An Image Site Is Victimizing Countless Women and Little Can Be Done (vice.com)

Allison Tierney, reporting for Vice: An international anonymous photo-sharing site where people post explicit photos without consent is playing host to the victimization of countless women. In the Canadian section of Anon-IB alone, there are currently over a hundred threads -- often organized by region, city, or calling out for nudes of a specific woman to be posted publicly. "Hamilton hoes," "Nanaimo Thread!," and "Markham wins" are some titles of Canadian threads. (Language used on the site equates the word "win" with sexually explicit photos of women.) Many major Canadian cities are represented on the site, and some threads even focus on women from specific schools. While it's a crime to share an "intimate image" of a person without their consent in Canada, sites that host this kind of activity don't necessarily fall under this. "[In terms of organizing content], is it criminal? No. Is it illegal? No," Toronto-based lawyer Jordan Donich, of Donich Law, told VICE. "It's a newer version of an older problem -- sites like these have been around for a long time." Anon-IB is not a new site; its current domain was registered to a "private person" in 2015 and ends in an ".ru." However, the site was initially up several years before 2015, going offline briefly in 2014.

Comments

Don't pose nude

[Anonymous Coward]

does that help?

Re:Don't pose nude

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it really victim blaming if the cold-hearted truth and reality of the situation is this will continue to exist and the "victim" shares their personal pictures with the wrong type of person freely?

Re:Don't pose nude

[Anonymous Coward]

you can do both you realise?

It's like leaving your door unlocked in a rough neighborhood, then getting robbed.

You are still a victim, and the robber still deserves the full punishment of the law. but just because you put yourself in a POTENTIAL situation, doesn't mean that someone exploiting it is without blame.

Fuck that site.

Re:Don't pose nude

[AmiMoJo]

Not really... This is just the latest problem. Paparrazi taking photos of celebrities on their private property through a zoom lens has been happening since zoom lenses were invented. It's getting worse with the availability of cheap drones.

We need to decide if we want private spaces and if privacy is to be enforced by high walls and anti-aircraft guns, or some other means.

Re:Don't pose nude

[ShanghaiBill]

Many of the photos were taken without permission. Even if permission were given to take a picture, that should not automatically include permission to distribute it. In some cases, the photos were copied by technicians from laptops or phones that were being serviced.

You may feel that women "deserve" abuse if they are not sufficiently chaste, but you may feel different if it is your GF, sister, or daughter.

The failure of the law to deal with this issue invites vigilante action. In my neighborhood a young man posted explicit pictures of his ex-girlfriend, and was hospitalized after a severe beating by an unknown assailant. His GF's four older brothers denied involvement.

Re:Don't pose nude

[gfxguy]

It's not about victim blaming, it's about prevention - you can make yourself NOT be a victim if you're not comfortable with the world seeing you nude by NOT POSING NUDE. That doesn't mean the people that violate your trust aren't guilty (of at least violating your trust, if not something illegal).

Hey, if I leave my car unlocked and someone steals something inside it, the scumbag who stole my stuff is still guilty - but I could have limited my chances of being a victim if I'd have locked my doors. It's an unfortunate side of society that we need to expend resources keeping people from violating our rights, but it is the way it is.

How is this news?

[icedcool]

This is an opinion piece, about outrage and victimization. How is this tech?
Why do we have this on slashdot news?