The Erin Brockovich of Revenge Porn
November 22, 2013 3:35 AM   Subscribe

This is what happens when the "most hated man on the Internet" messes with the wrong mother.
“Don’t worry. We’re going to protect you. We’re computer experts,” were the first words uttered by a man nicknamed “Jack,” who claimed to be an operative with the underground group, Anonymous.…“We know Hunter and his followers have been attacking you on Twitter. We will go after him and we won’t stop until he stops victimizing people,” he said.
The story of how a woman, the FBI and Anonymous shut down the king of revenge porn.
posted by Elementary Penguin (105 comments total) 29 users marked this as a favorite


 
An hour later, her photos were visible to the world along with identifying information, including the name of the school where she taught. This was the cue for followers of Is Anyone Up? to bombard the principal and school board with Jill’s naked shots and crude remarks, such as “Fire that slut” and “You have a whore teaching your children."

And then -- she was fired? How can this happen? I mean, this guy is an evil piece of shit, but he's able to do evil because he's tapping into some deeply sexist evil shit on the part of employers.
posted by angrycat at 3:47 AM on November 22, 2013 [55 favorites]


The FBI raided Moore’s home -- or more accurately, his parent’s home near Sacramento....

Of course.
posted by jquinby at 4:15 AM on November 22, 2013 [32 favorites]


In most cases, the scam began through Facebook ...

There are a ton of possible unintended consequences to joining social media. I almost think they should be restricted to adults.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 4:16 AM on November 22, 2013 [2 favorites]


We could kick Hunter Moore off Facebook anytime, any moment, regardless of how much effort he expended to compile “friends.” This is because I had created an alliance with the executives at the popular social networking service.
Also, one person from our group knew the CEO of PayPal and got Moore banned from the e-commerce site, hindering his ability to collect donations.
Corporate justice. The future has arrived.
posted by brokkr at 4:31 AM on November 22, 2013 [4 favorites]


Now, this is a total derail, and let me be clear, this is not a judgement of someone else's choices, but why is there so many nude photos and sex tapes out there to be released? There are so many of these stories about somebody being hacked or somebody releasing a sex tape for revenge. I feel I must be really sheltered (not to mention unattractive and possibly bad in bed) because recording the moment has just never even entered the conversation in my relationships. This question comes up every time I read one of these stories and I just thought I'd see what the hive mind has to say.
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 4:31 AM on November 22, 2013 [2 favorites]


I think what this mom did was great. But does anyone else think she might be overstating her involvement in the case a little bit? Everything is plausible, but something just sets off my bells and buzzers. I mean, take the kindergarten teacher. She has just been fired, in front of her class, for no stated reason. So she calls a complete stranger from the parking lot? (I hope she called her union rep first.) I also found it amazing that she was able to "an alliance with the executives" at Facebook over the course of 8 days. Is she or her husband somebody powerful? Like, I feel there's something missing from the story.
That said, good for her. She went to bat for her daughter in a supportive, non-judgmental way and helped a bunch of other people along the way.
posted by Biblio at 4:33 AM on November 22, 2013 [9 favorites]


There are so many of these stories about somebody being hacked or somebody releasing a sex tape for revenge. I feel I must be really sheltered (not to mention unattractive and possibly bad in bed) because recording the moment has just never even entered the conversation in my relationships. This question comes up every time I read one of these stories and I just thought I'd see what the hive mind has to say.

This member of the hive mind is wondering how you missed the parts in the article where she said that a number of the victims actually hadn't posed nude, but had had their faces photoshopped onto someone else's body.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:36 AM on November 22, 2013 [30 favorites]


Mr. of Foot, I suspect you did not read the entire article. There was some discourse in it about women who never had any nude photos taken, yet someone photoshopped their faces onto porn and posted all their identifying information anyway. Also, most of the postings were not revenge by ex-partners, they were malicious attacks by strangers. Let's leave off the victim-blaming, shall we?
posted by Kirth Gerson at 4:38 AM on November 22, 2013 [24 favorites]


There's so many parts of this story that seems so overly dramatized and cheesy. Like, straight out of this freaking movie kinda stuff. It just feels like cheesy things people would say in a TV show over and over.

>My computer had been bombarded with viruses, and a technician had advised me to buy all new equipment because the malware was tough to remove.

Oh come on, where did you go. Geek squad? Who would say that.

>“Also, be leery of unusual cars or vans in the neighborhood,” the tech added

is cheesy as fuck also. Like, really?

>While I was leaving my message, the principal had marched into Jill’s classroom and interrupted her lesson.

“Please gather your things and go home,” he said while five-year-old students watched in wonder.

Bewildered, Jill accumulated her belongings, and as she was leaving the building, the receptionist handed her my message.


Once again, reads like some bad as the world turns type shit. I believe that she got fired, but like that? It reminds me of a little kid talking about eating 1000 hotdogs or something. LITERALLY RIGHT THEN THEY RUSHED IN.

I will note that there's some depressing details like how LAPD treated them that are completely, depressingly believable to me. But even if this is the truth, the overly dramatic 60 minutes report but moreso way she told this story is so tiresome. It's trying way too hard to be an edge of your seat adventure when it's already pretty ridiculous and fucked up. Why try and sell it so fucking hard?

There's just something about the tone of this, and a lot of little details of it that really just kinda bug me. I don't doubt that nearly all of this happened, and this guy is definitely like... the father of all basement neck beard internet assholes, but the entire thing is just told in such an overly dramatic exaggerated sounding way that it makes it hard to take with the straight faced seriousness that this actual situation deserves.

She did a lot of work in shutting down assholes doing this type of stuff both legally and just through shear beating people into submission to join her side and get shit done. Just kinda wish that someone else could have interviewed her, collected the details, and written an account that wasn't so nails on a chalkboard to read.
posted by emptythought at 4:41 AM on November 22, 2013 [32 favorites]


I just looked at Laws' Wiki page. She's an interesting person, and she has political and media experience. So I think that probably explains why she was able to get more traction than the average person might.
posted by Biblio at 4:41 AM on November 22, 2013 [1 favorite]


There was some discourse in it about women who never had any nude photos taken,

so let's stipulate that s/he isn't talking about those people, but rather is talking about those that have taken nude photos or sex tapes.
posted by jpe at 4:43 AM on November 22, 2013 [2 favorites]


Angrycat makes an important point. "Revenge porn" is enacted by virulent misogynists, yes, but it 'works' to its evil ends because of systemic/assumed/unquestioned misogyny within our society. Bosses who immediately and without question fire women who are victims of this kind of thing represent a more insidious, difficult-to-combat evil, because they don't appear as hateful trolls who are obviously beyond the pale, but rather as banal 'normal' people reacting as the system has taught them to react, doing what is expected of them to do.

