• PhilSex (Philosophy of Sex ) - 1. Naughty Pictures

    1295986802
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6223
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    I've planned a series! I have a series of philosophical questions I've thought about that in some way relate to sex. Seeing as some of us love a good debate why not actively create one for all the super clever people to chime in to. Of course I'll stop if it falls flat on it's face but hopefully it'll bring a bit of thought, insight, musings and pondering! Forgive the long-winded title, it just allows easy searching.

    My first topic is:

    "Who owns naughty pictures and what can you do with them?"

    I can see scope for discussion of this because it seems we wish to, or do, have ownership over intimate photos we may not otherwise if the picture was mundane. I also believe it raises interesting questions because the law seems to support the view that photos of a personal nature should be treated differently than, say, a few holiday snaps.

    So when you consent to your photo being taken what control should you have over the images afterwards?

    Is there a valid reason the photographer shouldn't be able to do what they want when the same objection wouldn't be met concerning a snap of you in the street?

    Can you 'remove' the rights of the photographer to prioritise your rights (imagine causing harm to someone's livelihood to keep your 'dignity')?

    Does the context in how they were taken make a difference? Do you have less rights over 'selling' your body as a model compared to having a spur of the moment horn as a OH?

    What is the shape of the informal contract when you pass on pictures (is non-sharing an unwritten clause?)?

    If there are unwritten clauses what form do they take?

    Anything to add or another question to consider then please do!

    1295988528
    Dirty Red Angel [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 694
    • Joined: 16 Sep 2010

    WandA wrote:

    I've planned a series! I have a series of philosophical questions I've thought about that in some way relate to sex. Seeing as some of us love a good debate why not actively create one for all the super clever people to chime in to. Of course I'll stop if it falls flat on it's face but hopefully it'll bring a bit of thought, insight, musings and pondering! Forgive the long-winded title, it just allows easy searching.

    My first topic is:

    "Who owns naughty pictures and what can you do with them?"

    I can see scope for discussion of this because it seems we wish to, or do, have ownership over intimate photos we may not otherwise if the picture was mundane. I also believe it raises interesting questions because the law seems to support the view that photos of a personal nature should be treated differently than, say, a few holiday snaps.

    So when you consent to your photo being taken what control should you have over the images afterwards?

    Is there a valid reason the photographer shouldn't be able to do what they want when the same objection wouldn't be met concerning a snap of you in the street?

    Can you 'remove' the rights of the photographer to prioritise your rights (imagine causing harm to someone's livelihood to keep your 'dignity')?

    Does the context in how they were taken make a difference? Do you have less rights over 'selling' your body as a model compared to having a spur of the moment horn as a OH?

    What is the shape of the informal contract when you pass on pictures (is non-sharing an unwritten clause?)?

    If there are unwritten clauses what form do they take?

    Anything to add or another question to consider then please do!

    Whilst I'm constructing an answer to your questions I thought I'd better ask a question.

    Can us none super clever people chime in too

    1295988658
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6223
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    Hehe. Indeed. Philosophy is open to all, it deals with the mental spacy questions and the small everyday details.

    Feedback on the idea would also be good!

    1295989077
    Dirty Red Angel [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 694
    • Joined: 16 Sep 2010

    Firstly, I do own naughty pictures and have pictures that I've taken and that have been sent to me.

    None identify me by my face but to those that really know me, they'd know it was me!

    I think if you have your picture taken in an intimate setting your privacy should be respected. In my case, I made it clear that the photo's were for the eyes of the recipient only and there would probably be (bad) repercussions if they were discovered by someone else. Equally, I wouldn't show anyone the pictures I was sent without permission of the other person HOWEVER I have been sent pictures without the consent of the person in the photo BUT I'm the type of person that would equally respect the privacy of the random person and not forward that on either.

    In respect of your photo being taken in the street - I'm not naked or provocatively posed in the street!! And to be fair I don't want my picture taken without my consent anyway (as far as it can be helped) since I take a crap picture!

