is wrong to publish or disseminate such things, and there should be liability for doing so. I never suggested otherwise.

[cbdo2007]

39. No need to generalize.....just be sure to erase it soon afterward.

Wife and I made a video a couple of months ago. It was great fun, we watched it a few times since then (both together and separately) and then destroyed it.

[0rganism]

40. corollary: if your boyfriend asks you for "nude pix", dump him

make it clear up front that this is not okay, and act on it if the situation arises.

[smirkymonkey]

143. +1000

For reasons posted above.

[Warpy]

106. The line my wise mother used was "Never let a picture be taken

that you wouldn't want on the front page of the newspaper because that's exactly where it will show up eventually."

My ex had a porno photo of one of his old girlfriends as his prized possession. Two things were in her favor, she'd been smart enough to drape her hair across her face and it was a Polaroid (remember those) and has probably faded to the point you can no longer see what it used to be. That photo was shown as a trophy for many years.

Nudie photos last forever and will be circulated widely, even if the ex isn't tacky and hateful enough to post them on a revenge site. This is a real problem since we're still dealing with a double standard and societal slut shaming. Women have been fired from their jobs for a lot less.

I hate that it has to be this way, but if he wants a sexy photo to keep with him at all times, do a Glamor Shot with clothes on, even if those clothes are trimmed in maribou. This is one area where it doesn't pay to trust any man, ever.

[whathehell]

128. Agreed, sad to say...n/t

[Nay]

193. Agree totally. Just don't do it, whether you are a man or a woman. Applies also to drunk

photos, pissing photos, etc.

[whathehell]

126. +10 n/t

[bluestater1966fgs]

133. Probably the best comment on this thread

In this era of high speed internet and fancy tech, it's becoming more and more difficult to keep yourself anonymous. You have to be very careful about showing your pictures, etc, since any idiot could pass it on to millions of people around the world.

[ellisonz]

138. Generally speaking

For millions of people to actually see something that exposes you it has to be of interest to millions of people. If you don't have anything of interest or use people are going to ignore it. There are some sick people out there though, some of them even stalk this website, I wouldn't put anything past them - they are truly pathetic weirdo troll scum if you ask me and I wouldn't hesitate to seek a legal resolution if someone ever engaged in such horrid behavior. The technology that allows us to track down sick fucks like that can be truly amazing - take this case for example:

http://gawker.com/5950981/unmasking-reddits-violentacrez-the-biggest-troll-on-the-web

That asshole got what he deserved - lost his job. I'm surprised he was never prosecuted. The lesson: being that asshole can have consequences.

[smirkymonkey]

139. I don't care how in love with someone I am. I will NEVER EVER send them

sexual photos of myself. I know that things can always go wrong and that those photos could always end up plastered all over the internet in an act of revenge.

It amazes me in this day and age how careless people are about these things. Not that that justifies the perpetrator from the crime of posting photos without the other person's consent. It's despicable, but it happens all the time.

Just don't do it.

[Aerows]

168. Exactly

If you allow others to take pictures of you naked or in sexual situations, you can pretty much guarantee that sooner or later you will end up on a website.

[KansDem]

4. I'm baffled by this...

Why would you send "intimate photos" to "former romantic interests?"

I mean, I can't even get "former romantic interests" to engage me in an ongoing correspondence in which we wax philosophical about our observations on life and hopes for the future. Why would I, or she, want to send "explicit photos?"

Es geht nicht!

[KittyWampus]

5. probably sent to a lover who then posted pix AFTER the break up.

[KansDem]

8. That makes sense...

Thanks...

[KittyWampus]

9. This seems to me to be a form of virtual assault.

[redqueen]

18. It is a racket. They make money off the pieces of shit who want to look at them,

and charge the women victimized to have them removed.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/125514580

[Spider Jerusalem]

11. The solution is: don't take those pictures, don't let your boyfriend take them.

Legally? If you let someone take a photo of you? It's theirs to do with as they wish. Sending a picture to someone that they then use in a manner you wouldn't wish is a different matter, but the only legal recourse there is through copyright laws (as creator of the work you have legal rights regarding distribution and reproduction; it would remain to be seen whether a court might decide that you'd waived those rights by sharing the image in the first place and whether a contingent expectation that the image not be shared was reasonable).

[seabeyond]

21. cause god knows, we do not want to call all the men participating a vile piece of shit.

for revenge. to make money off the pictures. and to make money of the victims to get pictures taking off.

so fuckin' more easy on the ego to blame women, instead of a vile piece of shit doing this.

[Spider Jerusalem]

25. It's not about assigning blame

(although I agree that anyone who does this is a scumbag); it's about legal recourse.

[seabeyond]

29. my husband opined not long ago, how he would really like a picture.....

and i told him, ya. would be fun. not getting one.

i am also older, smarter, and well aware of consequence. and much less trusting.

in a perfect world, if only every woman lived my experience...

not gonna happen. and i do not blame women for wanting to give their dude a picture. i blame the fuckin' vile piece of shit that thinks so little about respect for women that he would do this. and the trash that goes in and jacks off to the pictures knowing damn well it is women against their wants. and the men profiting off the women like a bunch of creepy disgusting pimps.

[joeglow3]

31. If u give someone a picture, do they not own it?

Are they not free to share it with whoever they want, legally speaking?

Either way, this is why my wife and I won't take pictures of each other. All it takes is a lost phone/camera, a house broken into, etc. and it is all over the internet.