I'm glad this woman took this guy on. I'm also glad she never did what the awful LAPD officer immediately did—that is, suggest or even imply that her daughter should not have taken such photos to begin with. People like to feel sexy in a safe environment, people are curious about their own looks/bodies, etc. People who take revealing photos of themselves are not in any way to blame for the loathsome practice that is "revenge porn."
posted by erlking at 4:43 AM on November 22, 2013 [78 favorites]


Let's leave off the victim-blaming, shall we?

Who's blaming anyone, I had a question. People can feel free to snap nude photos of themselves or other consenting adults as they please. The hackers, in this case, and posters of malicious nonconensual content are terrible people. I just wonder how there has been such a huge phenomenon and I've been so blissfully unaware.
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 4:45 AM on November 22, 2013 [13 favorites]


I assume, in the era of digital cameras, most people have snapped revealing or nude selfies, out of curiosity if out of nothing else.
posted by erlking at 4:49 AM on November 22, 2013 [2 favorites]


I assume, in the era of digital cameras, most people have snapped revealing or nude selfies, out of curiosity if out of nothing else

If it was just curiosity, wouldn't a mirror that lacks the upheld arm with phone be the better way of satiating curiosity? The pixel count is above average and it allows for real-time 360 degree rotating views! There is some lighting trouble, however...
posted by Slackermagee at 4:54 AM on November 22, 2013 [4 favorites]


Yeah, I figure "for the hell of it" is a big reason. You can take as many as you like without having to drop them off at the Fotomat or send them off to some sketchy lab. Ditto for video.

On the other hand, if you had the wherewithal to develop your own film, you could shoot all you like, put them in a book and pretty much know that no one was going to see them unless you gave them the book, or they broke into your place and took it.
posted by jquinby at 4:54 AM on November 22, 2013


It's 2013, people use their phone cameras as essentially a mirror all the time -- how does my Halloween costume look? -- click -- Am I cute? --- click -- It's just that pictures are permanent and publishable in a way that goofing around in a mirror isn't. I've pulled plenty of poses in the mirror that I wouldn't want the world to see. No compromising selfies bc I am old, but I can see how someone would take utterly ridiculous and embarrassing pictures without thinking twice.
posted by selfmedicating at 4:55 AM on November 22, 2013 [7 favorites]


> "And then -- she was fired? How can this happen? I mean, this guy is an evil piece of shit, but he's able to do evil because he's tapping into some deeply sexist evil shit on the part of employers."

This is an aspect of the story that shouldn't be ignored, and often is. IT IS TERRIFYING that you can be fired for this kind of bullshit. Women especially can lose their jobs with no recourse. Revenge porn would instantly lose a huge part of its power if people had actual protection from being fired for things completely unrelated to their job performance.
posted by kyrademon at 4:55 AM on November 22, 2013 [50 favorites]


Also: Charlotte Laws is amazing, and it would be great if the post gave her credit by name instead of referring to her only as a "woman" and a "mother".
posted by medusa at 5:07 AM on November 22, 2013 [9 favorites]


Does anyone from KS recall seeing or hearing anything about the teacher story? I've been crawling around the Google and can't turn anything up.
posted by jquinby at 5:10 AM on November 22, 2013


Reasons you might shoot nude selfies/video of yourself:
  1. Long distance relationship
  2. One or both of you travel a lot for business/have different working hours.
  3. You enjoy watching porn as a prelude to sexytimes, so why not make your own?
  4. Your partner has been bothering you to do it, so you do it to make them happy.
I didn't name anyone in the post, and was just following the title convention on xojane. I agree that Charlotte Laws is amazing, and did not leave her name off as a slight.
posted by Elementary Penguin at 5:13 AM on November 22, 2013 [8 favorites]


[One comment deleted; take meta issues to Metatalk, please, and let's not start arguing about things nobody has even said yet. And maybe we can all try to avoid a total derail and a lot of fighting about why people might take nude photos?]
posted by taz (staff) at 5:14 AM on November 22, 2013


"Everything is plausible, but something just sets off my bells and buzzers" … "There's so many parts of this story that seems so overly dramatized and cheesy. Like, straight out of this freaking movie kinda stuff. It just feels like cheesy things people would say in a TV show over and over" … "There's just something about the tone of this, and a lot of little details of it that really just kinda bug me."

If the little things bug you - and they do me, too - and don't really make logical sense, why would you believe any of it?

Is it because you, like Mulder, want to believe? Because it fits in with your preconceptions, assumed stereotypes, and every other bit of cultural baggage you've absorbed over the years that fits together to make a good story?

Not saying it's not true - but on the face of it, it sure sounds like bull and I wouldn't be surprised if it smelt like it deeper down too.

Plus it doesn't help that it's on what appears to be the Internet equivalent of the supermarket tabloid "That's Life!"-style true story magazines, to be found right alongside pictures of Bat Boy and Elvis working in a diner…
posted by Pinback at 5:19 AM on November 22, 2013


Regarding the teacher firing. Several years ago a teacher in PA was fired because she posted a photo of her dressed like a pirate (for Halloween) drinking out of a plastic cup with the title "drunken pirate" on FB. Nothing in the photo suggested she was drunk in fact with a different caption you wouldn't know if she was drinking alcohol or fruit juice. Fired. For a photo title on FB.
posted by miss-lapin at 5:20 AM on November 22, 2013 [7 favorites]


This question comes up every time I read one of these stories and I just thought I'd see what the hive mind has to say.

I've made them with pretty much everyone I've ever been with, just because it's mutually enjoyable at the time and watching them together or alone later. YMMV.
posted by jaduncan at 5:33 AM on November 22, 2013 [3 favorites]


> If the little things bug you - and they do me, too - and don't really make logical sense, why would you believe any of it?

It reads like an email forward, but I assume the basic facts - woman called other people and researched the site, FBI became involved, the Voice ran a story, anon (or specifically, KY Anonymous) doxxed Hunter Moore - are true.

The tone shows a very different, probably naive and a little incurious, understanding of the internet compared to folks on metafilter (we kicked him...off the facebook!), but that was kind of interesting in itself. This is what a raid looks like to someone who lives offline.

