Difficult one this

Victims of revenge porn could get anonymity in shake-up of laws to tackle new online sex crimes

If you are in fact anonymous then it’s difficult to say that you’ve been a victim of revenge porn really. Given that the definition includes being publicly….

10 comments on “Difficult one this

  1. I thought it was more interesting that they are looking at making it a sex crime, which presumably includes entry on the register, for example.

    That seems disproportionate – whilst a disgruntled ex-bf posting revenge porn is obviously victimising his former gf, I doubt it says that much about likelihood of being a future rapist or his intentions towards children.

    For example, those anti-sex work activists who were covertly filming in the Manchester strip clubs recently, and who may get in trouble with the law as a result – should they be put on the register and at risk of being beaten up when it’s disclosed to nearby parents?

  2. “For example, those anti-sex work activists who were covertly filming in the Manchester strip clubs recently, and who may get in trouble with the law as a result – should they be put on the register and at risk of being beaten up when it’s disclosed to nearby parents?”

    It’s very hard to see the difference between that & covertly photographing over the toilet door. The reason it’s being done shouldn’t make any difference. It’s still capturing sexual images without the subject’s consent.
    But it’s hard to see why ‘revenge porn’ can be a criminal offence. The images were normally either taken or supplied with the subject’s consent. It’s a copyright matter.
    But modern law. Mostly bollocks.

  3. Making it a sex crime says something that it’s not. It’s not sex, it’s harrassment. Sexual harassment is different as there’s a sexual element to it, this is more about being vindictive.

  4. @bis

    More to photography than copyright. Even in nonsexual photography there are image rights, some jurisdictions have privacy rights.

    With revenge porn it really doesn’t matter if you use a photo you took yourself or a selfie that was sent to you, the core issue is that consent was not given for that image to be shared.

  5. If you are in fact anonymous then it’s difficult to say that you’ve been a victim of revenge porn really. Given that the definition includes being publicly….

    No, no, superheros do this all the time. They’ll reveal to the world their civilian name behind their superhero mask for a few issues. Then, after the writers get bored of the gimmick and want to go back to the classic status, they’ll come up with a way for the person behind the mask to become a mystery again.
    I remember Spiderman did it by making a deal with the devil. Others use massive memory erasing devices, or simply reboot the universe entirely.
    We just need to get these mechanisms in the hands of the courts.

  6. The definition will be stretched, wasn’t there a case recently where photos previously posted of girl in skimpy bikini or possibly topless where she asked the guy to take them down after they split and when he wouldn’t reported it as revenge porn. The basic idea that consent can be withdrawn later, at which point it could be difficult to make sure they are removed, just another feminazi tool to batter men with

  7. Revenge porn? Anonnimity is assured. If it’s any good, no one will have even noticed her face.

  8. Not true. It is feasible that the revenge porn is localised. Announcing the name of the victim would increase the likelihood of more people searching for / spreading the item, thereby compounding the matter.

    Not commenting on the wider implications of such a rule.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.