[LiberalFighter]

76. I don't think they have that much leeway. For private viewing only.

If they don't have express permission with a release form I don't believe it can be published.

[RC]

109. It can be legally published.

The picture taker (camera owner) owns the picture and holds the copyright. They can do just about whatever they want to do with it.
It just can not be used for commercial purposes without a release.

That said, the only way to make sure nude pictures can't come back to haunt you at some later date is not to let pictures be taken in the first place.

[seabeyond]

114. and all the men that do this and use the sites are vile creepy bottomfeeders. nt

[Yavin4]

34. Uh...This Happens to Men As Well

See Brett Favre.

If you take nude photos of yourself, whether you're male or female, and email, text it, or whatever, you are in effect making the photos available to the public.

[seabeyond]

35. omg... you use favre, sexually harassing a woman that had NO desire to see his penis as an example

of a victim?

geeezus.

[Yavin4]

56. I used Favre as an example of how nude photos get leaked on the internet

This is gender neutral.

[seabeyond]

36. link me to the site, run by women, asking for pictures of revenge of naked men. and then co. of

women that will only take those photos down, when they extract a payment from the victim. and then, you can say it happens to men, also.

[Yavin4]

60. I cannot find such a site right now because I am at work.

And, there may not be such a site. With that said, my point is, if you take a nude picture of yourself, whether you're male or female, and you email it, text it, or transmit in some fashion, that photo becomes public, whether you intended it to be or not.

[LanternWaste]

66. That's a band-aid rather than a solution.

That's a band-aid rather than a solution.

Solutions address the underlying and root cause, band-aids merely cover the most obvious aspects of a deeper problem.

[Duer 157099]

202. Curious, how do you stop someone from taking a photo of you? Have you ever tried?

Did you know they can do it practically without your knowledge and/or consent? What if you're asleep?

[seabeyond]

203. "walk of shame" site out of UK i believe. a one nighter. take a picture while she is asleep,

put on walk of shame and ridicule/humiliate/shame/demean/degrade the hell out of her.

[bluestate10]

229. You can't stop a person from taking a photo. But you can ensure that the photo is not

of you in a compromised position. Unless a person really trusts another person and that trust is valued, don't do something that is compromising like sleeping or walking around in the nude or partially dressed in a way that shows body parts like breasts, vagina, penis or testicles.

[seabeyond]

230. that would be in a dressing room, or bathroom, maybe hotel room? or your own bedroom,

and only having your laptop in that room.

[MineralMan]

30. Decent people destroy such things after a split.

When my former wife and I split up, she left and I later found some intimate photos we had taken at some point in our relationship. As soon as I found them, I shredded them. It would never have occurred to me to post them on the Internet. That is what decent people do. Sadly, the world is full of ugly, vindictive people who will post such photos or videos.

[seabeyond]

32. yes. decent people. you are right on. nt

[haikugal]

96. Absolutely...

[smirkymonkey]

144. Thank you for being a decent person.

I admire you.

[banned from Kos]

38. Our most respected actresses get naked and win Academy Awards

I think these ladies doth protest too much.

[polly7]

42. Ok, that was just very bad.

[IMG][/IMG]

[seabeyond]

46. then you condone a creep putting a womans naked picture on the net, when she says no? nt

[seabeyond]

51. so you condone a creep putting a womans picture on the net against her will? disgusting

that is fuckin beyond with disgusting. only a vile piece of dung would feel he has the right to disrespect another person in that manner.

and you approve.

[October]

57. The point is, actors/actresses consent to it; these women did NOT.

#obtuse

[banned from Kos]

59. So it is merely a legal issue? OK.

That works for me.

[seabeyond]

61. bullshit. with legal or illegal it is WRONG. why is that concept beyond you. i have to wonder

about men that do no UNDERSTAND why it is wrong to post a womans naked picture on the net without her ok. is that concept really beyond you?

[LanternWaste]

70. "Consent" encompasses the ethical and the moral, as well as the legal.

"Consent" encompasses the ethical and the moral, as well as the legal.

That should work for you too...

[Bluenorthwest]

103. Actors make choices involving many aspects, including money for sure. Key word is Choice.

A person's body is their own, to use in artistic expression if they wish, under conditions, collaborations and intentions that are suited to their own particulars.
Your attitude is disgusting and specifically offensive to me and mine. Just so you knows.

[gollygee]

156. You consider "consent" to be "merely a legal issue"

That's scary.

[seabeyond]

160. it is telling, also. nt

[uppityperson]

224. You see no moral or ethical issues with it? OK, thanks for letting us know.

I appreciate when people are so upfront with ethical situations so I don't have to wonder.

[Throd]

58. Those actresses made those movies by choice.

[MineralMan]

62. So, it's OK if some asshole posts photos of his ex?

I don't think so, and I think your equation is disgusting.

[msanthrope]

67. I feel slimy just reading this post. nt

[LanternWaste]

68. Our most respected actors (not actresses anymore) choose to

Our most respected actors (not actresses anymore) choose to, and do not have it done against their will. A most relevant and precise difference.

I think you defend the act too much...

[dsc]

71. sweet Lord almighty

I hope you forgot the sarcasm. First, I can't think of the last time an actress won an academy award for a role that was being naked for being naked's sake. I honestly can't think of very many where nudity was even involved. I decided to take a look starting with 1970, now I can't speak for every single winner since I haven't seen every single one, but of the 42 awards, Fonda's for Klute, Foster's for the Accused, Paltrow's for Shakesphere in Love, and Kidman's for the Hours are the only ones that I know for sure had nudity involved. The ones I don't know are the two wins by Glenda Jackson, Lange's win for Blue Sky, and Cotillard's for La Vie De Rose. The rest were not for nudity.

Second there is a huge difference between voluntarily being publicly naked and involuntarily being publicly naked.

[Bluenorthwest]

104. Here is an article that lays it all out about the Nude Best Actress Myth.

The myth itself predates actual film nudity, oddly enough....
http://popwatch.ew.com/2012/02/20/oscar-myth-busting-best-actress-nudity/

[geek tragedy]

73. Anyone have the jury results on this? nt

[seabeyond]

82. here

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your alert

At Fri Jan 25, 2013, 07:26 PM you sent an alert on the following post:

Our most respected actresses get naked and win Academy Awards
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2259016

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

YOUR COMMENTS:

Poster is defending men's right to put a naked picture of a woman on the net against her will. This is misogyny.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Fri Jan 25, 2013, 07:31 PM, and voted 3-3 to LEAVE IT ALONE.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: Is BFK still here? I thought they'd been banned already.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: A woman getting paid to show her bits on screen is not the same fucking thing...
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: Childish flame-bait designed to derail the thread, and a poorly constructed out one at that. Vote to "Hide" for general immaturity and lack of creative effort.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: The post is stupid, absurd and illogical, but I don't see it as a violation of the rules of this forum.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given

[seabeyond]

84. and here. and yes, i alerted. i am disgusted that anyone would pretend this is ok. it tells me

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your alert

At Fri Jan 25, 2013, 11:35 AM you sent an alert on the following post:

Why would they say no? Prudishness? Lack of compensation? Shyness?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2259263

only one thing about the poster.

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

YOUR COMMENTS:

Poster is defending men's right to put a naked picture of a woman on the net against her will. This is misogyny.

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Fri Jan 25, 2013, 11:43 AM, and voted 4-2 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: I'd bet this won't be hidden, but I'd vote to hide anything by this jerk. He should have been banned from DU long ago.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: in what world does the poster think it's ok to put a naked picture of ANYONE anywhere against their will or without their consent. WTF?
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: *sigh* Poster is expressing a different point of view than yours afaic. Why not engage in conversation rather than hiding the post?
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Poster is asking a question here. It is not against the rules on DU to ask a question.

[geek tragedy]

85. Christ, is it the same two idiots making the arguments #4 and #6 are making in every jury? nt

[Lone_Star_Dem]

97. If an actress uses her own body for a nude scene, which they often don't

They do it with afore knowledge that it's going to be viewed by many. Which is in no way the same as a personal intimate photo being posted to a "shame" site. But you know that already.

On edit: I see the poster is already locked out of the thread.

[Brickbat]

101. What the fuck is wrong with you?

[Squinch]

111. Because another woman consents to being naked on film shown to the public, I no longer have

a say as to whether I will be shown naked on film to the public???

What is the matter with you?

[seabeyond]

116. that would be the effects of pornification of our women and girls today. we are all....

pornified.

[Squinch]

119. That post is proof that those effects are real. And it's showing up HERE!! That's so disturbing.

[seabeyond]

127. yes. it is disturbing. nt

[Angry Dragon]

115. it seems you have trouble connecting the dots

[Marrah_G]

124. WTF?

You cannot possible believe the crap you just wrote.

[Whisp]

131. there aren't enough 'oiys' in the world to respond to this nonsense. n/t

[Javaman]

231. This poster is now part of the tombstone express. nt

Last edited Mon Jan 28, 2013, 01:44 PM - Edit history (1)

[MicaelS]

232. I'm a man, and I think you are dead wrong, period.

There is no excuse for doing something as reprehensible as what these men are doing. Suing the shit out of everyone concerned will be the only way to put a stop to this.

[Taverner]

47. wow...what a way to be a dick!

That's just fucked up

[HappyMe]

49. Well, that's an asshole move.

With the ease of how things can be dumped online without your permission, best plan is to not have photos or video taken in the first place. Don't take pictures of yourself and send them either.

[Recursion]

52. An awful one I shall not name looks to be permanently down, nuked at the registrar

I have a habit of sending *ahem* creatively formed packets (*cough cough*) to a list of sites I don't like just in case they didn't secure stuff properly; the ones to what's probably the worst revenge porn site out there came back ICMP Host Unavailable and the registrar shows the name as cancelled, so both their domain and IP address seem to have been pulled.

[Kurska]

69. It is a jerk move, but it shouldn't be illegal.

If you consent to having your picture taken a person can do whatever they want with that picture afterwards. That is at least the current legal standard and changing that would have drastic consequences for a lot of photographers and film makers.

[geek tragedy]

72. According to what fucked-up logic? nt

[Kurska]

74. If you allows someone to take your picture, then they can do whatever they want with it.

Just because you're in something doesn't mean you own the copyright to it. It has always been that way, at least that is my legal understanding of the matter.

Otherwise even background actors could turn around and demand movies be pulled from theatres or the shelves, just because they don't like them.

[geek tragedy]

75. Your legal understanding is exactly wrong.

If someone takes a picture of you at a family reunion, that does not give them the right to use that picture to advertise Viagra or AR-15s or Marco Rubio's political campaign.

