|
|
Post by Antaine on Nov 30, 2020 18:37:05 GMT
I'm not sure if anyone has been hearing about this, but there's been a lot of talk about these laws lately. Basically, it has to do with people spreading pictures, videos, etc of someone in an explicit and compromising position, thus leading to a lot of humiliation and so on. However, if I heard correctly on the radio, it seems some people expect these laws to be extended to sex workers.
In a situation in which two people are being personally intimate, and there is an expectation that such explicit content will be kept private, I agree that the leaker should be punished under the law as it is a betrayal of trust for incredibly cruel purposes. In regards to sex workers however, I find the extension of such laws ludicrous. I will admit I have a massive bias against the sex industry, so maybe I am feeling more harsh than others here, but if you decide to make a horrendous life choice by selling yourself - virtually or physically - for others gratifications, and then get exposed, that falls completely on you as far as I'm concerned. You made the choice to put yourself out there in a way you must understand the risks. It's not up to other people to clean up after you. I understand some people might argue it's still cruel - for e.g. when someone sends the content to the person's family - but if you decide to sell that content publicly yourself, you don't have a leg to stand on complaining about being "exposed".
Honestly, I just have no sympathy for people who do something like that, and then think they should be above consequences. If you're living a depraved life like that, then people should be able to make a choice as to whether or not they want to associate with you; especially in regards to a love interest. I would never want to be romantically involved with someone who is secretly selling themselves, and if I found out the person I was with was doing so, I would drop them in an instant. But according to some of the degenerate lunatics, that would make me the judgemental bad guy, where as the girl I'm with who was secretly doing it would be the victim, because I abandoned her for being sexually liberated or some nonsense.
And for the record, slut-shaming is still a stupid term. If you act like a slut, you should be utterly ashamed of yourself for living such an abhorrent life. But again, such a way of life is supposedly perfectly acceptable, but to be critical of it is the real crime. What a joke of a topsy turvy world we live in.
So anyway, any thoughts anyone? Too harsh?
|
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Dec 1, 2020 0:34:54 GMT
I think you might be too harsh here. Surely most people who become prostitutes do so out of desperation and have a right to not be humiliated like anyone else.
I do have sympathy with someone who gets involved unknowingly with a prostitute. But I wonder how often that happens? And how would a video of the intercourse prove she was a prostitute?
I agree slut-shaming is a stupid term, though I still wouldn't consider it my place to comment on somebody's choices in this regard-- unless they impinged on me or someone I care about. My own experience is that most "slut-shaming" comes from women!
Condemning sexual immorality or indecency in general, rather than commenting on an individual, seems perfectly fine to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Séamus on Dec 1, 2020 12:23:10 GMT
A couple of men have been convicted in Western Australia since similar laws were passed;from memory, at least one was jailed. I would be curious to see whether there'll be long-term equality in the penalties given to both male and female offenders. It's admittedly hard to feel much sympathy for any victims who have consented to photos in the first place, whether per se selling themselves or not; perhaps revenge porn laws can serve as a type of Nordic-model-deterrent to dissuade young people from this in the first place- I'd agree that sex workers are often life's victims also, but I would have actually thought that prostitutes and their clients were usually the least likely of people to be compromisingly filmed or photographed in the first place. It might turn out to be one of these clauses put in place for minorities that will make sense for few real cases. There was something in yesterday's paper about males being admitted to breastfeeding support classes if they intend to breastfeed someday,somehow. Perhaps the cases of brothel revenge images won't be as rare as this.