    I think its all about respect. If intimate pictures are taken by your partner/OH you wouldn't expect them to be forwarded on, whereas in a business transaction like a model, you do expect your picture to be taken and sold and forwarded.

    I guess the other question would be, in the even of a relationship breakdown do you keep the intimate photos or delete them?!

    1295989291
    Dirty Red Angel [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 694
    • Joined: 16 Sep 2010

    And in response to feedback, I have no idea if I'm any good at philosophical debate and I may miss the point but I've replied anyway lol

    1295989539
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6223
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    LittleKitty wrote:

    Firstly, I do own naughty pictures and have pictures that I've taken and that have been sent to me.

    None identify me by my face but to those that really know me, they'd know it was me!

    I think if you have your picture taken in an intimate setting your privacy should be respected. In my case, I made it clear that the photo's were for the eyes of the recipient only and there would probably be (bad) repercussions if they were discovered by someone else. Equally, I wouldn't show anyone the pictures I was sent without permission of the other person HOWEVER I have been sent pictures without the consent of the person in the photo BUT I'm the type of person that would equally respect the privacy of the random person and not forward that on either.

    In respect of your photo being taken in the street - I'm not naked or provocatively posed in the street!! And to be fair I don't want my picture taken without my consent anyway (as far as it can be helped) since I take a crap picture!

    I think its all about respect. If intimate pictures are taken by your partner/OH you wouldn't expect them to be forwarded on, whereas in a business transaction like a model, you do expect your picture to be taken and sold and forwarded.

    I guess the other question would be, in the even of a relationship breakdown do you keep the intimate photos or delete them?!

    This is the interesting bit in my opinion. The rest of your post is probably a fair summary of how many of us feel but this bit challenges ownership of the images. Who owns them and under what rights? Perhaps there are comparisons to be drawn to computer licenses, some expire and they can only be used on one machine! Although I feel myself agreeing to the use of the photos under that contract I don't really agree with the licensing terms of many computer programs, I feel if I buy something (or it's given to me) it should be mine to do with how I please. Is it a loan?

    1295989943
    Dirty Red Angel [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 694
    • Joined: 16 Sep 2010

    Hmmm good point - they're not a loan. They are yours to do what you want with but its about respect. Licences are generally in place, probably to make money. Microsoft for example don't want you to download 100's of copies of something and them only get paid once.

    If you have personal pictures you're probably not going to profit from them except sexually, unless you're a scumbag and sell them without permission of the person in them!

    Pictures cannot expire and they can be viewed on more than one machine but do you respect a new partner by not keeping them, but also respect the rights and privacy of the previous partner; that because you're not together the partner has ceased permission for you to view them (in some cases)?

    1295989980
    Dirty Red Angel [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 694
    • Joined: 16 Sep 2010

    Ohh and I'm pleased one sentence out of the paragraph was interesting!

    1295990763
    Yoko [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Captain
    • Posts: 68
    • Joined: 8 Jan 2011

    WandA wrote:

    I feel if I buy something (or it's given to me) it should be mine to do with how I please. Is it a loan?

    Are you suggesting that you should be able to do with naughty photos whatever you please ? Regardless of the consequences for the person in the photos? If so, then I'd have a huge problem.

    I dont know what the law has to say about the subject but I don't think the law is the place where this should be decided. There are some aspects of human behaviour/life which should never be guided simply by what the law says. Now, I know that we dont live in Utopia and so the law often has to step in.

    To me its an issue of my personal morals or ethics. I would consider it a huge breach of trust if any naked photos of me were disseminated by someone I trusted enough to take them (although I've never been that trusting).

    Would you share the contents of a confidential letter written by an ex? If you'd had an ex who had an embarrasing problem and he/she trusted you enough to tell you, would you consider it acceptable to tell other people the secret?

    Its the same issue here I think. Someone trusts you enough to let you take photos of them in a potentially vulnerable position, so why would it ever be ethical of you to spread them around?

