Al Franken Urges FBI To Prosecute "Revenge Porn" 306
mi contributes this excerpt from National Journal: "Sen. Al Franken is urging the FBI to more quickly and aggressively pursue and respond to reports of revenge porn, marking a rare burst of attention on a controversial topic about which Congress has typically been quiet. In a letter to FBI Director James Comey, the Minnesota Democrat asked for more information about the agency's authority to police against revenge porn, or the act of posting explicit sexual content online without the subject's consent, often for purposes of humiliation and extortion. Its popularity has ballooned in recent years, and victims are disproportionately women."
Here's Franken's letter.
c'mon (Score:4, Insightful)
It makes no difference if the victims are disproportionately any group; it would have to be UNIQUE to that group. Otherwise, if it's bad for people, it's bad for people, and no distinction need be made about age, gender or any other subgroup. It's not equality if we only consider some of the people, is it?
Re: (Score:2)
It makes no difference if the victims are disproportionately any group; it would have to be UNIQUE to that group. Otherwise, if it's bad for people, it's bad for people, and no distinction need be made about age, gender or any other subgroup. It's not equality if we only consider some of the people, is it?
It's cute that you think it works that way. Guarantee'd if it was predominantly men, or hell even an equal split, that suffered from this.. not even Franken would care.
Re: (Score:2)
It's cute that you assume I think it works that way. It should work that way, and in order to effect any change it should be presented group-neutral. I am simply pointing out the defective assumptions and language that are complicit in making it the way it is as a matter of backlash against stupidity.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:c'mon (Score:5, Informative)
All genders (and indeed all gender self-identifications) are entitled to equal protection, but not all genders *require as much*. As women move into representative numbers in jobs and supervisory positions, that situation is changing.
My wife once worked in a division of a state agency where the division and departmental management happen by chance to be women; a few years earlier the leadership had been entirely men but they'd moved on and the agency promoted from within. One day she was recounting how she and another scientist coworker had good-naturedly teased one of their male colleagues for having a habit of "man-splaining" (something which in my experience female geeks do as well). "Wait a minute," I said. "You can't do that anymore. It's called 'creating a hostile work environment'."
Now some men are still not willing to be seen complaining about higher ranking women taking the piss out of them, but the number of sexual harassment suits filed by men has been on the rise, doubling from 8% of all cases in 1990 to 16.4% in 2010. If that guy who'd been teased for "man-splaining" had complained the women could well been disciplined. Telling somebody their long-winded explanations sound condescending is being assertive and it's a good thing. Attributing their behavior to their *gender identity* is harassment.
Re: (Score:2)
Would +1 if I had modpoints.
Re: (Score:2)
All genders (and indeed all gender self-identifications) are entitled to equal protection, but not all genders *require as much*.
That sounds very much like a gender-based stereotype. Exactly which genders don't require equal protection, and why?
Re:c'mon (Score:4, Informative)
That sounds very much like a gender-based stereotype.
I don't think you quite understand what that word means. A stereotype is a simplistic model that is held as if it were true of *all* members of some group. So if I say, "blacks are poorer than whites in the US," that's not a stereotype, it's a statistical assertion about differences in economic attainment between groups in aggregate. But if I say "Blacks are poorer because blacks are lazy," that's using a stereotype because it attributes something inherent to blackness. Likewise if I say "Bob can't own that Mercedes because he's black," I'm implicitly stating that all blacks are too poor to own a Mercedes so that's a stereotype. If I were to say "the rate of Mercedes ownership is lower among blacks than whites" that is not a stereotype but a (made-up) statistical assertion.
So now I'm ready to tackle your question. Hitherto, men have not requires as much protection from sexual harassment as a group, because they have as a group dominated positions of authority and indeed all jobs except in a few professions like teaching and nursing. There have been cultural attitudes that give preference to men in hiring and salary, all other things being equal.
However that's a far cry from saying no man hitherto has ever needed legal protection for sexual discrimination or harassment. For example, it is legally possible to be harass or discriminate against people of the same sex. If your boss pressures you for homosexual sex, that's still sexual harassment.
Re: (Score:2)
That's the EXACT brand of bullshit that denies women commit half of all domestic violence (incl. severe violence) against men because men "have power" or similar nonsense explanations.
Men being a majority of managers has fuck all to do with whether or not they're sexually harassed or need legal protections from exactly that, just like men being bigger than women on average has fuck all to do with whether or not they're abused or raped by women.
Re:c'mon (Score:4, Interesting)
That sounds very much like a gender-based stereotype.
I don't think you quite understand what that word means.
I don't think you quite understand what that word means.
A stereotype is a simplistic model that is held as if it were true of *all* members of some group.
Ok. I'm with you there.
So if I say, "blacks are poorer than whites in the US," that's not a stereotype
I disagree. See your own definition above. You just demonstrated a simplistic model, being held as if it was true for all members of the group. There are some fabulously rich black people in the US. Your statement is not uniformly true.
it's a statistical assertion about differences in economic attainment between groups in aggregate
You didn't assert any statistics. If you had, then it would have been such an assertion. Besides, such an assertion would make a good foundation for a stereotype. (Stereotypes aren't always bad, or unjust. That's just a stereotype about stereotypes.)
But if I say "Blacks are poorer because blacks are lazy," that's using a stereotype because it attributes something inherent to blackness.
No. It's two stereotypes. 1. Blacks are poorer. 2. Blacks are lazy. They are both stereotypes because they are both general simplistic models of a group.
Likewise if I say "Bob can't own that Mercedes because he's black," I'm implicitly stating that all blacks are too poor to own a Mercedes so that's a stereotype.
If you're simply viewing Bob and stating your opinion about him driving his Mercedes, that's prejudice. Furthermore, if Bob does own the Mercedes, your prejudice is also false. It's related to stereotypes, but different. Prejudice is "a preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience." The basis for prejudice is often stereotypes.
On the other hand, if you're refusing to sell Bob a Mercedes because he's black, that would be discrimination. Discrimination is often the result of prejudice, which is often the result of stereotypes. Discrimination can sometimes be against the law. AFAIK, there are no laws in the US against holding stereotypes or prejudices, so long as you do not discriminate.
With regard to your other points, I agree.
Re: (Score:2)
Your posts are a rare moment of intelligent empathy in a thoroughly depressing set of ./ comments. Some posts really do bring out the worst aspects of this community.
Re: (Score:2)
the number of sexual harassment suits filed by men has been on the rise, doubling from 8% of all cases in 1990 to 16.4% in 2010
Except the men are actually suing men since women didn't build the companies, they've got no skin in the game. This is like claiming that kicking your dog teaches the fleas a lesson, but parasites don't react until the host is dead.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Whoa-ho. Christina Hoff Sommers is the "based mom" of gamergate just because she's a feminist the way Mitt Romney is an advocate for the poor. She's from a far-right think tank that believes feminism means women staying the hell out of men's jobs and women get raped because showing your knees is basically "asking for it".
Here's a little fun game for readers with time on their hands: Google, "Christina Hoff Sommers and GamerGate" and see wha
Re: (Score:2)
While they're at it they should google "Ayaan Hirsi Ali" and "Karen DeCrow" to see who else western feminists like you have ostracized for not being hateful and bigoted enough. After all we can't have a black victim of child marriage and genital mutilation who advocates for women's rights in countries where they're *actually* oppressed even after her partners were beheaded in the street and had death threats to her impaled in their corpses making you all look bad. Clearly she deserved to be completely ostra
Re: (Score:2)
How can you spot the person drinking the koolaid? They jump right into the "far-right think tank" conspiracy theory, then start making up the bullshit along the way.
Here's a useful tip, AEI employs people from the full political spectrum. CHS is also a democrat and classical liberal, sadly the fact that she came out in support of gamergate meant that her notability article on wikipedia then became a battleground for radical feminists, and people who have an axe to grind. Said people with an axe to grind
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So what's an institution to do once it's no longer needed?
