....to take down the photographs, he deserves it. What a nasty, ass thing to do.

they post peoples' booking photos and charge them to take them offline

same exact business model - reputation destruction for dollars

yet somehow perfectly legal

It's porn of unwilling people. I'd given him that sentence consecutively for each victim.

...this kind of stuff. (especially in the States)
I certainly wouldn't do something like that but wouldn't someone be aware that there are some real nuts in the world that would track you down and put a bullet between your eyes. ??

Identical 'baby mouths'--sign of arrested emotional development.

is there actually any real science behind that?

be blocked at the 'weaning' stage of development. This can be observed in a 'suckling' morphology around the mouth.

http://scholar.google.fr/scholar?q=weaning+disorders+narcissistic+personality&hl=fr&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ei=aM4fVY_cLYvKaOH5gcgP&ved=0CB4QgQMwAA
Cultures as a causative of mental disorder

Birth weight and the risk of depressive disorder in late life

Social psychological correlates of mental illness and mental health.

akin to phrenology, astrology and scientology.

Freud painted with the same brush as L. Ron Hubbard?

Ennnteeereesting! Ennnteeereesting!

he was important in his time, but we know a lot more now about mental illness.

Last edited Sat Apr 4, 2015, 01:04 PM - Edit history (1)

An evolving school of thought has carried on from his 'revolutionary' beginnings.

experiences dont cause mental illness so much as triggers it, extreme situation aside.
the sooner the idea of mental illness is replaced by actual brain science, the better. in the meantime, people are very much harmed by this approach, especially children and adolescents.

experience has been with the Freudian School of psychoanalysis and its heirs, or what 'anti-psych' axe you have to grind.

All I can tell you, is that Freudian/Lacanian psychoanalysis is alive and well and being practiced fairly widely in France.

http://changingminds.org/disciplines/psychoanalysis/articles/lacanian_psychoanalysis.htm

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/lacan/

https://www.cla.purdue.edu/english/theory/psychoanalysis/lacanstructure.html

school of thought with many adherents.

You can actually study it at UNIVERSITY in this country!
OMG!

Last edited Sat Apr 4, 2015, 07:17 PM - Edit history (1)

it is horseshit that you can study at university. And those universities should be embarrassed for passing horseshit off as scholarship.

It is anti-rational, obscurationist, and not evidence based. It's both tragic and dangerous to the human sciences that Lacan's brand of charlatanism is still given a veneer of respectability by institutions of higher learning. I don't just say this based on the judgements of others. I've read Lacan.

But this is worth a read, too

http://www.amazon.com/Fashionable-Nonsense-Postmodern-Intellectuals-Science/dp/0312204078/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1428189438&sr=8-1&keywords=Fashionable+nonsense

A few professional programs continue on the tradition or something similar. There's very little empirical support for it.

I liken it to theological studies where there are plenty of people willing to pay you or hire you for trying to explain something within a nonmaterial ideology.

Plus the French love narratives.

Attorneys use it to select juries.

Amazing Face Reading: An Illustrated Encyclopedia for Reading Faces, by Mac Fulfer, J.D.

http://www.amazon.com/Amazing-Face-Reading-Illustrated-Encyclopedia/dp/0965593126


Fulfer has given seminars on face reading to major corporations; and, on his web site, there are several videos which explain face reading.

http://www.amazingfacereading.com/

I've read his book, and it seems quite accurate. It might help to explain why some faces appear "creepy" but you don't know why.

It's like astrology - vague descriptions that fit anyone to a degree. The shape of your eyes indicates you go after what you want! Everyone goes after what they want! If you're a kid or teen and you buy this, fine. But an adult?! WOOF!

Actually, the descriptions are very specific and quite accurate. They are used to select juries. For example, a defense attorney in a civil lawsuit would not want someone who appears to be generous finding against their client and awarding a huge settlement.

Corporations are not run by teenagers and would not spend money to have their employees attend these seminars if it was total BS.

good call!

Unfortunately, Lubitz's passengers weren't so lucky.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

OTT, one person murdered over 150 people in cold blood. This kind of comparison is dangerous and just as bad as posting revenge porn. Please vote to hide.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Apr 4, 2015, 06:53 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Revengeporn guy must have sent this alert.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No, this post is not as bad as posting revenge porn.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This stupid post (they don't even look anything alike) is stupid. But it is not "just as bad as posting revenge porn". Talk about OTT!
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Separated at birth is silly little game we play. Which is worse the sick and depressed copilot or the gleeful pornographer?
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Totally dumb post, to say nothing of the lack of resemblance, and I hate these "OMG the eyes of a sociopath" post facto diagnoses, but... why is this being alerted? It's a personal attack on California Man?
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The post isn't great, but hardly rises to the level of a hide. I have served on juries for this OP and this is the worst thing I have seen that she has posted and it is not great but not all that bad. I am wondering why all the alerts (most frivolous) against this OP?

