Clearly you missed my point… sending indecent images to ANY unwilling and unknowing participant is deplorable and could be a sex crime. How is it different to running around a park and flashing people?
Ahh that one is easy: because it’s not a sex crime. Feel free to tell me the statute if I missed something here. Sex crimes include sexual assault, rape and I beleive harassment, however sexual harassment may be covered by other statutes.
You um… you have an email account right?
You uh… ever get spam with unsolicited nudes? Or you know, unsolicited commercial email (spam)? You know how those spammers don’t get fined or thrown in jail? This is because it isn’t a crime, or at least not a well enforced crime.
“Your honor, after paychologically abusing my child for years they sent me a photo of their nude form, something I already have baby photos of. This as I understand it is a crime.”
You have lost it, you are defending the sending of unsolicited indecent photos to individuals who did not ask, nor want them. Both OP and OPs dad are in the wrong here.
Defending one person sending an indecent photos to an unwilling recipient is the same as defending them all.
Leave me alone.
Also I don’t get spammed with spam emails, I have better controls around how and when I use my email address to avoid being on marketing lists et al.
You talk about context, and then come out with that shit?! The context here is that OPs dad misgendered her (OP indicates that this is something that has been going on for a while, to a point where it has caused irreparable damage to their relationship) so by means of retaliation to this particular interaction, but assumingly out of frustration of the constant bullshit he puts her through, she takes a photo of her vagina and sends it to her dad… Both are acting out of malice; ergo, both are cunts.
Clearly you missed my point… sending indecent images to ANY unwilling and unknowing participant is deplorable and could be a sex crime. How is it different to running around a park and flashing people?
Ahh that one is easy: because it’s not a sex crime. Feel free to tell me the statute if I missed something here. Sex crimes include sexual assault, rape and I beleive harassment, however sexual harassment may be covered by other statutes.
You um… you have an email account right?
You uh… ever get spam with unsolicited nudes? Or you know, unsolicited commercial email (spam)? You know how those spammers don’t get fined or thrown in jail? This is because it isn’t a crime, or at least not a well enforced crime.
“Your honor, after paychologically abusing my child for years they sent me a photo of their nude form, something I already have baby photos of. This as I understand it is a crime.”
You have lost it, you are defending the sending of unsolicited indecent photos to individuals who did not ask, nor want them. Both OP and OPs dad are in the wrong here.
Defending one person sending an indecent photos to an unwilling recipient is the same as defending them all.
Leave me alone.
Also I don’t get spammed with spam emails, I have better controls around how and when I use my email address to avoid being on marketing lists et al.
You’re a real dumb pile of shit, or are willfully acting in bad faith. Context is key, fuckwit.
Please leave me alone, we are going in circles.
Removed by mod
I feel like you are trying to pivot this argument because you cant put your point across without exposing yourself.
Removed by mod
You talk about context, and then come out with that shit?! The context here is that OPs dad misgendered her (OP indicates that this is something that has been going on for a while, to a point where it has caused irreparable damage to their relationship) so by means of retaliation to this particular interaction, but assumingly out of frustration of the constant bullshit he puts her through, she takes a photo of her vagina and sends it to her dad… Both are acting out of malice; ergo, both are cunts.
Removed by mod
Sure bud. Whatever you say.
“Retaliation to abuse is just the same as abuse, I am very intelligent”