where do these sexual assault people come from?

[Kinnikinnick]

You’re right about that leap, and I will try to clarify. MtG can speak for herself (or not). I don’t have a problem with two people doing whatever they want with or to each other and posting or not posting those things on appropriately NSFW tagged threads as long as all parties are consenting adults.

I don’t go into them generally, so no skin off my back either way.

I know that the vast majority of the posts probably are consenting, but it’s clear that there are photos where that is either in question, was unclear or omitted at the time of the photo being taken, or even full creeper mode.

Given the risk and consequences to the subject of the photos, IMO the only way to ensure that there isn’t any victimization or exploitation going on is to require positive consent on every photo. In doing so, you do end up assuming every photo is non-consensual unless proven otherwise.

I keep thinking about this like traveling in backcountry terrain. Once you trigger a slide, it’s too late to go back and dig a pit. The damage has been done and is irreversible.

Going to a standard like this may indeed kill the Pt 2 and the Ullr thread. Which isn’t ideal, but given the risks of the alternative, I think it’s a fair trade off. People would be free to repost any content they can show consent for in a new thread.

A lot of words but you havent come up with a viable implementable test of consent so you’re realistically down to banning all nude photos.

And don’t don’t tell me like Censorgirl that “professional porn” will be OK because in many cases it will be difficult to discern.





Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Game Over]

When did she share her story? Wasn't Bill already elected? I just read about this a month or so ago and have already forgot. Getting old sucks.

[JellyBear]

[wyeaster]

When did she share her story? Wasn't Bill already elected? I just read about this a month or so ago and have already forgot. Getting old sucks.

tired act

[Bromontana]

Yeah, that seems to be a major problem with our society at large....catering policy to small numbers of vocal people with outlying values and agendas.

It's a real thing, the intolerant minority. Think of the relatively small size of the Jewish community vs. the % of foods that pass kosher standards. Not bad inherently by any means, but certainly worth noting.

https://www.getabstract.com/en/summa...ant-wins/25806

https://greedygoblinblog.wordpress.c...rant-majority/

Edit to add: I'm not a fan of the shady stuff, and support some higher degree of scrutiny on the ullr stuff. An honor system with a basic sanity check to zap questionable stuff like booner's creep mode should work. Err on the side of caution but only act when posters aren't clear about the source (ok examples being BD & duderino's cosplay wife).

The idea of concrete proof is a cover for moving to ban organic pr0n. Is professional pr0n really the higher ground over kinky wifey material? I believe it's the opposite, given the known issues with adverse selection in porn women - many were personally abused or are currently abused within the industry. Feeding that beast is way worse than letting cosplay wifey fly her freak flag.

[Supermoon]

A lot of words but you havent come up with a viable implementable test of consent so you’re realistically down to banning all nude photos.

And don’t don’t tell me like Censorgirl that “professional porn” will be OK because in many cases it will be difficult to discern.





Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I don’t know what that test would be. Like I said earlier, I’m happy to brainstorm with people. If there is no way to do it, and that meant no nude photos, then that’s unfortunate but better than the alternative.

Why a ski forum needs “professional porn” I don’t know, but embedding photos from sites that do their due diligence would pass my idea of consent.

[Dexter Rutecki]

No, I'm not arguing for a solution. Not at all. And I don't think the "take it down after a complaint" works, not even a little. Because of the proof problem. The only solutions I see are a) do nothing, b) have a clear rule that you must have consent to post but it's an honor system (because nothing else is workable), or c) eliminate all nudity/porn. She's really arguing for "c" but isn't honest about it. She occasionally says stuff about whether this site needs porn at all, but her primary argument isn't "get rid of it all", even though that's what she really wants.

Yes, you're exactly right on all of this. And her inconsistency in making these arguments is why it is fruitless to engage with her--she either doesn't know what her real agenda is, won't admit to it, or is so scattered that it actually changes from post to post.

But I will come back to the point I already made that at this point a sensible solution could be for TGR to decide that this board doesn't really benefit from porn (again, that won't really solve the issue with people who want to post their own photos, but it would mostly 'solve' the porn problem, I think--or it could, anyway).

[Danno]

Yes, you're exactly right on all of this. And her inconsistency in making these arguments is why it is fruitless to engage with her--she either doesn't know what her real agenda is, won't admit to it, or is so scattered that it actually changes from post to post.

