~ archived since 2018 ~

If Alex from #alexfromtarget was a woman, there would be uproar.

-CK · 2014-11-03T23:15:49+00:00

If thousands of men found an attractive employee at Target and made them 'internet famous' based on a picture they stumbled upon online, the...

-CK

November 3, 2014

4 upvotes

/r/MensRights

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	If Alex from #alexfromtarget was a woman, there would be uproar.
Author	-CK
Upvotes	4
Comments	7
Date	November 3, 2014 11:15 PM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/2l7ew0/if_alex_from_alexfromtarget_was_a_woman_there/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/if-alex-from-alexfromtarget-was-a-woman-there.993911 https://theredarchive.com/post/993911

Comments

[–]Pitisica 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ugly_duck 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pitisica 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Mainly the fact that this is a creepshot. The photograph was taken without permission and without the kid's knowledge, as you can infer from the angle of the camera.

The now defunct r/creepshots contained similar photographs of young women, and was taken down after public outrage over its existence. One of its moderators was also doxxed, it was a huge shitstorm.

If you read the rules in the sidebar of r/adviceanimals, you will see why this situation is fundamentally different:

Don't make memes with pics of people that you saw in real life. Ever. Witch-hunts are forbidden.

Overnight this kid has had his privacy violated, his personal life exposed for all to see, and has been sexualized by thousands of women.

It is a massive invasion of privacy, and while he probably will handle it well, what if he doesn't? This could be damaging to him psychologically.

[–]ugly_duck 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The photograph was taken without permission and without the kid's knowledge, as you can infer from the angle of the camera.

I'm totally against creepshots, but where it seems everybody has a camera with the all the time, they seem to be a product of our time. I mean there's no outrage here on sites like People Of Walmart.

Don't make memes with pics of people that you saw in real life. Ever. Witch-hunts are forbidden.

I'm not sure everybody has seen Alex in real life. I've never met Alex. Out of the whole wide internet, I feel like only a handful actually know Alex before him being turn into a meme.

It is a massive invasion of privacy, and while he probably will handle it well, what if he doesn't? This could be damaging to him psychologically.

So, here's the real meat of the issue. Is this an issue of privacy or are we worried about psychological damage?

[–]Pitisica 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

You seem to be misunderstanding the r/adviceanimals rule I quoted

Don't make memes with pics of people that you saw in real life. Ever. Witch-hunts are forbidden.

This means the initial poster of the picture would not have been allowed to post to the subreddit, because it is a picture of someone she saw in real life. By posting that picture, and through its popularity, she has caused this kid's personal information to be revealed, which can be called an invasion of privacy, doxxing, witch-hunting, whatever.

You asked how this was different to a r/adviceanimals meme; there you have it.

Having your entire life suddenly scrutinized by hundreds of thousands of people is both an issue of privacy and a risk to the guy. He will be getting harassed, will receive unwanted attention, will probably get threatened by trolls: all of this can take its toll on someone.

You say there isn't outrage on here about stuff like People of Walmart, but there is. It's not as vocal as outrage over r/creepshots or the still active r/candidfashionpolice, but it's there.

Creepshots, whoever they may be of, and whether their purpose is to mock or praise, should never be tolerated. And as far as r/adviceanimals is concerned, they never are.

[–]ugly_duck 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Pitisica 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Now it's free game. I could go post it on Reddit and I would be following the rules.

Yes and no. Just because a picture has been posted before to the internet doesn't mean it should be reposted or rehosted. Some guy posts nudes of his ex-girlfriend online for revenge; is it legally wrong to repost or rehost the pictures? No. Is it morally reprehensible? Most would agree yes.

Obviously my example is extreme, and I'm not comparing the two situations, merely trying to point out the moral dilemma.

Should you post the picture to Reddit if it's been posted to Twitter? I don't have an answer to that. I guess it depends on your opinion of the matter. Personally, I wouldn't, because the picture was taken and shared without permission, and as far as I'm concerned, if he didn't allow it to be shared, then I should not be sharing it.

I would feel as uncomfortable sharing pictures of Alex from Target as I would sharing pictures from r/candidfashionpolice or People of Walmart. I figure if I wouldn't want my photograph taken and shared without permission, then I shouldn't do it to others.