> Reasons you might shoot nude selfies/video of yourself:

You're using a video camera to flirt and things progress. Is there a conception that nudes are something you sit down and plan and execute rather than the result of fooling around?
posted by postcommunism at 5:42 AM on November 22, 2013 [4 favorites]


This is the first I've heard of this revenge porn business. My first thought when I saw the post was that it was like genre fiction about someone taking epic revenge on the people who wronged them, like Kill Bill or Hamlet. Anyway I'm glad that people like Charlotte Laws are fighting back and I hope against hope that at some point the culture at large will re-examine the attitudes and prejudices that allow Hunter Moore to claim so many victims.

That said, the article doesn't do Charlotte Laws any favours. She's kind of turned herself into the Mary Sue of her own life story.
posted by wabbittwax at 5:52 AM on November 22, 2013


The thing I found weirdest about the article was the photos they used.
posted by brokkr at 5:56 AM on November 22, 2013 [43 favorites]


Did I read the same article as you guys? Wow.

The part that stood out to me most was how unstable and psychotic "Hunter Moore" sounds. I mean, internet trolls and all, but he seems to be someone that is actually crazy and not just blustering on the internet. He sounds like one of those old guys ranting on a street corner about how all women are whores that need to be raped because that's what they want anyway.

Charlotte Laws is a wealthy Californian with connections and a past as a detective - and that doesn't negate the fact that she accomplished something pretty huge and helped other victims - total strangers - along the way. Picking apart her writing style seems... weird. This story can't be true because you don't believe a teacher could be fired in that way? Actually it just says she was sent home, and there have been plenty of stories in the media about teachers being suspended or outright fired over shit on facebook. Every teacher I know (used to be one myself) uses a fake name on facebook and is very aware that ONE wrong picture or statement can get you fired, even escorted off the property, yes. As a preschool teacher I was once sent home because I had gone to a bachelorette party the night before and my hair smelled like cigarette smoke when I got to work in the morning. I quit over that.

I love how the comments on the article are like, "You are amazing and a hero!" and the comments here are like, "This sounds made up to me, because she's not a good writer."

Ugh.
posted by polly_dactyl at 6:18 AM on November 22, 2013 [52 favorites]


Reading her story made me think of some of the more investigative stories I've written as a newspaper reporter. I guess if you've never really tracked someone down you might be surprised by how much impact one person can have, if they possess good research skills, and the time and willingness to call absolutely anyone who they suspect might be able to help.

Maybe it doesn't come off as flattering because she makes clear her mission is to get Hunter Moore. And yeah she's proud of what's she's done, and lets you know it.

But I found her narrative credible. Once she compiled her dossier, a cheat-sheet for investigators, and handed it to the relevant authorities, they had to choose. Have a serious look themselves, or be the subject of her next round of interviews with sympathetic reporters.
posted by Andrew Galarneau at 6:19 AM on November 22, 2013 [11 favorites]


In Canada, the federal government has just proposed, as part of an anti-cyber-bullying initiative, to make it illegal to distribute intimate images without the consent of the person in the photo. It also makes the offender responsible for costs to take images down.

On first read, this seems reasonable to me. Physical intimacy is something one person grants to another; this should extend to the rights around "intimate" images. Is this a reasonable legislative approach?
posted by Artful Codger at 6:21 AM on November 22, 2013 [6 favorites]


Like a lot of bills the Tories cook up, this one is kind of a Trojan Horse.
posted by one more dead town's last parade at 6:26 AM on November 22, 2013 [6 favorites]


I thought it was pretty sad when the article said that she worried about her conservative boyfriend breaking up with her because of her stolen private photos.
posted by oceanjesse at 6:30 AM on November 22, 2013 [4 favorites]


Hm. I think today will be the day I delete my fb account, as I just realized somebody could tag one in a photo. I was thinking that as long as I didn't put up photos myself, I was cool. How naive of me (I teach and am female).
posted by angrycat at 6:31 AM on November 22, 2013 [7 favorites]


I figure "for the hell of it" is a big reason. You can take as many as you like without having to drop them off at the Fotomat or send them off to some sketchy lab.

FWIW, when I was in college a friend of mine worked for a local photo business and after the first month developing nude pictures had become so routine he quit even remarking on them. I once found some Polaroid nudes of my own parents and they were never exactly swingers.

All of which is to say that there is probably a long and unspoken history of nude "selfies" taken by ordinary people that is forgotten or ignored in these brouhahas. It's nothing new; what's new is the ability to have them broadcast, willingly or unwillingly.

It's a shame that the article's rather breathless prose automatically calls the story in to doubt. Because, superficially, lacking any evidence to say so, I see no reason to believe it isn't, basically, true. There's nothing about it any different from every other case of internet harassment except an extra degree of sociopathy, maybe.

Is it because you, like Mulder, want to believe? Because it fits in with your preconceptions, assumed stereotypes, and every other bit of cultural baggage you've absorbed over the years that fits together to make a good story?

Maybe you want to disbelieve for the same reasons.
posted by octobersurprise at 6:35 AM on November 22, 2013 [7 favorites]


I think today will be the day I delete my fb account, as I just realized somebody could tag one in a photo.

I'm not trying to dissuade you at all, but FB notifies you when someone tags you in a photo and gives you the option to remove the tag.
posted by Etrigan at 6:38 AM on November 22, 2013 [1 favorite]


angrycat, as I said most teachers I know use a fake name on facebook. Never, ever friend a student - if they ask if you're on FB, say no. Never post pictures of students or stories where students are mentioned by name. Make your FB as private as possible - once I was interviewing for a summer camp job and the director told me she had a policy - when setting up interviews, she checked facebook - anyone who was not private was immediately off the list. No "in the event you are hired we want you to make your facebook private," just straight up no interview.

It IS a shame that teachers have to put up with this kind of shit, but the problem for schools (edit: and camps, and daycares, and whatever else) is that the fallout from dealing with parents is insanity.
posted by polly_dactyl at 6:38 AM on November 22, 2013 [3 favorites]


Misogynists hate her! One small trick discovered by a mom to put an end to revenge porn.
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 6:47 AM on November 22, 2013 [8 favorites]


Etrigan: "I'm not trying to dissuade you at all, but FB notifies you when someone tags you in a photo and gives you the option to remove the tag."

You can also set it so that if someone tags you, it alerts you and asks you to approve it before the tag is even added.
posted by coupdefoudre at 6:47 AM on November 22, 2013 [4 favorites]


It's nothing new; what's new is the ability to have them broadcast, willingly or unwillingly.

This is exactly what raised my question. It seems this isn't new at all and way more common than I've ever imagined. I never knew I was such a square!
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 6:51 AM on November 22, 2013


Yeah, a lot of the conversion here is reaching "Are you sure she was harassed? That seems incredible to me" levels of doubt. I'm hoping that it's typical metafilter cynicism rather than sexism, but it's disturbing.
posted by happyroach at 6:53 AM on November 22, 2013 [6 favorites]


Regarding the teacher firing. Several years ago a teacher in PA was fired because she posted a photo of her dressed like a pirate (for Halloween) drinking out of a plastic cup with the title "drunken pirate" on FB. Nothing in the photo suggested she was drunk in fact with a different caption you wouldn't know if she was drinking alcohol or fruit juice. Fired. For a photo title on FB.

This kind of thing makes me so angry, because she was doing nothing illegal. It is legal to drink. It is also legal to smoke! And being fired for engaging in legal activities outside of work hours just should not happen. Arglebargle.

Of course, I assume it is also legal to take nekkid pictures of yourself so long as you don't purposefully show them to minors. You shouldn't be fired for that either.
posted by emjaybee at 6:55 AM on November 22, 2013 [10 favorites]


> Yeah, a lot of the conversion here is reaching "Are you sure she was harassed? That seems incredible to me" levels of doubt.

Since I mentioned tone upthread, just want to point out that I have no doubt she and the other people mentioned were mobbed exactly as described. That story happens over and over.
posted by postcommunism at 6:59 AM on November 22, 2013 [4 favorites]


I love how the comments on the article are like, "You are amazing and a hero!" and the comments here are like, "This sounds made up to me, because she's not a good writer."

Hunter Moore is already well known as a despicable psycho, and this whole thing reads like a Max Fischer play.

KAYLA, an attractive 24-year-old is in her bedroom emulating cute
and sexy poses from fashion magazines. She glances at her phone.

              KAYLA

    Mom! My left breast is visible
    on the Internet again!

CHARLOTTE, a demure but still youthful woman of indeterminate years,
is sitting in front of a DELL XPS 15 ULTRABOOK. She opens a new browser
window and begins typing, her hand slamming the RETURN key with
surprising force.

             CHARLOTTE

    Damnit! They circumvented the unique
    digital fingerprint blocking scheme by
    renaming the file! Charles, hand me the phone!

CHARLES, a tired man in late middle age, hands her the phone.

            CHARLOTTE
         (on phone)
    Patch me through to the Director! Now!

posted by Combustible Edison Lighthouse at 7:04 AM on November 22, 2013 [3 favorites]


...I just wonder how there has been such a huge phenomenon and I've been so blissfully unaware.
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 7:45 AM on November 22


When I was taking communication theory classes in college, one of the things I remember learning was that throughout human history, two groups almost always embraced new communication technology first:

(1) People who want to spread their religion
(2) People who want to make erotica, for themselves or for others

...and not necessarily in that order.

So the end result is that when drawing and painting were discovered, some of the earliest cave paintings have nude or sexualized pictures. When photography was invented, some of the earliest photos were erotica. When satellite TV was developed (remember the huge dishes some people had in the '70s?), pornographers sought to use that technology to delivery their product to the masses. Home video recording changed the porn industry forever when people were able to made their own sex tapes--starring themselves!--for their own use. The Internet allowed a flood of amateur pornographers to share their work.


The real kicker started to come when technological developments occured in personal photography. Remember back in the '70s when people made jokes about "naughty Polaroids"? Remember when you risked getting in trouble (maybe not legally but socially) by taking your erotic home photos to the local drug store so the film could be developed? Cameras and our ability to share photos have developed so much in the last 40-odd years since then. We've gone from an age of photography being highly technical to make and expensive to share, to being able to make quality photos and broadcast them to millions for free and nearly instantaneously.


My point is this: from the beginning of recorded history, people have been making nude or erotic pictures of themselves, their loved ones, and/or complete strangers. This is a widespread human trait, and by no means a recent phenomenon. The only thing that's actually changed is the technology we use to make and to share those pictures.
posted by magstheaxe at 7:05 AM on November 22, 2013 [18 favorites]


I find I have the same reaction to people picking on this woman's writing/actions/pictures as I do people who say Skyler from "Breaking Bad" is an "annoying bitch": Yes, I suppose she does come across as somewhat unpleasant if you completely ignore the context of her being forced to deal with an unspeakably monstrous, life-ruining, narcissistic psychopath.
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 7:28 AM on November 22, 2013 [51 favorites]


I think this story would actually be more interesting as a full-length book. As currently written, it feels like certain points get glossed over really quickly (for example, after Hunter Moore sends his goon squad after the author, it's just sort of like, "But then Anonymous called and took care of it for me"). This is a story where many of the details that she quickly rushes through (like getting allies at Facebook, putting together a team of victims, her background as a private detective) are actually the most interesting parts of the tale and would benefit from a fuller description.
posted by The Gooch at 7:44 AM on November 22, 2013 [6 favorites]


recording the moment has just never even entered the conversation in my relationships.

There are a lot of things that I wouldn't want to do, but it's fairly easy to think of plausible reasons that others might.

Perhaps taking photos makes them feel sexy--it tells them that the way that they look in an intimate moment is worth recording. Perhaps it's exciting because it is ever so slightly transgressive. Perhaps they want to use the images for masturbating later.

Whatever the reason, nude photos get taken. And then women get blamed for taking nude photos if they're released, because why would you do that, you should know better. As if women should be expected to be on guard against terrible betrayal even in the context of an intimate relationship. Women are not allowed to trust their lovers by these people; if they do, they're sluts or fools.

By the way...

I once got into an internets fight with a set of some very persistent, pathetic little internet trolls after I banned them from a forum I was a moderator of. They attempted to manufacture all sorts of trouble, including creating fake screenshots. One thing that they did was track down a photo of me and paste my face onto a porn shot. Luckily, they were poor photoshoppers and I was careful enough about not connecting my internet activity to my real name.

This kind of revenge sexual shaming is not behavior that's remarkable because it's rare. It's remarkable because it's so common--and so effective, because the women are still held responsible for this crime against their privacy.

(This is one of the reasons that I laugh when straight white males say that we should be required to use our real names on the internet.)
posted by Kutsuwamushi at 7:47 AM on November 22, 2013 [41 favorites]


Is it because you, like Mulder, want to believe? Because it fits in with your preconceptions, assumed stereotypes, and every other bit of cultural baggage you've absorbed over the years that fits together to make a good story?

What? Jesus Christ, NO.
posted by bakerina at 7:50 AM on November 22, 2013 [2 favorites]


My computer had been bombarded with viruses, and a technician had advised me to buy all new equipment because the malware was tough to remove.

And you know, because MCSE.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 7:56 AM on November 22, 2013 [3 favorites]


Is it because you, like Mulder, want to believe? Because it fits in with your preconceptions, assumed stereotypes, and every other bit of cultural baggage you've absorbed over the years that fits together to make a good story?

Not saying it's not true - but on the face of it, it sure sounds like bull and I wouldn't be surprised if it smelt like it deeper down too.


Yeah, WTF? how unaware of yourself are you? You clearly demonstrate a desire NOT to believe based on your preconceptions, assumed stereotypes, and other cultural baggage. I mean 'It smells like bull' is not an argument.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 7:56 AM on November 22, 2013 [10 favorites]


This question comes up every time I read one of these stories and I just thought I'd see what the hive mind has to say.

If you read the article, a significant number of these were from hacked emails that were personal accounts (weight loss progress pics, the out takes from glamour shots) or were 'morphs', photoshop jobs of the person's head onto another body.

But this comes up time and time again- 'don't take pictures and nobody will hurt you!', but at the end of the day, since a face pic is enough to make you a target, this is hardly fair or practical. It's like saying how you don't see how women drink, (no judgement meant), since alcohol is involved in a significant number of sexual assault cases and you never go to bars and parties!

Plus, there is really no problem with wanting to ask "why do people want to look at naked pictures?!", but the context here is a bit risky for being bundled into the general thread topic, much if there was a topic about police profiling of an ethnic minority and their harassment and disproportionate arrests, sentencing and prosecution, and someone asked "not to judge, but considering the greater scrutiny, why would that minority ever get involved with crime?"
posted by Phalene at 8:14 AM on November 22, 2013 [10 favorites]


The story is interesting, if she had any part in removing isanyoneup from the internet then good on her. The photos she has chosen straddle the weird/inappropriate line for me and possibly reveal more about her than the text.
posted by asok at 8:34 AM on November 22, 2013 [5 favorites]


People complaining about the quality of the writing are clearly not familiar with the long and storied history of the It Happened To Me column which originated in Sassy approximately one million years ago and has apparently changed very little.
posted by elizardbits at 8:34 AM on November 22, 2013 [22 favorites]


I came in to say pretty much the same thing as elizardbits. The style of both those columns and most of xojane is fairly informal. Just because its not Pulitzer Journalism style doesn't make it invalid.
posted by captaincrouton at 8:36 AM on November 22, 2013 [3 favorites]


It was like the teenage girl reality tv of the 80s and 90s and I am still mad at my mom for throwing out all my old copies.
posted by elizardbits at 8:45 AM on November 22, 2013 [6 favorites]


The photos she has chosen straddle the weird/inappropriate line for me and possibly reveal more about her than the text.

This has so many layers of irony in it that I HAVE to assume you're totally joking, right?
posted by like_a_friend at 9:08 AM on November 22, 2013 [13 favorites]


The OP is also interesting in the context of the Lulu thread. Both are about uploading, tagging, and then publicizing members of the opposite gender, but in very different ways.
posted by postcommunism at 9:25 AM on November 22, 2013 [1 favorite]


Huh - when I saw "most hated man on the Internet", I thought Casey Serin. But upon further reflection he's "the world's most hated blogger".

However, I notice that they're both from Sacramento. Is there something in the water?
posted by Flunkie at 9:46 AM on November 22, 2013


I'm glad she got the photos taken down. She had a good point about how the authorities only seem to pay attention when it's someone famous or powerful who gets hacked.
posted by arcticseal at 10:03 AM on November 22, 2013 [1 favorite]


I also found it amazing that she was able to "an alliance with the executives" at Facebook over the course of 8 days. Is she or her husband somebody powerful?

It seems really hard to believe, but we're all just an email or a phone call away from almost everybody in the world.
posted by KokuRyu at 10:06 AM on November 22, 2013


Why do so many people hate women so much?
posted by gucci mane at 10:06 AM on November 22, 2013 [10 favorites]


I was also going to say that that it's too bad she did not elaborate on the "Geek Squad" tech's comments.

What he was saying was that someone (the dude in the white car) could easily gain access to their home WiFi network and their computers and hard drives and data from the street outside. Easily.
posted by KokuRyu at 10:07 AM on November 22, 2013


Why do so many people hate women so much?

Because eventually mommy weaned them all.
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 10:12 AM on November 22, 2013 [2 favorites]



The photos she has chosen straddle the weird/inappropriate line for me and possibly reveal more about her than the text.

This has so many layers of irony in it that I HAVE to assume you're totally joking, right?


I'm totally behind what Charlotte Laws is doing to take down miserable internet misogynists, but by the fifth dramatic photo of Charlotte Laws staring moodily into the mirror I felt like the presentation somewhat distracted from the meat of the article. I don't want to be wondering why Ms. Laws felt the need to insert so many staged photos of herself while reading about all the work she's put into fighting an important fight, you know? Most non-anonymous "It Happened to Me" articles on XOJane are not so heavily illustrated.

But she's also an actress, journalist, and realtor so maybe it's par for the course. She also has a Ph.D in Social Justice and Masters in Professional Writing. She's quite accomplished so it just seems weird that her article has the same ratio of personal photo to words as a self-help guru's website.
posted by oneirodynia at 10:14 AM on November 22, 2013 [4 favorites]


KokuRyu: "...could easily gain access to their home WiFi network and their computers and hard drives and data from the street outside. Easily."

This bears repeating. Even WPA isn't foolproof. Tools like this make it trivial.
posted by jquinby at 10:18 AM on November 22, 2013 [1 favorite]


Maybe to pre-empt efforts by trolls to post images of her or something? I thought the article was interesting and didn't pay much attention to the photos.
posted by KokuRyu at 10:18 AM on November 22, 2013 [1 favorite]


Tangential: While the revenge porn law that California passed is a step in the right direction, it doesn't apply when the photos are selfies, and so wouldn't apply in the case of Laws' daughter. Which is incredibly lame.
posted by oneirodynia at 10:19 AM on November 22, 2013 [1 favorite]


"I also found it amazing that she was able to "an alliance with the executives" at Facebook over the course of 8 days. Is she or her husband somebody powerful?"

Within a couple of hours, I could have Mark Zuckerberg's cell number if it was something really important. Because I know people he's worked with closely enough for them to have his cell. Likewise, I could get Bill Clinton's cell number with a couple of calls. I don't find it implausible at all that she could get in contact with lower-level execs.
posted by klangklangston at 10:46 AM on November 22, 2013


Within a couple of hours I could have both Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Clinton's cell numbers, because I can memail a guy who knows people. If any of you are interested, I accept paypal.
posted by Think_Long at 10:58 AM on November 22, 2013 [17 favorites]


My cranky old grandfather one time called up Charles Schwab, no, not the company, I mean Chuck himself, well, at least he got his executive assistant's desk anyway, all over some minor accounting error on his brokerage account. She asked him if there was anything she could help him with, and he crankily replied, "I don't know, you're just his secretary." To which she replied, "just try me, buddy." 24 hours later he got a Fed Exed letter signed by Charles with an apology and a check for the difference plus interest and this was in the pre-internet era!
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 11:02 AM on November 22, 2013 [5 favorites]


"[T]he FBI investigation [of Moore] was pending. The case is still open today."

And I couldn't find anything else on this. Is he being prosecuted for something?
posted by Eyebeams at 11:06 AM on November 22, 2013


You put up the flood of normal pictures of yourself so that when someone does a google image search of you, those images eventually pre-empt all of the disgusting hack photoshop jobs that carbon-wasting jackoffs have attached to your name against your will.

You put up the flood of normal pictures of yourself to underscore that you, and your daughter, are human beings and not wank fodder for whoever, whenever.

You put up the flood of normal pictures of yourself because you refuse to be ashamed that so many disgusting excuses for human beings hate you, because you have a vagina.

And then someone else on the internet gets all huffy because who are you to put up pictures of yourself?

and the cycle of you can't ever ever win marches on, undisturbed
posted by like_a_friend at 11:09 AM on November 22, 2013 [36 favorites]


"Within a couple of hours I could have both Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Clinton's cell numbers, because I can memail a guy who knows people. If any of you are interested, I accept paypal."

Heh. Yeah, but realize with every link in the chain, the call has to be over an even bigger fucking deal. I'm not sure what I'd need Clinton's number for that's under the level of, "My brother is being held hostage in North Korea."
posted by klangklangston at 12:26 PM on November 22, 2013


You know, if your brother didn't go to North Korea, then he wouldn't need Bill Clinton's help. Clearly, the victim is at fault here.
posted by Etrigan at 12:38 PM on November 22, 2013 [10 favorites]


Why is everybody's brother going to North Korea? Why haven't I been aware of this for all these years?
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 12:45 PM on November 22, 2013 [7 favorites]


Ha! I've been to North Korea with him! Only in the DMZ, but still.
posted by klangklangston at 12:45 PM on November 22, 2013


With Mark Zuckerberg? He seems like an intense travel-buddy.
posted by Think_Long at 12:53 PM on November 22, 2013 [3 favorites]


Count me in as one who was excited by this intrepid woman's achievements but really, really creeped out by the pictures which reminded me of the various outtake dating-site photos my mom always e-mails me asking for feedback. Ugh. Mom. My sister and I do NOT want our brains anywhere NEAR a combination of you and J-Date :(
posted by Mooseli at 1:01 PM on November 22, 2013 [5 favorites]


I just don't understand hiw this is still legal and why Moore isn't in jail. We have so many dumb laws but this is ok?
posted by fshgrl at 1:37 PM on November 22, 2013


Did the article really need five pictures of the author and two of the daughter?

Plus, the one with her sitting with the framed picture of her daughter made me think "okay did the daughter commit suicide further on in the narrative?"
posted by mrbill at 1:53 PM on November 22, 2013 [9 favorites]


You put up the flood of normal pictures of yourself so that when someone does a google image search of you, those images eventually pre-empt all of the disgusting hack photoshop jobs that carbon-wasting jackoffs have attached to your name against your will.

Until you wrote this, like_a_friend, I was trying unsuccessfully to fight off the knee-jerk reaction of "these pictures are tacky and unnecessary." But this explanation is probably exactly why she decided to include them, considering part of her advice to the victims was to beef up their online presence to the point that the naked pictures wouldn't be at the top of a google search.
posted by AbbyNormal at 1:53 PM on November 22, 2013 [6 favorites]


I think she included them because she really, really likes to show people pictures of herself. Check out her "political website." It has a million pictures of Charlotte looking pretty. There are at least a hundred pictures of her with celebrities, including 3 pages of her with Tom Jones! (Which confirms for me that she has a head start in getting the ear of the rich and powerful.) She's a really interesting person who is obviously smart and driven, but a little bit kooky, too.
posted by Biblio at 2:22 PM on November 22, 2013 [10 favorites]


This story can't be true because you don't believe a teacher could be fired in that way? Actually it just says she was sent home, and there have been plenty of stories in the media about teachers being suspended or outright fired over shit on facebook.
...
I love how the comments on the article are like, "You are amazing and a hero!" and the comments here are like, "This sounds made up to me, because she's not a good writer."


Jeeze, i knew i was setting myself up to get mortared in the morning by writing that, but no, nowhere did i(personally, me, at least) say that i didn't believe any of the major events of this story had occurred. It would be trivial to prove they did and i don't disbelieve it anyways. I saw a lot of stuff about isanyoneup getting shut down and various accounts and drama bullshit that guy had caused by being an enormous asshole.

I just think that a lot of minor details of it are gussied up to make it sound more dramatic, and that it takes away from the impact of it as a powerful story to me. It like, hampers my ability to take it at face value when it's so dramatic and fantastical that it almost tries to activate the "Ok, i'm watching a tv show, stop trying to explain why everything doesn't make sense" suspension-of-disbelief center of my brain.

Your general tone makes it sound like any negative comments about this story are somehow a Bad Thing. I think what she accomplished being a great thing and the "you go girl!" have pretty much all already been said and don't need to pop up here. This thread is a lot more interesting with you know, actual viewpoints instead of just being the opposite of a thread full of .'s because someone died or something. Far too often i get the feeling that we're not allowed to be at all critical of something positive without just being poopypants assholes, and fuck that. Nothing is beyond a proper discussion, criticism and all.

Yeah, a lot of the conversion here is reaching "Are you sure she was harassed?

I knew coming out and saying absolutely anything negative about this was going to invite this sort of response, but where did i say that?

Is everyone going to turn the firehose of saying i'm a concern troll or something on me now? I literally have said, many times, that i completely believe everything relating to the harassment and the misogynistic moore shit in this story. The only criticism i've leveled, or that i've even seen anyone else level up until your comment was about the writing style and the "breathless prose".

Is criticizing this article at all in any way essentially weasel words for "i don't believe this happened?" to you?

I find I have the same reaction to people picking on this woman's writing/actions/pictures as I do people who say Skyler from "Breaking Bad" is an "annoying bitch": Yes, I suppose she does come across as somewhat unpleasant if you completely ignore the context of her being forced to deal with an unspeakably monstrous, life-ruining, narcissistic psychopath.

Your racking up a ton of favorites with this, but i really think you're painting a lot of people with a really unfair brush of permanent "see, they're assholes, we should dismiss them!" ink here.

As i'm now having to state, breathlessly(heh), where can you find anyone slagging on her actions? she did what needed to be done. I doubt she even chose the photos for the article(which are just kind of... strange, not really bad though. They remind me of stuff my mom would post on facebook. pretty normal).

Does saying that she presents the story in a bizarre way that makes it a bit of a bitter pill to swallow like some kind of fanfiction make us terrible womanhaters who are completely misunderstanding the context?

I myself am not at all unfamiliar with this kind of harassment, i watched it go down in highschool and watched several friends suffer through it. I've actually watched 4chan blow up on someone i know. I also have no doubt that this guy is an absolute mega asshole, and have dealt with someone quite similar to him actually posting photos online that weren't from google maps of the front of my house going "this is where he lives, go fuck him up".

Why is so hard to separate the criticism from all these uncharitable things you imagine the person writing them saying? Why do i, and others, have to fit in to this easily dismissable villain suit?

I honestly find myself agreeing with The Gooch above that this feels like a story outline for a novel or novella, that could be fleshed out in to something that with the assistance of a good editor was actually an interesting read. A lot of good stuff gets glossed over... and god does it need someone to smack it with some kind of writing 101 shit and a second opinion. I guess it's just that writing was, for a long time my passion that i wanted to turn into a career(and i had a very stern english teacher to constantly smack me about style and such), but UGH.

(This is one of the reasons that I laugh when straight white males say that we should be required to use our real names on the internet.)

I've been a forum moderator, and it's lead to harassment closer to whats described in this article than many would think. Including the photoshops, the aforementioned driving to my actual house and taking photos of it, and other awful shit including managing to 'sploit there way in to my personal server, and hop on an SSH tunnel and root my desktop at home and spy on EVERYTHING i did for an unknown period of time.

I, too, laugh when people say this. As this article about moore proves, assholes don't care about their names being attached to their assholery. They're like k-12 school bullies. They'll just go "Yea, i did that, and?". Whereas anyone who would be a victim is just that much more exposed.

Anyone who campaigns for that sort of internet accountability is horribly naive.
posted by emptythought at 2:37 PM on November 22, 2013 [8 favorites]




It's true that people who harass others on the internet tend not to care too much when they're identified, but that's because they don't suffer many real consequences for it. That's what needs to change. The script needs to be flipped, so it's the perpetrators and not the victims who lose their jobs and have their reputations haunt them.

Society as a whole needs to take a long hard look at the victim blaming and the cruel, horrific misogyny that makes it so life ruining for women to have nude pictures leaked in the first place, and needs to instead make it life ruining to be outed as a sexual predator. People need to go to jail, they need to lose their friends and jobs and not be able to find new ones. They need to be the ones worrying about people finding out about their pasts.
posted by ernielundquist at 4:18 PM on November 22, 2013 [4 favorites]


Looks like Hunter Moore is doing this now.
posted by bakerina at 4:31 PM on November 22, 2013


And then -- she was fired? How can this happen?

A moral turpitude clause, which is likely deliberately vague.
posted by dhartung at 4:33 PM on November 22, 2013 [1 favorite]


Looks like Hunter Moore is doing this now.

There's something deliciously ironic about the fact that he's covering his face on that poster.
posted by emptythought at 4:40 PM on November 22, 2013 [1 favorite]


Same story over on Jezebel. Interesting dynamic in the comment section on a few threads: some people are talking about Anon as a vigilante counterpoint to Hunter Moore types, while a sole poster who's been doxxed and harassed by Anon pretty much as described in the OP tries to talk history and context.
posted by postcommunism at 6:11 PM on November 22, 2013 [2 favorites]


Also: Charlotte Laws is amazing, and it would be great if the post gave her credit by name instead of referring to her only as a "woman" and a "mother".

"Mom puts revenge porn kingpin in jail using this one weird trick."
posted by jayder at 7:55 PM on November 22, 2013


I think Hunter Moore has had a few out-of-court settlements, but he seems to have a really good lawyer.

I've had to send him takedown notices when he used copyrighted images of mine on isanyoneup and he was surprisingly quick and cordial but anytime someone threatens a lawsuit they have no intention of carrying out and little chance of winning, he sends em a dick pic and throws em to the wolves that are his fanbase. Apparently, he submits any nude pictures that appear to be of underaged people to the FBI. I'm 700% sure that this is out of advise from his legal counsel and not altruism.

I stopped monitoring him once his site went down and I didn't have to make sure my pictures were ending up there The last time I fell down a twitter rabbit hole and ended up on his page, it looked like he was mostly providing a platform for his fans to self-submit and open themselves up to be cheered and jeered. Any positive effects of this are, I'm sure, completely coincidental but I'd like to think that somewhere in all the vitriol and stupidity something positive shines through. One of the things I noticed was that, no matter how conventionally attractive/unattractive a woman was, there would always be someone calling them ugly and always someone trying to fuck them. Several of each. This doesn't help men treat women as real people or anything but at least maybe some more body positivity can come out of it.

I don't know what he's doing with the brand these days but I hope he's at least pushing a more consent-based type of evil if evil's what he needs to pay the bills. I've met the dude before and it seems like he put himself in a corner with the persona he put out there and wanted out. I can't say I'm sympathetic because "suffering from success" and guilt is not really an adequate sort of justice for the suffering he's put others through.
posted by elr at 8:49 PM on November 22, 2013


Looks like Hunter Moore is doing this now.

Wow. It's everything I hate.

His music combines dubstep, trap and more traditional electronica.

Of course it does.

Ladies 18 & up are permitted / Guys 21 & up are permitted,

Of course they are.

Moore began releasing music in collaboration with reputable DJs

Of course you have to specify "reputable".
posted by flaterik at 11:13 PM on November 22, 2013 [3 favorites]


You put up the flood of normal pictures of yourself so that when someone does a google image search of you, those images eventually pre-empt all of the disgusting hack photoshop jobs that carbon-wasting jackoffs have attached to your name against your will.