Obviously that institution is still needed.
Or how do you explain that obviously no ordinary law enforcement is taking the problem serious and takes action?
In Germany/Europe a guy who would be caught publishing "revenge porn" would minimum get 2 years in prison, depending on country ...
Only question is if he gets caught, but considering how stupid those idiots are a search warrant likely finds the movies on his computer and he upload protocols ...
Reve
Re: (Score:3)
Who is talking about sexual assault? If you give someone consent to take a video of you having sex then you need to beware, you just gave up some of your privacy rights.
Re:c'mon (Score:5, Insightful)
If you give someone consent to take a video of you having sex then you need to beware
In many cases, no consent was given. Even if it was, consent to take a picture shouldn't automatically imply consent to broadcast it to the world. A girl at my daughter's high school was a victim of revenge porn. She killed herself. That is far from an isolated case. To suggest that this isn't traumatic, and that the victims somehow deserve it, is asinine.
Re: (Score:2)
Not isolated at all, and becoming more common all the time.
Re: (Score:2)
Why? Go on, explain your logic.
Re:c'mon (Score:4)
I've re-read that a couple of times, and it still makes no sense. Parity of treatment, which is what feminists actually argue for, is not the same as "we demand equal numbers of suicides between men and women!", because the latter would be *a really stupid thing* to argue for. Is it malice or incompetence that leads you to put forth weird strawmen?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, they deman equality of *results*, sometimes even superiority in many other fields - high paying jobs, political power, legislation benefits. So hell, why not equalize suicide rates? Hell, I'm pretty sure the high male suicide rate is either a social construct or a sign of "The Patriarchy" to them anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Excellent., thanks for your answer. You've made it quite clear that in your case, it's a toxic mix of both malice *and* incompetence. Well done!
Re:c'mon (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, they deman equality of *results*, sometimes even superiority in many other fields - high paying jobs, political power, legislation benefits.
Really? How many victims of revenge porn have demanded any of these things? All they are asking for is protection from one of the most egregious invasions of privacy imaginable. To imply that they deserve it because of some completely unrelated feminist agenda being pushed by completely different people, is idiotic.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, they deman equality of *results*, sometimes even superiority in many other fields - high paying jobs, political power, legislation benefits.
Really? How many victims of revenge porn have demanded any of these things? All they are asking for is protection from one of the most egregious invasions of privacy imaginable. To imply that they deserve it because of some completely unrelated feminist agenda being pushed by completely different people, is idiotic.
No one implied that they deserved it; that's just how *you* choose to read it, which says more about you than it does about me.
Re: (Score:2)
I've re-read that a couple of times, and it still makes no sense. Parity of treatment, which is what feminists actually argue for, is not the same as "we demand equal numbers of suicides between men and women!", because the latter would be *a really stupid thing* to argue for. Is it malice or incompetence that leads you to put forth weird strawmen?
Firstly, you shouldn't go around accusing people of incompetence when you can't even read the thread properly - I didn't reply to this message yet.
Secondly, as a matter of fact the slightly deranged group of people who keep posting stories about the *numbers* of women in certain jobs/games/industries are, in actual fact, asking for the *numbers* themselves to reflect parity. It's not my damn argument that men and women must be equally represented in $FOO.
It's illogical, irrational and inconsistent to say "p
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
An isolated case is exactly what it is considering that somewhere north of 90% of suicide victims are male, and it's the second leading non-accidental cause of death for boys starting at age ten. the difference is nobody gives a shit about them. Nobody gives a shit that there is a website up RIGHT NOW on oh so feminist HuffPo mocking a man's penis and inviting people to share in mocking his leaked nude pictures further. Nobody gives a shit that Jezebel's parent company spreads men's leaked sex tapes and bra
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
considering that somewhere north of 90% of suicide victims are male
Not true: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G... [wikipedia.org]
Also, if you read the section on the US, it turns out that females attempt suicide more often, it's just that males are more successful.
Nobody gives a shit that Jezebel's parent company spreads men's leaked sex tapes and brags about fighting legal efforts to stop them.
A quick Google for Gawker doing this turned up nothing, do you have more specific details?
Re: (Score:2)
A girl at my daughter's high school was a victim of revenge porn. She killed herself.
More males kill themselves than females. Why not blame society for that too?
Re: (Score:2)
And your point is? This is OK because it somehow karmically redresses the balance so we need to make more girls kill themselves in the name of equality? Or perhaps it's your pet cause and you want the OP to do something about it because your too lazy?
But well done for using some poor girl's suicide as a way to win points on the intenet. Go you.
Re: (Score:2)
Reduction in suicides is a good thing. Relative rates of suicides between male and female people might inform what solutions are effective, but no, parity between males and females is not particularly important or "good" here. In exactly the same way that it's not important that we have parity in the number of men who are sexually harassed by their bosses at work.
Parity is a reasonable goal for allocating limited amounts of a good thing in many cases.
Instead of saying we shouldn't do something about this,
Re: (Score:3)
That parity between males and females is not a good thing?
Depends on how you get the parity. If you get it by driving more women to suicide, then congratulations, you've just made the world a worse place.
The fact that more young men kill themselves has NO bearing on that particular young woman deciding to kill herself, but some idiot always brings it up as if it's somehow OK because we need numeric equality in all things regardless of how we get it.
Re: (Score:2)
No. What is this, the 1960s? (Score:3, Interesting)
Honestly, this whole thread feels like I've stepped into a man-cave of a 1960s summer camp.
Unless you have some well researched data pointing to an epidemic of kids offing themselves, clearly caused by someone they were dumb enough to let into their pants later posting a photo of their wee-wee without permission.
You make an interesting point about the number of suicides in that age group--the data you point to is inconsistent with what I learned in Developmental Psychology not too many years ago, but interesting.
But you are also victim-blaming. The AC next-door is saying she loved the attention and had it coming. These are positions overwhelmingly held by men trying to rationalize the rape of women.
You even realize this, an
Trafficking "huge" ... actually not. (Score:2)
The data does not support that contention. Here's a link with some well-researched facts, complete with useful references. [wordpress.com] I suggest some reading in a thoughtful vein.
There is overwhelming evidence that the "trafficking" narrative is agitprop specifically designed to trigger moral outrage. Those who spread the meme and those who believe it are the actual victims here.
Re:c'mon (Score:4, Interesting)
(</sarcasm> - in case anyone was wondering!)
Actually, you don't say whether you think revenge porn should be illegal in the US, only that victims (mainly women) should be 'man' enought to put up with it!
(I'm pleased to say that in England and Wales (I'm in England) it is already illegal - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31429026 [bbc.co.uk]. Scotland and Northern Ireland are considering it.)
Re: (Score:2)
I am saying that anyone who decides to kill themselves because of their "honor and reputation" being "sullied" is either mentally ill or a fucking moron. Or both.
So a child, particularly a female, who lives in the modern world surrounded by images of unrealistic female bodies and who is just coming to terms with her sexuality becomes mentally ill due to having images of her body posted on the internet.
That's like saying that someone who gets stabbed can bleed to death. It's obvious. It's not their fault, it's the way the human body works when stabbed. Clearly we need to try and stop people getting stabbed, through a mixture of education about how not to get stabbed
Re: (Score:3)
Sorry but the guy with either a mental illness or being and idiot or both, that is you.
Being so ashamed that you rather commit suicide then stand the eyes of the glaring community is not a mental illness.
It is actually a very basic human behavior, as sad as it is.
Re: (Score:3)
Why are there so many people out there who can't comprehend that fault can lie with more than one person? This includes BOTH victim and victimizer.
If I run around a bad neighborhood at night with clothes made out of taped together money and get mugged... It is my fault! That doesn't mean what the mugger did was ok. He should go to jail just like any other mugger and I should not! Although.. if I were so stupid then maybe I should go into some sort of custody for my own protection.
