121–130 of 141 posts
was it hidden in the contract? just curious the extent of the lying.
My understanding is the girls are told that the videos will go in some wealthy dude's private collection or something like that. No one reads contracts.
was it hidden in the contract? just curious the extent of the lying.
Contracts can be spoken as well as written, and spoken things can also legally be considered part of the contract even when there is a written contract.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Obviously these women were victimised, but this is a completely separate issue from those 'sending emails' as those who were doing that would have been completely unaware of the mitigating circumstances and therefore operating under the assumption said women were simply 'making porn'. You're essentially insinuating that it's 'evil' to consider that 'doing porn' is possibly inconsistent with the values of an instituti…
It might not be normative in parts of the world (even the western world) but I still have the right to hold that view and to condemn those who emailed to try destroy the woman's career as immoral (evil is a terrible term). Regardless of your disagreement with my view I have the right to hold it. And based on recent history I'd bet I'm on the right side of history here.
Also you're probably not on the rights side of history.
I think we are becoming more tolerant of things that people do in their personal lives, but I don't think we're going to see porn normalised.
The easiest way for attractive young women (or men?) to make money is porn, and I don't suggest that any of us want our 18 year olds taking on that hobby to pay for whatever.
While most people would be 'more forgiving' I don't think for a second that most people would support their kids doing porn for cash.
Just because there's movement in some areas we may see as 'progress' doesn't mean that the needle keeps moving that way, nor does it imply things are black and white.
We're just starting to understand the social implications of young people doing porn for a few dollars at age 18 and having it follow them for the rest of our lives, I think we may start to develop a more nuanced view as time goes on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With little or no thought or concern for what happens next.
I'm pretty sure they see what happens next as justice. Not that I agree with it but I imagine they feel pretty okay with the outcome given their moral beliefs.
This whole thing is idiotic. The lying producers are assholes. The women are idiots for trusting anything told to them in this context by complete strangers motivated only by money. In the words of Shakespeare, "all are punished". >“These are millennial women who grew up with the internet – they knew the consequences of pornographic videos ending up online which is why they asked where the videos were going before th…
The vast majority of business decisions are between strangers motivated by money. We have a justice system to prevent fraud just like this. You seem to have a very simplistic view of society.
This is disgusting. I am sure you can find enough people in the world who would voluntarily do this without coercion. Getting people drunk in another city/state (?) and coercing them to do something else is rape territory, and I hope everyone involved faces criminal justice for that It's strange that the site is still up? I'm not visiting but, but how can there be civil and criminal charges and the site is still up..…
(no disrespect intended to the victims in this story when I say this) This is a cautionary tale in the world we live in today: Once something is recorded, it could be anywhere. Even without willful intent on the part of the owner, phones get lost or stolen, old hardware gets sold on ebay, cloud accounts get compromised, etc. Have fun, but be careful.
This does indeed come off as disrespectful. These videos weren’t “leaked”, they weren’t found on someone’s old phone. The people who shot the video LIED to the participants in order to coerce participation. They paid other people to lie to them as well in order to create a more complete deception. Then they posted the videos in exactly the way they said they would not do. They also provided drugs and alcohol to the p…
Maybe the participants shouldn't be taking the drugs and alcohol to begin with?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you be more specific on why you think the people who sent emails are "evil" and deserve to be judged? And I'm talking about moral aspect here, not legal. > They are clearly nothing but malicious, bigoted and evil. Try to look at it this way. Jane Doe lived in a society (family, coworkers, friends) where she was respected and was considered to be good, ethical and honourable person. At the same time she wanted to…
"Can you be more specific on why you think the people who sent emails are "evil" and deserve to be judged" Sure. they did something to harm another person without any real benefit to society. I know you argue that "her students parents may not want a porn actor to teach their children" but of course there is no actual harm of a porn actor teaching children. Parents only object to the idea that a porn actor is teachin…
The image drawn in the story is far better than reality is. At least one of these “girls” was charged of theft and underage alcohol, with issued arrest warrants. You know the lack of morality doesn’t come alone, otherwise it would not be a big deal.
>Someone takes a picture of you through your bedroom window and sends it to your school
Having fun behind closed doors is normal. Doing that on camera for redistribution is not. If you were spied on, you’re a victim. If you shoot pro porn consciously, you’re blamed. Social reaction supports that de facto, that’s what this case is about. Is it that hard?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you be more specific on why you think the people who sent emails are "evil" and deserve to be judged? And I'm talking about moral aspect here, not legal. > They are clearly nothing but malicious, bigoted and evil. Try to look at it this way. Jane Doe lived in a society (family, coworkers, friends) where she was respected and was considered to be good, ethical and honourable person. At the same time she wanted to…
> to report Jane and act in the society's interest, or not report Jane and act in her interest. Why is it in society's interest (or rather someone's twisted representation of society) that Jane be reported? Has she killed/harmed anyone or did any damage? > If she's a teacher, her students parents may not want a porn actor to teach their children And some people (still) don't want to interact people of certain ethnici…
Why don’t they sue their colleges and parents then? Maybe there is still no law for this even on a horizon and you’re stretching things a little further than they are.
>nobody is getting hurt by the lie. She's "lying" because society still attaches some stupid stigma around pornography and she doesn't want the fallout on her career/relationships
One of them said something like “I don’t want anyone to find out since I love my bf”. In a first world country. Idk to laugh or to cry. Maybe some people deserve a society and relationships they try to build as a punishment, but not everyone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Obviously these women were victimised, but this is a completely separate issue from those 'sending emails' as those who were doing that would have been completely unaware of the mitigating circumstances and therefore operating under the assumption said women were simply 'making porn'. You're essentially insinuating that it's 'evil' to consider that 'doing porn' is possibly inconsistent with the values of an instituti…
Sending emails (and any other reaction to public availability of the videos) was what actually did the lasting harm. If you did harm then being motivated by your morality or religion doesn't justify what you did. It just explains why you did wrong and why you behaved evil.