But thats what we are saying. You can use the "if you dont want ______ then don't do ________," for anything. Everything has a certain level of risk, and we have to weigh the level of risk. Recently here, someone just died and 7 others seriously hurt in a fair ride accident. The ride broke apart in motion. Not a single person is saying "wellp, they shouldn't have ridden the ride!" Again, you have to weigh the level of risk. Celebrity or not, there is nothing at all reckless about taking a nude photo of yourself, in your home, with your password secured phone. Just as there is nothing reckless about getting on a carni ride. There is no unreasonable level of risk in doing either of those things, to where you'd be a complete idiot for doing them and deserve what's coming to you. Sometimes shit just happens and you're the unlucky one. Sometimes your house gets broken into. Sometimes your shit gets stolen. Sometimes you get into a freak accident. I dont think what she did was unreasonably risky at all. It was her phone and her secured account. We never imagine our house will get broken into either, but when it does no one says you were stupid for not having MORE security. It is perfectly acceptable to lock your doors and assume youll most likely be ok without getting an alarm system, bullet proof windows, and a safe room. Sure, you can get all those things, and you probably will after you get robbed the first time. But it wasn't at all your failing for not having them in the first place.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh
