> Under the Sexual Offences and Online Safety Act, it is illegal to intentionally send or share a photograph or film of someone’s genitals if the sender intends for the recipient to experience alarm, distress, or humiliation.
interesting, I wonder what this means for the hordes of porn-educated mouth-breathers who think woman actually like unsolicited dick pics and are otherwise not acting maliciously
No_Echo2745 on
2 years is more than plenty get for far more serious offences.
himmygal on
2 years in prison seems very harsh for causing ‘distress and alarm’. There are a lot of people committing actual violent offences who don’t even get prosecuted. I’m a woman, and of course I don’t like dick pics. But I don’t think people should be prosecuted for sending them, let alone imprisoned.
doofcustard on
What is God’s name would make you think that was a good idea?
4 commenti
> Under the Sexual Offences and Online Safety Act, it is illegal to intentionally send or share a photograph or film of someone’s genitals if the sender intends for the recipient to experience alarm, distress, or humiliation.
interesting, I wonder what this means for the hordes of porn-educated mouth-breathers who think woman actually like unsolicited dick pics and are otherwise not acting maliciously
2 years is more than plenty get for far more serious offences.
2 years in prison seems very harsh for causing ‘distress and alarm’. There are a lot of people committing actual violent offences who don’t even get prosecuted. I’m a woman, and of course I don’t like dick pics. But I don’t think people should be prosecuted for sending them, let alone imprisoned.
What is God’s name would make you think that was a good idea?