In the event of a breakup, reformat all memory sticks and hard drives.

October 17, 2008 1:20 PM

Revenge porninvolves posting your ex's nude pics or video to the Web. It can be difficult to prosecute because it's not a specific crime and pornography "performers" hold no copyrights, but it's easier to press charges when the victim is a minor. A victim speaks out: "There's a reason I don't like having my picture taken." Sometimes it's not even real porn. (all links SFW)
posted by desjardins (74 comments total)

Friday Flash Fun?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:25 PM on October 17, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

This thread is useless without morally reprehensible Flash videos.
posted by Astro Zombie at 1:27 PM on October 17, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

C'est cheesy.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:36 PM on October 17, 2008

Video and pics or it didn't happen.
posted by photoslob at 1:37 PM on October 17, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

I wouldn't mind if my ex posted revenge porn on me on the internet. I don't have that video anymore and I'd like another copy.
posted by sciurus at 1:42 PM on October 17, 2008 [2 favorites has favorites]

Good post. Too bad the comments are, so far, completely idiotic.
posted by sondrialiac at 1:43 PM on October 17, 2008

Thank God sondrialiac broke the streak.
posted by Astro Zombie at 1:45 PM on October 17, 2008 [21 favorites has favorites]

It’s not just that men do it more, it’s that it means more, and differently, when men do it. It’s called revenge porn because showing a woman’s naked body is supposed to constitute vengeance against her. Whether or not a woman does something so ungentlemanly as to pass around naked pics of her ex doesn’t enter into it, because a woman who merely exposes a man as a non-virgin is not tacitly understood to be shaming him.

Most relevant quote from the Feminist link, IMHO.
posted by headspace at 1:46 PM on October 17, 2008 [6 favorites has favorites]

streak

That was completely inappropriate.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:47 PM on October 17, 2008

I am honestly not trying to blame the victim but I just don't get why any woman would agree to have photos or video taken of herself naked. While shitty, publication of the images seems pretty much inevitable to me. Having said that, guys who do this are pretty much shits.
posted by GuyZero at 1:52 PM on October 17, 2008

Oh, and after reading the article further, yeah, I realize not everyone knows they're beign taped.
posted by GuyZero at 1:54 PM on October 17, 2008

Whether or not a woman does something so ungentlemanly as to pass around naked pics of her ex doesn’t enter into it,

Because she'll just tell her friends about him instead of passing around pics.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:54 PM on October 17, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

I also don't know why anyone would willingly allow themselves to be photo'd nude or during sex. WTF?

That said... first revenge porn I can recall was perpetrated by Harlan Ellison in his book An Edge In My Voice. He published a naked photo of an ex (without her knowledge, if I remember correctly) after she left him and stole some stuff (again, if I remember correctly). Faulty as my memory is regarding the details, I'm certain the book contains a naked picture of his ex and that he published it for "revenge".
posted by Manhasset at 1:57 PM on October 17, 2008

This is definately a new media sort of issue. If you took naughy photos as little as 10 years ago, you were probably using actual film, and then it was either an instant camera or you had to know some place that would develop those sorts of things. (I remember a place in downtown Minneapolis that offered that service.) A video would probably have been made on videotape, and duplicating it was time consuming and cost money.

Nowadays, a children's digital camera, bought for $20 at Target, can be used to make a porn film, and an internet access is all it takes to get it uploaded; duplication, obviously, is all-but free. So there are a lot more of these films being made, and, as a result, something that would have been really laborious just a few years ago becomes a trend.

I can't say what will happen. New laws? Reapplication of laws that are already on the books? Or will people who agree to this sort of thing be expected to understand that it might end up online?

It will be interesting to see how it plays out, but right now, when it is just turning into a trend, is when it's going to cause the most heartache, because it's the sort of the thing that a real bastard can easily do to really hurt someone.
posted by Astro Zombie at 1:58 PM on October 17, 2008

I am honestly not trying to blame the victim but I just don't get why any woman would agree to have photos or video taken of herself naked.