[Kurska]

77. On edit: Only sources I can find agree with my initial assessment.

http://kellywarnerlaw.com/revenge-porn-websites-a-legal-look/

"When people first hear about revenge porn sites, they’re usually aghast at the paucity of U.S. laws that govern civil privacy of this nature, much less online privacy. While the Fourth Amendment grants citizens “the right…to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,” it doesn’t protect those who “gift” naked pics; once you hit send, it’s the property of the recipient. As such, if the person in the photo is 18 or older, there’s very little they can do. If, however, the subject of the photo is unaware the photo was taken, and the setting is not a public place, a reasonable expectation of privacy constitutional violation could be argued."

[Kurska]

79. On further research, the website is also protected under section 230 of the Communications Decency

As long as only the website is profiting financially from it and not the ex's I believe they are only pretty solid legal ground, barring a change in the law which I could totally see resulting from this.

http://www.citmedialaw.org/section-230

[geek tragedy]

80. this kind of thing is also a state law matter.

CDA did not replace state law claims.

[Kurska]

81. Or foreign laws, nothing is keeping a website like this from registering in another country. n/t

[geek tragedy]

83. Presumably, the ex-boyfriends live in the US. nt

[Kurska]

87. Aren't they suing the website though? That is what this story is about.

It is an exceptionally poorly written story though, I read it again and that doesn't seem entirely clear

I also don't believe it would be easy to establish any sort of legal liability against the person who posted the pictures. What law could you say they broke? What would the penalties for that be?

[Dr. Strange]

100. Except...

there's a related site that will take the picture off for you--if you pay them.

Is Anybody Down features ads for Takedown Hammer across its site, and a link called “Get Me Off This Site!” takes you to a post about Takedown Hammer’s success in removing its clients’ photos from Is Anybody Down. Takedown Hammer claims to be operated by a New York-based lawyer named David Blade, III, but no such name appears in the New York State Unified Court System’s attorney database.

Nevada-based lawyer Marc Randazza, who is representing Bullyville founder James McGibley in a defamation suit against the revenge porn proprietor Hunter Moore, has conversed extensively with the profiteers of Is Anybody Down. After studying the IP addresses associated with the computers of Is Anybody Down’s owner Craig Brittain and the owner of Takedown Hammer, he told Betabeat that the two sites are definitely both run by the same person.

http://betabeat.com/2013/01/victims-of-revenge-porn-mount-class-action-suit-against-godaddy-and-texxxan-com/

This muddies things up quite a bit, if you ask me.

[Kurska]

110. That would very much be illegal, but I believe that is a different website.

That part of the article is talking about a separate, but similarly in theme website "Is Anybody Down".

[RC]

113. You sure like to twist words around.

The picture taker (Camera owner) owns the copyright of his pictures, regardless of who or what the picture is of.
If they use the picture for commercial purposes, and political is counted as commercial purposes, then the picture owner needs to get a signed release from all recognizable people in the picture. The exception being news stories. There are a few other exceptions.
For most any non-commercial purposes, the copyright owner can do just about anything they want with their pictures.

Me? I am an amateur photographer, with well over a gigabyte of pictures I have taken since digital photography was invented.

And you?

[geek tragedy]

123. I don't disagree with you.

Especially when I get my modest check every two years for having a picture published in a travel guide.

[MotherPetrie]

78. Victims should start their own site and post photos, names, addresses, phone #'s, of these assholes

Also the names and phone #'s of their bosses at the companies where they work.

[seabeyond]

86. that is a good idea. i am also thinking there is something to this. i think i recently read

something similar to this, maybe not this specifically, but women going after men in this respect. maybe it is the "walk of shame" blog. one nighters, while the woman is asleep, a man taking her picture while naked and posting it. then shaming them for daring to have a one night stand.

hence walk of shame.

[Dr. Strange]

99. Sounds like a job for...

Anonymous.

[beevamp]

89. Pictures/videos can be great for reliving encounters

As long as it is kept private, I don't see what is wrong with taking hot pics of your adventures. Every guy wants to be the star of his own porno. Just fun between consenting adults.

[seabeyond]

91. I don't see what is wrong with taking hot pics of your adventures.

what is wrong is now every woman must say no, or they are consenting it be shared with all on the net cause he may turn our to be a vile creep who has to pay back cause he has so little respect for women.

yes, it should be kept private. yes, it should be fun and games. but, women cannot do it, with an expectation that it will be kept private.

and the woman will be blamed that she dare to feel it would stay private.

[libdem4life]

94. Ladies, ladies ladies. Grow up. You tell, they show. Good lord, girls, get a grip.

Not everyone is Kim Kardashian ... stop trying to compete and get the royalties ... Lord have mercy.

[seabeyond]

95. again, the ladies and girls problem. the men, meh, just being a man. hey men.... does that

attitude work for you? i think if i were a man, i would be bothered at the suggestion of having so little character.

[libdem4life]

105. Unfortunately, from those with little EQ or IQ, it doesn't really matter. Sorry to say.

And still, in the 21st century, it's up to us "little ladies" to keep the fires stoked and the food cooked and the kids safe. Men I know don't have a problem with it...it's those that can't figure it out we have to watch. They are the ones taking us into war and such.

[SWTORFanatic]

112. DO NOT TAKE NAKED PICS OF YOURSELF. DO NOT TAKE

VIDEOS OR PICS OF YOU HAVING SEX.

Just.

Don't.

Note: I am female and I am NOT blaming the victims here. I hope they sue the living crap out of the guys (and maybe some girls?) who did this and win! And if posting the pictures was legal, I hope the laws get changed and I hope the posters get some karmic justice.

