|
|
Post by gibbyb1 on Oct 21, 2022 11:48:44 GMT -5
100% and that is a conversation that I am sure has happened multiple times by both administration, and individual teams. Overall, just reading these comments I think there are a lot of people who are pretty out of touch as to how different these kids lives are from when most of us grew up. I have two great daughters who are both wonderful people and people with high values, having said that if I found out they were with friends having a good time flashing and taking pictures of it I would not be surprised in the least. These are young adults being young adults and someone not only took a photo but shared it with people they shouldn’t have. They did absolutely nothing wrong, and it’s sad and unfortunate that they had to learn the hard way about the dangers of taking photos, and how little regard people show in terms of sharing things that were not meant to be shared Half and half, no one is blaming them for taking the pictures, being young adults, and having fun in 2022. The larger issue at hand is the liability UW now faces, and the fact that there are woman that may not have consented to a photo of them being taken considering they are in the background 100% nude and vulnerable with their name in big white letters above them for the internet to know exactly who they are and what they look like without any clothes on. I don’t see anything that would make UW liable. |
|
|
|
Post by moderndaycoach on Oct 21, 2022 11:51:28 GMT -5
Not even, only fans is supposed to be private and there are laws against you sharing those pictures - those people are afforded protection and rights. By you saying this is a bad take, one could assume that you think there is a stigma around a public school teacher that makes 30k a year selling underwear and feet pictures to supplement the fact she is underpaid, yet you champion woman who took the same exact photos with non consenting individuals in the background that unfortunately got out after intended to be private. I believe this is called, not being able to have your cake and eat it too. Or just simply called hypocrisy. Sure, Jan. It is ok to admit you were unintentionally being a hypocrite similar to these pictures unintentionally winding up on the internet. |
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Oct 21, 2022 11:51:35 GMT -5
Should the school also outlaw phones anywhere players expect privacy? This is actually kind of interesting. In my line of work, there are lots of things we don't want people taking pictures of, because they could give away trade secrets. When I started as an engineer about 30 years ago, it was a firing offense to have a camera on company property unless you had a "camera permit", which was something they gave out for people who were supposed to take pictures of things (like, to show the engineers where these two parts didn't fit together, or whatever). Then came smartphones, and pretty soon the company lost control over the idea that people were not supposed to bring cameras in to company property. Eventually they gave up and established rules about using the cameras, because it was no longer feasible to have rules forbidding them. |
|
|
|
Post by volleystan on Oct 21, 2022 11:53:07 GMT -5
Is anyone moderating these threads? There’s now a second thread on the same topic. Can we please end this discussion of leaked nudes or get it moved to Over the Net or whatever that other board is called? The weirdos, creeps, and perverts can continue their “discourse” somewhere else. Maybe coordinate together to schedule a group therapy session or something.
|
|
|
|
Post by moderndaycoach on Oct 21, 2022 11:54:25 GMT -5
You didn't read my post well enough or have been following then. I am speaking about the blatant disregard from posters here that are not taking into account the liability problem UW faces here, I guarantee they are not just saying oh shoot, these girls got exposed lets go get those people. While they have shown they in fact are doing that, they are also likely having internal conversations about their potential risk and exposure - people sue for anything now and UW is not out of the woods yet. There is no liability unless the disregarded previous complaints. Should the school also outlaw phones anywhere players expect privacy? Most schools do this already, walk into most high schools, gym locker rooms, university locker room or bathrooms, and you are likely to see a sign that explicitly says no photos or videos allowed in these premises to prevent this exact situation from happening. |
|
|
|
Post by rjaege on Oct 21, 2022 11:56:46 GMT -5
or trying to prevent/reduce the occurrence of such instances in the future No. Just blaming the victim. It is NOT the behavior - taking photos or walking at night, or "dressing like that" - that causes the "instance". To say or imply otherwise is blaming the victim. Suggesting ways to avoid becoming a victim is victim shaming/blaming? I started this thread to hopefully provide discussion on how to avoid a reoccurrence. That has nothing to do with victim blaming/shaming IMO. Obviously you disagree, but how would you advise preventing a repeat of this situation? It is not unique, pics not intended for public distribution get published on the web everyday. The people in the pics are victims, the people taking the pics are not, but not necessarily villains either. Maybe their is one person who maliciously posted the photos, maybe there a multiple leaks. Those are the villians. The question I have is privacy from photos in the locker room to much to ask. Obviously, opinions vary. However, private pics getting published keeps occurring and will re-occur in the future. If we want to stop it, how do we do this? Criminal prosecution is difficult and is not preventive. |
|
|
|
Post by moderndaycoach on Oct 21, 2022 11:57:27 GMT -5
Half and half, no one is blaming them for taking the pictures, being young adults, and having fun in 2022. The larger issue at hand is the liability UW now faces, and the fact that there are woman that may not have consented to a photo of them being taken considering they are in the background 100% nude and vulnerable with their name in big white letters above them for the internet to know exactly who they are and what they look like without any clothes on. I don’t see anything that would make UW liable. In their code of conduct, if it mentions that no cell phones or video recording devices are allowed in their bathrooms or locker rooms, any parent of an athlete, or athlete that agreed to the code of conduct, could come back at UW with some sort of negligent complaint that they did not enforce the conduct agreed to resulting in them being completely nude with their names above them all over the internet. Obviously we would need someone to share UW code of conduct, but it wouldn't surprise me to see some sort of clause in writing somewhere that mentions this. And if there is not a clause about this, I can assure you there will be very soon. |
