Typically, at the start of public events where you may be photographed, it’s up to the organizers to put up signs letting participants know (a helpful reminder) that, “by participating in this event you may appear in a photograph or on video.” Responsible organizers do so, and that tends to prevent later confusion.
2 Likes
Man, check out the corners on that pixel! I’d marquee-tool that!
2 Likes
If he’s a surf photog the same guy probably has a ridiculous telephoto lens. He could take a crisp junk shot at hundreds of metres if he wanted to.
We’ve already figured out the cultural norms: Are you in public? Are you upset about being photographed or filmed? Then go somewhere private.
2 Likes
Wait until glassholes start getting assaulted too.
Dude, what do you mean wait?
Luddite morons of the mission district who don’t understand supply and demand have already taken to attacking people with Glass.
show the guy physically and offensively invading someone’s personal space and refusing to leave.
That’s your assertion. He’s doing nothing illegal (except filming on private property). You can stand on the sidewalk and film inside a private property, but you cannot stand in that private property and record without the owner’s permission.
has some kind of agenda with the footage.
Again, merely your assertion.
There is no promised payoff of increased security or even the implicit assumption that the footage will be used in an ethical way or destroyed once it has fulfilled its purpose.
So? Nor is that a promise for any particular security camera, nor is there any promise that security footage will eventually be destroyed. Worse yet, In-store security camera footage can be tied to your financial transactions, all of which can be added to a database for potentially far more nefarious purposes than sticking up on youtube to make a philosophical point.
It’s literally just an asshole with a camera who is obviously going to upload the video to YouTube.
When you find the law or rule that says he’s doing something disallowed come back and type more. Until then:
Edit: I watched a few more of his vids. Some of what the guy does could be construed as harassment, and the one where he’s filming a taxi while standing in front of it on a crosswalk is both douchey and illegal. I think he would be sensible to do things that are strictly legal as his social commentary would have more weight. I actually find it fascinating that by doing something entirely legal he can entice members of the public into doing things that are illegal. I really like the subjects who are just like “Hey man…sup?”
1 Like
Can you explain what aspect of SEXUAL violence she inflicted on the young man ?
Question: Would ripping a 17 year-old girl’s shirt off be considered a sexual assault? If so, why not for a boy?
3 Likes
Did a quick check through my history and it didn’t pop out at me. I’ll look again in more detail tomorrow.
Dude - many of the women who have attempted to report an incident of sexual assault or domestic violence to law enforcement or other authorities are already familiar with their reports being scrutinized, doubted or treated dismissively (see: tens of thousands of untested rape kits in uncontrolled, uncatalogued storage).
For every “abuse” such as this - there are thousands of incidents of assault , sexual assault, violation of privacy that girls/women have TRIED to report which are essentially ignored. Tenfold if the woman is of a “marginal identity”(ie non-white, poor, obviously LBGTQ identified, not a US citizen, not gender normative, mentally ill, sex worker, too young, too old, not "dressed properly"etc.).
1 Like
Yeah, I gotta say, she had him in a submissive position, was taunting him and ripped off his shirt for the express purpose of exposing his torso. She probably wasn’t doing something that would be considered a sexual attack, but that’s only because she wasn’t doing for sexual gratification (that’s usually a required component, so I doubt she’ll even be charged that way). The attack was due to her responding to a perceived threat in a manner that isn’t OK with our legal system.
Her history won’t excuse her attacking a stranger. I already posted a link to the current CT laws for voyeurism and various other public misbehaviors. If she’d been attacked in the past, she’d be well-versed in them and know that he had every right to film at a state beach.
1 Like
Here’s his video, direct from the source. It appears to be unedited. It’s from his youtube, where you can view other high flight videos shot prior to the assault.
1 Like
It’s certainly not rape. I wish I had made that more clear in my post.
She attacked him because she thought he was “perving” and wanted him to stop. She used violence to suppress what she assumed to be prurient activity on his part.
It’s not rape, but it’s not the opposite of rape. (inverse? contra-positive?) I think, culturally, we don’t have a good name for this.
If a girl is “slut-shamed” because she is wearing clothing that some viewer considers to be excessively revealing, do we not consider that a form of sexual harassment? If she were to be physically attacked because of her attire, would we not consider that to be sexual violence?
I suppose where I’m going with this is: I don’t think sexual violence need necessarily have the sexual gratification of the attacker as its motive.
What should we call violence that is intended to control the legal sexual behavior of others?
Not so. She attacked him after he stopped and was in the process of putting away his equipment. She even laid hands on his photography gear. His own video shows that. He was packing to leave peacefully, and she prevented it. Any judge worth their salt will say that she incited the violence herself.
She perceived a false threat, it tried to leave, and she didn’t let it.
We already have a word for that: “assault”.
BTW, I think she may have thought he was some other type of threat (not sexual, but political). He’s smaller than her, and she doesn’t say “he’s taking pictures of girls” she says “he’s taking pictures of people”. If she isn’t a crank (and I posted that she may be an actress), this may be an entirely different kind of fear.
1 Like
Admit it: You added the, “…and ripped her shirt off” part just because the image pleases you.
You were doing fine until then. Making a good point and then you took a hard left into Penthouse Forum territory.
She was standing her foreground.
3 Likes
Have you watched the video?
At one point during the assault she calls him a “little pervert.”
It’s uncomfortable stuff to watch, but listen to what she says at about the 1:05 mark in the very YouTube link you shared, a few posts above.
She thinks he was perving. She wants him punished. When he shows signs of leaving before the police arrive, she takes matters into her own hands. She didn’t intend to restrain him for the police, because at 1:51 she declares “I’m going to beat your ass, you little motherfucker.”
I think her motive is pretty clear.
1 Like
I didn’t “add” anything. I mentioned it because in the video, she ripped his shirt off. Had the exact events from this video taken place with swapped genders, the attacker would certainly have been charged with sexual assault.
2 Likes
Of course I’ve seen it. I’m the one who went and found it.
I’m also the person who found her listing as an actress. You’re getting pretty snarky here. You kinda totally glossed over the fact that I said MAY (twice) about another reason she might have originally called the cops. She’s clearly very confused about what’s going on, because it’s after she pins him and he tries to break hold that she tells him to let go of her! All I did was posit another reason for her initial reaction, not her behavior during the full incident.
Her motive isn’t clear, only her behavior is.
Except the North American social and cultural standards decree that women’s breasts and nipples are obscene/sexualized and must be hidden from public sight, even while performing their natural function (ie breast-feeding), while the male nipple/chest is not obscene. There is a difference between her ripping his shirt off, and a boy/man ripping off a girl/woman’s shirt off.
Not that any form of physical assault is right or correct.
1 Like
I apologize for that. My question “Have you watched the video?” was out of line.
I admire your suspension of judgement about motive here. I have certainly reached a conclusion, but I respect that you have not.
Let us hope the legal system gets it right.
2 Likes