That said, it is still such a horrible idea to take naked pictures of yourself. I am a lesbian and I have been asked be e-friends online to do it. I never have. One guy was genuinely STUNNED that I had never taken a naked picture of myself which means many girls have sent him naked pics.

[Demo_Chris]

153. And many do not care if the pictures get around

Some people, however, do care. And for them one would hope that men would have a little basic decency and honor. I still believe that the answer to both the trauma of having pictures leaked, and the desire to leak them in the first place, is a more healthy attitude towards sexuality in the first place.

[SWTORFanatic]

155. Your last point is of course true, but more of a long term solution. I hope it does

occur in my lifetime.

[seabeyond]

161. you understand that men get these pictures and then tear the women up. they ridicule, make

humiliating and shameful comments. they get as ugly as they can. it is a bonding amongst their buddies. so do tell me in this ever gentle and pure society you talk about, how little a woman would have to think about herself to not be bothered at all with the ugliness?

[Demo_Chris]

199. I do. SOME men are mean and hateful

There is no way to change that, any more than we can change how some women treat men. Meanies are going to be meanies.

But we CAN pull the teeth on one of the more common insults, and that's what I was getting at.

[seabeyond]

200. we can make laws that will catch up with the net. have a penalty and watch these cowards back off.

no repercussion, and it is way too many men.

telling anyone that has an issue with naked photos on the net are prudes, or repressed or any number of things does not but try to shame a person and is not a reality. people would like to make it that simple. it is not.

i grew up in calif in the 70's as a competitive swimmer. both genders might as well have been naked, all day long. that was not an issue. and we did not turn it to sexuality... well, unless we were playing with someone. but, the environment as a whole treated it as nothing. that is acceptance of nudity.

in our home, we have never had an issue. my 15 yr old still takes his shower, door open for all to see. no one cares. that is acceptance of nudity.

what is being done is not about naked.

it is all about degrading and demeaning.

[Demo_Chris]

211. How are you going to prove anything?

Unless the pictures are stolen (which is already illegal but tricky to prove) there is no way to prove anything. The images are not evidence of a crime as they were taken and given voluntarily.

"Your Honor, he told me these pictures would be private!"

"No your Honor, I did not. She encouraged me to share them, then when we broke up she came up with this to get back at me."

Case dismissed.

[seabeyond]

212. so then really, lets not bother with rape laws. your honor, he rape me. your honor, nope. nt

[Demo_Chris]

217. As you know that is sometimes a problem with those cases

Particularly things like date or spousal rape. And that's what we are talking about here, only far trickier from a prosecutorial perspective. Which is not to say that I am opposed to laws against this, I just don't believe they will accomplish much.

[seabeyond]

218. i think it is far less tricky. nt

[Codeine]

166. Naked photos are fun.

I have taken loads of pics of myself and of various partners over the years, but I'm not the sort of sexist, untrustworthy piece of filth that would violate anyone's deepest trust by sharing them without permission (there are a few I've been encouraged to share openly, but that's different -- we all have different boundaries.)

Pictures and video are fine. Pictures and videos are, in fact, awesome. Being a dick isn't. The fault lies entirely with the douchenozzles who use this as a form of petty revenge for imagined slights or to aggrandize their own egos.

[seabeyond]

169. excellent post and i agree totally. thanks. nt

[SWTORFanatic]

173. No, they aren't. I don't trust anyone with them, not even my wife of 9 years.

And in my opinion, no good comes of it.

Then again I do not want to see naked pics of my wife or any friends or anything like that - so I don't get why to do it.

If I need that sort of material there is a gigantic load of porn out there

[redqueen]

176. Well said. nt

[Squinch]

118. The over-riding message of the responses on this thread is

"It's smarter not to trust a man with your privacy." We are saying that you should never have photos of yourself in another's hands because it is possible that they will turn up on one of these sites.

And I do agree with that.

But the message behind that, which most of us here are accepting, is that you can't know which men you deal with are trustworthy, and which are not.

Wasn't that a big bone of contention a while back in all the rape threads? Weren't women who said they were always cautious around unfamiliar men branded "man haters?" Weren't they accused of assuming every man was a rapist? I seem to recall there was a lot of outrage about that.

Strange that here no one has a problem with a woman having a healthy caution about men's trustworthiness.

[seabeyond]

129. and in those arguments i pointed out the contradiction that men wanted it both ways. women get the

blame regardless.

dont allow a picture and a rigid prude. allow the picture and hey.... what do you expect from a man. why would you expect anything more.

totally amazing.

[Whisp]

120. what a shitty thing to do. those guys are weiner morans. n/t

[DogPawsBiscuitsNGrav]

122. I believe there's a law that any site that hosts adult content must be 2257 compliant. Meaning

they must have copies of the photo ID of anyone naked to be able to prove to the government with 24 hour notice, that it's actually adults in the photos. I would think someone would demand the site be checked for compliance. Even if a person looks 70, no ID, no photo's.That's the law, at least the way I understand it.

[Xithras]

136. 2257 applies only to the producer, and exempts user-generated content.

The way the law is written, it applies to the people who take the photos and to the people who actually insert them into the website. There's a mile-wide loophole here though. If a website allows other people to upload photos and exerts no editorial control (like a porn version of Youtube or Flickr), then the site itself doesn't have to be 2257 compliant. In that situation, the website is a "service provider" and not a "producer" (because they're not creating the images, or selecting and placing them on the site), and is exempt from the law. The PHOTOGRAPHER is still bound by 2257, but not the website.

