SubscribeJody Tresidder: I'm not sure I'd want you on a jury if you reckon a wounded "fantasy" male sexual ego is grounds for expecting genuine violence.Hey, look everybody- Jesus McBuddha herself has posted! Congrats on your utter enlightenment and all-encompassing aura of forgiveness and understanding.
Then again, if you read all the responses and found them fascinating, you're something of a sadist. In Guy World, this is perfectly legitimate grounds for getting your ass kicked- although maiming or death would be going too far- and no right-minded guy would really disagree.Just to clarify, because that paragraph structure was misleading: I'm saying the original action of the trolling/outing was grounds for getting one's ass kicked, in the "guy" world of how men's minds think... not to suggest that Jody's voyeurism in reading the responses was grounds for ass-kicking.
Why do I have so many first dates that end in sex? Because I find women who are sexually overt with me and respond to my sexual overtness. One or both of us sees this overtness as a signal of genuine attraction. That perceived attraction translates into that highly charged, tangible feeling I always act on. But, the truth might be that we're just responding to each other's approval (or willingness to express attraction to each other), and thus we have our first screw up: going after almost any attractive woman who gives "yes" signals.Later...
Special note here: I often have an instinct immediately after sex that sometimes fills me with the urge to "RUN!"Maybe this is all due to shame...?
I typically get involved with women who:...have a willingness to submit to me sexually, and are driven to please whatever needs I have, and derive satisfaction from pleasing me. We usually enjoy excellent sex.He sums it up as:
So, the cycle seems clear: find a hook up, feel good about the approval from an attractive woman, get a nagging feeling to RUN, get in a relationship anyway and give it a try, things end badly.< shooting from the hip>
In Guy World, this is perfectly legitimate grounds for getting your ass kicked- although maiming or death would be going too far- and no right-minded guy would really disagree.Not sure if you're trying to blow my mind with your gender reversal because you think I'm some troglodytic meathead, but yes, I suspect it does. If they were posting publicly identifiable information (i've not seen that site, and don't feel like visiting), then sometimes there's no better way to say "stop being an asshole".
transona5: Does the same apply to Tucker Max and the howwasshe.com guys?
sour cream: How do we know that the original bait was posted by Jason Fortuny?I'd had that same thought at first, but his rfjason persona seems well established over a period of time, and on that same LJ he's talked about the bait/scam, so I'd say it's him. And yes, he really is that stupid, I guess.
Maybe it was really posted by someone who wanted to see that guy's ass kicked "thoroughly and righteously".
vorfeed: Violence may not be fair and it may not be right, but it is still an unescapable part of reality. Reasonable people understand this, and act toward others accordingly.Thank you, vorfeed, for expressing this more articulately than I was able.
You, on the other hand, seem to think that "reason" or "propriety" or some such abstract ideal will protect you from people that you've wronged in a very public manner, for no motive other than your own enjoyment.
ふる池や-Matsuo Basho
かはづ飛び込む
水の 音
(the old pond
a frog jumps in
the sound of water)
"First, it can be argued that the e-mail exchange had an expectation of privacy. This is akin to inviting a house guest over and using a hidden camera on them while they take a shower. The expectation of the e-mail sender is that the e-mail was being sent to who they said they were and that the contents would remain private.IANAL, but to those who are do these points have merit?
Second, this would make him responsible for any and all damages to the individual. This includes loss of job and any emotional distress caused to marriages, relationships, friendships, and other social consequences the publication of the e-mails would cause.
Finally, he had no right to publish the images. Not only are the images not his property, but the e-mailer should be given that expectation of privacy. But the biggest issue he could fall into is the fact that posting nude images online without proper 2257 documentation is illegal. You can't post nude images online in the US without proof that the individual is 18 years of age or older. A single offense could be a fine of $25,000 and up to 5 years in jail."
« Older Vegetative Patient 'Communicates'... | ABC agrees to take the lies ou... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by dobbs at 7:30 AM on September 8, 2006