    Some years ago I had some naughty photos of an ex. The relationship ended, my heart was broken and I was very angry. Now I could have done something horrible with the photos and made a complete fool of him (which does not sit well with my personal moral code at all) or I could do what I actually did and ritually burn the damn things in the fireplace with a bottle of wine, all the while cursing him and all his future offspring

    The issue for me is very simple; its a breach of trust if you use those photos in any way which could be perceived as embarrassing for the subject of those photos. The law is irrelevant here; the question is whether or not your behaviour is ethical.

    1295990800
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6223
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    It was more than one! I find the complex mechanisms we have in place regarding 'privacy/dignity/respect' interesting but it was that which struck me most!

    LittleKitty wrote:

    Hmmm good point - they're not a loan. They are yours to do what you want with but its about respect. Licences are generally in place, probably to make money. Microsoft for example don't want you to download 100's of copies of something and them only get paid once.

    If you have personal pictures you're probably not going to profit from them except sexually, unless you're a scumbag and sell them without permission of the person in them!

    Pictures cannot expire and they can be viewed on more than one machine but do you respect a new partner by not keeping them, but also respect the rights and privacy of the previous partner; that because you're not together the partner has ceased permission for you to view them (in some cases)?

    I do find this notion of respect interesting. What is it and what does it trump? If someone was offered 10 grand for a set of pics of an ex does that trump the respect of someone else if you really need the money, afterall they are yours, or atleast they were sent to you.

    Is it the consequence that makes the sharing 'wrong' or the intent? I assume spiteful uploading on a porn site would be different to being sold for 10K...

    1295991166
    Yoko [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Captain
    • Posts: 68
    • Joined: 8 Jan 2011

    WandA wrote:

    I do find this notion of respect interesting. What is it and what does it trump? If someone was offered 10 grand for a set of pics of an ex does that trump the respect of someone else if you really need the money, afterall they are yours, or atleast they were sent to you.

    Is it the consequence that makes the sharing 'wrong' or the intent? I assume spiteful uploading on a porn site would be different to being sold for 10K...

    Its still a question of morally acceptable or not. There is never an excuse for deliberately robbing another person of their dignity. If you want to approach the ex and get their permission; fine. But to knowingly put someone else in a potentially embarrassing and/or difficult situation for your own personal gain?

    You're standing on very, very dubious moral ground. Say goodbye to your self respect at that point....

    1295991170
    Dirty Red Angel [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 694
    • Joined: 16 Sep 2010

    WandA wrote:

    It was more than one! I find the complex mechanisms we have in place regarding 'privacy/dignity/respect' interesting but it was that which struck me most!

    LittleKitty wrote:

    Hmmm good point - they're not a loan. They are yours to do what you want with but its about respect. Licences are generally in place, probably to make money. Microsoft for example don't want you to download 100's of copies of something and them only get paid once.

    If you have personal pictures you're probably not going to profit from them except sexually, unless you're a scumbag and sell them without permission of the person in them!

    Pictures cannot expire and they can be viewed on more than one machine but do you respect a new partner by not keeping them, but also respect the rights and privacy of the previous partner; that because you're not together the partner has ceased permission for you to view them (in some cases)?

    I do find this notion of respect interesting. What is it and what does it trump? If someone was offered 10 grand for a set of pics of an ex does that trump the respect of someone else if you really need the money, afterall they are yours, or atleast they were sent to you.

    Is it the consequence that makes the sharing 'wrong' or the intent? I assume spiteful uploading on a porn site would be different to being sold for 10K...

    I am not in the position whereby I have photos of someone who has screwed me over or that I have fallen out with so its difficult to say BUT

    I truly don't think I would sell the pictures even for the money. They were given to me with a degree of trust and security. If someone tells you a secret you don't sell out that secret just because a better one come's along.

    I think spitefully loading a photo and selling it for £10k, whilst the intent may be different, the action is the same. You're sharing them, when you do not have the permission to do so. It is not your right to share them if you don't have permission.

    Slightly different but if you work in a bank you're given lots of money to look after. It's not yours but it is in your custody. It's not yours to steal when you feel like you need it. It's was entrusted in your care but is not to be shared. Whilst its a little different because a photo has been given to you, it has been trusted to you.

    1295991258
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6223
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    Yoko wrote:

    WandA wrote:

    I feel if I buy something (or it's given to me) it should be mine to do with how I please. Is it a loan?

    Are you suggesting that you should be able to do with naughty photos whatever you please ? Regardless of the consequences for the person in the photos? If so, then I'd have a huge problem.

    I dont know what the law has to say about the subject but I don't think the law is the place where this should be decided. There are some aspects of human behaviour/life which should never be guided simply by what the law says. Now, I know that we dont live in Utopia and so the law often has to step in.

    To me its an issue of my personal morals or ethics. I would consider it a huge breach of trust if any naked photos of me were disseminated by someone I trusted enough to take them (although I've never been that trusting).

    Would you share the contents of a confidential letter written by an ex? If you'd had an ex who had an embarrasing problem and he/she trusted you enough to tell you, would you consider it acceptable to tell other people the secret?

    Its the same issue here I think. Someone trusts you enough to let you take photos of them in a potentially vulnerable position, so why would it ever be ethical of you to spread them around?

    Some years ago I had some naughty photos of an ex. The relationship ended, my heart was broken and I was very angry. Now I could have done something horrible with the photos and made a complete fool of him (which does not sit well with my personal moral code at all) or I could do what I actually did and ritually burn the damn things in the fireplace with a bottle of wine, all the while cursing him and all his future offspring

    The issue for me is very simple; its a breach of trust if you use those photos in any way which could be perceived as embarrassing for the subject of those photos. The law is irrelevant here; the question is whether or not your behaviour is ethical.

    I am playing devil's advocate for debate by the way.

    For it to be a breach of trust, to me, implies there is some form of informal contract to which you agreed to when you took the pictures. It seems the same with a confidential letter of case. It then appears what we don't say is perhaps more important than what we do say!

    If this is all true, what then happens with crossed wires? I thought if I showed my best mate ypou wouldn't mind etc...?

    1295991368
    Alicia D'amore [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 3434
    • Joined: 2 Feb 2008

    I do think it's a risk you take when you send a photo to someone - you are effectively *giving* them that photo and if they own it then they'd be within their rights to do anything with them.

    I'd only ever give photos to someone I implicitly trusted not to do anything I didn't approve of them whether we were on good terms or not. Luckily for me, WandA is that person - his morals trump his feelings/emotions most of the time.

    I would, however, keep hold of photos if we split. Not share them, but keep them. I do agree it'd be unfair on a new partner though. I've often said if me and WandA were to split any future partner would have to accept that noone would ever live up to him and he'd still mean a hell of a lot to me, maybe even more than the new partner. I wouldn't expect anyone to enter a relationship on those terms though so I'd probably die a spinster :P

    Adx

    1295991459
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6223
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    Yoko wrote:

    Its still a question of morally acceptable or not. There is never an excuse for deliberately robbing another person of their dignity. If you want to approach the ex and get their permission; fine. But to knowingly put someone else in a potentially embarrassing and/or difficult situation for your own personal gain?

    You're standing on very, very dubious moral ground. Say goodbye to your self respect at that point....

    But what is dignity in a grander scheme? If you sell something at a stupid price or buy something well below the value because that person is hard up is that not stripping them of dignity?

    1295991557
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6223
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    LittleKitty wrote:

    I am not in the position whereby I have photos of someone who has screwed me over or that I have fallen out with so its difficult to say BUT

    I truly don't think I would sell the pictures even for the money. They were given to me with a degree of trust and security. If someone tells you a secret you don't sell out that secret just because a better one come's along.

