Thursday, May 25, 2017

Former Playmate Sentenced For Snapchat "Body-shaming" Of Naked Woman At Gym

Here's one of the things I've been doing the Cassandra thing about.
   Preliminaries: I haven't been really keeping up with this case, and IANAL, obviously. And there's little doubt in my mind that the way this looks legally is different than the way it looks if you read this story. 
   However..: I am totally down with something on the order of an invasion of privacy charge here. Or possibly harassment? Is that a legal thing? But here's what the prosecutor said:
This was a very important case to me - as a father, as a son, as someone who recognizes the damage that body shaming can do because it is so humiliating,"..."The issues that surround body shaming can be devastating – not only to daughters and mothers, but also to sons and fathers, members of the LGBTQ community, to a trans kid who might be struggling with identity, to people who are disabled. The message today is clear: body shaming is not tolerated in the City of Los Angeles."
  This is pure, unadulterated PC/SJ newspeak. It's not the invasion of privacy that was motivating him, nor some other respectable charge (e.g. harassment) --it's SJW concerns about a favored SJW concept, "body shaming." Defenders of PC try to brush off concerns about it by arguing that it's isolated to campuses. Well, (a) universities are places, too, and (b) today the university, tomorrow the world, and (c) it's not limited to universities, Jack...not even today.
   The idea here is that the state can prevent Smith from making fun of Jones. And that's a horrific idea. The state can punish Smith for invading Jones's privacy. The state can stop Smith from harassing Jones (right?) But the state has no legitimate authority to prevent Smith from making fun of Jones. This is, once again, liberalism vs. the totalitarian left. And what's at issue is your freedom of thought and speech--even if you're an asshole.
   (Oh and, just incidentally: if the PC left wins the transgenderism debate, their position ultimately leads to the elimination of sex-segregated locker rooms...so...how different is that, really, than the view that locker rooms don't need to be private in any significant sense? And, if we go down that road, don't we end up with the view that we have no legitimate interest in keeping our nakedness private? I mean...as always...I'm happy to have the debate, and I think that a more enlightened society might very well believe that our interest in concealing our bodies is loony. But: let's have an honest discussion of it rather than ending up at that point via an irrational trajectory. Though...if we did accept that we have no legitimate interest in keeping our bodies and facts about them private, that undermines a gigantic chunk of the PC theory of transgenderism...)

[Also: PC, being largely PoMo...or PoPoMo...doesn't seem to be constrained by considerations of consistency... If "body shaming" is bad, is it because "shaming" is bad? Because the PCs / SJWs loooove "shaming" their opponents for heterodoxy... If "shaming" is bad generally, should political shaming also be illegal? If not, why not?
   My inclination, as I expect is made clear above, is that this body-shaming nonsense needs to be laughed out of court...and possibly everywhere else as well. Making fun of people for certain things does make you an asshole...but which things isn't completely clear to me. One thing that does seem clear: the state has no legitimate authority to prosecute people merely for being assholes.]

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home