A Crash Course in Feminism Mk. II (or, why everyone should be a feminist)

[eldargal]

Yep but in this case it's more like you should be able to leave your wallet in a hidden safe in your bedroom and expect it to still be there when you get back. I mean people are saying things like 'well if they didn't want them to get out they shouldn't have taken them' but that logic ultimately leads to women having to be fully clothed 24/7 or else any invasion of their privacy is their fault, it is absurd. also contrast to the reaction when a male celebrity has nude photos leaked, no one gives a **** unless an ex-girlfriend has leaked them in which case it's a heinous breach of the poor mans privacy... (which it is, just highlighting the difference when a woman is the victim)

[Psychosplodge]

I suppose the safe is more like a hotels safe deposit box than in your house.

[Wolfshade]

I do agree with you see # 7506

There is an argument about how safe is "safe" online.

There are certain sites that that "safe" would be transparent and people can see it, others where the "safe" would be paper, others where while looking strong can actually be picked rather straight forwardly.

Ultimately, it *shouldn't* matter, if it is private people shouldn't go a-hunting (back in the very early days of the internet there were no passwords or safe guards, people just didn't think of it). Knowing however, that there are those people about I at least would be a little cautious and I don't think that there are people trying to leak my photos (if you do really want one PM me)

I wouldn't leave my wallet on the table in a fast food joint, however I probably wouldn't think about not doing so in a restaurant (note, I don't count those chain abominations like "toby" or "harvester" etc as restaurants).

Certainly, there is a massive difference between how society views mens/womens bodies

[Psychosplodge]

I wouldn't leave my wallet on the table in a fast food joint, however I probably wouldn't think about not doing so in a restaurant (note, I don't count those chain abominations like "toby" or "harvester" etc as restaurants).

Well no, they're food pubs.

[Wolfshade]

Well no, they're food pubs.

Unfortuantely that view isn't a concensus.

"Oh I've arrange to go out for dinner with some friends want to come?"

"Yeah sure"

"Ok we meet at the restaurant at 1930"

"Which one?"

"Frankie and Bennie's"

*FACEPALM*

[Psychosplodge]

I'm not sure where'd I'd put them on the scale cause they don't pretend to be pubs either?

[Wolfshade]

Any place that sells wine by the glass...

[Psychosplodge]

Ah lols.

[CoffeeGrunt]

I kinda like food pubs...

It's difficult to really say, "we should really stop hackers," because let's face it, the US Government alone is constantly ramming internet control laws down the system's throat in order to achieve this...supposedly. In hacker culture, getting J-Law's noodz is probably on the same level as finding the NSA's How To Spy On Your Granny Powerpoint tutorial. You release that and it will get you much fame and fortune.

However the NSA will ruthlessly hunt those that steal the data showing how bad their actions are, but noodz are not considered something worth the same crackdowns.

I dunno, not to victim-blame, but one simply cannot be too safe with digital data and the like.

[Kirsten]

I know that the taker of the photograph owns the copyright, what I am saying is if you are photographing people, the subject should own the copyright unless explicitly stated. so an actress going to a photoshoot might say yes, I give the rights to this photographer/publication for x use. it is ridiculous that paparazzis go around snapping people out and about, on holiday etc, horrendous invasion of privacy. plus it would cover the afore mentioned revenge porn and leaks.