    I think spitefully loading a photo and selling it for £10k, whilst the intent may be different, the action is the same. You're sharing them, when you do not have the permission to do so. It is not your right to share them if you don't have permission.

    Slightly different but if you work in a bank you're given lots of money to look after. It's not yours but it is in your custody. It's not yours to steal when you feel like you need it. It's was entrusted in your care but is not to be shared. Whilst its a little different because a photo has been given to you, it has been trusted to you.

    But is intent not a complex thing? If naked photos of me would save someone serious hardship I'd have no issue with them selling them without my permission, I may not like it but I'd prefer it to them starving to death for example...

    1295991624
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6223
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    Alicia D'amore wrote:

    I do think it's a risk you take when you send a photo to someone - you are effectively *giving* them that photo and if they own it then they'd be within their rights to do anything with them.

    I'd only ever give photos to someone I implicitly trusted not to do anything I didn't approve of them whether we were on good terms or not. Luckily for me, WandA is that person - his morals trump his feelings/emotions most of the time.

    I would, however, keep hold of photos if we split. Not share them, but keep them. I do agree it'd be unfair on a new partner though. I've often said if me and WandA were to split any future partner would have to accept that noone would ever live up to him and he'd still mean a hell of a lot to me, maybe even more than the new partner. I wouldn't expect anyone to enter a relationship on those terms though so I'd probably die a spinster :P

    Adx

    I'm not replying 'cos you should revise.

    *Humpf*

    1295991709
    Dirty Red Angel [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 694
    • Joined: 16 Sep 2010

    It's prob worth mentioning that I have shared pictures with someone who I don't *implicitly* trust.

    I trust him but I know he has shared pictures with me, that didn't have the consent of the third party (as far as I'm aware) which means he could do this to me too, but my face isn't in it!!

    1295991846
    Dirty Red Angel [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 694
    • Joined: 16 Sep 2010

    WandA wrote:

    LittleKitty wrote:

    I am not in the position whereby I have photos of someone who has screwed me over or that I have fallen out with so its difficult to say BUT

    I truly don't think I would sell the pictures even for the money. They were given to me with a degree of trust and security. If someone tells you a secret you don't sell out that secret just because a better one come's along.

    I think spitefully loading a photo and selling it for £10k, whilst the intent may be different, the action is the same. You're sharing them, when you do not have the permission to do so. It is not your right to share them if you don't have permission.

    Slightly different but if you work in a bank you're given lots of money to look after. It's not yours but it is in your custody. It's not yours to steal when you feel like you need it. It's was entrusted in your care but is not to be shared. Whilst its a little different because a photo has been given to you, it has been trusted to you.

    But is intent not a complex thing? If naked photos of me would save someone serious hardship I'd have no issue with them selling them without my permission, I may not like it but I'd prefer it to them starving to death for example...

    Ahh, but perhaps you're more open.

    What happens if you didn't want your picture to be sold regardless of hardship? How would you feel then?

    1295991884
    Yoko [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Captain
    • Posts: 68
    • Joined: 8 Jan 2011

    But what would be the intention behind your showing a nude photo of a girlfriend to your best mate? Not so your best mate could see what lovely slender fingers she has, right?

    Wouldn't the intention be bragging, boasting, look-what-I've-got-that-you-haven't-got? A good old fashioned ego-boost, i.e. personal gain? Is that really crossed wires then?

    As an aside, it occurs to me that had I ever consented to nude photos in the past I would have expressely said "for your eyes only" and there would be no question in my mind that if they'd been shown elsewhere it would have been against my express wishes.

    I'm not sure its an "informal contract" as you put it. Is there an informal contract between you and your best friend if (for instance) he tells you he has ED? Or is it just common human decency to respect his privacy and keep that information to yourself?

    At what point do you stop trusting people to behave respectfully towards others? Isn't that the issue here? Do you want the law telling us what is and what is not acceptable in every sphere of our lives?

    Post a reply to this thread

    Please sign in to post messages to the forum.