'Cause homemade porn is kinda fun?
posted by Mental Wimp at 1:58 PM on October 17, 2008 [12 favorites has favorites]

Wow.

James Cory Lanier was a 20-year-old sophomore political-science major at Oklahoma State University, in Stillwater, when he broke up with his girlfriend last year. Lanier's ex alleges that after the split he threatened to post on the Internet a sex tape they had made unless she had sex with him again. According to her application for an emergency protective order, Lanier threatened that if his ex didn't comply, "things would be really bad" and "get ugly." The woman contacted the police, who charged Lanier with felony blackmail.

The blackmail charge was eventually dismissed; Lanier pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct, a misdemeanor. He now has a restraining order against him and has agreed not to contact his ex. "You have to look at the incident in the context of their relationship," explains Lanier's lawyer, Billy Bock, of Oklahoma City. [Emphasis added]

"Yeah, I mean, she was a total bitch. Like the time she recorded over his copy of Top Gun with several episodes of Will and Grace. Did she have it coming? You tell me."
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 1:59 PM on October 17, 2008 [4 favorites has favorites]

All publicity is good publicity.
posted by clearly at 2:02 PM on October 17, 2008

I had no idea about the legal part of revenge porn (not that I've ever done such a thing). Makes me wonder if they'll make up some kind of law in the near future to counter act this, especially since, like Astro Zombie said, the technology is making it much easier to do.
posted by Chan at 2:09 PM on October 17, 2008

A related issue is when people under 18 put or send their own naked pictures online and then get charged with auto-child pornography.
posted by TheOnlyCoolTim at 2:14 PM on October 17, 2008

I am honestly not trying to blame the victim but I just don't get why any woman would agree to have photos or video taken of herself naked.

Because not everyone likes to do everything under the assumption that the people who are closest to them are vindictive, hateful, and petty.
posted by sondrialiac at 2:18 PM on October 17, 2008 [6 favorites has favorites]

"You have to look at the incident in the context of their relationship"

I took this to mean that the pictures were taken willingly and knowingly, while the couple was in a relationship. If there was coercion, threats or force used to obtain the pictures, or someone was drunk / drugged while the pictures were taken, then it could be a different story.

Lanier's lawyer might have argued that his ex should have retained access to the pictures at all times, because they could have been posted during the relationship just as easily. Now it would be done in revenge, instead of bragging or for money.
posted by filthy light thief at 2:19 PM on October 17, 2008

Anyone who does this is an asshole. Done.
posted by kirkaracha at 2:24 PM on October 17, 2008 [7 favorites has favorites]

"Ha ha - that picture of your ex you just posted? You don't get that anymore because you screwed things up! You're a total loser! Never going to have it that good again! Looooser! Loooooser!"
posted by Joey Michaels at 2:24 PM on October 17, 2008

I am honestly not trying to blame the victim but I just don't get why any woman would agree to have photos or video taken of herself naked.

Because the sort of edgy trust you have to give to someone to give them something that there is a good chance you can't really reclaim is, for some people, hot in and of itself.
posted by jessamyn at 2:28 PM on October 17, 2008 [12 favorites has favorites]

Because the sort of edgy trust you have to give to someone to give them something that there is a good chance you can't really reclaim is, for some people, hot in and of itself.

People take naked photos of themselves, have a partner or friend take photos, and will even pay money to have naked photos of themselves taken by a professional, all the time. It's a really common thing to do. It's validating, it's sexy (in their minds at least -- most amateur porn is pretty unsexy to the outside eye), it's naughty, and as Jessamyn says it can be a rush to express that kind of trust (just like people will have bareback sex not just because it feels nice, but also because they enjoy the intimacy and trust expressed in that decision).
posted by Forktine at 2:58 PM on October 17, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

While shitty, publication of the images seems pretty much inevitable to me.

