Revenge porn — or when a jerk posts private sexy photos of a woman online without her permission with the intent to humiliate or exact comeuppance — is seriously disruptive to the lives of the women victimized by it. Laws haven't caught up to reality, though, and in most states, once you sext a guy pictures of your boobies, they're legally his to do with what he pleases. Thankfully, California just passed a law designed to combat this practice. Confusingly, some people who wrote about the law don't understand that this is a problem.
First, the nitty gritty on the new sext regulations. Here's The Guardian on what's going to happen now that California Governor Jerry Brown signed the bill into law.
The bill, which takes effect immediately, makes it a misdemeanour to post identifiable nude pictures of someone else online without permission with the intent to cause emotional distress or humiliation. The penalty is up to six months in jail and a $1,000 (£620) fine.
"Until now, there was no tool for law enforcement to protect victims," the bill's author, senator Anthony Cannella, said in a statement. "Too many have had their lives upended because of an action of another that they trusted."
Cannella, by the way, is a Republican. Maybe standing together against revenge porn is what this divided country needs!
But not everyone thinks that revenge porn is that big of a deal. Here's the lede from the story on the law from Newsy's Christine Hartman:
Revenge porn was apparently a big enough problem in California to make a law.
Ah, the passively sarcastic "apparently"— I use it, you use it, we all use it. But when it's used in reference to victims of a creepy sexual violation, it's less cute and playful, and more bitchy.
Wow, Hartman, no one's ever going to sext you with that 'tude.