Posting Unsolicited inappropriate photos should be against the law everywhere.

edited May 17 in General

I think there should be world wide heavier measures to punish and ban those found doing that off of the internet. And potentially fined, jailed. It is despicable!

I've heard a dating site was trying to do something similar to help combat this issue.

Have you heard of any updates about that? What are your thoughts on how we can better combat this issue?

«134

Comments

  • edited May 17

    @Lovelight good luck getting this site to be accountable to what men are doing on this site. I just am really clear in my profile and that has helped immensely. While some people have accused me of sounding fearful and judgemental, noone is doing the creepy things that were happening before other than messaging me without a photo, which I said feels power differentially to me (especially on this site where men routinely are anonymous and women are visible.. it's just bleeeeccchhhh!!! No thanks, mr anonymous, sir.
    But basically I'm on my own here. I'd love to hear that this site does anything at all to hold men accountable for being creeps. However, my personal opinion is that it would be used against women, and I'm not down with this site doing that.. it's a pay site for men, basically. Sometimes I'm unsure why they even have this discussion forum, and I stay on here partly for the morbid entertainment. It's such a far cry from anti-oppression, and it doesn't deserve the reputation for being innocent. It could, if it would take on any anti oppression guidelines at all, but it's moreso just a place for headless men to try to pay for women or to complain about people charging. There are a few exceptions and that's another reason I'm still on here.

  • It goes both ways. Plenty of girls on here doing shady things and offering "extra services" for more money not just guys being creeps girls also

  • It is unfortunate that we encounter unsavory and creepy things, while in search of things that fill our need for human contact in a wholesome way.

    That said, I am grateful for the connections I've made on this site that have been mutually enriching. You know who you are!

  • Jailed? Come on now.

  • @BooksnTeas:
    You sure there aren’t any anonymous women or female creeps (however you want to define that) at this site? You’re absolutely positive it’s only the men who are “headless”? Sounds to me you’re feeding into the typical and generalized women-good-men-bad narrative that tends to rule the message boards here.
    I can almost hear the White Knights (1 in particular) predictably rushing in to save you now...

    I don’t know you, but after reading your comment, I’m thinking if you’re wasting negative energy with anyone at this site, maybe you’re just getting back in return what you’re putting out.

  • edited May 17

    @RTL1970 There's a difference between a Knight and an ally. I know it when I see it. You can read articles on how to be an ally, but until you do don't try to call it anything else. I have a feeling whatever knight you're referring to is probably not worried about whether some cranky man is upset that he stands up for people.. maybe you should reach out to him and ask him why he does that.. the world needs more allies, you can be that.
    I already wrote that I'm not getting negativity back anymore since I was clear with my boundaries. I'm only getting people who can handle them. I hope I've made some people think and not just run to the next person with what they had been writing to me before. I hope that after you've read my profile you'll think as well.. from someone's perspective that comes from a historically mistreated gender (not cis-male) and really take it to heart.. picture an area of your life where someone has cut you down repeatedly, add an entire populace and every calendar day, and add in some really big takedowns occasionally that bring you to the floor... and sit back and take in what that feels like to get it again.. and then after you do that.. think about whether I"m being negative, or being responsive. I'm ok with myself.
    But I have little patience for dudes who accuse me of feeding into someone else's narrative. I have a lived experience, and I'm not subject to some else's narrative.. it's belittling to say so and I'm not fooled by that tactic.. remember, people you disagree with have their own big girl minds!.
    I also have no interest in holding any women accountable on a website that is owned by men and makes money off of mainly women. But if I did.. yes, I'm fairly certain that this site is vast majority men without pictures. And that there is a stark power differential here of men who hold relative power and want anonymity in order to uphold their marriages or their jobs.. that's what I've experienced here before I put those guidelines in. What this tells me is that when I didn't say what my boundaries were I got treated poorly by default. That's telling.. not of the people who respond to me anyway despite my stated boundaries, but telling that misogyny is a default to others.