Hm, not at all. There's some really damning stuff out there of me, enough that I can never run for public office, yet I'm 100% sure it's never been posted, because I don't fuck people I don't trust.
posted by desjardins at 3:23 PM on October 17, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

That said... first revenge porn I can recall was perpetrated by Harlan Ellison in his book An Edge In My Voice. He published a naked photo of an ex (without her knowledge, if I remember correctly) after she left him and stole some stuff (again, if I remember correctly). Faulty as my memory is regarding the details, I'm certain the book contains a naked picture of his ex and that he published it for "revenge".

You're remembering pretty correctly--she's wearing a pair of PJs and exposing her breasts to the camera. Ellison reprinted the essay and photograph in The Essential Ellison (the first printing--not sure if it's in the most recent version).

My reaction to reading the essay & seeing the photograph, circa early 1990s: "Wow, HE, this is not accomplishing what you think it's accomplishing."
posted by thomas j wise at 3:23 PM on October 17, 2008 [2 favorites has favorites]

because I don't fuck people I don't trust.

Me neither. Doesn't mean that the trust hasn't been betrayed.
posted by waraw at 3:32 PM on October 17, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

Ellison reprinted the essay and photograph in The Essential Ellison (the first printing--not sure if it's in the most recent version).

It was in my recent copy. Boy, did I get some dirty looks on the plane when I was reading that essay.
posted by infinitewindow at 3:33 PM on October 17, 2008

Part of me is sick of the bullshit puritanism that leads to stuff like this (it's only revenge because nudity and sex are omgscandalous), and people getting fired for drinking or smoking pot in a photo that ends up on Facebook, and whatnot.

We shouldn't politely assume people are teetotaling virgins just because we don't have evidence telling us otherwise. And similarly, when we do have evidence telling us otherwise, we shouldn't conclude that this person is ruined, a sinner that we can't risk hiring or associating with in public. That same part of me hopes that every one of these cases desensitizes people just a little so we can all just chill the hell out.

Nevertheless, no one should have to be an unwilling trailblazer for that cause. I feel terrible for these folks.
posted by Riki tiki at 3:33 PM on October 17, 2008 [5 favorites has favorites]

it's not a specific crime

What about publishing pictures without a photo release?
posted by ZenMasterThis at 3:43 PM on October 17, 2008

This is actually a fairly common phenomenon. So common that it has its own following, and its own websites, serving this type of material to individuals who desire the same. I am not, for the record, one of those people.
posted by paisley henosis at 3:47 PM on October 17, 2008

I am honestly not trying to blame the victim but I just don't get why any woman would agree to have photos or video taken of herself naked.

Seen any of the Girls Gone Wild series? Slimy f*cktards who know 'The Game' can pressure the fairer sex to do anything. The girls may agree but that doesn't mean they like it.

"Come on baby....you're beautiful, I want a keep sake. Yes I promise not to show anyone"

Next day it's passed to a friend, then its uploaded to whatboyswant or imagebeaver and it exists in cyber space forever. You can't undo this shit.

I've danced with amateur internet porn (as I'm sure alot of males have) but the day it started making me sick was when I stepped back and asked "Where do all these pictures come from?" Alot of them were obviously not meant to be seen by anyone other than the photographer. How do they make it to the sites then?

That there are women and girls out there that have no idea that they have countless men that know what they look like naked. Accidental pornstars. I pity the poor future teen scouring porn to get off that accidentally finds himself whacking off to his mum when she was 18. Mark my words, it will happen at least once.

Point is - don't let anything compromising near the net unless you want it found and distributed. Perverts will find it. This information should be hammered into every teenager that wants to embark on a serious relationship with the internet.

Revenge Porn is insidious and to think that some males do it because they think it's funny makes me puke. It shows a total lack of respect and basic human decency. I don't get my fellow man sometimes, I really don't.

Anyone who participates in it should be punished by having naked and compromising photos taken of them and then passed around to their email contact list. Then the photos should be uploaded to a website where they stay forever. See how they like it.

Fuckers.
posted by AzzaMcKazza at 3:50 PM on October 17, 2008 [6 favorites has favorites]

Outragefilter.
posted by PostIronyIsNotaMyth at 3:57 PM on October 17, 2008

This sort of thing is not a new phenomenon.
posted by mosk at 4:03 PM on October 17, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

Part of me is sick of the bullshit puritanism that leads to stuff like this (it's only revenge because nudity and sex are omgscandalous), and people getting fired for drinking or smoking pot in a photo that ends up on Facebook, and whatnot.

