Revenge Porn

by skully Mon 05 Sep 2016, 01:16

Revenge porn to be made illegal in NSW

"The New South Wales government is considering criminalising revenge porn in response to a privacy inquiry.

The state attorney general said it was important to protect people from those who could distribute intimate or sexually explicit images of their former love without their consent.

“No one has the right to share explicit photos without consent and new laws will protect people and make it clear this kind of behaviour is totally unacceptable,” Gabrielle Upton said in a statement on Monday.

“These images can have a devastating emotional and social effect on the person pictured and can be used as a way to deliberately humiliate, control or harass the intended victim,” she said.

Plans for the new laws are part of the government’s response to a parliamentary justice committee inquiry into privacy."

---------------------------------------------------------

I wish I could say "Yay, I don't have to beg ALL THOSE WOMEN who have pics of my tiny junk to PLEASE NOT make them public", but I'm just not that prolific. Cool

by embee Mon 05 Sep 2016, 02:48

women?...yeah, right ...SGDT

by JGK Mon 05 Sep 2016, 02:50

Isn't posing for the pic in the first place consent enough?

by lardbucket Mon 05 Sep 2016, 05:56

skully: electron micrographs are relatively anonymous

by skully Mon 05 Sep 2016, 06:44

What can I say? Some guys were just behind the door when the dicks were handed out. As you all know, my middle bro got my and my littlest bro's share!! Cool

Woody would have been stoked to have revenge porn of his tiny junk posted - as proof that he did once have a girlfriend!!

by Ethics? The Gall! Mon 05 Sep 2016, 07:28

JGK wrote:Isn't posing for the pic in the first place consent enough?

youre giving consent for the person to take the photo and look at it
that doesnt mean you want her or him to post it on the internet so the whole ****** world can see it

plus photos taken without the persons consent have also been used like this

by skully Mon 05 Sep 2016, 07:31

Word, ETG. Still, things done in the throws of passion or flirting should be considered very carefully before recording for posterity.

by JGK Mon 05 Sep 2016, 07:37

Ethics? The Gall! wrote:
JGK wrote:Isn't posing for the pic in the first place consent enough?
youre giving consent for the person to take the photo and look at it
that doesnt mean you want her or him to post it on the internet so the whole ****** world can see it

plus photos taken without the persons consent have also been used like this

Where do you draw the line between when posing for a photo gives consent to publish more broadly in the absence of any specific request not to publish? Fully clothed? In a bikini? On a bad hair day? etc..

Drafting a law for this isn't going to be easy.

by taipan Mon 05 Sep 2016, 07:41

JGK wrote:
Ethics? The Gall! wrote:
JGK wrote:Isn't posing for the pic in the first place consent enough?
youre giving consent for the person to take the photo and look at it
that doesnt mean you want her or him to post it on the internet so the whole ****** world can see it

plus photos taken without the persons consent have also been used like this

Where do you draw the line between when posing for a photo gives consent to publish more broadly in the absence of any specific request not to publish? Fully clothed? In a bikini? On a bad hair day? etc..

Drafting a law for this isn't going to be easy.

One can assume most photos of celebs are taken without permission. So none of these can be published?

by Ethics? The Gall! Mon 05 Sep 2016, 07:52

if you cant tell the difference between a photo taken in private thats meant for private viewing by an intimate partner and one of a person in public life while in public you have major problems

its not difficult. you dont share private images without consent any more than you share private correspondence or personal secrets

by taipan Mon 05 Sep 2016, 07:57

Ethics? The Gall! wrote:if you cant tell the difference between a photo taken in private thats meant for private viewing by an intimate partner and one of a person in public life while in public you have major problems

its not difficult. you dont share private images without consent any more than you share private correspondence or personal secrets

either there is or isn't consent. You can't be a tiny bit pregnant.

by Ethics? The Gall! Mon 05 Sep 2016, 08:24

giving consent for a photo to be taken by an intimate partner is not giving consent for it to be freely distributed. how ****** hard is that to understand?

'i didnt steal your car. you said i could borrow it'
'that was 20 years ago for a trip down to the shops in a clapped out cortina. i didnt say you could take the brand new ferrari to cairns last week'
'you gave consent. you cant be a little bit pregnant'

by JGK Mon 05 Sep 2016, 08:28

Ethics? The Gall! wrote:giving consent for a photo to be taken by an intimate partner is not giving consent for it to be freely distributed. how ****** hard is that to understand?

'i didnt steal your car. you said i could borrow it'
'that was 20 years ago for a trip down to the shops in a clapped out cortina. i didnt say you could take the brand new ferrari to cairns last week'
'you gave consent. you cant be a little bit pregnant'

As I say, where do you draw the line?

by taipan Mon 05 Sep 2016, 08:30

Ethics? The Gall! wrote:giving consent for a photo to be taken by an intimate partner is not giving consent for it to be freely distributed. how ****** hard is that to understand?

'i didnt steal your car. you said i could borrow it'
'that was 20 years ago for a trip down to the shops in a clapped out cortina. i didnt say you could take the brand new ferrari to cairns last week'
'you gave consent. you cant be a little bit pregnant'

It's always been fun to pull your tail, so to speak.

Sometimes it's just too easy though.

by Ethics? The Gall! Mon 05 Sep 2016, 09:01

JGK wrote:
Ethics? The Gall! wrote:giving consent for a photo to be taken by an intimate partner is not giving consent for it to be freely distributed. how ****** hard is that to understand?