If these sites are just allowing people to upload photos, and the site owners aren't picking and choosing the photos themselves, tney don't have to be 2257 compliant.

[DogPawsBiscuitsNGrav]

137. Thanks for clearing that up. Hm, what about the person who uploaded the video? Is that also included

in the loophole?

[Xithras]

140. The person who uploads is considered a "secondary producer" and is required to be 2257 compliant

The primary producer is the person who generates the original photograph. The secondary producer is a person who takes the photograph and places it into a location where it can be distributed (whether that's a magazine, a website, or whatever). If I take 5 nude photos, build an HTML page, and upload them to a web server, I'm a secondary producer. Both primary and secondary producers must be 2257 compliant.

The company running the web server, which is simply hosting the content produced by others, is considered a service provider and not a producer, and isn't liable.

If the FBI had a directive to do so, they could pursue the people uploading the photos criminally. It would only take a few convictions to get the majority of these sites shut down, as most people aren't going to risk prison just to get even with an ex.

[seabeyond]

141. good info xithras. nt

[DogPawsBiscuitsNGrav]

142. That's exactly where I was going with the 2257 compliance stuff. There are ways people can fight

back. 2257 appears to be one of them. Thanks for sharing your knowledge. Hopefully someone who needs the information will find it and make use of it.

To bad it's wayyyy down at the bottom of the thread

[Xithras]

154. Sadly, you missed one very important line in my post...

"If the FBI had a directive to do so..."

They don't. There has only ever been ONE 2257 enforcement action, and that was against the guy who runs the Girls Gone Wild video sites. No other website operator has ever been charged with violating it (there have been a handful of "investigations", but no others have led to charges).

The problem is that the constitutionality of the law is still being fought in the courts. The law has been ruled unconstitutional, that ruling was overturned, the challenges were dismissed, and then reinstated again. The fighting over the constitutionality of the law (which includes provisions allowing law enforcement to demand 2257 records without a warrant) will probably continue for a few more years. There's also a huge potential for another fight over the whole "secondary producers" thing. The original law, as written, only applied to commercially produced material with paid models and specifically exempted non-paid photographers, hobbyists, and people who were taking personal photos. The whole secondary producers thing was added by the DOJ arbitrarily to cover ALL nude photos, and wasn't actually in the law as passed. In fact, the current DOJ definition of "secondary producer" may actually be in violation of the law as it was written, and there's a substantial chance that it won't survive court challenge.

Until the challenges and legality of the various parts of the law are settled in the courts, the DOJ hasn't shown any real interest in pursuing any serious criminal investigations of its violators.

Depending on how the challenges go, 2257 may BECOME an effective tool for these women to use against the men, but it's not much use right now.

[Odin2005]

130. Bad breakups + intimate photos + Internet = Disaster

I hope she sues the hell out of them.

[Wednesdays]

132. Good Lord Almighty

I could only get through part of the replies before gagging on all the pretzel logic on display here.

I'd have thought it'd be simple, but I guess not. I'm a man, and I can totally sympathize with the women's views here.

Let's say I take nude photos of my girlfriend or whatever. Simply because she consented to being photographed does NOT mean she consented to any distribution of the photographs. I mean, even if there's no law against it (and there should be), something like that is a horrendous breach of trust and privacy. The fault would be 100 percent on the guy who violated that trust. Period.

It's hard to understand that, why? Mega-facepalm on this thread.

[seabeyond]

134. The fault would be 100 percent on the guy who violated that trust. Period.

and i am sure the majority of men perfectly understand that. those fighting it, i gotta wonder.

thank you wed, for saying it like it is.

[Codeine]

167. This.

Don't use a person's trust as a weapon to hurt them later.

[seabeyond]

170. you and i are totally on the same page. it isnt so tough. i posted above

it is so simple, i do not get why people make it so hard.

[smirkymonkey]

145. Thank YOU!

So glad that you get it!

[alp227]

147. Indeed, I wonder why the outrage flies out the window regarding the photos.

Why can't it be a crime to distribute private photos w/o consent if it's a crime to have sex w/o consent?

[redqueen]

178. "Why can't it be a crime to distribute private photos w/o consent if it's a crime to have sex w/o

consent?"

Precisely.

It should be.

[redqueen]

177. It's great isn't it?

'Women being punished for being openly sexual? Showing off their bodies? Well what else could they expect?!'

I so wish i could say I was surprised.

I am glad to see more than a few people chiming in to point out how wrong it is, though. Thank you!

[Demo_Chris]

146. Obviously posting someone's picture without their permission is wrong

Obviously none of us here would excuse or condone this.

Equally obvious is that allowing such pictures to be take of yourself involves trusting someone else that might not be worthy of that trust. None the less, it is going to happen. People will take these pictures and share them, and the wrong people will see them eventually. And as time goes on, more and more people are taking and sharing these pictures.

Which suggests to me that it might one day be a self-correcting problem. But let me back up a step.

The one non-negotiable offense here is the violation of trust. I think we can agree that violating a trust is basically always wrong. In many cases however, these images come from people's private facebook and photobucket accounts either because someone hacked the account, or guessed the password, or the security settings were wrong, and the pictures are out there. And once they are out they are out.

It seems to me, however, that the next offense is not that these pictures were taken or shared, but in terms of how other people respond to them.