I'd say it has less to do with puritanism and more to do with a violation of sorts. If you think your body is a beautiful thing, it should be your choice to decide who gets to see it nonetheless - just as if you enjoy sex, you should get to decide who you have sex with. When someone takes that away from you, it's more than a violation of trust; it's a violation of that person's body and their right to choose who may or may not see it.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 4:09 PM on October 17, 2008 [2 favorites has favorites]

I get it now, that teapot on eBay was trying to get back at its owner.
posted by MiltonRandKalman at 4:15 PM on October 17, 2008 [5 favorites has favorites]

Slimy f*cktards who know 'The Game' can pressure the fairer sex the drunken and/or shockingly insecure to do anything.

FTFY
posted by Flipping_Hades_Terwilliger at 4:17 PM on October 17, 2008

(BTW: Azza, I wholeheartedly agree with the rest of what you said.)
posted by Flipping_Hades_Terwilliger at 4:20 PM on October 17, 2008

Regarding the idea that there's no law against this, there sure as hell is for the majority of the country—it's US Code 2257, which requires that you create and maintain records of the identity of any perfomer engaged in sexually explicit activity.

Yes, that means that if the Feds really want you, and you live outside of the sixth district, that they can bust you for having naked pix of your girlfriend. Or hell, even your own dick if you can't append an ID to it.

I haven't been able to find any cases of the law being applied to non-commercial uses, but every year a couple of studios get fined for not having 2257 records properly kept.

That all said, God, what a terrible article. I mean, look, there are already a rich bevy of conflicting issues regarding amateur porn—it's often hotter than professional porn, with the same issues of authenticity and passion that differentiate indie music from major label stuff (bullshit as those metrics can be). But then there's always the dubious issue of providence, and the gender power disparities that are arguably magnified more in amateur porn than in pro stuff (which the article touched on a little). And the sidelong issues of consent and privacy and intimacy… But the article was more like, hey, bros, like, sometimes your ex was a total bitch and, like, PAYBACKS!
posted by klangklangston at 4:21 PM on October 17, 2008

When the girl discovered the photos had been posted on the Internet with explicit captions, she contacted police, who asked Phillips to take them down or face jail time. Police said the boy refused, saying, "F*** that, I am keeping them up."

Ok, everyone. On 3.

1...

2...

3...IDIOT!
posted by MiltonRandKalman at 4:22 PM on October 17, 2008

"Point is - don't let anything compromising near the net unless you want it found and distributed. Perverts will find it. This information should be hammered into every teenager that wants to embark on a serious relationship with the internet."

As someone who's looked at a lot of amateur porn on the net, I'd disagree with you on a couple points: First, the vast majority of "amateur" porn is recycled shit from fake am sites. Second, there are a fair number of women (and men) who post pictures of themselves because they want to. While, again, providence is always a probability game, there are a fair number of places where communities create porn and post it themselves (LiveJournal's Show_Your_Pussy is an example). Third, sure, yeah, if you have naked pix on the net, someone will find them and keep them and likely jerk off to them. But it's a lot like putting an album up—the amount that's out there is just so incredibly vast and the metadata is so slim that finding someone specific is really a non-trivial task. I've stumbled across pictures of a girl I went to high school with, but the name attributed to her was wrong (as was the date and hometown—I recognized her because I was around when she got a pretty distinctive scar on her cheek). Out of curiosity, I tried to track down more photos under her real name and got nada (and I'm not an unexperienced porn searcher).

(Weirdly enough, after not seeing her for ten years, two days after I stumbled onto the shots, she added me as a friend on Facebook. I'm still not sure whether I should tell her.)
posted by klangklangston at 4:32 PM on October 17, 2008

As klang just wrote, finding someone specific is pretty difficult, and after a few years and a haircut or seven, how many people are really going to recognize you if they saw you? And even if they did, you can easily shrug it off as "not me, looks like me but definitely not me."

