Revenge Porn Legislation and the First Amendment
Revenge Porn Legislation and the First Amendment By Jeremy Saland oseph Campbell, a musician Frank Ocean advocated bruised eye or bloodied lip. mid-20th-century a more aggressive and “eye-for- Buoyed by our nation’s obses- scholar of compara- an-eye” approach when it comes sion with social media, “me first” tive religion credited by to jilted lovers. Ocean asserted, culture, and insatiable desire for George Lucas for influ- “If someone breaks your heart, instant gratification with little Jencing Star Wars, poignantly just punch them in the face. Seri- thought about the ramifications wrote, “We must let go of the life ously. Punch them in the face and of our actions, abusers have a we have planned, so as to accept go get some ice cream” (https:// new vehicle to inflict overwhelm- the one that is waiting for us” tinyurl.com/y62q8kg2). Even ing emotional and psychological (https://tinyurl.com/y5khnlga). though the latter attitude is harm, among other injuries, to Although quite relatable to the starkly different than the former, the subjects of their jealousy and changing landscape and uncer- neither reaction to anger, sadness, frustration. Commonly referred tainty of the COVID-19 world in and despair is likely unique to to as revenge porn, this form which we find ourselves, Camp- these two men, nor their respec- of online harassment allows a bell’s advice is no less valuable in tive contemporaries. scorned lover—emboldened by a multitude of contexts, includ- What is of grave concern, how- a cowardly sense of security due ing times of grief, sorrow, and ever, is that the consequences to remoteness and lack of person- despair precipitated by failed of the Oceanic philosophy are to-person interaction—to unleash relationships and unrequited potentially far more insidious with a simple click of a button an love.
[Show full text]