No but adding unsubstantiated comments about how your ex wanted to post revenge porn about you probably is.
Edit: you can stop the down voting, I didn’t pick up the part where she screenshotted his threats. Either way, be careful with that sort of vigilante justice as you might be right but still break the law.
You made a very strong claim that she committed a sex crime. You imply her accusations are wrong and malicious. You jumped to that conclusion and took that as fact. And you didn’t even bother to read what she did. You judged her without even caring about that.
Not saying you are a bigot, but what you did was bigoted. You should reflect on your behavior, apologize and resolve not to do it again. Only then you could ask for the downvotes to stop lol.
To an audience that isn’t interested in seeing them, yeah. They require consent, otherwise it’s a sex crime not dissimilar to flashing. I can’t remember the specific term. Non-consensual something or other.
Edit: I still can’t remember but the word “brandishing” keeps hopping to the forefront of my mind, and brandishing tits sounds hilarious
While violation of social media ToS is possible, I find it difficult to believe that a court would regard the sex crime angle of publishing one’s own photos online seriously. Otherwise anyone linking to their OF without asking for permission to send the link first would be a sex criminal.
It’s confusing cuz you lot are arguing about something that’s not happening.
“Oh what if she was a minor then it would be inappropriate” yeah it would be incredibly inappropriate if she was a minor, but since she isn’t, it isn’t.
To win an IIED claim, you need to prove the sender’s behavior was extreme and outrageous, they acted with intent to cause you severe emotional distress or with reckless disregard for that possibility, and that you suffered severe emotional distress as a result.
Another legal ground is invasion of privacy, specifically a claim for “intrusion upon seclusion.” This recognizes that individuals have a right to be left alone in their private affairs. Your direct messages, email inbox, and text message threads are considered private spaces. When someone intentionally intrudes by sending offensive material, it can be viewed as a highly offensive invasion of your privacy.
It would seem a very difficult argument to apply in this case.
It varies by country, but in south Africa for example, you don’t have to prove emotional distress, the law is clear in stating that exposing someone to genitalia, anus or female breast without consent (provided it is deliberate) is an offense.
So you’re right, but in some countries, you’re more right than others.
I don’t write the law, but for the sake of answering, consent is implicit in this case. Sexual offences must be sexual in nature, and breastfeeding is not sexual. So any mother breastfeeding her child in public would be exempt from prosecution of such a sexual offence. Many traditional ceremonies are also conducted in traditional attire whereby the woman are topless. This is also not regarded as sexual and anyone attending such an event must implicitly consent here as well.
Our law makes many provisions for the reasonable man. So if you happen to stumble upon a nude beach (official status or otherwise), and be exposed to a female breasts, it would not be unlawful as people on this beach reasonably expected the people there to have consented. You could be charged with other offences such as public indecency if official nude beach status is not granted at that beach, but it would not be a sexual offence. Also, the prosecutors would likely be hesitant to waste the courts time on that, and drop the case. So the cops would likely just ask you to cover up if a complaint is received.
Our law is pretty good in that regards, it’s our police and investigative side that is over worked and under skilled, mixed with loads of socio economic issues, that result in overloaded courts and high crime rates that we have.
Oh, that’s way different. I read “exposing someone to genitalia, anus, or female breast (provided it’s deliberate)” and took that literally, which would be insane. It needing to be sexual is much more reasonable.
That was the point of my comment, that sexuality should not always be assumed by the exposure of body parts.
I know you’re making a bad faith argument, but I will answer anyway.
Trans people are accepted in south Africa, and offered many legal protections, including official recognition status of their preferred gender (there are certain prerequisites required to change your gender, but I don’t know what those are, I just know people who have done so). Should someone undergo gender re-assignment, and have the gender changed on their ID, it would or would not be an offense based on what gender they have transitioned to at the time the incident had occurred.
South African law is pretty forward thinking in many aspects regarding discrimination, primarily because of how racial discrimination has massively featured in our history.
A bad faith argument? In what respect? The US is basically burning based on identity politics, so I’m curious about how beaches function after someone gets top surgery. In the US, many states don’t draw a legal distinction between male and female breasts whatsoever, mine included, which solves the bigotry either way.
… publishing your own nudes is a sex crime?
Every morning I human traffic myself to work.
And then micro-retire for the weekend?
Technically I’m micro retire as soon as I log into my computer and then spend half an hour getting a coffee.
Wouldn’t that be nano-retiring? I’m nano-retiring a couple of times a day when going to the toilet!
I mean… If it’s somewhere you don’t want to be…
Plus you’re usually getting fucked in some way.
Then i slave away
No but adding unsubstantiated comments about how your ex wanted to post revenge porn about you probably is.
Edit: you can stop the down voting, I didn’t pick up the part where she screenshotted his threats. Either way, be careful with that sort of vigilante justice as you might be right but still break the law.
You made a very strong claim that she committed a sex crime. You imply her accusations are wrong and malicious. You jumped to that conclusion and took that as fact. And you didn’t even bother to read what she did. You judged her without even caring about that.
Not saying you are a bigot, but what you did was bigoted. You should reflect on your behavior, apologize and resolve not to do it again. Only then you could ask for the downvotes to stop lol.
lol btw.
If the quotes are screenshotted, it would be substantiated.
Sounds like the claims were pretty well ‘substantiated’ in this case…
We have a pedo rapist in the White House. The rule of law is meaningless until this is corrected.
Actively ignore the vigilante justice warning. Wanna be a manipulative psychopath? Meet shame.
To an audience that isn’t interested in seeing them, yeah. They require consent, otherwise it’s a sex crime not dissimilar to flashing. I can’t remember the specific term. Non-consensual something or other.
Edit: I still can’t remember but the word “brandishing” keeps hopping to the forefront of my mind, and brandishing tits sounds hilarious
While violation of social media ToS is possible, I find it difficult to believe that a court would regard the sex crime angle of publishing one’s own photos online seriously. Otherwise anyone linking to their OF without asking for permission to send the link first would be a sex criminal.
if only laws had logic
minors have been charged with creating pedo porn from their own photos
Yeah but she’s not a minor.
This comment section is very confusing.
yes I can see how life would be very confusing for some
It’s confusing cuz you lot are arguing about something that’s not happening.
“Oh what if she was a minor then it would be inappropriate” yeah it would be incredibly inappropriate if she was a minor, but since she isn’t, it isn’t.
yes I understand that you can state the obvious and not get it
If the intent is to shock or harm, or it can be argued that way, it’s usually best to avoid. If you care to read up, you’re welcome to it.
It would seem a very difficult argument to apply in this case.
But not impossible. It’s just an unnecessary risk.
Well, enjoy never leaving the house.
Hmm
Username checks out.
21
Tagging people to let them know they exist is not forcing them on anyone.
I really don’t care to argue the point. Read up, if you care to argue it in court
That link is talking about sending images. I am saying that tagging is not sending images.
I really don’t see a meaningful distinction, but even less do I care to argue the point
You gonna put someone in jail if they tell you nude photos exist? Lmao
It varies by country, but in south Africa for example, you don’t have to prove emotional distress, the law is clear in stating that exposing someone to genitalia, anus or female breast without consent (provided it is deliberate) is an offense.
So you’re right, but in some countries, you’re more right than others.
Do infants consent to breast feeding? I’m sorry, I know you didn’t write the law
I don’t write the law, but for the sake of answering, consent is implicit in this case. Sexual offences must be sexual in nature, and breastfeeding is not sexual. So any mother breastfeeding her child in public would be exempt from prosecution of such a sexual offence. Many traditional ceremonies are also conducted in traditional attire whereby the woman are topless. This is also not regarded as sexual and anyone attending such an event must implicitly consent here as well.
Our law makes many provisions for the reasonable man. So if you happen to stumble upon a nude beach (official status or otherwise), and be exposed to a female breasts, it would not be unlawful as people on this beach reasonably expected the people there to have consented. You could be charged with other offences such as public indecency if official nude beach status is not granted at that beach, but it would not be a sexual offence. Also, the prosecutors would likely be hesitant to waste the courts time on that, and drop the case. So the cops would likely just ask you to cover up if a complaint is received.
Our law is pretty good in that regards, it’s our police and investigative side that is over worked and under skilled, mixed with loads of socio economic issues, that result in overloaded courts and high crime rates that we have.
Oh, that’s way different. I read “exposing someone to genitalia, anus, or female breast (provided it’s deliberate)” and took that literally, which would be insane. It needing to be sexual is much more reasonable.
That was the point of my comment, that sexuality should not always be assumed by the exposure of body parts.
Breasts as well? That’s surprising. How accepted are trans people in South Africa? Because there might be some confusing times ahead.
I know you’re making a bad faith argument, but I will answer anyway.
Trans people are accepted in south Africa, and offered many legal protections, including official recognition status of their preferred gender (there are certain prerequisites required to change your gender, but I don’t know what those are, I just know people who have done so). Should someone undergo gender re-assignment, and have the gender changed on their ID, it would or would not be an offense based on what gender they have transitioned to at the time the incident had occurred.
South African law is pretty forward thinking in many aspects regarding discrimination, primarily because of how racial discrimination has massively featured in our history.
A bad faith argument? In what respect? The US is basically burning based on identity politics, so I’m curious about how beaches function after someone gets top surgery. In the US, many states don’t draw a legal distinction between male and female breasts whatsoever, mine included, which solves the bigotry either way.
you can just put your titties behind a nsfw tag / spoiler?
spoiler
like this
Most disappointing spoiler tag ever.
Giant Tits
spoiler
Much better!