But I will come back to the point I already made that at this point a sensible solution could be for TGR to decide that this board doesn't really benefit from porn (again, that won't really solve the issue with people who want to post their own photos, but it would mostly 'solve' the porn problem, I think--or it could, anyway).

yet mtgirl says the "porn" is ok, even though "amateur porn" is a thing and there's really very little ability to know what truly has consent and what doesn't. She just wants the ullr thread taken down because she assumes that the people here are less trustworthy than youporn.

[Dexter Rutecki]

Ha, that hadn't occurred to me (the ubiquity of possibly non-consensually taken photos elsewhere, and comparing what probably happens elsewhere on the intrawebz to here). But the fact is that for whatever reason (I suspect because she doesn't want to admit, for some reason, that suppressing all those photos is the goal) she keeps throwing out moving targets and being dishonest in her responses.

But for the possibly the fifth time, and maybe unnecessarily at this point, I'll repeat my position that at this point I think TGR would do well to banish the porn (maybe not people's own photos, but actual porn).

[MTT]

Pretty much explains it all For me anyway

[Meanfruit]

Consent means that a person says they are ok with whatever you are doing.

Yes, you can take these pictures of me, and yes, you can post these pictures on the internet.

That is consent.

Since unless the pictures person posts here, it's likely they won't see the pictures, at least not right away, how can they police it themselves?

The internet is a big place. Posters need to be responsible for their content.

As an aside, people should use due diligence when allowing others to photograph, or have access to photos of them in compromised positions, IMO. You might want to think twice before letting a casual aquaintance snap shots of your genitals. Honestly, just weird shit. Here, take pictures of my dick/pussy. WTF

Sent from my XP7700 using TGR Forums mobile app

[Game Over]

Edit-Spooks a kook so I won't trigger his borderline ass

[hutash]

Fuck ups in the past does not excuse present or future behavior.

[Danno]

Hello! I've always thought the phrase *objectification of women* was not that useful. We all function as sex objects. This isn't inherently bad.

Thank you for your input! Goodbye!

[jmedslc]

Thank you for your input! Goodbye!

Lol nice work

[skiskiskiskiski]

Careful. Posting revenge porn is a felony in some states..

[Dantheman]

Just listened to this guy on Huberman Lab, pretty fascinating.

https://hubermanlab.com/dr-david-bus...and-long-term/
https://www.amazon.com/When-Men-Beha.../dp/0316419354

[The AD]

Is there any particular reason this thread was bumped after lying dormant for four years?

[m2711c]

bots.

[Dantheman]

Yeah, bots. It was already at the top so I figured I'd link to that book--now there's a whole book answering this exact question.

[Danno]

Is there any particular reason this thread was bumped after lying dormant for four years?

see the now-deleted post I quoted (my post looks to be the bump but wasn't).

[abraham]

see the now-deleted post I quoted (my post looks to be the bump but wasn't).

You missed a great chance to call them a dildo.

[Bunion 2020]

A man who stalked and killed two women and used his position as a hospital worker to sexually abuse more than 100 dead bodies has been sentenced to life in jail. David Fuller, 67, was described as a “vulture” by the judge during sentencing remarks on Wednesday as she handed down two life sentences for the 1987 murders and a concurrent 12-year term for his mortuary abuses. “Your actions go against everything that is right and humane,” she said. “They are incomprehensible.” “The sentence I am about to pass means you will spend every day of the rest of your life in prison,” the judge added.

Fuller had previously been linked to the 33-year-old murders of Wendy Knell, 25, and Caroline Pierce, 20, following his identification through a DNA breakthrough. Authorities who raided his home in December 2020 found hard drives stuffed with material of his necrophiliac rapes and extreme Internet pornography. Prosecutors said he had continuously entered the mortuaries of two Tunbridge Wells hospital from 2008 to 2020 to sexually abuse 102 corpses between the ages of 9 and 100. Investigators found that he had researched many of his victims on Facebook after he had attacked them, and that he had recorded his abuse, cataloguing it in various folders, including one labeled “best yet.”

.

[The AD]

see the now-deleted post I quoted (my post looks to be the bump but wasn't).

Got it. Didn't realize that was a deleted post.

[Bobcat Sig]

.