It wasn't so very long ago that someone coming out of the closet and telling the world that they were gay was cause for shock and sometimes dismay or worse. It was like confessing to being a criminal almost. Today, people are far more tolerant, and with every year that passes an ever larger pool of people will respond with indifference. One day, hopefully soon, everyone will say "No one cares if you are gay Bob."

I expect one day the same thing will apply here. As more and more women and men share these images online (and make no mistake, a lot of these pictures are shared knowingly) an ever growing number of people will simply not care. I am already there myself. I don't care if there are naked pictures of you online, I don't even care if there are naked pictures of me online (though how they got there, who took them, and who in their right mind would want to see them would definately be interesting). In any case, If you want to look at me knock yourself out. It certainly doesn't hurt me.

If someone was sharing a face shot of their ex girlfriend no one would bat an eye -- damn near everyone in America has face shots of themselves online. So the problem isn't that it is a picture, it's that it is a picture showing naughty bits. The parts that our religions tell us we are supposed to be ashamed of. And it seems to me that addressing THAT is the begininning of the solution to the problem. Not the pictures, not the naughty bits, but this societal hang-up we have with nudity and sex.

And I think that we address that through education and time and a conscious decision to stop being so sensitive and defensive about one of the most important aspects of our short and often miserable lives.

[redqueen]

181. No, it is not about a "hang-up we have with nudity and sex".

Nudity is a loaded term in a patriarchy, anyway.

Many women don't care how many people see them. Some women don't want hardly anyone seeing them.

That is not a hang up, that is a personal preference, and it is their right.

The problem here is not that some women don't want to be seen by anyone and everyone, the problem is people who exploit and betray other people's trust.

[seabeyond]

182. thank you redq, i just didnt want to get all into this one. nt

[Demo_Chris]

195. I was quite clear that I believe this is wrong.

It is wrong and a violation of trust that no honorable person would do. We are all on the same page there. The question, however, is whether or not this is the end of the conversation. I believe that there is more to be said.

I believe that the women in these cases are victimized not once, but TWICE.

The first time though this violation of their trust and privacy.

The second time by a society that uses a repressive anti-female and anti-sexual moral code to deny women (and men) the freedom of sexual choice. It is my contention that there is NOTHING shameful in any sexual activity between consenting adults, whether we are talking something as innocent as naked images, or as freeky as GOP Convention Spank sessions. And further, I contend that when we react as if something as insignificant as nude pictures is deserving of shame we feed into the repression. We are respond the way they want us to respond.

So yes, we agree that sharing the pictures is wrong. We agree that we live in a Patriarchal society. The question is how do we move forward from here. Recognizing the issue does not automatically provide the solutions.

Honestly, I don't have an answer beyond awareness, education, and a rejection of that moral code. Perhaps you do. If so I would be very interested to here it as you are far more versed in this topic (the war for women's rights) than I am. In any case, I am on your side, or I am damn sure trying to be.

[redqueen]

197. I agree that women being shamed for their sexuality, no matter what it is, is a problem.

You get insulted for being reserved, and insulted for being adventurous.

However, that is an entirely separate issue. Even if women were not subjected to hatred and harassment for being adventurous sexually, we will still have this problem with people feeling it is their fault if their ex partners betray their trust, unless we put the blame for such noxious behavior squarely where it belongs: on the one betrayer.

[Demo_Chris]

204. But don't we now? (Discussion, not challenge)

Your comments in bold text:

"I agree that women being shamed for their sexuality, no matter what it is, is a problem. You get insulted for being reserved, and insulted for being adventurous."

Yes, and in my opinion THIS lies at the heart of a lot of the bullshit women are faced with. Isn't that the heart of the WOMEN, DOn't take these pictures! suggested solution? Why shouldn't women take these pictures? Women should be able to take any damn pictures they want.

However, that is an entirely separate issue. Even if women were not subjected to hatred and harassment for being adventurous sexually, we will still have this problem with people feeling it is their fault if their ex partners betray their trust, unless we put the blame for such noxious behavior squarely where it belongs: on the one betrayer.

We already do this. At the most you will hear someone offer the advice to not take these pictures. Which, in my mind, misses the point.

The real weapon used against women here is that nice girls don't do that. Virtuous wholesome godly women should be properly ashamed of their bodies and their sexuality. I believe if we can destroy that nonsense we can pull the teeth on the most devistating attack. After all, no guy is sharing pictures of his ex saying "Here she is, isn't she ugly."

And even if he (or others) did just that, so what. He can do that with ANY picture.

What I am trying to say here is that it you remove the major damage if you remove the stigma. Then all that's left is some guy being a jerk, with no shame directed towards the woman at all.

If that makes any sense.

[PoliticAverse]

196. Dailymail version of the story...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2268476/Ex-plicit-revenge-porn-site-allowed-jilted-lovers-anonymously-post-revealing-pics-girlfriends-facing-class-action-suit.html

[seabeyond]

198. wow. all that, but the height of the bottomfeeder is a grown man thinking he could walk up to a

woman, and tell her this shit. just shows what kind of scum these men are.

[PoliticAverse]

201. San Francisco Chronicle version of the story...

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Women-on-revenge-porn-sites-describe-their-4213364.php

[seabeyond]

205. "you're a prude" hmmm, where it do we hear men attacking womens sexuality to get their way?

