• Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    10 months ago

    Nobody should have to consent to everything like that

    I’m sorry but holy fuck that is just morally bankrupt.

    Someone should have the ABSOLUTE right to control any distribution of their image when of a sexual nature that they didn’t actively consent to being out there

    Anything less is the facilitation of the culture of sexual abuse that lets the fappening or age of consent countdown clocks happen

    Drawing a picture of someone under the eifel tower is a wildly different act than drawing them in the nude without them knowing and agreeing with full knowledge of what you plan to do with that nude piece.

    • Fal@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      Calling this sexual abuse is absolutely insulting and disgusting

      • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        10 months ago

        Trying to pretend it’s not is feeding the culture of not listening to victims.

        It’s like saying that cat calling is harmless, forcing people to be reminded they are seen as a sex object is well known and documented as a tool of keeping the victim “in their place.”

        It’s harassment, and when done at the scale famous folks experience for the crime of being well known and also attractive, basically amounts to a campaign of terror via sexual objectification.

        Nevermind how tolerating it makes space for even more focused acts of terror like doxxing and making threats of sexual assault.

          • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Nah it’s the nudes, and you have more than enough free material on pornhub from consenting participants to not need to crusade about your god given right to spank bank Jennifer Lawrence over her objections to you getting to have nude images of her.

            As much as it enrages people who don’t touch grass, you’re not actually entitled to non-consentually get yourself fap material of people who don’t want the public having fap material of them, and insisting you are is pretty fuckin’ rapey actually. I’m sure you insist you’re a nice guy or nice girl too and can’t wonder why the pretty people won’t give you a shot over the jerks and hoes.

        • Fal@yiffit.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Trying to pretend it’s not is feeding the culture of not listening to victims.

          No, it’s insulting to actual victims of actual events that happen in real life

          • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            Getting spammed with artificially generated nudes to “put you in your place” is real life, and jackasses like you are why victims hesitate to report this behavior that often escalates to credible threats of physical violence.

            • Fal@yiffit.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              Being spammed and harassed and threatened is a totally different thing that, like you said, is real life.

    • DreamerofDays@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’m wondering if the degree of believability of the image has, or should have any bearing on the answer here. Like, if a third party who was unaware of the image’s provenance came across it, might they be likely to believe the image is authentic or authorized?

      For another angle, we allow protections on the usage of fictional characters/their images. Is it so wild to think that a real person might be worthy of the same protections?

      Ultimately, people are going to be privately freaky how they’re gonna be privately freaky. It mostly only ever becomes a problem when it stops being private. I shouldn’t have to see that a bunch of strangers made porn to look like me, and neither should Taylor. And mine are unlikely to make it into tabloids.