  • edited May 17

    Also, didn't mean to derail. @Lovelight was wondering "I've heard a dating site was trying to do something similar to help combat this issue. [of people sending unsolicited inappropriate pictures off the internet]. Have you heard of any updates about that? What are your thoughts on how we can better combat this issue?"
    -She was clearly feeling put upon.
    -I responded this site is not responsible about men who do that.
    -Someone told me women giving extra services are what should also be noted (rather than concern himself with the op's question).
    -Someone said something nice about nice people!
    -Another person mocked her for mentioning jail. (rather than see it as an expression of upset.)
    -Another person accused me of feeding into narratives and being neggy (also instead of responding to the op's concern.)
    -I defended myself from men who think my response to the op about this site not being accountable when it comes to men should have had more to say about women.
    -I called attention to the concern about whether this site should be accountable about people who send unsolicited inappropriate photos offline.. in other words.. her feeling and questions are what people should be responding to. Which by the way, was what I was trying to do.

  • In Canada, it actually is against the law to send unsolicited pics to people.

    Some states in the US have criminalized it too, like Texas.

  • @BooksnTeas

    "good luck getting this site to be accountable to what men are doing on this site. .." from my experience this site is doing it's best to help by banning all rule breakers. By the way, I'm getting the sense that you think I'm refering to inbox inappropriate photos. Though I'm talking about it in general, even on public areas of sites, unfortunately. While I understand that this specific issue is most likely mostly done by men, unfortunately, I find it worth talking about the issue in a general manner. Because to me, evil is evil, no matter what sex does it, and should be combated equally. And thank you for your other "Also, didn't mean to derail. @Lovelight was wondering "I've heard a dating site was trying to do something similar to help combat this issue. .." comment!

    @JoyfulHeart I'm glad you've had good experiences. I hope we someday can come up with better solutions to said issue.

    @LucidDreams84

    It seems for whatever reason, you take this issue much less serious than I do. I and those who can, shall continue to find ways to help make sites like these more safer. It is absolutely disgusting to see such disgusting stuff on where it DOESN'T belong. And seeing that when some of us might be interacting with sites like these in a public place, and/or especially when young children are likely to see: is horrifying.

    @Sheena123 thank you, I'll look into it when I can.

  • To the guy (and anyone alike): who messaged me a lengthy writing beginning with "You make no sense. All your ramblings will fall on deaf ears. You should focus your energy on something else. .." and insulted me, after having made light of this issue, may you learn to rid yourself of such hatred.

    And you don't dictate what I focus my energy on.

  • In any discussion of this nature, we must all remember that when someone says or openly implies "I would like to have sex with you", it usually has a very strong and different effect when it is a man making the statement, compared to when it is a woman making the statement to a man.

    The anatomical difference usually requires a degree of conscious agreement by the man. Imagine if credit cards issued to men always had the PIN number printed on them, and were invalid if erased ; men would be a lot more concerned about them being lost or stolen, and certainly wouldn't publish unsolicited photos of them.

  • edited May 18

    I haven't read all the things but I don't know how a guy sending an unsolicited dick pic is different than exposing yourself in public... which is illegal like... in a lot of places. Why is over the phone different?

    The only excuse to not make it illegal online is you can't tell if it's actually that guy's dick or was sent by that guy (if it was a guy). Police generally don't care about online harassment (and 99% of it is just chest-thumping, trolling, and wankery anyway), but at least a phone number can be traced to a person (usually).

    I really think sites where guys could send dick pics to women should show the pics blurred at first and then let the user click to reduce blur... 3 clicks let's say, and then the user can have the option to click to "trust" the user, which would show the pics unblurred until the user marked a pic as offensive, than they would go back to being blurred by default. It can't be that difficult to build.

  • It’s unsolicited, blurry or not. Most women don’t find it attractive and we don’t want to see it. For those that actually want to see it, they will ask. If they don’t ask, don’t send it! Let me repeat for the morons that think it’s ok to send them. If a girl doesn’t ask for an unsolicited dick pic, don’t send it!
    In Canada, it’s illegal, period. It’s harassment and it happens way too often. I don’t know how a mans brain can think it’s ok but as soon as we see the pic sent, we see red. It’s so rude to assume we want to see that. Newsflash, we don’t....

  • When such an event recently occurred in the UK, I think it was a driving instructor sending it to a pupil, he claimed it was intended for his girlfriend, and he had accidentally sent it to the wrong number.

    That would be a case of "sending dic pics without due care and attention", which is still a violation.

    (un)true story.
    A man exposed himself to a young girl in a park, and said, "Do you know what this is ?"
    The girl put on quizzical expression as she looked at it for a few seconds, then said, "I'm not sure. It kinda looks like a penis . . . only smaller".

  • @Lovelight
    My suggestion is to not waste your time with the issue, for your own well-being.

    I think that artificial intelligence photo recognition software can effectively screen content, but it requires some expense and time to do so, and it is unlikely to be implemented by any website unless it can provide a positive return on investment. However, if it were made law, websites would have to comply or risk fines or litigation.

  • @LucidDreams84 If a person in a trench coat walks up and flashes people they can be jailed. The only real difference here was they managed to get into my house to do it instead of the park. Their trench coat is now the internet. I have no problem with criminal consequence. If such penalties existed the occurrences would decrease just as street flashing would skyrocket if there was no penalty.

    @Sheena123 is correct. Dudes its called your JUNK for a reason. (except mine of course, its magnificent. lol) No one wants to see peoples junk.

    @BooksnTeas My apologies for our oppression of you.

  • @snuggleme123, more people like you who support systems that hold people accountable as a method of reducing intrusions on other people's well being. Thanks for the analogy with the laws that prevent street flashing, thank god for those laws.. the difference between flashers and people who don't is an understanding of CONSENT. Everyone knows it's a tactic of harassment to send unsolicited inappropriate photos. It's very much like how rape is not sexual, but about control. If it's not a conversation, it is about imposing on someone, in the areas where we need people to not experience harm. If we can't agree as a culture that people should be accountable we are condoning it.
    And even if their aren't governing laws in the united states (a backwards, base country founded on cultural genocide, slavery and all the sexual assault that came with it) smaller communities, even websites, can uphold better principals. This site does not, and that is a problem.
    Meep moop, @RTL1970, got another ally for you!! It's not hard!

  • For THIS site, if users send inappropriate pictures, report them. If users are communicating offline via text and sending unsolicited dick pics: block them, and come back here and report them.

    For elsewhere on the vast internet, there will never be world-wide agreement on nudity and what constitutes "inappropriate." Communities and groups get to define their protocols and standards, which should be 100% clear on this site.

  • edited May 19

    @BooksnTeas I actually am in agreement with @RTL1970 . I am not going to say anything about you personally, but your comments were painting with way too broad a brush and include the stereotypical men are pigs statements that help nothing. I am giving you the benefit that your sensibilities were assaulted as were mine and, I would bet, @RTL1970 as well. But men in general, faceless or not, are not to blame. @Mark is not to blame. The site you bashed for not doing anything, did take down both threads and banned the profiles as swiftly as you could expect, for people who I am sure have other lives outside of this site. They have done it countless times in the past. Anything I have ever flagged was delt with swiftly. Outside of penis and nipple recognition software I dont know what else they could do. Thanks @BashfulLoner for alerting @SoulcuddlerZ. I happened to be on the site when the two threads were up. I actually went to the two profiles wondering who the heck was putting up this crap. One was a WOMAN and the other was a self described Queer. One definitely would not be a male and the other probably would not want to be assigned male pronouns. So slamming males for this, in this instance, is invalid. Now can men be pigs and worse? Yes. But, can you see that you may have, on account of righteous indignation, gone overboard in your response?

    Again I am not commenting on you personally, just the extent of your posts.

  • edited May 19

    And more to the site defense, I bet most of this is done off Virtual Private Networks VPNs that you can have with your norton subscription. Anyone can have them and with them you could be in Iowa but look like you are in Istanbul one second and Australia the next. Impossible to trace, which is why banned people can make new profiles again and again.

  • Dang, glad my name isn’t Dick. Couldn’t send pics anywhere.

  • @davebutton We are on the same page with the flashing analogy but I dont think proving it is your parts (male or female) is an issue. I dont think the cop stopping me on the street showing a poster of a 5 ft long dong or even a 4 foot tall vagina will let me pass with the defense that it is not a pic of my junk. And It should not be an issue of a poster to get free cuz it is not his willie. Would it not be nice if we would just respect each other, and above that, respect ourselves more.

  • I remember a case of a woman setting up a social media account with another woman's details, making contact with a man, and convincing him that she had a rape fantasy. She arranged for the guy to visit "her" house and force himself on "her" while "she" "convincingly resisted".

    The guy turned up as arranged, but quickly realised that something wasn't right, and stopped.

    I guess that is the sexual equivalent of "SWATting", where a person convinces armed police to raid a person's home.

  • @BrooksnTea
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/when-the-slave-traders-were-african-11568991595

    "And even if their aren't governing laws in the united states (a backwards, base country founded on cultural genocide, slavery and all the sexual assault that came with it) smaller communities, even websites, can uphold better principals. This site does not, and that is a problem."

    If you don't like this great country then leave and go somewhere that is better for then. Yes, it's not perfect but it's a lot better than other that don't have our freedoms. Especially freedom of speech. If you would of said what you said in places like China or North Korea. You would of been taken and killed or sent to a labor camp for saying stuff like that. Yes, slavery is bad and wrong. But what about when the Spaniards and other Europeans came before the birth of this country? When they invaded Americas? They slaughtered, raped, imprisoned, and enslaved tens of millions of Native Americans for hundreds of years. Long before the Africans. People are not perfect little angels. Their are good people and bad people. We are animals. It's in the blood. It's natural.

  • @geoff1000

    "I remember a case of a woman setting up a social media account with another woman's details, making contact with a man, and convincing him that she had a rape fantasy. She arranged for the guy to visit "her" house and force himself on "her" while "she" "convincingly resisted".

    The guy turned up as arranged, but quickly realised that something wasn't right, and stopped.

    I guess that is the sexual equivalent of "SWATting", where a person convinces armed police to raid a person's home."

    I'm so glad the man turned away, and nobody was hurt. Any of you know if it made to an article or the news? It really should, and that's why it's best not to wander into a strangers home, especially one never seen for things of that nature. I've also heard of a similar one, depressing.

  • @MrPaul

    "My suggestion is to not waste your time with the issue, for your own well-being.

    I do my best to be mindful of that and take a break from such difficult topics when needed. I just find it important to give time to it.

    I think that artificial intelligence photo recognition software can effectively screen content, but it requires some expense and time to do so, and it is unlikely to be implemented by any website unless it can provide a positive return on investment. However, if it were made law, websites would have to comply or risk fines or litigation."

    If topics like these get more discussion and reach the minds of those who can put into action a good change, I think things will begin to get better. I believe more sites would take on it even if it turns away a few - who want to send such content without consent.

    I'd refine that idea as something like, for example, a dating site:

    They would have the detection program set to automatically block out all such content that's sent without consent. And for anyone to receive, they'd have to consent to receive it from the specific individual. Though it might really be difficult to create such programs because they might mistake other things as inappropriate. Though perhaps anything that it identifies as possibly being inappropriate it could ask the user to unlock it to view. And if it turns out to be an inappropriate photo which there is no record of explicit in chat consent given, then that person could face charges. That is if the site allows such content. If it doesn't, then the user can be banned and there can possibly be charges too.

    I think the above measures are just about reduction and I don't think sites should be forced to have such programs that reduce the impact.

    Though if a site doesn't explicitly say that users can send such content through their site and have their members consent to that prior to allowing them to join. Then there should still be grounds for charging the individual sending such content.

  • I remember a "porn detection" algorithm which looked for the amount of pink in an image ; which was easily defeated by using actors of ethnic origin.

  • This was a man posting a fake "rape fantasy" ad, but I'm sure a woman has also done it :
    https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2010-jan-11-la-na-rape-craigslist11-2010jan11-story.html?_amp=true

  • I’m surprised so many here are so cruel to think sending people to jail is the answer. Really sick people to be advocating for jail!

  • @eddie2sweaty So true. Gestapo stuff really. Sending more people to jail, that’ll work.

Sign In or Register to comment.