It may serve as an historical precedent to mention the possible vilification of a woman who lived a thousand years ago: "Lady Godgifu was renowned for her holiness as the devout client of Our Lady as well as for her beauty. However,she is more familiarly known to us as Lady Ghodiva or Godiva....in his Pietas Mariana Britannica, the nineteenth century antiquary Edmund Waterton tells us that she denuded herself of her possessions and one wonders whether this could have provided one foundation for the story of her famous ride. Amongst her jewels Lady Godgifu possessed a particularly fine necklace which William of Malmesbury describes as a circle of threaded jewels upon which she was wont to number her prayers. This was long before St Dominic could have invented the rosary" (Anne Vail,Shrines of our Lady in England)
I have heard of campaigns directed at school graduates warning of the dangers that compromising images may have on future careers;I'm commenting as someone living in the Cenozoic age,but a discreet campaign reminding people of just how unknown the full consequences of cyberspace still are would probably be a better start overall,even if revenge laws need to exist somewhere.
An indifferent example would be that of Star Wars producers,old or current,who would have been happy to consider the one and only 1970s Star Wars tv Christmas special,made with original cast members,to be totally dead, buried and forgotten. But by the wonders of internet here it is being discussed, emerging in 2020 like Dr Ransom's Merlin from the grave.
|
|
|
|
Post by Antaine on Dec 3, 2020 21:58:04 GMT
Maolsheachlann,
I have to disagree with you. While I do think there are times when that's the case, from things I've seen it would seem some women (as few as they maybe) see prostitution as just another type of work. Desperation has nothing to do with it for them. But to be specific, I wasn't actually talking about prostitutes or brothels. I was referring to what is very neutrally referred to as a "cam girl" - Girls who livestream themselves doing sexual things on camera. And now we have something called OnlyFans which girls use to sell pictures and videos of a sexual nature. Desperation isn't the problem. They could get jobs, but I suppose they figure they can just make easy money off of strangers drooling over their bodies. These are the people I'm referring to in regards to revenge porn. They are willing putting that content out there for people to see; so I find it a bit rich for them to claim concern about certain people seeing said content.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Dec 4, 2020 9:17:17 GMT
Maolsheachlann, I have to disagree with you. While I do think there are times when that's the case, from things I've seen it would seem some women (as few as they maybe) see prostitution as just another type of work. Desperation has nothing to do with it for them. But to be specific, I wasn't actually talking about prostitutes or brothels. I was referring to what is very neutrally referred to as a "cam girl" - Girls who livestream themselves doing sexual things on camera. And now we have something called OnlyFans which girls use to sell pictures and videos of a sexual nature. Desperation isn't the problem. They could get jobs, but I suppose they figure they can just make easy money off of strangers drooling over their bodies. These are the people I'm referring to in regards to revenge porn. They are willing putting that content out there for people to see; so I find it a bit rich for them to claim concern about certain people seeing said content. Oh well, that's different. I don't see how you could complain about an infringement of privacy when you've put the material out there yourself. I don't know anything about the phenomenon, but I am not going to Google it, especially not at work... It reminds me of one of the greatest movie tag-lines ever, from a "steamy" film called Camera Girls: "They're over-exposed, but not underdeveloped". (I read this in a book of cinema trivia, I hasten to add; I have not seen this particular work of cinematic brilliance.) |
|
|
|
Post by Tomas on Dec 9, 2020 14:06:46 GMT
Maolsheachlann, I have to disagree with you. While I do think there are times when that's the case, from things I've seen it would seem some women (as few as they maybe) see prostitution as just another type of work. Desperation has nothing to do with it for them. But to be specific, I wasn't actually talking about prostitutes or brothels. I was referring to what is very neutrally referred to as a "cam girl" - Girls who livestream themselves doing sexual things on camera. And now we have something called OnlyFans which girls use to sell pictures and videos of a sexual nature. Desperation isn't the problem. They could get jobs, but I suppose they figure they can just make easy money off of strangers drooling over their bodies. These are the people I'm referring to in regards to revenge porn. They are willing putting that content out there for people to see; so I find it a bit rich for them to claim concern about certain people seeing said content. If that´s the case, motivation to a large extent by money, it would make sense to be offered collection to a bit more of the same through this procedure. No moral obligations from society, only supportive. Couldn´t be easier if only those retards mentioning "sin" or "right & wrong" could shut up in the matter altogether? |
|
