Reply to Politico: Susanna Gibson's Online Sex Life Was Exposed

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Politico: Susanna Gibson's Online Sex Life Was Exposed"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I know Gibson lost and the other thread was closed. But she just gave an interview to Politico and is framing this as a revenge porn situation. I voted for her, but didn't she willingly film herself on a porn site? I'm surprised that fact got scrubbed from this article:

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/12/09/susanna-gibson-virginia-digital-privacy-00130883[/quote]

Moral: Republicans don’t understand consent when it comes to women’s bodies.

[i] I think a big underlying factor that really needs to be addressed, and our society needs to start being educated on, is there is this devaluation and misunderstanding of consent, especially when we’re talking about digital privacy. [b]Content that is initially made in a consensual context, which is then distributed in a non-consensual context digitally, is a crime. Just because someone consented to share something in one particular context doesn’t mean that it is or should be fair game for the whole world to see.[/b]

[b]Choosing to share content, online or in whatever medium, with select people with the understanding that it will disappear and can only be seen by those present at the time — when we’re talking live streaming, webcamming and Skype — that is a far cry from consenting for that content to be recorded and then broadly disseminated. [/b]And there is case law precedent confirming this.

Daniel P. Watkins, a lawyer for Gibson, said disseminating the videos constitutes a violation of the state’s [b]revenge porn law, which makes it a Class 1 misdemeanor to “maliciously” distribute nude or sexual images of another person with “intent to coerce, harass, or intimidate.”[/b]
“We are working closely with state and federal law enforcement,” Watkins said.

Watkins said [b]Gibson was not aware of, and had not authorized, the posting of Chaturbate material on other sites.[/b]
Asked why Gibson had a reasonable expectation of privacy on Chaturbate, Watkins pointed to a 2021 Virginia Court of Appeals ruling that found [b]it was unlawful for a man to secretly record his girlfriend during a consensual sexual encounter even if he did not show the video to others.[/b]
In that case, Ronnie Lee Johnson v. Commonwealth of Virginia, the court found that [b]consent to being seen is not the same as consent to being recorded, writing that there was a “stark distinction between an image existing only in someone’s memory … [and] a permanent file that may be shared or re-viewed indefinitely.”[/b]
[/i][/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics