Re: A Family's Horror -- and the Role of Google Images

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: L Jean Camp <ljcamp () indiana edu>
> Date: February 6, 2010 5:08:59 PM EST
> To: dave () farber net
> Subject: Re: [IP] Re: A Family's Horror -- and the Role of Google  
> Images

> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: "Jonathan S. Shapiro" <shap () eros-os org>
> Date: February 5, 2010 2:33:20 PM EST
> To: dave () farber net
> Cc: ip <ip () v2 listbox com>
> Subject: Re: [IP] re A Family's Horror -- and the Role of Google  
> Images
>
> [For IP, if you like]Should a police officer have disclosed evidence  
> in this fashion? Certainly not. But it might just as well have been  
> a reporter or a passer-by with a camera, and *that* person is under  
> no moral or ethical constraint in this situation. The officer at the  
> scene's error lies in acting momentarily in a normal (if  
> regrettable) civilian role when his professional role was called  
> for. The officers who re-circulated the photo acted insensitively  
> and in bad taste, but if they did it using personal resources they  
> have done no wrong, and if they did it using office resources they  
> have done no more wrong than you or I do daily at *our* jobs in  
> using our employers' resources for momentary personal activity. I do  
> not like these conclusions, but they are no less true for my dislike.
>
>
> Just because a thing is appropriately legal does not make it right  
> or even "not wrong".  I do hope we can grow to a point where it is  
> the person who posts the video or photo is the subject of shame, not  
> the subject of the image.    Adultery, is a case in point. Now in a  
> heterosexual relationship when a man breaks his vows, it is widely  
> seen as shameful to the man and not the woman. It certainly should  
> not be illegal, and a spouse who is betrayed is not the one  
> deserving of opprobrium.  This is a significant, even radical,   
> social change.
>
> Now when a girl sends a semi-nude photo to an untrustworthy forward- 
> happy male, she is one shamed for being sexual while the betraying  
> male is relieved of agency. To add to this the claim that what is  
> done is, "no wrong", is to add insult to injury. When an adult male  
> in a position of authority sends imagery out to the world for the  
> entertainment of others in the actual destruction of a teenage girl,  
> this is in no way "not wrong".
>
> Social change that can happen. But for it to happen, we have to  
> acknowledge that it is the voyeurs and posters, not the subject, who  
> are in the wrong.
>
> thanks -



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com