I suppose in the context of the story, of immediate revenge posting where locations, hairstyles, clothing, etc are going to be verifiable, that's different--and it's all pretty smarmy.
posted by maxwelton at 4:44 PM on October 17, 2008

I am honestly not trying to blame the victim but I just don't get why any woman would agree to have photos or video taken of herself naked.

For the same reason that I let a good friend come over to my house--alone--the other day: Because I trust that he respects me and wouldn't hurt me in a million years. He wouldn't be my friend if I didn't.

(And yet, if he turned out to be a totally different person, and something did happen, people on MeFi would say, "I just don't get why a woman would invite a man into her house alone.")

Dude, part of having relationships with people is trusting them. I don't think I could ever have a close relationship, platonic or sexual, with someone I thought was capable of hurting me in this sort of deliberate, sexually exploitative manner.

Yes, people's judgments about each turn out to be wrong sometimes, sometimes tragically. But it's absolutely disgusting to me that when the issue is one of sexual violence or invasion of privacy, the response to women is "treat every man as a potential scumbag." That denies us the ability to have close relationships with men--close relationships that are, at least for the heterosexual ones among us, a very basic, human desire. In a way, it denies our humanity.

If you think I'm overreacting or unfairly picking on you, please understand I'm seeing your comment as part of a pattern. You don't mean to blame the victim, but you are implying that she shouldn't have trusted this guy, and that is a common victim-blaming tactic when women are hurt by men they were in a relationship with.
posted by Kutsuwamushi at 4:45 PM on October 17, 2008 [20 favorites has favorites]

A few years back, when I was just barely getting over a messy, terrible break-up, someone on a message board posted a link to a risque-but-not-nude site of this nature, and it had photos of the girl I had been seeing, which I hadn't taken. That was upsetting.
posted by paisley henosis at 4:51 PM on October 17, 2008

publication of the images seems pretty much inevitable to me

Call me old fashioned, but that is a level the lowness of which I would not sink to.
posted by StickyCarpet at 5:11 PM on October 17, 2008

You don't mean to blame the victim, but you are implying that she shouldn't have trusted this guy, and that is a common victim-blaming tactic when women are hurt by men they were in a relationship with.

This, I think, is what is really so bad about revenge porn against a woman. It's not that she's shown to be a "non-virgin", as the quote from Feministe implies. In this day and age, that's pretty much accepted for a grown woman. It's that, if she has naked pictures and the guy has them, it is accepted that he's tricked her, and she can never be anything but the butt of a joke he makes with them.

In the words of another post from Feministe (I'm a fan), "Sex isn't a trick men play on women." But according to an ancient and now rarely articulated narrative, sex outside marriage is just that. It's a modern kind of pillory for a woman. Amongst a good chunk of our boys, no matter how badly a man may have treated a woman, the possession of naked pictures and the posting thereof turns the breakup into his Nelson Muntz moment.

I'm chilly. I'm gonna go put some more clothes on.
posted by Countess Elena at 5:13 PM on October 17, 2008 [5 favorites has favorites]

So I will absolutely admit that I was, in part, blaming the victim, thus my disclaimer (also: some of my best friends are black). Auto-pron doesn't float my boat so all I see of it is the downside of someone else seeing it. I do understand on an intellectual level that some people are into it. (and I don't think you're picking on me, no)

But I would ask: would anyone take more naked photos with boyfriend n+1 after boyfriend n put his photos on the interweb? Photos cannot be untaken; photos these days can be spread with zero effort and zero cost. I know that these photos, like sex itself are predicated on trust but there is no one, absolutely no one on this earth, not even my wife of over a decade that I would trust with pictures like that of me. To each his own and all, but photos and videos have a life of their own and trust simply doesn't enter into it. Anyone can make one mistake or have one bad day. And that is all it takes. (ignoring that they can be stolen by roommates, etc). Having unprotected anonymous sex with a stranger is fun to (cf. everything written by Ms Hollander in the 70's) but I doubt anyone would suggest that it's safe behaviour.
posted by GuyZero at 5:27 PM on October 17, 2008

When a grudge fuck just isn’t enough...

