Whoopi Goldberg taking heat for victim blaming women who send nudes.

[Sterling Archer]

Do you not believe people should be allowed to take pictures of themselves with a reasonable expectation of privacy?


Even in the case of the pap photos, the conversation can (and does, often) turn to "well, don't be out in public like that".

Shots of pictures under your skirt? "Welp, should have worn pants/underwear".

Of course people have a right to privacy. Thats not even up to debate but just because you have a privacy fence, doesnt mean you should leave your door unlocked. You can be mad that someone robbed you but you have to accept responsibility of your actions and the common sense you lacked in leaving your door unlocked in the first place because you expected someone to respect your privacy. No. You secure your own privacy. And if that door isnt lock, its incumbent upon you to lock that door or remove your valuables from being accessed by that door. Likewise, if you know that you cant secure your nudes, then dont take them if you are concerned about them getting out because the cloud is an unlocked door and your expectations of privacy is a fence.

 

[Sterling Archer]

i dont think she understood the connection of his 2nd response to the topic.

They most certainly didnt understand just how visceral a reply that was.

 

[KneeGrow.]

Youre using broad strokes on a very specific outcome. This is about sexually charged images and will remain as such for the argument. So it stands to reason that if you dont want sexually suggestive images revealed unintentionally, then the surefire way to make that happen is to not take sexually suggestive images (displaying modesty). You cant violate someone by taking something they dont have. If you are a woman and recording videos of you sucking dikk, you are not modest (and thats ok) and you can potentially be violated. Of course, she knew that not only before she sucked dikk on camera, but the moment she thought about sucking dikk on camera prior to.

I don't think you're being broad enough and are being too particular

I'm being broad because the point is more general.

Is the contention that less "modest" people are more deserving of being violated?

Why is she not modest in her sexual proclivities if she deployed them in private, with the expectation of privacy?

 

[jwinfield]

Do you not believe people should be allowed to take pictures of themselves with a reasonable expectation of privacy?

You should.

But in her case, no. She's a celebrity. For the last few years we've seen the cloud accounts of many famous women get hacked and personal pictures and videos get posted everywhere. If you're famous, you should have no expectation that there's not somebody out there trying to hack into your icloud to get some good shyt to leak.

It's fukked up, but that's how it is.

 

[Sterling Archer]

I don't think you're being broad enough and are being too particular

I'm being broad because the point is more general.

Is the contention that less "modest" people are more deserving of being violated?

Why is she not modest in her sexual proclivities if she deployed them in private, with the expectation of privacy?

The contention is immodest people are more LIKELY to be violated. Modest people are impossible to be violated with nudes because their modesty doesnt allow them to be taken.
There is no "expectation of privacy" regarding the cloud in 2019. And thats why its lacking in common sense for anyone to think otherwise.
Exhibitionism is not modest by the simple nature of what it is and taking nude images is just that, exhibitionism. There is no nature of privacy in exhibitionism . They are as mutually exclusive as they are immodest.

 

[TELL ME YA CHEESIN FAM?]

yeah but aren't you a rapist?

First response too

 

[KneeGrow.]

Of course people have a right to privacy. Thats not even up to debate but just because you have a privacy fence, doesnt mean you should leave your door unlocked. You can be mad that someone robbed you but you have to accept responsibility of your actions and the common sense you lacked in leaving your door unlocked in the first place because you expected someone to respect your privacy. No. You secure your own privacy. And if that door isnt lock, its incumbent upon you to lock that door or remove your valuables from being accessed by that door. Likewise, if you know that you cant secure your nudes, then dont take them if you are concerned about them getting out.

bro she was hacked

 

[DaPresident]

Weird times we living in brehs...


She's CRYING because SHE leaked the photos? I don't take pics of things that I don't want seen because, well...SOMEBODY COULD SEE THEM!!!!


Folks only want the good when it comes to opinions and actions. None of the bad

 

[KneeGrow.]

The contention is immodest people are more LIKELY to be violated. Modest people are impossible to be violated with nudes because they dont take them.
There is no "expectation of privacy" regarding the cloud in 2019. And thats why its lacking in common sense for anyone to think otherwise.
Voyeurism is not modest by the simple nature of what it is. There is no nature of privacy in voyeurism. They are as mutually exclusive as it is immodest.

Do you believe modesty is a virtue?

 

[Sterling Archer]

Do you believe modesty is a virtue?

Not particularly. Not anymore at least. I think its just a personality trait.

 

[Sterling Archer]

bro she was hacked

She was. :ohwellkobe:

 

[KneeGrow.]

people who don't want to be seen naked aren't taking pictures of themselves naked. Can't really claim you expect privacy when you putting yourself out there like that.
I don't understand the "they shouldn't be out in public" argument though. people have to leave to house eventually to work or get food. nothing they can do about that. No reason you need to take nude pics though.

As far as the underwear, the paps are the ones zooming in at low angles. they're not flashing their p*ssy to anyone. they may as well have snuck up on them in the shower and took pics. Follow anyone long enough and you will see their private parts eventually. None of that is preventable by the victim. The leaked nude pics are preventable though.

I feel you're putting a particular emphasis on nude ones but I don't understand why. If the pictures were nothing more than face selfies, it's still a remarkable violation. Them being explicit in nature doesn't make it a more reasonable violation.

There's no reason to take any pictures.

 

[TELL ME YA CHEESIN FAM?]

Smart chicks never show their faces when they take nudes or get smashed on camera

 

[Slystallion]

Does JBO have the pics?

 

[Poetical Poltergeist]

No lies told.