|
|
|
Post by winesalot on Oct 21, 2022 11:57:51 GMT -5
If you had a teenage daughter who was visiting Chicago, would you advise her to not walk the streets alone at 3am? Obviously it wouldn't be her fault if she got mugged. That doesn't mean there aren't ways to avoid being the victim of a crime. You are blaming the victim. Stop it. How is it victim blaming to caution your child to avoid situations where the could get hurt? If a young woman walks alone at 3 am and gets mugged, of course it's not her fault. But I think that most parents want their children to avoid pain and suffering in the first place. The locker room should be a safe space for athletes. Period. And whoever leaked those photos is SO very wrong. But I don't think it's bad to remind young people that sometimes your actions have consequences you may not see coming and to consider those consequences before you act. None of those girls expected those photos to be public but now they are. And some of them, at least, are hurt because of it. |
|
|
|
Post by moderndaycoach on Oct 21, 2022 12:01:33 GMT -5
Should the school also outlaw phones anywhere players expect privacy? This is actually kind of interesting. In my line of work, there are lots of things we don't want people taking pictures of, because they could give away trade secrets. When I started as an engineer about 30 years ago, it was a firing offense to have a camera on company property unless you had a "camera permit", which was something they gave out for people who were supposed to take pictures of things (like, to show the engineers where these two parts didn't fit together, or whatever). Then came smartphones, and pretty soon the company lost control over the idea that people were not supposed to bring cameras in to company property. Eventually they gave up and established rules about using the cameras, because it was no longer feasible to have rules forbidding them. Amazon, Ikea, Target, any data center, etc. that have proprietary information, data systems, or operation models that exist want to do anything they can to prevent trade secretes or means and methods from becoming public information to the level if you could be prosecuted for breaking an NDA that you likely agreed to while working there or even being in a facility. This goes the same for a lot of bigger cooperate gyms, they now outlaw the use of picture or video recording devices while in the locker rooms or bathrooms to help prevent an exact situation like this that might expose a non consenting individual that trusts they have privacy while in one of these facilities. |
|
|
|
Post by rjaege on Oct 21, 2022 12:06:59 GMT -5
Half and half, no one is blaming them for taking the pictures, being young adults, and having fun in 2022. The larger issue at hand is the liability UW now faces, and the fact that there are woman that may not have consented to a photo of them being taken considering they are in the background 100% nude and vulnerable with their name in big white letters above them for the internet to know exactly who they are and what they look like without any clothes on. I don’t see anything that would make UW liable. Things we do not know. Here are a few. Did UW have a policy on photos in the locker room If so did they enforce the policy Did UW staff take the pics Did UW staff facilitate or set up a shared team file that included these pics If so what security measures were taken, including password protection, distribution and periodic changes But that's another topic. More interested in ways to prevent similar releases. I doubt any degree of IT security can assure that, but I'm not an expert on that. |
|
|
|
Post by jammaster on Oct 21, 2022 12:30:28 GMT -5
Because discussion is how we solve problems. The OP is asking a question of what rules people have had and how it has worked out. Shaming curiosity is bad. No discussion needs to be had on a public forum about teams’ private locker room rules. Trust me, zero. There’s no problem here for us to solve, LOL. As a parent of two players, I would like to think that locker room rules are well thought out and followed. |
|
|
|
Post by robtearle on Oct 21, 2022 12:32:04 GMT -5
No. Just blaming the victim. It is NOT the behavior - taking photos or walking at night, or "dressing like that" - that causes the "instance". To say or imply otherwise is blaming the victim. Suggesting ways to avoid becoming a victim is victim shaming/blaming? Yes. |
|
|
|
Post by coachdirector13 on Oct 21, 2022 12:33:46 GMT -5
This needed a second thread? Get it together. Technically a third one.... The Wisconsin 2022 page is filled with it. |
|
|
|
Post by robtearle on Oct 21, 2022 12:34:23 GMT -5
You are blaming the victim. Stop it. How is it victim blaming to caution your child to avoid situations where the could get hurt? If a young woman walks alone at 3 am and gets mugged, of course it's not her fault. But I think that most parents want their children to avoid pain and suffering in the first place. The locker room should be a safe space for athletes. Period. And whoever leaked those photos is SO very wrong. But I don't think it's bad to remind young people that sometimes your actions have consequences you may not see coming and to consider those consequences before you act. None of those girls expected those photos to be public but now they are. And some of them, at least, are hurt because of it. You are saying "don't take the photos, and the photos won't get leaked". That is assigning "responsibility" - read "blame" - to the victims. Stop blaming the victims. |
|
|
|
Post by jayj79 on Oct 21, 2022 12:36:14 GMT -5
Think about these young women moving into their profession after volleyball. If they move into a role where women are the minority, it is extremely difficult to be taken seriously and not get objectified for your looks. Now imagine you are dealing with this, and a picture of you topless gets out to your co-workers. What was already a difficult situation just became a lot worse. You think those male co-workers are going to pay attention to them when they are talking about work? Do you think they will be taken seriously? sounds like some really sh##ty co-workers. don't get me wrong, whoever leaked the photos/videos/whatever, as well as anyone that continues to disseminate them is definitely in the wrong and should be prosecuted. But there is no reason you shouldn't be able to take someone seriously just because you find them attractive or have seen them out of business attire. |
|