“It shows a total lack of respect and basic human decency.”

It does. I think it’s temporary though. F’rinstance, being blackmailed for being gay is no longer the threat it was. In certain communities it is, of course, but they’re sort of backwards anyway.
You can get a job being a homosexual as, say, a courier. And moreso if you’re openly gay.
Someone says “I’ll tell everyone your gay” and you say “Yeah, I am. So? In fact, tell everybody, I’d like to meet someone.” - pretty big matzo ball hanging there.

The culture shift hasn’t completed, but it’s getting there. Same thing - eventually - with this sort of thing. At some point a woman with a healthy interest in sex won’t have the stigma of being a slut and people who attempt treat women in such a manner will be seen (eventually) as atavistic as people who beat their wives.
(Wife beating has been socially acceptable at various times in the past)

I don’t think men will ever not enjoy looking at nude women or sex pics.
And there are realationship realities in any form of sex play which evoke trust and shame, power and ‘punishment’ and other such things.

And to some degree there is an artifice there that supports women being ‘sluts.’ In that some women enjoy such things.

I’m not blaming the victim here. I’m asserting a consensual validity to these things, not contending that there’s some sort of reality - any more than people who enjoy rape play want to be actualy beaten and raped or someone who playfully calls someone ‘daddy’ wants to have actual sex with their father.

There are body issues as well. Which are faulty social constructs as well. Mere matters of taste really. (I do like zaftig women, tho’ all women are beautiful. Meh, I’m a romantic.)

Of course, this could hang around for another 30, 40, 50, years depending on the way and speed technology changes social interaction. So it doesn’t help with now.

Still, I think the best attitude, one I on mefi a bit ago in the airport security thread is the - they’re sex toys, y’know for fucking - sort of approach to these kinds of revelation.

Just because it’s nobody else’s business, doesn’t mean there’s anything to be ashamed of.

Hell, I close the bathroom door when I take a crap, doesn’t mean there’s something ‘wrong’ with it.

Other than being seduced by the chorizo and refries and (red hot) chile and huevos for breakfast. Looks good, but wow, it’s not good for you.

Still, it’s not shameful to make that kind of mistake. And it shouldn’t be in sleeping with someone who looks nice but turns out to be an equivalent of the above experience.
posted by Smedleyman at 5:36 PM on October 17, 2008 [2 favorites has favorites]

not even my wife of over a decade that I would trust with pictures like that of me.

Wow. I hope she doesn't read this. Does she have access to your credit cards? I'd much rather have someone see me naked than have my bank account cleared out and my credit ruined. My husband of 3 weeks has both naked pictures of me and his name on my credit cards. I would not have married him if I couldn't trust him with both of these things (plus much more).
posted by desjardins at 6:00 PM on October 17, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

It doesn't matter who takes the pictures or if you allowed them to, it matters that they're on the freakin' internet.

If there were naked pictures of me on the internet it would be immaterial to me whether they were taken by an ex or some total stranger with a telephoto lens hiding in the bushes in my yard. The problem would be the same as far as I was concerned.

Although if I knew the person it would make it easier to hunt them down and kill them slowly, I give you that.
posted by fshgrl at 6:11 PM on October 17, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

But I would ask: would anyone take more naked photos with boyfriend n+1 after boyfriend n put his photos on the interweb?

What point are you trying to make with this question? You're still focusing on women trusting their partners as the problem.

Yes, I'm sure that some women would take more naked photos with boyfriend n+1, and for various reasons. Perhaps they're emotionally vulnerable and are pressured into it. Perhaps they get something out of taking naked photos and don't want all of their future relationships to be tainted with suspicion because of one bad experience. So what?

