An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet • Hacker News Board

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#241

Post by mikem170 » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:03 PM UTC

yosito wrote: post #172

vagrantJin wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But the thing that really puts me off about this interview and the WikiFeet website is the lack of consent. A bit of a harsh, knee-jeek reaction to something entirely meaningless. Topped with a vague proposition of privacy in a public forum. It's just feet. Unless someone knows you, your "privacy" isn't likely to be in peril from a site filled with feet.

It's not about the feet. It's about the lack of consent. It troubles me that you don't see a problem with that.

You used the word creepy to describe the wikifeet site, which might lead people to think that you are motivated by prudish reasons.

From a legal consent perspective are you also opposed to google image search for the same reasons, that google did not get consent to redisplay the resulting images? What about pictures of public personas in news articles where consent was not given? Could I prevent my friends from posting unflattering pictures of me? What if I google images of feet to get off on? Maybe consent should apply to audio and written information, so people are not quoted out of context?

The legalities around consent seem to get complicated, and conflict with other legal precedent. Also you might have a hard time convincing other people of the harm in feet pics, and that might be the first thing you need to do to get a law passed against it.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#242

Post by polote » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:07 PM UTC

danaliv wrote: post #239

Glad to hear the majority of Hacker News thinks it's ok to sexualize and catalog pictures of me without my consent. At least now I know who I'm dealing with here instead of merely suspecting it.

The thing is that all her information are public. and if you type her name on google you will directly find her instagram which display the same photos

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#243

Post by FooBarBizBazz » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:07 PM UTC

jjk166 wrote: post #203

zinclozenge wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I heard that crossed wires theory and I just don’t believe it. For me the simplest explanation is that there’s an entire industry built around selling sexy women’s footwear (heels) that draws attention to the foot, so it really shouldn’t be a surprise.

Seems more likely that a massive industry popped up around selling sexy footware (as opposed to say sexy satchels or sexy mittens) because there was a substantial demand for it. Perhaps the success of the industry has reinforced and perpetuated the belief that feet are sexy, but it doesn't make sense that some industrialist woke up one day and said "I'll make an extremely impractical shoe and sell millions by convinc…

Side note:

Women's heels, in Western Europe, evolved from shoes worn by Persian cavalrymen; they were designed to stay in the stirrup. You still see something similar in "cowboy boots".

Women appropriated the shoes as a symbol of empowerment at a time when other "butch" fashions were being borrowed (e.g., epaulets). That they made intimidated clomping noises as you walked around was half the appeal.

Then the shoes became more and more "feminine", culminating in the "stiletto", which takes its name from a dagger used to finish off armored soldiers.

So they've always been symbols of violence.

Which makes all the more ironic that their wearers experience feet aches and leg problems, and view them as tools of male oppression. Maybe you should just stop clomping around in the things. They ruin good marble floors, make loud noises, and pain me just to look at. The whole point is for riding a horse. If you're off a horse, then it's like walking around in ski boots.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#244

Post by FredPret » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:10 PM UTC

yosito wrote: post #64

red_trumpet wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there are two dimensions. The personal consent one, where I do not agree with your opinion, but that's okay. On the other hand, copying a picture to another website can also be a copyright infringement.

How would you feel if you walked by a porn shop, and in the window you saw a magazine cover with a photo of you taken from your public social media accounts printed on the cover with the headline, "Hottest people on Instagram to get off to in 2021". Some people may be flattered by that, but many, many people would feel that it was a violation and an assault to their dignity.

I don’t know if that’s illegal or not but it really should be

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#245

Post by tootie » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:19 PM UTC

janpot wrote: post #9

It's so refreshing how this article doesn't try to impose an opinion on me. It really engages me to think about the matter and form my own.

I'm pretty sure that's just journalistic technique. You won't get answers out of someone by being combative. What's unusual is that she just posted a transcript of the conversation and didn't really turn it into a narrative piece.

It may seem like she's being a good sport and isn't bothered by this at all, but I don't think you can draw that conclusion.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#246

Post by ddoubleU » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:19 PM UTC

exikyut wrote: post #209

ddoubleU wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, sending it to all my male friends now without even looking

Possibly a bad idea. Potential outcome: Them, knowing more than you might assume: " OwO what's this? " You: possibly now a furry due to inversion of plausible deniability

They don't know what being a furry is, so they can't throw it back at me taps head (that I hope at last).

On a more serious note, within the circle of my friends this falls into "prank link" category - rickrolling etc.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#247

Post by Ancapistani » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:21 PM UTC

Nursie wrote: post #217

Tarsul wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine you are reading wikipedia every day for years and really like its content and it gives a lot to you and then suddenly you see grave mistakes on some of the sites (like when I saw that wikipedia had the wrong year for nicolas cage's oscar win!), wouldn't you go "out of your way" to fix these mistakes? I mean wouldn't it annoy the living hell out of you to know that this mistake lives on while you go on consumi…

> wouldn't you go "out of your way" to fix these mistakes? On wikipedia? As someone who has not spent years building up a reputation? No, it would just be reverted in ten seconds flat by whoever had nominated themselves as guardian of the truth about Nick Cage.

That’s not at all been my experience. I’m not a regular contributor, but I correct errors when I come, add sources, and sometimes remove unsourced claims.

The most that’s ever happened is that I’ve had my edits reverted until I added citations. Since then I include them by default and haven’t had it happen in years.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#248

Post by trhway » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:32 PM UTC

tsimionescu wrote: post #201

zinclozenge wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I heard that crossed wires theory and I just don’t believe it. For me the simplest explanation is that there’s an entire industry built around selling sexy women’s footwear (heels) that draws attention to the foot, so it really shouldn’t be a surprise.

Your theory doesn't explain male foot fetishism at all. Personally, I believe this has much more to do with the taboo nature of feet (as they are usually seen as dirty), similarly to other fetishes (e.g. urine). Foot fetishism is by no means a modern phenomenon driven by advertising.

>taboo nature

i think everything that is closed/covered becomes such a taboo/fetish. Feet have been in shoes (and under a long dress for women) most of the recent times. Give a couple years more of the mask regime and lips/noses would become taboo/fetish too :)

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#249

Post by ycombinete » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:33 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #193

janpot wrote: post #9

It's so refreshing how this article doesn't try to impose an opinion on me. It really engages me to think about the matter and form my own.

The article’s title makes it seem like the person continues to upload her feet without her permission. I feel like that’s clickbait-y, but otherwise it’s impartial. It otherwise could have been titled “An interview with the man who uploads my feet”, but I guess that one doesn’t invoke as much outrage.

Most often article headlines are chosen by editors, not the authors.

Re: An interview with the man who keeps uploading my feet to WikiFeet

#250

Post by lotsofpulp » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 6:34 PM UTC

ivanche wrote: post #115

ALittleLight wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but collecting sexual photos of them and rating them may be.

Irony is that The Facebook started exactly like that.

Are photos of people's faces sexual? (obviously not a photo of a face associated with a sexual act, which I assume facebook's original websites were not)