A while ago a friend, who is an amazing artist and generally rad human being, found herself the target of a revenge porn campaign via an ex, who submitted pictures of her to various sites with her full name and other details. One of the things we did to combat it was to say her name over and over again and post pictures of her art in an attempt to drown the revenge hit in search engines. (She managed to get some of them taken down, but a couple of site owners were... well, they were dicks.)


Also, If you give me Bill Clinton's phone number I swear I will only use it to drunk dial him and talk about Peter Brötzmann, and see if I can persuade him to weild his own axe to make a short soundtrack for a video.
posted by louche mustachio at 2:25 AM on November 23, 2013 [2 favorites]


Your racking up a ton of favorites with this, but i really think you're painting a lot of people with a really unfair brush of permanent "see, they're assholes, we should dismiss them!" ink here.

As i'm now having to state, breathlessly(heh), where can you find anyone slagging on her actions?


"I don't doubt that nearly all of this happened, and this guy is definitely like... the father of all basement neck beard internet assholes, but the entire thing is just told in such an overly dramatic exaggerated sounding way that it makes it hard to take with the straight faced seriousness that this actual situation deserves."

"I think what this mom did was great. But does anyone else think she might be overstating her involvement in the case a little bit? Everything is plausible, but something just sets off my bells and buzzers."

"Not saying it's not true - but on the face of it, it sure sounds like bull and I wouldn't be surprised if it smelt like it deeper down too."


No one is slagging on her actions because no one has to: Like most times a woman does something, all they have to do is paint her as "over-dramatic" and then all her work suddenly becomes "suspicious" and 'hard to take with a straight-faced seriousness that this actual situation deserves.'

But yeah, I'm sure I'm just "racking up favorites" with a witty and unfair 'gotcha'. Maybe people are just liking it because they like Breaking Bad.
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 8:24 AM on November 24, 2013 [4 favorites]


Author Patrick Rothfuss is eloquent on the subject of commenters' responses to this story on Facebook.
posted by Coaticass at 4:05 PM on November 24, 2013 [1 favorite]


Speaking of the FBI and Anonymous: How Antisec Died
posted by homunculus at 5:14 PM on November 24, 2013


No one is slagging on her actions because no one has to: Like most times a woman does something, all they have to do is paint her as "over-dramatic" and then all her work suddenly becomes "suspicious" and 'hard to take with a straight-faced seriousness that this actual situation deserves.'

I feel like i'm caught between a rock and a hard place here. I'm genuinely trying to not be a shitty person, but it seems that there's no way for me to win here.

Is there no way to criticize this article or the way the author presented it without coming off like a sexist shithead? Is there no "clean" way to make the type of criticisms i did without them just being indistinguishable from the background noise of internet misogynists?

I couched everything i said in those qualifications of thinking this was a set of net positive actions in the universe because i thought if i just head on said "this is what pisses me off about this" with no exceptions of expansion of my opinions then i would instantly be dismissed as some asshole like the people who call Skyler White a C**t on reddit.

So if i throw all that extra fluff in there to try and create a blast shield around being instantly dismissed and ganged up on i'm a concern troll, and if i don't i'm just a misogynist.

So yea, is there any way to criticize this article or comment with my opinion of the way it was written without sounding like an asshole? Is anything along those lines an inherently asshole thing to be saying because it's indistinguishable from the criticisms seemingly leveled at any woman who dares to get angry and especially on the internet?

The entire concept of something being "above criticism" always inherently bugs me, but i recognize that's a long dark road that leads to some very reddit commenter places.

Throw me a bone here.

I'm just a bit disturbed that there seems to be at least a noticeable amount of one or the other syndrome going on here where you're either for this and all "WOOHOO TAKE IT TO 'EM" or you're against them, and it's some disney-esque good Vs evil thing where there is no good or evil, or room for any sort of discussion. I might be a bit hyperbolic there, but i really feel a bit attacked.
posted by emptythought at 6:38 PM on November 24, 2013 [1 favorite]


I guess the issue is one of wanting to talk about style over content perhaps? This may easily create a perception that you value one over the other, for better or worse.
posted by Coaticass at 6:52 PM on November 24, 2013 [2 favorites]


Personally I liked her style so it wasn't a problem for me- yes it was attention grabbing and "punched up" if that's the term, but I felt that made the story more not less effective.
posted by Coaticass at 6:56 PM on November 24, 2013


"So yea, is there any way to criticize this article or comment with my opinion of the way it was written without sounding like an asshole?"

Yeah, there is.

You're kinda getting caught out because your opinion boils down to feeling that some details were over-dramatic, but the ones you point out don't seem that outrageous, and that your broader complaint is one that gets aimed at women a lot.

The style goes with the site, and was probably pretty heavily edited. And they're also not really the point of the article, so even if the tech told her something that got retold down to 'dump all your stuff and get outta the house, lady!' it wouldn't really matter to the broader narrative of how she stood up to the IsAnyoneUp? guy.

It's worthwhile being skeptical about stuff like this, but you should also be aware that you can totally come across as one of those, "I'm just sayin'" kinda guys, so if you make kind of a weird nitpicky complaint that's also pretty congruent to one that gets aimed unfairly at women all the time, you're gonna catch some snark for it. Which you did.
posted by klangklangston at 7:32 PM on November 24, 2013


Nude pics and homemade videos are just a bad idea. You HAVE to accept that they might get out there. I don't know how many times I have had friends forward nekkid pics or pass the phone around at a gathering. I even saw one girls pics get around a second time. Even in a really trusting relationship these are gonna be seen. A good friend was showing me pics of a friend or family or something on her phone when,...WHOOPS! I saw a picture of her ass meant for her husband.
posted by Che boludo! at 7:38 AM on November 27, 2013


The (sexual) nude photos and video I've shot of friends and lovers has never and will never become public, at least not until I'm dead and I'm planning on living for a while. It's easier because I primarily shoot film, but keeping your images secure isn't very hard. Things can get out if you're sloppy about it, but when you take intimate pictures, one of the rules is that you can't be sloppy and it requires consent of both parties to distribute.

I mean, this is a bit orthogonal to general prankish dick pics, which I have seen and shared, etc., but when your friend uses your phone to take pictures of himself teabagging Matlock, it's kind of assumed that they're comfortable with that being public knowledge. (I've also gotten prankish titty pics, though none involving Matlock.)
posted by klangklangston at 12:21 PM on November 27, 2013


"I once found some Polaroid nudes of my own parents..."- posted by octobersurprise

Was that where you got your nick from?
posted by turbid dahlia at 10:23 PM on November 28, 2013




« Older The patch as disguise. Or no patch at all.   |   Always a Borrower or a Lender Be Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments