viewing stolen nude photos

[johan]

But if you're going to agree to let someone take nudes of you in your home, you do so willing accepting the risk that your boss might see them or your brother or anyone with an internet connection.

This is absolute lunacy to me.

There is no question there is a risk in the act of taking a nude photo. But the same inherent risk exists in buying expensive jewelry and wearing it in public. The same risk in purchasing/driving a car, the same risk in pretty much anything you do.

Correct. We're both saying exactly the same thing. However you seem to have a problem with it so I assume the difference between you and I is that you somehow believe that because everything carries some level of risk, a person therefore for some reason does not need to ever weigh the risk vs the reward and make a decision about whether or not they feel assume said risk is worth it.

Driving is pretty handy thing. And yep, there's risk involved but much of that risk is manageable if I stay sober, keep my vehicle maintained and don't drive recklessly. The risk/reward is there for me. What's the reward for having nudes of yourself? We know what the risks are, but what's the reward? Is it worth it? For me, it isn't and that is why you won't pics of my junk on the net.

But having nude pictures stolen from a person (whomever it is) is the only thing in that infinite list where (primarily) women get blamed for even having taken them in the first place. There exists somehow in the human zeitgeist that women are to blame for sex happening to them or being taken from them. They are the temptress ("what was she wearing?") or they shouldn't have done something (taken the pictures, worn the dress, gone to the party full of frat bros) that "caused" someone to take from them. 

It's just fucking ludicrous. Of course it's immoral to take from a person you don't know something you don't have consent to take. Period. End of fucking story.

Wooh wooh wooh wooh wooh. You are now putting a metric shit ton of words in my mouth that I never said. I do not blame women for stolen pics. Not at all. I do not blame women for sex. Maybe other people do it, but that shit ain't me. Ever.

And for the record, the question posed wasn't is immoral to steal photos of others and publish them i.e. commit the crime. The question posed was is it immoral for other people to view them once released. Two TOTALLY different questions with very different answers as far as I'm concerned.

---

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. 

 
Ahem.... <raises hand>.... I will not set foot on a carnival ride. Ever. I've seen how those operations run and you won't catch me on one of those rides ever. Way too little training of those running them and way too much duct tape and bailing wire holding them together for my tastes. Now I'm not all saying those kids shouldn't have gotten on the ride nor that they deserved what they got. Not at all.

But at the same time, don't make the claim that just because the rate of occurrence is low, everyone is somehow released of the responsibility to weigh the risk/reward for themselves and make an informed decision.

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.

With all due respect, while this statement can be valid under some circumstances, there are lots of situations where it is very much not valid at all. If you have a known high value property, say a warehouse filled with electronics for instance, and that property is located in a known high crime area? You are an idiot if you assume just locking the doors will be enough and additional security measure aren't required.

We do not have a high value property where I work and it is not in a particularly high crime area. But we have electronic locks on the doors and alarm system and have had it for quite some time. And even at that, we felt it wasn't enough so security cameras are being installed this week. We've never had a break in. And we don't want to have one, so we're taking precautions. That doesn't mean I blame victims who didn't take precautions they could have taken. But it also doesn't mean its automatically guaranteed I'll feel all that sorry for them.