No one here is talking about the particularities of the dude. What defense did he mount? What was the nature of his presentation during the sentencing portion of his trial? Did he exhibit remorse or understanding of his crime? If he maintained that what he did was legal or even ethical during the trial then the judge may have taken that into consideration when considering his sentence. Putting him in jail may have the purpose of preventing him from continuing his criminal behavior if he showed no likelihood of reforming himself. You can be sure he wonât have access to a computer for a long time and the only people he can scheme to damage are his fellow inmates who are capable of defending themselves since he wonât be able to hide behind anonymity in prison.
Plus, an 18 year sentence is probably more like six years in actual fact. The seemingly harsh sentence may be a signal to future parole boards to look carefully at the guy before believing anything he says.
Thatâs what bothers me about it. The notion that the context of these photos makes them particularly âvengefulâ seems rather off to me. Considering other remarks made here:
This to me implies that the guy was exploiting people generally having unhealthy attitudes about sex. The main reason why what he did to people was shitty, was specifically enabled because he could reliably expect people to be shitty to each other. This is what bothers me, not the sentence. If the photos were of people waiting at bus stops nobody would have paid any attention to it.
Those complaining about the 18-year sentence should realize thereâs no way heâll serve anywhere near that amount of time. As a non-violent felon in California heâll be booted out pretty fast to make way for what they consider more dangerous criminals. And even without that heâd have good behavior, and paroleâŚ
Weâre in the dumb territory where you have to give him 18 years to make sure he (maybe) serves 6.
If someone posted a naked picture of me my response would be, âsorry you had to see thatâ. But I donât get to decide someone elseâs reaction. And exploit is definitely the correct word.
I think the stats say that harshness of punishment is not a good deterrent (beyond some limit the US is far past), but that certainty of prosecution is.
Given this apparently went on for a long time before prosecution, and the punishment is pretty big itâs a good example of getting that backward.
In the context of US sentences this seems about right, but that context is certainly insane.
I rambled a lot about this but I think it should be condensed down to this:
Given the context of our overlong incarcerations, this punishment might well be seen as fitting even from a socially liberal Americanâs standpoint, but that context is itself hugely problematic.
Consider the power dynamic involved. The publisher of images has power because we (US society) deem the images to be immoral. In so many words, this guy exploited our conditioned reactions to sexual doxing.
More wordily:
Our norms regarding sexual crime (laws & mores both) reinforce the status quo that that sexuality (especially womenâs) is inherently prurient and that evidence of it is and should be at least shameful and at most ruinous. There is a widespread idea that itâs not merely OK for women to feel shame and be shamed if they exchange imagery of a sexual nature, but that they should.
Given this actuality, many people were ruined or significantly harmed. Considering the actuality and the current state of American sentencing practices and that heâs a white male, itâs arguable that he got off lightly.
Still, I donât think this status quo is right. On a dispassionate level I think the sentence is too long (as are most American incacerations). I donât know that it will properly redress his victimsâ situations, I doubt it will positively reform his character, and I think it will reinforce rather than counteract our culture of shaming.
While the cultural aspect is unfortunate(and has consequences for many more people than were among the victims here), that doesnât seem even remotely exculpatory; though it would be nice if it were not present.
The very most sympathetic interpretation would still be a âtake your victim as you find themâ/âeggshell skullâ smackdown. The much more likely, and much less sympathetic, possibility is that the perp specifically exploited this cultural condition because he knew it would be effective. As it is, he is definitely correct; but even if he were wrong; the deliberate attempt to select a highly effective extortion mechanism would still leave him with some pretty ugly motives.
While it would be nice if mores were different and his extortion attempts had been a vaguely baffling failure; not coming down on him exactly as hard as his actual motives and actual success dictate seems sort of like working along the lines of âMan, itâs really too bad that we have to charge him with murder, if only trauma surgery were more advanced everyone would be better off and it would have just been assaultâ.
[quote=âfuzzyfungus, post:72, topic:54955â]not coming down on him exactly as hard as his actual motives and actual success dictate seems sort of like working along the lines of âMan, itâs really too bad that we have to charge him with murder, if only trauma surgery were more advanced everyone would be better off and it would have just been assaultâ.
[/quote]
I would agree with you if I thought âcoming down hardâ on people achieved meaningful ends beyond satisfying simple vengeance.
And I think your analogy works. Itâs perhaps unsavory, but it seems to be actually true. That is, it is indeed the case that improvement of medicine has increased the severity of violence required to be prosecuted for murder (as opposed to attempted murder).
Continuing the analogy, our moral growth wrt sexuality (and specifically our refusal to fetishize female sexuality) would, I presume, increase the severity of sexual crime necessary to be prosecuted for sexual crimes as they are currently defined.
Ehhhh this has grossed me out quite a lot. I really donât like MRA types and I feel like Iâll be construed as one. I was also brought up in a conservative community and so have strong chauvinistic responses to this guyâs crime (along the lines of âhe hurt women, and women are super unique and so deserve extra protection, therefore he should be punished quite harshlyâ). Iâm really skeptical of those responses because most of the time they have really shitty effects⌠maybe this is a special case. I dunno.
Sure, extortion is a crime in any case. But I disagree with your analogy. Murder is inflicted by the attacker, while the outraged societyâs neurotic mores are inflicted by themselves. Maybe itâs more like exploiting a very stupid - yet predictable - accident of some kind. People often rage about accepting part of the responsibility for this sort of thing, but IMO itâs empowering to know that there are things we do to create this climate, and that we can make it better for people. Shaming is blaming, is it not? If we can accept that blaming the victims is wrong, then maybe we can also leave the shaming of them in the past.
The douchecanoe sourced a lot of his pictures from ex-boyfriends who wanted to fuck up the womanâs life. Thatâs where the âvengefulâ come into it. And, for anyone playing along at home, thatâs where the violence comes into it.
Can I come and live in your utopia where women (and some men!) arenât regularly slut-shamed for having a sex life?
And, regarding the sentencing, think about how that looks for the victims. Imagine that he got 6 months. What does that do to the mental health of one of his victims - to have their pain trivialised by a sentencing judge?
How is normal, healthy living âutopianâ? Maybe sex-negative, shame-mongering people are the dysfunctional idealists. It still puzzles me how/why sex-negative people hypocritically keep reproducing if they think itâs so âwrongâ.
Like I said, if we donât tolerate victims being blamed for the poor treatment they receive from others, then we shouldnât accept them being shamed either. Sympathy is nice, but only goes so far. Why not speak up and encourage people to be proud and open about their sexuality? This seems to go a lot further towards an equitable society than being willing to punish the occasional offender, but yet accepting that we should wallow in a victimizing culture.
Oh, I am with you, believe me. I call it a utopia because it is so, so very far from what I see now.
And just because you are able to live a normal and healthy life, free of sex-negativity, doesnât mean the vast majority of (for the most part) women are able to enjoy the same luxury. Some of the victims of this website lost their jobs because of this douchecanoe. You can argue that the blame for that should rest with their employers (and, yes, some of it should) but this asshole ran his website so successfully because he knew that was the likely outcome of these pictures getting out.
Just to be clear, I do encounter sex-negative attitudes with regards to my own situation, I simply donât accept them. I gave up on allowing myself (or others) to be shamed. One cannot control others responses, but one can always master oneâs own outlook and resolve. If people refuse to accept who you are, you donât need them in your life anyway. Internalizing their values and resorting to self-censorship IMO might be even more harmful in the long term.
