"I have been raped."
The police nod. No question about it.
"Get that man off the street so he doesn't do it again."
The police shake their heads.
"What we can do is ask the rapist not to fuck you again. If he does, he may get another warning. If he fucks you a third time, we may put him in jail for a week. If he does it again, we'll put him in jail for a whole month."
WHAT?
And yet, that's what happens on EBAY.
A proven VISUAL RAPIST is allowed to keep doing it.
If Emma Watson objects to being portrayed as a slut who wanders around naked...
...the seller can re-post that image again and again before any action is taken. That the image is also a pedophile image taken before she was 18, and that it's in violation of Federal Law because there's no signed model release of age and consent...STILL doesn't seem to matter to EBAY.
When a seller has done something so heinous as deliberate visual rape, and pretending a photo is REAL, and has been CAUGHT...shouldn't that seller cease and desist? Instead of posting 500 more images, shouldn't that seller now have to show proof of age and consent and licensing?
The seller above was caught. And caught. And caught. SEVERAL prominent actresses told the VeRO (verified rights owner) program this man and wife in New Jersey were NOT authorized and had NO PERMISSION to sell these Photoshop jobs on them.
On August 24th, a report was filed with PAYPAL, and shortly after that, the seller pulled all the items. It seemed that finally, justice had prevailed.
Just why the seller, less than 3 weeks later, decided to sneak FIVE HUNDRED more into eBay's "adults only" section, nobody (as of this writing) knows. Hopefully the seller will finally be suspended.
Meanwhile, his visual rape list includes the Emma Watson image, and, despite her having lost her sister just a few days ago and being in mourning, Rosanna Arquette.
Rapists. Visual rapists. It's the same motivation: sociopathic rage and hatred. That a MARRIED COUPLE do this is even more disturbing. The list goes on and on, including:
Doesn't "NO" mean "NO?" When several women have alerted EBAY that there's a visual rapist preying on them, and on their sisters, shouldn't meaningful action be taken?
When Federal law requires pornographers to have a signed statement of AGE AND CONSENT on file, shouldn't eBay's pornographers be doing that?
Haven't we gone beyond the cynical "she was asking for it" excuse? What's going on here? Emma Watson, star of "Harry Potter" movies, is ASKING for it?
If a woman is a celebrity, that means that her private photos can be hacked and tossed all over the Internet, and her emails leaked by people who get their jollies by invading privacy?
The strange twist here, is that if a man worked at EBAY or PAYPAL and passed around a Photoshop job on a female co-worker, he'd be fired, and perhaps even arrested. But that courtesy and respect doesn't extend to women who are being SOLD on EBAY, with money collected by PAYPAL?
Somebody on EBAY says "Here's hot pix of my ex-wife" "Here's my girlfriend naked" and no signed model release is needed? Someone says, "Here's Emma Watson...Selena Gomez...Tara Lipinski...Gabby Douglas..." all underage...and it's ok to profit off lewd pedophile images? It's up to Emma to know there's an "adult" section on EBAY and to go look at this stuff and report it?
When one woman comes forward and says, "This is sex without consent," it should send a message of concern, not a shrug of apathy.
No comments:
Post a Comment