Since now you've shifted from "why would anyone do it at all" to "why would anyone do it twice," it seems like you're looking for something that the victims did wrong. That focus is seriously misplaced.
posted by Kutsuwamushi at 6:16 PM on October 17, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

Seen any of the Girls Gone Wild series? Slimy f*cktards who know 'The Game' can pressure the fairer sex to do anything. The girls may agree but that doesn't mean they like it.

Wow, it's like women don't have moral agency or anything! I don't defend the guys who do this for a split second, but let's not infantilize the victims. That isn't helping.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 6:29 PM on October 17, 2008 [2 favorites has favorites]

It probably doesn't count as revenge porn, but stuff can get out to the internet by losing or having a digital camera stolen, or having a home broken into as well. It's not just a matter of the trust level between the "participants". Or, what about a sibling "prank"? Like Billy thinks his older sister has been treating him like shit, but he know where she stores here "personal" pics on the computer, or hides that datastick, etc.

Also, is there still an issue of sexism when it's same-gender relationship revenge porn? A jilted lesbian lover could want to have the same effect of humiliation on their ex.
posted by stifford at 6:38 PM on October 17, 2008

I am pissed off about pictures of me taken at kid's birthday parties that are on the internet. I really truly deeply hate being photographed.

Also, men take picture of women while they are sleeping. It's possible I didn't catch everyone who tried this.
posted by Lesser Shrew at 6:41 PM on October 17, 2008

I am pissed off about pictures of me taken at kid's birthday parties that are on the internet. I really truly deeply hate being photographed.

Me too. In my head there is a clear connection: picture taken ---> picture on internet ---> picture associated with name ---> LOL HURF DURF. In a society where appearance is so influential and so easily used against us, it's entirely rational to be wary about who has any amount of control over any aspect of yours.
posted by Countess Elena at 6:52 PM on October 17, 2008

I vaguely recall some massive AskMe thread about the conflict between the "don't take my picture" crowd and the "that's completely unreasonable to ask" crowd.
posted by smackfu at 7:49 PM on October 17, 2008

Anybody wanna see my junk?

Kidding! Kidding!
posted by NedKoppel at 7:49 PM on October 17, 2008

Just wait until camphones that embed GPS data in the photo are the norm. Can you imagine the Google Maps mashups? (The inevitable march of technology is going to privacy a charming anachronism).
posted by Leon at 8:02 PM on October 17, 2008

...going to make privacy...

Stupid brain.
posted by Leon at 8:07 PM on October 17, 2008

Some topics turn out to be surprisingly telling as to the readership of the blue.
posted by kid_twist at 8:12 PM on October 17, 2008

not even my wife of over a decade that I would trust with pictures like that of me.

That seems really weird to me. Doesn't she have access (as mentioned) to your bank account? If she were to have an affair, wouldn't you be at risk for an STD? What if she went psycho and you woke up with your nuts super-glued to the kitchen table, and there she is yanking on the pull-starter of your new chainsaw?

Joking aside, we trust lovers and spouses with quite literally everything that we have, including our lives. Trusting them with naked photos is not such a stretch, for all that it can sometimes turn out poorly.
posted by Forktine at 8:26 PM on October 17, 2008

That focus is seriously misplaced.

So, just so I'm not pilloried, I agree. Any person who posts these pictures is seriously an asshole and it really should be a crime. I guess I'm kinda repeating myself saying that I just don't get why people put themselves in the position where it could happen.
posted by GuyZero at 8:30 PM on October 17, 2008

I was the object of revenge porn twenty years ago. It never occurred to me to thank my lucky stars all he had were a photocopier, stapler, and a bunch of utility poles, but I guess there truly is a silver lining to any cloud. This is not "par for the course" as some seem to suggest, nor is it the victim's fault. It is a betrayal of a most intimate kind and a completely reprehensible violation of privacy.
posted by notashroom at 8:43 PM on October 17, 2008 [2 favorites has favorites]

I've had girls I've been in relationships throughout the years give me risque photos, hell most I took myself. Would they go up online after the relationship ended? Hell no - that doesn't accomplish anything.

