Here are two stories but basically the same thing.
22 year old woman sends nude photographs of herself to a long distance boyfriend over the internet, sexting with pictures. Her pictures end up on websites across the internet.
47 year old man sends shirtless and sexually graphic photographs of himself to women over the internet, sexting with pictures. His pictures end up on websites across the internet.
Both expect the recipients to keep the photographs for themselves and not to send them to anyone else. Both are idiots.
But why is one portrayed as a pervert and the other portrayed as a victim?
Is it because when a man does it society automatically labels him a pervert that got exposed and when a woman does it society automatically refers to her as a victim of being violated?
Now there are differences. The 22 year old woman was not married and sending her photographs to a long distance boyfriend while the 47 year old man was married and sending various photographs of himself, some graphic and some not, to several women across the country. But both still probably expected, whether entitled or not, to not have the photographs distributed outside those private communications.
So again I ask: Why is the woman being portrayed as a victim of betrayal and why is the man being portrayed as just a pervert? Were not both betrayed by the people they sent their photographs too?
The 22 year old woman who is now 30 is Holly Jacobs who claims she is an "internet rape" victim. The nude photos she sent to her now ex-boyfriend ended up on internet porn sites called "revenge porn" less than a year after their breakup. She claims it violates her again and again just like real rape does. She has a point that her photographs were posted online without her knowledge or consent in a public and humiliating way when they were meant to be private.
But was not Anthony Weiner's photographs that were obtained by the media from those women he sent them to privately not posted in a public and humilating way also? We can say he was wrong for betraying his wife by sending photographs to other women and we can despise him for that.
And we can certainly call him stupid. But is not Holly Jacobs also stupid? A stupid victim, like Anthony Weiner?
My point is this:
If Anthony Weiner is stupid, then so is Holly Jacobs. If Holly Jacobs is a victim of being betrayed and violated, then so is Anthony Weiner. Neither one of them expected the recipients of their photogrpahs to post them online, one to porn sites, and the other in the media. Neither one of them have any legal expectation of privacy regarding those pictures under most current laws however. If one is stupid then so is the other. If one was violated then so was the other.
Obviously no one is going to defend Anthony Weiner's stupidity. Not too many people, if any, are referring to him as a victim. In fact some people refer to the recipients of his photographs as victims. Many people will probably also consider Holly Jacobs as stupid, but why should the same people that refer to Anthony Weiner as a mere pervert, refer to her as a victim?
The Police in Miami where she lived did not refer to her as a victim and took no action because she was over 18 and consented under the law. Once she sent her boyfriend the photographs they were his property and could do whatever he wanted to with them - just like the women that sent Anthony Weiner's pictures to the media.
Holly Jacobs is now taking action herself by creating a website called "End Revenge Porn" and formed a group called Cyber Civil Rights Inititive (CCRI) which she is CEO and executive director. She wants to change the laws to make it a crime to post photographs online when they were exchanged with the assumption of remaining private. Good for her, right? Okay, but would that not make it a crime then when the women sent Anthony Weiner's pictures to the media?
A 22 year old woman sends digital nude photographs to another person on the internet, sexting, with the assumption the recipient keeps them private but they end up online.
A 47 year old man sends digital nude photographs to another person on the internet, sexting, with the assumption the recipient keeps them private but they end up online.
To me they are both the same thing. Both stupid. And they can both be considered victims. And they can both be perverts. But to me it is hypocriticial to refer to one exclusively as a victim and to one exclusively as a pervert.
The woman, by the way, also had a video of her performing sex acts on herself end up on the internet too.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/revenge-porn-victim-speaks-article-1.1334147