hey gawker dudes. what the fuck is wrong with you?

"YOU GUYS ACCUSING MY FRIEND OF HOMOPHOBIA ARE THE REAL HOMOPHOBES." so embarrassing.

even if he's out to his wife, i imagine being outed to the world at large as a client of gay porn star escorts might make his life difficult

think in a way both sides of that privacy debate really belong to that generation, teasing out the rules while older generations are bewildered that anyone would have nude shots on their phone or feel violated when it was used w/o their consent, like 'if you don't want yr nude shots to get out don't take them and have them on yr phone are you crazy' is a new version of old reactionary 'if you were a good girl you wouldn't be out at that hour dressed like that and nothing would have happened to you'. to nearly every person in their early 20's i know bfs sending gfs dick pics and gfs sending bfs poorly shot vag pics is almost routine. think the success of yik yak ties into that also somehow.

that's why I added "of course"

xpost

― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:00 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

what you did was a take a sentence out of context from a post so you could ignore the post was saying all the things you were, along with some other stuff.

zing economy.

anyway two more things that bug me while i'm at it:

1) all this "wife and family" stuff. lots of people have spouses and families. why does that make a difference one way or another. you can't out of one side of your mouth complain about victorian morality or w/e and out of the other be shouting "think of the children"

2) everyone asserting some sort of connection between "oooh... and CN owns... reddit!" for one thing it isn't true. CN bought reddit, but then handed it over to the parent company, advance publications, as a direct subsidiary sometime around 2011. So CN hasn't owned or run reddit for some time now. And a bit later, advance spun reddit out so it is an independent company with advance being the majority shareholder. Like this "CN/Reddit/feud" story sounds good on the face of it, but check your facts

max was the one saying 'think of the children'

and anyone who plays the "but this ruined those kids lives!" card isn't?

"YOU GUYS ACCUSING MY FRIEND OF HOMOPHOBIA ARE THE REAL HOMOPHOBES." so embarrassing.

Not to mention anyone defending anyone from homophobia by disclosing their sexuality as if gay men aren't notoriously among the most homophobic people out there.

(Or, at least, this one is.)

(xxp) not really comparing like with like there

whether their father made personal decisions that hurt his family is entirely for him and his wife and children to work through. the victorian morality is to expose the family's private scandal for the sake of the children being traumatized by their philandering (maybe) gay porn star hiring father. once the media makes it public though, we all have a stake in whether that story hurt the children bc the media ostensibly exists for the benefit of the public. the father wasn't hiring an escort in the name of the public interest. gawker was outing him in the name of the public interest.

'if you don't want yr nude shots to get out don't take them and have them on yr phone are you crazy' is a new version of old reactionary 'if you were a good girl you wouldn't be out at that hour dressed like that and nothing would have happened to you'

lol @ this analogy um no

I mean in one way I guess it's fun/interesting/apt to compare capitalist corporate hegemony as being akin to misogynist patriarchy but surely if anyone's naive it's the people investing any credence in the idea that there is privacy in digital relationships. there isn't and there never will be.

yeah sorry i'm not gonna buy it's ok to post hacked nude shots or post revenge porn w/o consent. i know you're a skeptic of "consent" in general though.

like you can simultaneously think that there's nothing wrong with the father's behavior AND that revealing that behavior could damage his family. all you have to do is recognize that not everyone has the same evolved morality that you do, and that even objectively fine behavior can have negative consequences when revealed.

yeah sorry i'm not gonna buy it's ok to post hacked nude shots or post revenge porn w/o consent. i know you're a skeptic of "consent" in general though.

I'm p explicitly not making that argument, just calling out yr stupid anlogy but whatever. dunno why you would think I'm a skeptic on "consent" either.

for another thread, perhaps

tbh i think it's OK to think cheating is wrong

true tho a. we don't know if he was cheating and b. even if it's wrong it's not in the public interest wrong

young ppl are often naive but new social mores are often born of naïveté. i still don't think a woman whose ex posts sex tapes of her is getting what she deserves, we can agree to disagree on that, but my point is for old fucks like us it's an actual conversation while for young ppl yr viewpoint might seem old fashioned or reactionary instead of just common sense. for me personally keeping amateur porn of yrself on yr person is ridiculous but to my dad the whole idea of netflix is ridiculous.

ten years from now this entire conversation will be ridiculous
possibly ten minutes

there seems like a direct line between any kind of shared intimacy whether that be digitally recorded or strictly verbal, and i don't see how the breaking of a confidence is any more acceptable with the one than with the other

like "you were crazy to let that person film you naked" is only, perhaps, a question of degree compared to "you were crazy to tell that person anything about yourself you didn't want publicly broadcast"

B===D~~~gawker~~

you can believe an expectation of privacy is naive and still think that the violation of that privacy is bad. like reporting from a war zone without realizing you might get caught in the crossfire is naive but the people who killed Daniel pearl are still evil fucks

the "people's sex lives are inherently interesting" assertion bugs, prurient interest isn't public interest. not saying i expected sound moral reasoning but this is fucking weird

also "my gay brothers" fuck outta here with that solidarity you extend to your gay coworkers but not to closeted gay men

that's why I added "of course"

xpost

― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:00 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

what you did was a take a sentence out of context from a post so you could ignore the post was saying all the things you were, along with some other stuff.

