Mega Thread The Random Thoughts Thread Part 1

[Doctor Feel]

Um, no, the buck stops with the perpetrator/betrayer of trust. 100%.



As an analogy it fits perfectly actually.

Some people fail at assessing risk in actions. The blame is not 100% either side. I just can't support the notion that the victim is blameless is all.

Being in a car with a dickhead driver who you egg on because its fun and you trust them, then crash. It's symbiotic.

 

[raman]

Some people fail at assessing risk in actions. The blame is not 100% either side. I just can't support the notion that the victim is blameless is all.

Being in a car with a dickhead driver who you egg on because its fun and you trust them, then crash. It's symbiotic.

That's a self-pwning analogy, Feel. What is the "egg on" factor in the situation at hand?

I'm not saying that trusting the wrong people isn't foolish, just that it's disgusting that that alleged foolishness becomes the main talking point in the media and public discourse.

 

[El_Scorcho]

Victim blaming on the nude photo issue is pretty disgusting.

It's a short step from that to blaming a rape victim because she wore a short dress.

The images were sent in confidence and it's no different to anything else said in confidence.

If you told your girlfriend that you ****ing hate your boss and that he's a moron and doesn't know what he's doing, and then a few months later you break up and she goes and tells your boss and you get fired, is that your fault for telling her?

 

[chiwigi]

Victim blaming on the nude photo issue is pretty disgusting.

It's a short step from that to blaming a rape victim because she wore a short dress.

The images were sent in confidence and it's no different to anything else said in confidence.

If you told your girlfriend that you ******* hate your boss and that he's a moron and doesn't know what he's doing, and then a few months later you break up and she goes and tells your boss and you get fired, is that your fault for telling her?

In your analogy...yes.

For the nudes, I think people are told often enough that this may happen that they need to take some responsibility for the existence of the photos. But the w***er who collated them is the true vermin.

 

[raman]

In your analogy...yes.

For the nudes, I think people are told often enough that this may happen that they need to take some responsibility for the existence of the photos. But the ****** who collated them is the true vermin.

You seem to be missing the most important overriding point that sharing such photos privately should NOT be discouraged.

 

[chiwigi]

You seem to be missing the most important overriding point that sharing such photos privately should NOT be discouraged.

That's my quandary.
Being honest many are happy for their images to be shared, rarely is it a fat ugly person sending them. The nature of the sharing is the issue.

Whenever a girl has sent me similar I honestly tell them they are nuts and anyone could find them, they still send more!

 

[El_Scorcho]

You seem to be missing the most important overriding point that sharing such photos privately should NOT be discouraged.

Yeah this is absolutely the thing.

You shouldn't have to worry when you share something, anything, with someone close to you that it might be revealed to everyone in the world some time later.

The celebrity hacking scandal was despicable, but this is argubly worse, because the people who have been trusted with the images are actively trading them around like basketball cards.

 

[Janus]

But unlike celebrities, the photos are immaterial without context. If I see a hot girl naked, it's not exactly a rare occurrence because I can find a lot of amateur pr0n or whatever on the net.

But if said hot girl has sent me said photo with the implication that she wants to **** me...then it has greater meaning.

Amy reposting her photo shows she doesn't give a ****. Good on her.

 

[Doctor Feel]

But unlike celebrities, the photos are immaterial without context. If I see a hot girl naked, it's not exactly a rare occurrence because I can find a lot of amateur pr0n or whatever on the net.

But if said hot girl has sent me said photo with the implication that she wants to **** me...then it has greater meaning.

Amy reposting her photo shows she doesn't give a ****. Good on her.

That also can imply amy is a shameless whore. Probably better not to react at all and remain neutral/upset. atleast publicly.

 

[Doctor Feel]

Now what if the guy requests "send me noods" and the girl does, with no talk of confidentiality. What are the laws behind this, anyone know?

I wonder how it's different to the girl sending images without a request to do so.

 

[I Dont Care]

I always tell people that once you upload a pic on the internet, that the internet then owns it. It's just that the internet is filled with...well, 'interesting' people

 

[I Dont Care]

That's why I keep my modest collection private.

Would I be able to view your collection? For research purposes of course. I will maintain your privacy

 

[El_Scorcho]

That also can imply amy is a shameless whore. Probably better not to react at all and remain neutral/upset. atleast publicly.

What does she have to be ashamed about? This is a pretty disgusting viewpoint m80.

She can either say nothing, complain and get nowhere, or take ownership of the whole thing away from the losers who are posting this shit and move past it. She's done it the best way possible IMO, but whatever way she chose to react was fine and totally up to her.

 

[Andre]

But unlike celebrities, the photos are immaterial without context. If I see a hot girl naked, it's not exactly a rare occurrence because I can find a lot of amateur pr0n or whatever on the net.

But if said hot girl has sent me said photo with the implication that she wants to **** me...then it has greater meaning.

Amy reposting her photo shows she doesn't give a ****. Good on her.

It's not even they sent photos that makes it a story here, it's only as they are local girls. And they'd be no different to any random 400 in any western city. People from Adelaide are just being voyeuristic hoping they see someone they know, either to tut-tut or to perve.

As for sending them out in the first place I'm of a similar opinion to feel, these aren't girls having private pics (mostly) with long time partners, they are sharing it out to impress friends or new(ish) guys.

I don't have daughters, but if I did I'd be less then impressed with them sharing nudes online and would not feel overly sympathetic. If they'd taken them for a BF / Husband offline and then he abused that trust then I would.

 

[raman]

Now what if the guy requests "send me noods" and the girl does, with no talk of confidentiality.

Confidetiality is implied in the exchange. Give me a break.

 

[Macca19]

As for sending them out in the first place I'm of a similar opinion to feel, these aren't girls having private pics (mostly) with long time partners, they are sharing it out to impress friends or new(ish) guys.

Spot on.

 

[raman]

I don't have daughters, but if I did I'd be less then impressed with them sharing nudes online and would not feel overly sympathetic. If they'd taken them for a BF / Husband offline and then he abused that resist then I would.

Baffling distinction.

 

[Andre]

Confidetiality is implied in the exchange. Give me a break.

From the girls POV maybe, but these are going to guys who (unless they've spent their teenage years under a rock) are likely going to be bragging to their friends about getting in their pants. Send evidence of said lay and they're shocked? They need to be explicit. And stop being so lacking self-confidence they'll throw nudes out at a drop of a hat.

 

[Schulzenfest]

Unless that guy was Ollie Wines...amitrite? #chickmagent

Well, that would definitely explain why Amy Cornes was on the list #futurefathersons #demgenes

 

[raman]

From the girls POV maybe, but these are going to guys who (unless they've spent their teenage years under a rock) are likely going to be bragging to their friends about getting in their pants. Send evidence of said lay and they're shocked? They need to be explicit. And stop being so lacking self-confidence they'll throw nudes out at a drop of a hat.

Just because it's typical and predictable behaviour doesn't mean it's right. Again, more victim blaming.

 

[ScooterBrother]

Baffling distinction.

I think you can see a bit of a generation gap in peoples understanding of this topic.

 

[Schulzenfest]

Actually, the evidence is piling up here. Ollie doesn't mind a topless Snapchat ('genetically gifted') and as we all know he proved himself to be a WOMAN HATING MISOGYNIST PIG at half time of the Melbourne game.

Ollie is the nude photo collector. Now watch the Advertiser run with it.

 

[Macca19]

Theres no doubt its a break in confidence whether the pics are sent to a long term boyfriend or whether they are sent to a bloke on tinder they've known for 24 hours, or whether they've been taken from facebook/instagram, but it also shows the naiveity of those involved.

 

[Macca19]

Actually, the evidence is piling up here. Ollie doesn't mind a topless Snapchat ('genetically gifted') and as we all know he proved himself to be a WOMAN HATING MISOGYNIST PIG at half time of the Melbourne game.

Ollie is the nude photo collector. Now watch the Advertiser run with it.

Amuses me that dickheads like crowcrap have a go at Ollie for what he said but comments from their coach about man conversations (whats the difference between a man conversation and a normal conversation?) go straight through to the keeper

 

[chiwigi]

Confidetiality is implied in the exchange. Give me a break.

Morally maybe, legally nope.