"I get frustrated trying to get the point across to people about who is to blame – it's not that simple," Toups said. All of the women The Enterprise interviewed said they felt pressured to send photos to their boyfriends.

"If you don't, I've had guys be like, 'You don't love me,'" Toups said.
"Or you're a prude," Hinson interjected.

[proverbialwisdom]

219. Peer pressure is the more trivial and least helpful part of the article compared with this reporting

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Women-on-revenge-porn-sites-describe-their-4213364.php

Women on ‘revenge porn’ sites describe their pain, humiliation as lawsuit moves forward
by Beth Rankin
Updated 8:56 am, Tuesday, January 22, 2013

<>

Personal life invaded

Last week, 27-year-old Kelly Hinson was shopping at Walmart when a man approached her. "He said, 'You're Kelly, right?' Then he told me — in person — that he saved my photos to his computer," Hinson said. "I literally ran off. I ran off."

Hinson doesn't know who posted the photos on the website. The man who took them, her ex-boyfriend, is dead. Hinson said he committed suicide two months before the photos appeared. Hinson is now nine weeks pregnant, a fact introduced to her "revenge porn" page by anonymous commenters.

"The people commenting anonymously are posting where I live, my location, basically to kill myself," she said. "They said I should abort my baby with a rusty coat hanger."

Hinson approached two police departments and two lawyers, with no luck.

"Nobody was taking me seriously," she said. "They were basically telling me there was nothing I can do."

At first, Toups had similar luck. Until she met Morgan.

<>

[seabeyond]

220. ya. i replied to that on the post above. says a lot about a creep that would go to a woman, to her

face, in public and say this crap. the need to personally humiliate her, when he is the vile person getting off on this site. he does not get what a bottom feeder he is.

i would have so taken him on in the middle of walmart. but, i get why women would feel as she did.

and nothing but cheers for her now standing up and saying .... fuck 'em

but, prude is absolutely relevant. it is was it is used and consistently, constantly on du to shut women up.

[SoCalDem]

206. Women would be so much better off if they never

gave boyfriends (anyone) "nudie pics"..

If they are in an intimate relationship, he has probably seen her nude many times and most men have "active" imaginations and could probably conjure up a memory of that in a nano-second...

Some relationships end badly, and any "evidence" could be used against her..

Safe is always better than sorry..

It's truly bad form for the guys to exploit the photos, but if he never had any to use, he would have a harder time doing it..

[retread]

207. Even though I am a male I am thankful I had my "wild period" before there was

the internet!

[seabeyond]

208. me TOO!. lol. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

210. Consenting adults should be able to see other CONSENTING ADULTS nude or having sex on the internet.

The key word is "consenting".

It's not that complicated. You can't stick people in Hollywood movies or on TV without them signing a consent form. The people who think it's okay to post nude pictures of other folks WITHOUT their consent are wrong, just as wrong as the folks who entertain censorship fantasies of clomping around demanding that the consenting adults who WANT to let other people see them naked, stop doing so.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

213. Like online dating, I just don't understand this at all.

A number of women have sent me unsolicited explicit pictures over the years (and for bonus points almost always to my office blackberry) and while I don't want to be accused of "slut shaming" I definitely thought less of them and their judgement for it. These were not women I was dating, almost all of them were just business acquaintances looking to fool around.

Don't ask me what frame of mind one has to be in to take a photo of yourself topless, with your face showing and send it to the employee of a competitors work phone. Even if I deleted it, who is to say someone in IT wouldn't find it?

We also had a few office scandals when spectacularly explicit webshots and myspace accounts were uncovered, not of teenagers or college students. But 30+ professionals.

In the words of Don Draper, "limit your exposure".

[arudnev]

214. Re: Women try to get recourse for revenge porn photo posts

The only way to stop RP is by getting lawyers involved and going after hosting companies. They make money by providing hosting services to revenge porn websites. MyTestify.com for example allows for people to quickly organize a victim community, all girls have to do is document their complaints, lawyers will take care of the rest.

[proverbialwisdom]

221. Related: NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams on webcam abuses

http://todaynews.today.com/_news/2013/01/24/16641666-rossen-reports-webcam-hackers-can-spy-on-you-in-secret?lite

January 24, 2013
NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams

Rossen Reports: Webcam hackers can spy on you in secret

Authorities are saying criminals can now hack into your webcam remotely, using it to watch your most intimate moments without you ever knowing. NBC's Jeff Rossen investigates how you can protect yourself and your family

<>

Computer expert Jim Stickley of TraceSecurity showed us how easy it is. From thousands of miles away he broke into one family's laptop and turned on their webcam to view teen girls in their bedroom and in their dining room as the family ate dinner. "It took about three minutes" to hack into their system, Stickley told us.

Stickley said such families are easy targets for webcam predators -- criminals like Luis Mijangos. Prosecutors say he was spying on more than 200 women through their webcams, even blackmailing some of them. He's now serving six years in prison.

"People who are victims generally have no idea that they are victims," Stickley said.

"And suddenly, someone has naked photos of you? Or something else?" we asked.

"Suddenly you're all over the Internet," Stickley said.

So we set up an experiment using the Siegel family of New Jersey. With dad Robert's permission, we had our expert hack into their computer. How'd he do it? He sent them an innocent-looking e-card with a virus.

More.

[seabeyond]

228. well, we better figure out a way to blame the women and girls, quick, and let these creeps/criminals

off the hook. cause we know, guys cant help it if there is a way.

i have tape over my little cam. i never and will never use it, so....