Translate

Thursday, 12 February 2015

Deal with the problem of revenge porn AT SOURCE through slut-shaming

'Revenge porn' illegal under new law in England and Wales

The Koran has an excellent way of dealing with stupid sluts who photograph themselves performing lewd acts, send them to random men for the purpose of arousing them and then complain when the men  pass them on to other men or post them online.

004.015
YUSUFALI: If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, Take the evidence of four (Reliable) witnesses from amongst you against them; and if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them, or Allah ordain for them some (other) way.
PICKTHAL: As for those of your women who are guilty of lewdness, call to witness four of you against them. And if they testify (to the truth of the allegation) then confine them to the houses until death take them or (until) Allah appoint for them a way (through new legislation).
SHAKIR: And as for those who are guilty of an indecency from among your women, call to witnesses against them four (witnesses) from among you; then if they bear witness confine them to the houses until death takes them away or Allah opens some way for them.

In this case 4 people viewing the lewd image in question will constitute the 4 reliable witnesses and the slut's goose is as good as cooked. This will send a very strong message to other sluts so inclined to do the same to refrain from doing so.

Pornographic images of people sent to you willingly by people you know should become your property after you receive them, just as letters and messages sent to you become yours after you receive them.

2 comments:

I'll show you mine ... said...

Why isn't this just an ordinary copyright matter? The owner of the image can take legal action against the distributor or the sites that display the pictures/film.

If someone sends an image without contract or copyright then it is the recipients' property to do as they please.

If it is claimed they did not consent to the image being taken then they should have went to the police at the time.

If we accept this law then shouldn't it apply to any photographic image according to the perception of the 'victim'? For example, if someone puts a photo online of me without my wig and false teeth could I claim I am a victim of a revenge attack, that I am traumatised and that my reputation is ruined?

And what if the 'revenge porn' leads the 'victim' to securing a better man, or celebrity status?

Claire Khaw said...

If a wife sends sexually arousing images of herself to her husband and he publicises them, he would be infringing the rule of spousal privilege. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spousal_privilege

Of course this rule would exclude stupid sluts who send lewd images of themselves to random men.

As for a photograph of you looking a fright without your wig or your dentures, I think it would depend on how the photograph came to be taken. If it was taken as a result of trespass, without your permission and co-operation then it would be evidence that the person in possession of the photograph had committed a wrong ie trespass.