Hell, once the relationship ended, the photos were destroyed. A shame really, because I've gone out with a few really good lookin ladies.
posted by cerulgalactus at 9:34 PM on October 17, 2008

Phillips, who is one year older than his ex-girlfriend, has been charged with possession of child pornography, sexual exploitation of a child by a person under 18 and defamation.

Wouldn't the underage girl who sent pics to her boyfriend be guilty of the manufacture and distribution of child pornography?
posted by MikeMc at 7:28 AM on October 18, 2008

But it's absolutely disgusting to me that when the issue is one of sexual violence or invasion of privacy, the response to women is "treat every man as a potential scumbag."

Then they get angry with us for doing just that.
posted by zarah at 7:31 AM on October 18, 2008

AzzaMcKazza: it has happened, but not the way you think. I know someone who has something of an interest in late 1960s/early 1970s Playboy and similar magazines for their autoerotic assistance material.

Imagine that person's surprise when their mother, who came to visit and found the collection, grinned and said, "Wow! Did you know that this is me in 1968?", displaying the centerfold. (Mom used a false name and, uh, had changed a great deal in more than 20 years.)

I understand there was some serious mindgrinding.
posted by mephron at 8:00 AM on October 18, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

That's the problem with women having sex with men. They'll just turn it into something dirty. I don't understand why a woman would have sex with a man.
posted by Mental Wimp at 10:45 AM on October 18, 2008 [2 favorites has favorites]

I guess I'm kinda repeating myself saying that I just don't get why people put themselves in the position where it could happen.

And I would be repeating myself if I pointed out that most of the victims probably didn't think it could happen, because if they did they wouldn't have had sex with the guy in the first place.
posted by Kutsuwamushi at 11:19 AM on October 18, 2008

There is an insoluble trade-off between intimacy and vulnerability. Guarded people shield themselves from potential harm by others, but then don't get to experience the total intimacy every human unconsciously craves and benefits from. Further there is the sneaking suspicion on the part of the non-Guarder that the Machiavellian philosophy of the Guarder (often born out of their own betrayal) has twisted the Guarder themself, making them less trustworthy and more likely to abuse the trust of others. Because of this, non-Guarders are less likely to select Guarders as partners. So Guarders will more likely have to pair up with yet more untrustworthy Guarders, leading to more betrayal and even stronger Guarder philosophy. The assumptions of the Guarder leads to relationships which confirm those assumptions. It becomes a self-fulfilling philosophy.

Game theory suggests, on average, the non-Guarder philosophy leads to the higher "pay off" in economic terms. Robert Axelrod's experiments with the iterated prisoner's dilemma showed that altruistic strategies worked best, including "tit-for-tat' which is an eye-for-an-eye strategy (Yeah... fuck you, Jesus!), but every new interaction begins with trust (Guarding is like "defecting" before your "opponent" does). Economists and sociologists, in particular, extol the many social and economic benefits of trust.
posted by dgaicun at 12:35 PM on October 18, 2008 [2 favorites has favorites]

dgaicun: using that highfalutin chalk talk to keep the nekkid pichuz coming since 1997.
posted by dgaicun at 12:48 PM on October 18, 2008 [2 favorites has favorites]

Joking aside, we trust lovers and spouses with quite literally everything that we have, including our lives. Trusting them with naked photos is not such a stretch, for all that it can sometimes turn out poorly.

Actually one thing that comes to mind is that trust aside, you'd also need to be fairly confident of the other half's ability to keep digital media (I think we're mainly talking about digital images here, as opposed to prints) private. A just-as-likely scenario would be somebody else laying their hands on the files and then distributing them. For example, when the laptop is sent for repair (see the Edison Chen photo scandal), or an email account is compromised, or the computer is infected with malware, etc. Or heck, if the boyfriend stores the goods in his pr0n directory which happens to be shared via Limewire.

Its probably a lot harder to trust people with digital media because the average computer user just isn't as security-conscious in the virtual world as they are in the real world.
posted by destrius at 12:53 PM on October 18, 2008

Solution: put pictures of yourself naked on the internet before your ex can get the chance!
posted by you zombitch at 1:04 PM on October 18, 2008