Likewise if I were an atra
Re: (Score:3)
Why would you use such a stupid example as "an atractive [sic] female and I passed out nudies of myself to any and every short-term fling"?
There are plenty of cases of people having pictures put up by long-term partners with whom they're in a loving relationship. And there are some cases where the pictures have been taking without the victim's knowledge.
So:
1. You're creating a hierarchy of sexual behaviour that reinforces conservative notions of what is morally "worthy", as though we're still in the 50s
2. Y
Re: (Score:3)
Why are there so many people out there who can't comprehend that fault can lie with more than one person? This includes BOTH victim and victimizer.
No it does not.
It is only the "fault" of the idiot uploading/publishing the video somewhere. Does not matter who filmed it.
You take a video of me and you, I publish it: my fault.
I take a video of you and me, I publish it: my fault.
You know about the video, I publish it: my fault.
You don't know about the video, I publish it: my fault.
What ever *I* do -- and often
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Women intentionally objectify themselves by using the mere sight of their naked body as some sort of "prize" and "reward" for desired behavior and you're telling me--MY GOD--some males might bypass the system altogether and look at porn, or visit prostitutes instead of jumping through their artificial hurdles? What's wrong with these men? How sick in the head do they have to be to want to satisfy their sexual needs without submitting to a long process of jumping through hoops for the potential
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Women...
By lumping 50% of the entire population into one group and blanket accusing them of the same thing, it's rather difficult to take anything you write seriously at all. It just comes over as angry backlash, and no better than the cliched "all men are bastards" call of the recently dumped.
Re: (Score:2)
Sooo...how many hitchhikers do you have buried in that basement, anyway? Just curious.
Re: (Score:3)
Who is talking about sexual assault? If you give someone consent to take a video of you having sex then you need to beware, you just gave up some of your privacy rights.
I salute your flexibility in bending over backwards to blame the victim. Most people would know the difference between a private recording made between two people and the intentional broadcasting of that material with the intention to harm.
Re: (Score:2)
You did not give up any of your privacy rights: distributing the video, regardless of content, is still a violation of privacy or personal rights.
Re: (Score:2)
Who is talking about sexual assault? If you give someone consent to take a video of you having sex then you need to beware, you just gave up some of your privacy rights.
It may not be sexual assault, but it certainly isn't a "minor thing" either. I don't think GP should have been modded flamebait. But this is /. People only care baout the difference between theft and piracy, andn ot about other people's feelings and expectations, especially if these people are women.
NO-ONE of these people gave any consent to put these videos on The Net. Is that so difficult to understand?
Re: (Score:2)
It is for the MRAs that come to Slashdot every Friday night for their glory at the crossroads, care of timothy.
This is no longer a pattern, it's an institution. Friday nights have become conclaves of the Slashdot Chapter of the Ancient & Royal Order of the Women Haters Club. It's kind of funny, really. I don't know this "timothy" character, but he must be a real piece of work.
Re: (Score:2)
Because an egregious violation of someone's privacy that's can be traumatizing as a sexual assault is a minor thing.
No, it cannot.
Re:c'mon (Score:4, Insightful)
Because an egregious violation of someone's privacy that's can be traumatizing as a sexual assault is a minor thing.
Revenge porn is a sexual assault? Seriously? Do you also regard the iCloud compromise [ibtimes.com] as a sexual assault?
His premise that revenge porn "can be as traumatizing as a sexual assault" is not in any way the same as saying "Revenge porn is a sexual assault.". What you did there was to twist his words to create a straw man to attack, saying his statement about traumatization was instead claiming actual assault. Re-read his statement and you'll see he never said what you claimed as his premise.
Re: (Score:2)
Which crime? (Score:2, Interesting)
The letter didn't mention what Federal criminal code violation he wanted the FBI to use to justify such a response. After a quick search, I found no such law.
Re: (Score:2)
The letter didn't mention what Federal criminal code violation he wanted the FBI to use to justify such a response.
No, but it did mention the case of former revenge-porn king Hunter Moore [wikipedia.org], who was convicted of conspiring to hack into victims' accounts, and subsequent identity theft.
IANAL. The actual posting of "revenge porn" may or may not be a violation of Federal criminal codes. But the manner in which the material is obtained may be a violation of those codes, and apparently was for the case of Hunter Moore.
I would assume a victim of revenge porn would have access to civil courts to seek redress. But the bite of Fede
Re: (Score:2)
The letter didn't mention what Federal criminal code violation he wanted the FBI to use to justify such a response. After a quick search, I found no such law.
You Google Foo must not be very strong then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenge_porn#Criminal_prosecutions [wikipedia.org]
He is a Senator, he can write laws (Score:2)
The letter didn't mention what Federal criminal code violation he wanted the FBI to use to justify such a response. After a quick search, I found no such law.
Well he is a US Senator. So the lack of a law should not be too much of a problem since he is one of the very very few people in the country that can write and submit a new law to the US Congress.
Re: (Score:3)
The letter didn't mention what Federal criminal code violation he wanted the FBI to use to justify such a response. After a quick search, I found no such law.
Right in the post is says (emphasis added):
In a letter to FBI Director James Comey, the Minnesota Democrat asked for more information about the agency's authority to police against revenge porn, ...
IOW, Franken's asking them what they can do about it. I suppose if it turns out they can't do much that might lead to Franken introducing a bill but at this point he's just gathering information.
Re: (Score:2)
After a quick search, I found no such law.
Why not criminal copyright infringement? Surely those laws have to be good for something, right?
Knee Jerk Responce (Score:2)
The problem here is a knee jerk response by an individual who should know better. When writing news laws care should always be take with, how reliably facts can be obtained about the action, how readily can the law be defrauded, how difficult will it be to be reliably prosecuted and how does the harm occur. The biggest problem with revenge porn is it underlies a basic deceit, about how differently people act in private compared to how they act in public and who they pretend to be. Those who feel the most v
probably legal outside of california (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The whole "what people do with the video" isn't the problem in itself. Its that a specific subset of usage of said video squarely fall into various categories of sexual harassment, extortion, etc. This wouldn't get prosecuted as a copyright case.
Re: (Score:2)
Bingo. It's not a copyright issue at all. Sure, the person taking the photo or video "owns the copyright". All that grants him the right to limit copying activity by others. But if a photo happens to contain confidential or private information, owning the copyright doesn't automatically grant you any additional rights to do things with that confidential information. You can well own copyright to photos that you have no right to redistribute for any number of reasons.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm glad you're not a lawyer because that is untrue in many, many situations. You can't take a picture of a celebrity and use it in advertising for example, even though you can publish that very same picture in a tabloid newspaper article full of unflattering insinuations. Sure you own the copyright but that doesn't grant you the right to use the information in that picture any way you want
Grandstanding (Score:2)
You don't know Franken - you are wrong (Score:2)
He was recently elected; he isn't getting any points for doing this now - if that were the case he'd wait many years before doing this.
He needs media attention to create pressure and build momentum plus we have the worst congress probably in our history so stuff like this is all that has a chance of passing. It still won't end up with a law during this congress.
Re: (Score:2)
If Franken were serious about this, he would have just sent the letter to the FBI, but not made it public. By publishing the letter, he's saying "Hey look at me! I'm the glorious defender of the innocent! Vote for me! Vote for me!
Exactly. How dare a United States Senator make government business visible to the public.
You can't retroactively withdraw consent (Score:2)
If you let me take naked pictures of you when we're in a relationship... then you can't retroactively withdraw your permission to have those pictures.
So... I have every right to have them.
The question then becomes, do I have the right to put them on the internet without your approval? That is a little dicey because I don't think the legal system gives you more right to naked pictures of yourself then just pictures of yourself period. They're both just "pictures".
I think the big mistake is having naked pictu
Cyberbullying in general needs prosecution (Score:2)
Cyberbullying in general needs prosecution. It is not just revenge porn that they need to go after but all the cyberbullies. Currently there is no way to deal with these criminals because you would have to bring a lawsuit in their local court against them which costs a great deal. The police show no interest in dealing with the problems. It crosses state lines. It's a national and international problem, work for the FBI at least for the state by state cases.
Not sure it needs criminalized (Score:2)
I can see three categories here:
1) Victim is underage. Child porn laws apply, obviously.
2) Victim did not consent to be photographed. I don't know what the law says here, but I could see the justification for making this a criminal offense if it's not one already. A reasonable expectation of privacy would be a standard - being photographed by a spy cam in the bathroom isn't the same as being photographed sunbathing on a nude beach.
3) Victim did consent to be photographed, but did not consent to have the
Re: (Score:2)
At a guess he would like them to go after some who did something that wasn't illegal but prosecute them into oblivion anyway. Then he will take the scalp back home to his constituents.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Once a clown, always a clown. (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason the FBI isn't doing more to combat revenge porn is thus: It's not illegal.
I would expect Franken, or at least someone who works for him, to know this. Perhaps he just wants it declared illegal by executive fiat, as is the practice with this administration.
But really, this ploy, and Slashdot's new social-justice-warrior driven coverage of it, is driven more by a desire to distract everyone from foreign events, Hillary's email server, and Obama's frequent and blatant power grabs.
That's actually kind of funny, now that I think of it. There's been no story posted at all about Clinton's email shenanigans. Well, we know who Dice has thrown their lot in with.
I would expect someone who writes a comment accusing the subject of being misinformed would at least RTFA to ensure they aren't completely misinformed on that very fact:
In a letter to FBI Director James Comey, the Minnesota Democrat asked for more information about the agency's authority to police against revenge porn, or the act of posting explicit sexual content online without the subject's consent, often for purposes of humiliation and extortion.
[...]
Franken wrote in his letter. "As technologies rapidly advance, it is our responsibility to ensure that our nation's laws keep pace with those technologies. But it is also our responsibility to ensure that existing laws are strictly enforced."
[...]
In addition, Franken wants information on any limitations within current law that may have impeded the FBI from carrying out investigations or making arrests. Franken, who asked for a response by May 8, is exploring whether legislation may be necessary to combat revenge porn, his office said.
In summary Franken is saying that revenge porn is a serious problem and he wants to know if the FBI can do more with the laws already there or if they need additional laws to fix the problem. Isn't this exactly what you want a legislator to do?
FBI Director to testify: (Score:3)
The fact that revenge porn is not against Federal law has "impeded the FBI from ... making arrests".
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Isn't this exactly what you want a legislator to do?
Well yeah, but not a legislator (D) by his name who consistently calls us right-wingers out on our B.S and makes us look like the asses we are.
Sheesh.
Re: (Score:2)
The reason the FBI isn't doing more to combat revenge porn is thus: It's not illegal.
At the very least, it seems to be considered identity theft.
But if blackmail, or hacking, is involved, then other charges can follow.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenge_porn#Criminal_prosecutions [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
The reason the FBI isn't doing more to combat revenge porn is thus: It's not illegal.
At the very least, it seems to be considered identity theft.
By whom? Hunter was convicted of identity theft not because he posted the images but because of how he got them. He could have been convicted for that even without posting them.
Franken is talking about revenge porn that results in harassment, stalking, assault and murder. Those are already crimes. Identity theft is a crime. The major convictions for this porn have been the large-scale players who are acting against large numbers of people not for revenge over relationships gone bad, but monetary gain. Wh
Re: (Score:2)
THANK YOU. It's like everyone's drinking the cool-aid and nobody realizes that bullshit like this happens every time something important goes on. There's a fucking nuclear deal in Iran going on RIGHT NOW... but someone, somewhere might be jacking off to pictures of women? NO WAY
Re: (Score:2)
Hey moron. Whether it Reagan, Clinton, Bush, Obama, using executive orders are not power grabs. It enshrined in the frigging constitution. Do yourself a favor. Stop watching Fox News and listnening to propoganda radio. Gawd people are so easy to brain wash - smh.
Look past left or right wing bullshit.. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
I find it disgusting that the author wouldn't stop revenge porn because it's an immoral or criminal act, but only because most of the affected audience happens to be women.
Nice straw man. There's nothing in the letter or TFS or TFA that suggests anyone is doing this "only because most of the affected audience happens to be women."
The overwhelming majority of rape victims are women. But we have laws against rape because it is wrong, not because women are in the majority as victims.
Re: (Score:3)
You just made the grandparent's point entirely by accident. The overwhelming majority of rape victims are women because the definition of rape does not count men raped by women as rape victims. Per Koss men are not raped by women because they "choose to engage in unwanted sexual intercourse". This is why the federal government counts men raped by women as "other" and not "rape" victims in the National Intimate partner and Sexual Violence Survey. This is a textbook example of the fallacy of equivocation. "R
Re:Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
The implication here is more along the line of: "revenge porn is wrong, period. Some people may not feel like its an issue because they're guys and the victims are usually women".
Re: (Score:2)
Revenge porn is a despicable concept, don't get me wrong, but you know what else is despicable? Writing laws under emotional pretense without weighing the potential for abuse. When the only thing that separates "homemade porn" and "revenge porn" is intent, god help the innocent. I can think of a dozen hypothetica
Re: (Score:2)
And this is why only a small tiny fraction of rapes ever end up with someone ending up in jail. "Your word vs hers", and without evidence, you can't throw someone in it. There's always going to be issues because our system is broken, mind you, but that doesn't mean you should just go and make it legal.
In the same way here, if there's not enough evidence, so be it. But there's some people that literally flaunt about it. You can get enough evidence to stop THOSE at least.
Re: (Score:2)
"And this is why only a small tiny fraction of rapes ever end up with someone ending up in jail. Your word vs hers", and without evidence, you can't throw someone in it.
Are you kidding? It is quite the opposite. The accusation alone creates a scandal that smears the name, image, and reputation of the accused while the accuser is kept anonymous, and heavens forbid the accused is famous it becomes a scandal the media guarantees they will never live down. Many prosecutions succeed based on "her word" alone, and even of the ones that don't, the stigma haunts the accused for the rest of their lives and the journalists that made a lot of noise about the accusation will make fa
Nothing, but the LAW (Score:5, Informative)
Nothing except perhaps, the fact its against the law. IANAL, but I think that is covered by:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/us... [cornell.edu]
Re: (Score:2)
[...] I cannot see that "revenge porn" is anything that could be affected by the eighteen "Enumerated Powers" listed in the Constitution. These are the only legitimate powers that the Federal government has.
[...] I think the STATES should prosecute "revenge porn" viciously.
Fine, but that won't work if the victim lives in a state that has revenge-porn laws, and the perpetrator lives in a state that does not.
Re: (Score:2)
You missed the part: who shall flee from justice, and be found in another state .
One would have to be in the state that forbids the activity, commit the crime and flee to another state.
Then you can be extradited.
Otherwise Texas would be busy nabbing everyone in the U.S. who orders stuff from Bad Dragon.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile PopeRatzo still frequents and supports websites that loudly and proudly display revenge porn and leaked nudes, even going so far as to openly mock the victims and invite further derision be heaped upon them for their genitals, provided those victims are men.
Hypocritical? Maybe. But it's an easy leap for someone who already claims to support equality yet rallies behind domestic abusers, pedophiles, neonazis, and rapists.
Re: (Score:2)
That's an interesting accusation you have there. Do you have proof?
Re: (Score:2)
You poor, pitiful sonofabitch. It's easy to "go your own way" when no women want anything to do with you.
No, you won't and no you don't. There's a reason accounts like yours were given the name, "Anonymous Coward".
Re: (Score:2)
The Left has been acting like the Right, but with a different flavor to their censorious authoritarian moralism.