Last edited Sat Apr 4, 2015, 12:40 PM - Edit history (1)

Had no idea my casual observation (intended with a I might add) could ruffle someone's feathers!

alerts myself.

Then I post the same ideas and attribute them to Carlin (rightfully so, I don't make it up.) and not a peep.

He had a mic and an auditorium of rapt listeners.

If you don't agree, vote to hide, I say!

The juror is clearly confused.

I couldn't imagine how someone reading the results of an alert that was 7-0 to leave could see it as anything but a "frivolous alert."

I think we can be pretty sure that the term OP was used as shorthand

Sometimes I wish I could believe in Hell.

It's been alerted on, but nobody can make up their mind--no on-site experience or reporting back, so far.

Hung jury!

I would have voted to leave your post, had I been a juror.

around my originally tongue-in-cheek post of the 'twin' sociopaths, and the fact that it was flagged.

Nothing serious, just fooling around.

And, thanks for the hypothetical 'leave' vote!

imo for saying he was convicted for running the site when thats not what he got convicted for.

I thought that was a "white-collar" crime, like "oh you're just doing capitalism wrong (by getting caught)". I mean I'm not shedding tears, but the people actually posting this crap seem to be the ones violating consent/privacy boundaries (well, aside from the blackmail stuff.)

to make an example to deter others. That should wipe the smug smile off his face. Dude was mean spirited and twisted with bitterness.

Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves.
-Confucius

It probably never occurred to the idiot that he was committing extortion! Youth wasted on the young.

Hurting innocent peiple....

He got what he deserved.

But what about revenge porn itself? I think it's a disgusting practice, but can we do anything about it that doesn't violate the First Amendment?

Revenge Porn. Anyone tying to do it will be severely dealt with.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/02/revenge-porn-california-first-conviction_n_6258158.html

that two consenting adults made together.
I have my doubts that they can but then again SCOTUS has surprised before with some of its rulings like that corporations are in essence people and that its ok if the rich bribe politicians with money under the guise that its a "campaign" contribution.

Basically, if a man and woman are dating, and one posts a nude image of the other online with the caption "Look at this hot piece! I'm tapping it!" no laws (other than the laws of common sense and decency) are broken. While that's still offensive, it's not illegal under California law.

If the same person posts the same image with the obvious goal of shaming, attacking, or embarrassing the person in the photos, then they have committed a crime. It's not the actual posting of the photo that is the crime, but the intent and consequences of it. It's the HARASSMENT. The recent case where they guy got the year is a great example. He posted a nude photo of his ex to her employers Facebook page with the intent of getting her fired. The goal of harassing the person in the photo was obvious and plain to everyone.

Or, to put it another way: It's not illegal to stand on a sidewalk. It's not illegal to stand on a sidewalk and look at a house. It IS illegal to stand on the sidewalk and stare at your exes house every day with the goal of intimidating or scaring them. The physical action is the same, but the intent and demeanor make an otherwise legal activity into a crime.

Plus I can see other potential problems such as someone enticing an ex to post a video that they made and then claiming harassment.

In America? A guy who goes out of his way to make life hell for people and actually gets punished for it? Republicans and banksters, take notice!

matter.

The sentence for this guy is out of proportion to the crime.

gotten a slap on the wrist at worst.

Money talks and money walks.

But have a look at the story some time.

Or didn't you know that? I suggest you do some additional reading about sentencing alternatives. You are naïve.

...no matter how many crimes he's convicted of?

His worst crime was extortion, for which he deserved additional prison time.

Next time try thinking before you reply. You seem to think that promoting revenge porn is as bad as murder. If that's your opinion, there's something wrong with your moral compass.

Did you have a particular length in mind?

I'd have to look more closely at the details. But I knew someone who got 17 1/2 years for murder, which is standard for the state where I live. Revenge porn plus extortion should get less than that, because it's not as bad a thing to do. More severe crimes should get more severe punishments. That principle needs to be respected, and should not be abandoned for emotional or political reasons.

...have had to have been to justify something like twenty years?

What if there were 100+ murder victims...?

How much worse? "100 times worse" means nothing to me. Anyway, the worst that you can do to the murderer is execute him or give him life in prison, unless you want to get medieval, which is what some people in this thread might want to do.

. . . but he doesn't look like he's laughing much anymore!

That's what long time prisoners will say to poor Kevin when he cries as he gets off the bus for intake.