'i didnt steal your car. you said i could borrow it'
'that was 20 years ago for a trip down to the shops in a clapped out cortina. i didnt say you could take the brand new ferrari to cairns last week'
'you gave consent. you cant be a little bit pregnant'

As I say, where do you draw the line?

its like sex. unless explicit consent is given you assume it hasnt been given

by Ethics? The Gall! Mon 05 Sep 2016, 09:03

taipan wrote:
Ethics? The Gall! wrote:giving consent for a photo to be taken by an intimate partner is not giving consent for it to be freely distributed. how ****** hard is that to understand?

'i didnt steal your car. you said i could borrow it'
'that was 20 years ago for a trip down to the shops in a clapped out cortina. i didnt say you could take the brand new ferrari to cairns last week'
'you gave consent. you cant be a little bit pregnant'

It's always been fun to pull your tail, so to speak.

Sometimes it's just too easy though.

i dont know what the ****** you think youve just proved except that youre a ****** troll

by taipan Mon 05 Sep 2016, 09:08

Ethics? The Gall! wrote:
taipan wrote:
Ethics? The Gall! wrote:giving consent for a photo to be taken by an intimate partner is not giving consent for it to be freely distributed. how ****** hard is that to understand?

'i didnt steal your car. you said i could borrow it'
'that was 20 years ago for a trip down to the shops in a clapped out cortina. i didnt say you could take the brand new ferrari to cairns last week'
'you gave consent. you cant be a little bit pregnant'

It's always been fun to pull your tail, so to speak.

Sometimes it's just too easy though.

i dont know what the ****** you think youve just proved except that youre a ****** troll

by JGK Mon 05 Sep 2016, 09:14

Ethics? The Gall! wrote:
JGK wrote:
Ethics? The Gall! wrote:giving consent for a photo to be taken by an intimate partner is not giving consent for it to be freely distributed. how ****** hard is that to understand?

'i didnt steal your car. you said i could borrow it'
'that was 20 years ago for a trip down to the shops in a clapped out cortina. i didnt say you could take the brand new ferrari to cairns last week'
'you gave consent. you cant be a little bit pregnant'

As I say, where do you draw the line?
its like sex. unless explicit consent is given you assume it hasnt been given

What's like sex? Taking photos?

by JGK Mon 05 Sep 2016, 09:17

Ethics? The Gall! wrote:
taipan wrote:
Ethics? The Gall! wrote:giving consent for a photo to be taken by an intimate partner is not giving consent for it to be freely distributed. how ****** hard is that to understand?

'i didnt steal your car. you said i could borrow it'
'that was 20 years ago for a trip down to the shops in a clapped out cortina. i didnt say you could take the brand new ferrari to cairns last week'
'you gave consent. you cant be a little bit pregnant'

It's always been fun to pull your tail, so to speak.

Sometimes it's just too easy though.

i dont know what the ****** you think youve just proved except that youre a ****** troll

Revenge Porn E7fdb8dfaa180ff24ebc5d3f695a3aa50ecaae99f1920d7f7d063edd487d0d9e

by taipan Mon 05 Sep 2016, 09:25

JGK wrote:
Ethics? The Gall! wrote:
JGK wrote:
Ethics? The Gall! wrote:giving consent for a photo to be taken by an intimate partner is not giving consent for it to be freely distributed. how ****** hard is that to understand?

'i didnt steal your car. you said i could borrow it'
'that was 20 years ago for a trip down to the shops in a clapped out cortina. i didnt say you could take the brand new ferrari to cairns last week'
'you gave consent. you cant be a little bit pregnant'

As I say, where do you draw the line?
its like sex. unless explicit consent is given you assume it hasnt been given

What's like sex? Taking photos?

Well we could also delve into explicit consent. Do you have to sign a contract?

by Ethics? The Gall! Mon 05 Sep 2016, 09:45

we could do a lot of ****** things but theres no point trying to talk about this with dickheads who arent capable of treating it as anything but a joke

hope you never get woken up the way i did

by JGK Mon 05 Sep 2016, 09:48

Ethics? The Gall! wrote:we could do a lot of ****** things but theres no point trying to talk about this with dickheads who arent capable of treating it as anything but a joke

hope you never get woken up the way i did

To be fair, skully hasn't been involved much in the debate so far.

by taipan Mon 05 Sep 2016, 09:54

Ethics? The Gall! wrote:we could do a lot of ****** things but theres no point trying to talk about this with dickheads who arent capable of treating it as anything but a joke

hope you never get woken up the way i did

So it's personal? How were we supposed to know that. TBF I have seen you make plenty of Jokes about topics that could be personal to others.

by lardbucket Tue 06 Sep 2016, 17:28

Ethics? The Gall! wrote:
JGK wrote:
Ethics? The Gall! wrote:giving consent for a photo to be taken by an intimate partner is not giving consent for it to be freely distributed. how ****** hard is that to understand?

'i didnt steal your car. you said i could borrow it'
'that was 20 years ago for a trip down to the shops in a clapped out cortina. i didnt say you could take the brand new ferrari to cairns last week'
'you gave consent. you cant be a little bit pregnant'

As I say, where do you draw the line?
its like sex. unless explicit consent is given you assume it hasnt been given

This (tea consent, original copyright Thames Police) has been around for a while, but is very nicely done.

by horace Wed 07 Sep 2016, 01:17

taipan wrote:
Ethics? The Gall! wrote:giving consent for a photo to be taken by an intimate partner is not giving consent for it to be freely distributed. how ****** hard is that to understand?

'i didnt steal your car. you said i could borrow it'
'that was 20 years ago for a trip down to the shops in a clapped out cortina. i didnt say you could take the brand new ferrari to cairns last week'
'you gave consent. you cant be a little bit pregnant'

It's always been fun to pull your tail, so to speak.

Sometimes it's just too easy though.

Oh. The old Nigel NSR schtick when losing a debate. Classic.

Revenge Porn

Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn

Re: Revenge Porn