~ archived since 2018 ~

Man jailed for Facebook sex ratings comments - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

internethardman

August 21, 2012

5 upvotes

/r/MensRights

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-21/man-jailed-for-facebook-sex-ratings-comments/4212574

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	Man jailed for Facebook sex ratings comments - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Author	internethardman
Upvotes	5
Comments	29
Date	August 21, 2012 8:52 AM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/ykmf5/man_jailed_for_facebook_sex_ratings_comments_abc/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/man-jailed-for-facebook-sex-ratings-comments-abc.1015392 https://theredarchive.com/post/1015392

Comments

[–]thrway_1000 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]liberallysprinkled 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]thrway_1000 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]liberallysprinkled 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ThePigman 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 13 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]ThePigman -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]EpicJ -6 points-5 points-4 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]FlightsFancy 6 points7 points8 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]EpicJ -3 points-2 points-1 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]FlightsFancy 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Drainedsoul -5 points-4 points-3 points 13 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]FlightsFancy 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[+]Drainedsoul -6 points-5 points-4 points 13 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]FlightsFancy 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]Drainedsoul -5 points-4 points-3 points 13 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]FlightsFancy 6 points7 points8 points 13 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

You don't have a right to have information about experiences you share with others kept secret.

Really. According to whom? Is this your expert legal opinion?

Tell me, if you were having sex with someone and they filmed it, and then posted the video online, you wouldn't have any legal recourse?

What if you paid for a full-page ad in a major newspaper like the New York Times saying, "I had sex with X, and this is their full name and contact information. PS They were lousy in bed."?

Yeah. There are privacy laws, libel laws, and laws about protection of personal information, which McRory violated when he tagged the Victoria women on his Facebook page.

you don't have a right to "gag" someone else just because you don't want to suffer the ramifications of what they might have to say.

I see. This is yet another attempt to demonstrate that women don't want to "take responsibility" for their actions. It's not about personal privacy, safety, or the ability of private citizens to conduct their lives without drawing massive amounts of unwanted scrutiny via a social networking site. You're trying to make this about women pushing for jail time for this guy because they "don't want to suffer the ramifications" of what he has to say.

Because, yeah, of course women should be publicly shamed and humiliated for having sex. It's perfectly acceptable for McRory to post their full names and tag them on Facebook (thus giving anyone who looks at the page access to their personal pages, and any information they've made available there). Because, y'know, a woman's right to privacy is less important than society's right to shame them.

This is not about accepting personal responsibility. This is about an individual's deliberate attempt to humiliate and shame his sexual partners on a highly visible public forum. And, as an added bonus, exposing their personal details to friends, family, employers, clients, etc, as well as anyone else who might want to stalk, harass or intimidate them.

Look, if a bitter ex-girlfriend did this to her boyfriend, /r/mensrights would be up in arms about it. But because it's one man harassing and humiliating a group of women, it's an action that you're eager to defend by saying, "Just learn to take responsibility for your choices, ladies." As if any reasonable person would think widespread exposure and humiliation is the natural result of choosing to have sex with someone.

[+]Drainedsoul -6 points-5 points-4 points 13 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Tell me, if you were having sex with someone and they filmed it, and then posted the video online, you wouldn't have any legal recourse?

There is a difference between having "legal recourse" and having a "right".

Having "legal recourse" is no more than having access to a mafia with a reality-distortion field so that the populace doesn't repudiate them.

Having a "right" is having a moral case for why something should or should not happen.

What if you paid for a full-page ad in a major newspaper like the New York Times saying, "I had sex with X, and this is their full name and contact information. PS They were lousy in bed."?

If I didn't want my contact information disclosed by this person, I should've either:

Elected not to give that person my contact information.
Contracted with them so that in the case that they disclose my information I'm entitled to collect damages from them.

Freedom of thought and speech should mean just that -- you're free to think or say whatever you want without becoming a victim of aggressive state violence. I shouldn't gain the ability to control your speech just because I told you some of my information.

This is yet another attempt to demonstrate that women don't want to "take responsibility" for their actions.

No, it has nothing to do with "women", it has to do with people. People expect to be able to use the state's violence to underwrite their own irresponsibility. Whether it's people calling for other people to be "gagged" because they exercised poor judgement in disclosing their personal information, or people calling for other people to be "taxed" (i.e. stolen from at gunpoint) because they couldn't get a job, education, manage their money properly, et cetera.

Irresponsibility isn't gendered. It isn't endemic to one gender or the other. It just so happens that in this case the irresponsible people are women. If it was a man trying to have a woman prosecuted my opinion wouldn't change -- I'm not sexist.

Because, yeah, of course women should be publicly shamed and humiliated for having sex.

Advocating that someone should be able to do something without becoming a victim of violence is not the same as saying that the person-in-question should do that thing.

I support peoples' right to consume, grow, et cetera whatever substances they want to and can within the confines of their property rights, but this does not mean that I think people should take heroin, even though I support their right to do so if they wish.

Look, if a bitter ex-girlfriend did this to her boyfriend, /r/mensrights would be up in arms about it.

Of course, and we should be.

But there's a difference between disagreeing with someone and translating that disagreement into a presumption that you ought to be able to use violence to victimize them.

[–]FlightsFancy 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Drainedsoul -3 points-2 points-1 points 13 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]FlightsFancy 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 13 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]FlightsFancy 9 points10 points11 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, the only reason a woman (or anyone) wouldn't want to see their private sexual encounter detailed and rated on a public Facebook page is because it would hurt her feelings.

Never mind that her family, friends, coworkers and employers could see her "rating." That her job could be jeopardized. That her professional relationships with coworkers, clients or business partners could be negatively affected, impacting her ability to conduct her business, support herself or her family, or advance in her career. Or that she might be subjected to stalking, harassment, unsolicited phone calls or emails, doxxing, or that her image and the associated rating (along with any details about the sexual encounter) could end up on a 3rd party website.

Yeah, you've really nailed it. It's all about the women's feelings, not about their right to privacy and protection under the law. Damn those uppity women for getting this poor guy sentenced to (gasp!) jail time for committing a crime!

[+][deleted] 13 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]FlightsFancy 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 13 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]FlightsFancy 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I know your feminist ideology doesn't tolerate freedom of speech

Go on, tell me more about my beliefs. Define feminism for me. You clearly have an airtight grasp on the central concepts. Tell me, exactly which feminist theorists disavow free speech? Which feminist activists have historically protested against it? Which feminist group (there are many) hold disavowal of free speech as a tent pole issue? Can you even name one?

but everywhere else in the civilized world it's deemed a human right.

You know what else is a "basic human right"? The right to privacy.

If you know anything about constitutional law, you must be aware that "everywhere in the civilized world" there are limitations on free speech when it interferes with the safety and autonomy of others. There are legal restrictions on libel and defamation. In the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, there are limiting conditions on hate speech when it's used to promote violence or discrimination against marginalized groups. In America, you can't just yell "fire!" in a crowded room, incite panic, and then claim, "Hey, freedom of speech!"

There are sensible limitations designed to balance individual rights against the rights of others. Is your right to talk about me in a broadly public context, identifying me by name and providing personal contact information, more important than my right to privacy? In Australia (which, again, doesn't even have a constitution), there are restrictions on using social media for purposes of defamation or harassment. That's not "feminist ideology" - that's something the legal system has put in place to protect individuals, not just women.

But since you're obviously more interested in irrationally blaming "feminism" for everything that you believe is wrong with the world than arguing a point with any reason, logic or proof, I'll leave you to it.

[–]ThePigman -5 points-4 points-3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]FlightsFancy 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link