zing economy.

what you need to do is fuck off

you can believe an expectation of privacy is naive and still think that the violation of that privacy is bad

it's not that expectation of privacy is "naive", it doesn't seem more naive now that at any point in history as far as people's obligations to one another are concerned - the real step change is the ability to broadcast indiscretion so widely so quickly, not that people as individuals are now more likely to be indiscreet

the "people's sex lives are inherently interesting" assertion bugs, prurient interest isn't public interest. not saying i expected sound moral reasoning but this is fucking weird

also "my gay brothers" fuck outta here with that solidarity you extend to your gay coworkers but not to closeted gay men

― gwyneth anger (patron sailor), Tuesday, July 21, 2015 12:34 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i could be dead wrong about this but has richjuz expressed a certain hostility to the closeted in the past?

idk i shouldn't probably not even post that but w/e, it's in the spirit of the times

He's expressed a certain hostility toward anyone who isn't as sex-positive as he is.

(That's what makes him so sexually attractive.)

https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/3e1oj1/gawker_drama_jordan_sargent_incinerates_sam/

hey gamer dudes. what are jokes to you?

there seems like a direct line between any kind of shared intimacy whether that be digitally recorded or strictly verbal, and i don't see how the breaking of a confidence is any more acceptable with the one than with the other

― Does she write about anything other than love, relationships, etc (Noodle Vague), Tuesday, July 21, 2015 12:31 PM (8 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Very well-stated.

yeah i don't want to compare jlaw to daniel pearl but yeah there seems to be a delineation going on of 1) of course privacy practically doesn't exist 2) at the same time betraying it is completely unacceptable and can't be tolerated or promoted. w/ older ppl there's a heavier element of 'what were you thinking- of course this will happen' in the discussion while w/ young ppl (ime) there's a heavier element of 'of course she had a pic of her asshole on her phone, everyone has a pic of their asshole on their phone. that doesn't mean someone else gets to show the world her asshole'. how much of that is a new social norm developing and how much of it is kids are stupid or olds are prudes i don't know.

i know what you're saying about olds but people back in ye olden days have been blackmailed over polaroids, love letters, whatever...people have recorded things that they mightn't want shared with the world for as long as there's been some medium for recording.

and i'm sure each older generation wd be like "wait...you wrote that shit down???"

Privacy has only ever existed to the extent that we're collectively willing to acknowledge and respect others' desire for privacy. Which is what I was trying to say way upthread wrt things like revenge porn feeling most essentially like a violation of the social contract. Because, yeah, the more we permit violations of privacy, the more it really will cease to exist even as a tenuous notion.

like reporting from a war zone without realizing you might get caught in the crossfire is naive but the people who killed Daniel pearl are still evil fucks

Just when you thought gawker's self-aggrandizing couldn't get any worse, we hand them a daniel pearl analogy.

everyone has a pic of their asshole on their phone. that doesn't mean someone else gets to show the world her asshole'. how much of that is a new social norm developing and how much of it is kids are stupid or olds are prudes i don't know.

it's automatically OK though if it's Cokie Roberts' asshole.

or Cokie Roberts' sister

o yeah, it's just now the creation of that, uh, vulnerable media is so easy and more routine and at the same time more easily disseminated (now you can even distribute it to millions of ppl and not have the victim find out until long after if at all).

well I wasn't exactly comparing gawker writers to pearl - in this analogy gawker are the beheaders

i think gawker would be the taliban in mordy's analogy

as i say, i think it's the ease of dissemination that's the real killer. yr scarlet letter can now be visible everywhere in the world all at once

i could be dead wrong about this but has richjuz expressed a certain hostility to the closeted in the past?

idk i shouldn't probably not even post that but w/e, it's in the spirit of the times

― goole, Tuesday, July 21, 2015 12:39 PM (22 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

turns out i'm wrong about this, fyi

Again, a generational thing, but most people under a certain age are in pretty solid agreement that, all mitigating circumstances aside, being closeted is not preferable to being open.

in this analogy gawker are the beheaders

you say that as if gawker wouldn't want to be compared to the beheaders.

1) of course privacy practically doesn't exist 2) at the same time betraying it is completely unacceptable and can't be tolerated or promoted.

yes agree w this, it's all good balls

i swear anytime any ilxor is all 'fuck this place' or 'fuck this ilxor' just go glance at reddit real quick and you'll get perspective pretty quick. you dudes are alright in my book.

quick generational check: does EVERYBODY have a picture of their asshole on their phone? asking for a friend

xp smdh at the conclusion of that richjuz piece.

We will continue to risk outrage by telling the truth. We will continue to make editorial decisions that yield self-righteous denouncement. We will continue to publish stories that even our coworkers dislike and disagree with because every human being on earth has his or her own interpretation of what the truth is and what the pursuit of it entails.

Yeah, this seems like a great time to debate the nature of truth. These are exactly the kind of deep philosophical questions that outing a CFO on a gossip site invites. And not at all a pompous way of saying "quit being mean to my friend, everyone."