Opinions on onlyfans and adult entertainment industry

sasta le wrote: »

The other lady pushing this Megan J Renee I've been told she does Onlyfans and Webcam girl and it's well know in Limerick.
But looking at her Twitter and media bits she never mentions she is a sex worker

Are Megan J Renee, and Megan Sims one and the same?
I mean Megan Sims is victimsalliance.ie's head of image based sexual abuse?

seamus wrote: »

It's not, and there are valid frustrations here.

The archive contains identifiable information. When the group contacted the Gardai they were told not to look through it (as it may contain child porn), and that they should not contact anyone in it because that could compromise the investigation.

Now the Gardai have said that they can't do anything about it unless one of the people in the leak makes a complaint. But nobody who is in it, knows they are in it, because nobody has contacted them.

It's a "between two stools" kind of issue. Because at this stage it's probably considered a data breach more than anything else (which is outside the Gardai's remit), and there is no specific evidence nor complaint that anything in there was not permitted to be.

But you can understand the frustration. Imagine you found out that someone had been flying a drone over the country, taking pictures of people sunbathing in their back gardens and storing them along with location details. The first thing you'd want to know is whether you were in it, so you could make a complaint. But you wouldn't be allowed to know whether you were in it, in order to make the complaint.

Seeing as the Gardai have decided there is no child porn in it, it would make the most sense now for this victim's group to actually go through the archive and use the contact details therein to notify the people who are in it. It's legally grey (a Data protection issue at worst), but very unlikely to land them in any hot water.

Very good summary and that makes perfect sense.

The other side of it is that we can't see what the pictures actually are and how they were stored and commented on, so that would be another issue. If you thought all and sundry were commenting on a family photo or an instagram photo of your family member, you'd go legal on it. But you dont know, what you dont know, as you say.

The question now is will the new legislation cover both private photos and the Only Fans type of photos - it remains to be seen.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

https://twitter.com/teflondub/status/1331762330363944960?s=19

Nice to see you back, any opinion yourself?
Or are you merely continuing to repeat what you seem to have been told to?

Any disputation to the inference your failure to address Linda doxxing a child lends?

As for throwing herself under a bus?
I'm sure her actions have led to quite a few extra views on her Onlyfans.
So hardly.

The only people thrown under the bus by conflating revenge porn with copyright infringement are the actual victims of blackmail, coercive control and abuse based on images they shared privately or had stolen from them.

Those are the people left wondering what credibility can be assigned to them now they may well be lumped in with onlyfans girls.
The only people hurt are them, and they have my sympathy.
I hope they bypass victimsalliance completely and engage with one of the professional women's and victim support services.

Earlier you said you knew of one instance of blackmail arising out of this?
The Garda commissioner has said there is none, which is it?

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I get the feeling the lovely Megan has fallen under the influence of activist types..
The BLM, direct provision in the bio..and the she/her too..

Activism is grand, it's how change starts.
Have no issue with that, and I'm parent to a kid is incredibly politically motivated and involved.
I wouldn't get too bogged down in that aspect at all tbh.

Interestingly however, Andrew's tweet paste does confirm that Megan J Renee and Megan Sims are one and the same.
The head of sexual image abuse at the newly minted victims advocacy service is a woman who produces porn.
Not at all a difficult thing to reconcile when your counselling someone who's cloud account has been hacked and your personal photos shared.
You are a victim of crime, she's lost a revenue stream.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I dunno really..I think there can be a push to activism that isn't necessarily positive..Like, are we to seriously listen to this young one's input in writing law in this country..Yeah, she's personally affected, but like, she's "grown up" thinking the Kardashians were something to be aspired to..

Not only is she personally affected she is adamant she's a victim.
When I say activism is grand, I should have qualified that a little more.
It is if you can defend your stance, convince others what should or could be changed and build consensus towards changing that.
Activism as a fashion accessory? Taking a stance without applying some critical thought to who, what, why, where, when or how?
That's just idiocy

There's no safe space or echo chamber allowed, you have to change minds not shout until people just switch off.

Now the gardaí are wrong btw
They are arranging support (always good) for anyone who wishes to make a statement.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Shocking, isn't it. Activist women. They'll be looking for the vote next.

She's just finding out what the music industry found out 20 years ago. If you put content on the internet, expect it to get stolen.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You lied with your claim that I said that the NZ lad had it coming to him. I never said any such thing. You tried to justify your lie with some nonsense about what I didn't say. Apparently I'm supposed to deny something now in order to get a little honesty about what I actually said - the old 'Have you stopped beating your wife yet' technique.

And now you've added a further lie - that I'm somehow being 'told to' say things by somebody. As I said before, why you lie?

I've said very little about the NZ situation, because, funnily enough, I know very little about the NZ situation. I know that's a fairly novel approach round here on boards, but it works for me. I've seen your claims about IP address tracking, but (taking a leaf out of your book), I've seen no evidence of this myself so it clearly never happened.

The Garda Commissioner has NOT said that there are no instances of blackmail or harassment. He has said that Gardai have no reports

So the Gardaí are wrong and criminal activity in relation to this cache has occured?
Well you'd better tell them then...
Make them aware or do you need an explanation of what legislation the offender could be charged under?

Andrew this has been explained to you multiple times.
There was no lie, the sentence you have issue with has a qualifier.
Go back and re-read a few times should you still not grasp it fully.

Much like the Gardaí drawing an inference from someone's refusal to answer...
Given how many times you refused to engage in whether you agreed Linda's actions were right.
Inferring you agree with her actions is quite reasonable.
If you wish to disavow me of the notion?
Go back, pick any one of the multiple times you were asked and address it with something better than

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Honestly, if you're best argument is that the 16 year old lad might get a slap from his mammy if she's in a bad mood, you're on fairly shaky ground.

because condoning a possible violent reaction is a bit extreme.
You dodged and diminished the possibility of a violent reaction from the parents everytime it was raised.
So let's try this instead.

What actual harm was imposed on the girls it is claimed that this boy shared images belonging to?
I note that there is talk about mental trauma and self harm?

Let's imagine the doxxed NZ boy's mother didn't "just give him a slap"?
Let's imagine she labelled her child a sex abuser?
It's not a huge leap to think he might spiral into depression or self harm is it?

So I'll ask you again, what is your opinion of the actions Linda undertook in doxxing a child?

As for how she tracked the child down, I do know you mentioned earlier perhaps it was via twitter?
That may well be.
The mechanics of the how are important however?

If she parsed info such as usernames, twitter, web posting history and perhaps even an email header to lockdown the boys identity?
That would be a quite impressive feat.
No less wrong, and the problem I have with her undertaking it that way at all?
Well, it's really down the wealth of talent brought to bear on the victimsalliance website.

If however she obtained the IP from discord?
Discord has only 2 ways to do that, without it being disclosed by discord on foot of warrant.
1 is to trick the targeted user to open an IP grabber.
The other is to be the server admin.

So how the boy was located has a huge bearing on the whole story.
But however she found him, from 12000 miles away she decided to identify and inform his family members of his alleged activity?
Bit hypocritical, nah?

Isn't that precisely what she's advocating against?
So I'd like to know how she sourced the boys ID?
I"d like to know how she ensured it was the boy and not someone else at the home address?
I'd like to know why a victims rights activist chose to abuse a child in the same manner she is professing to be against.
I'd like to know what due process she afforded the child before she undertook the doxxing?
I'd like to know why if there was evidence to doxx a child?
Why that evidence was not passed to NZ police for prosecution.
One can't be a victims right advocate for one class of victim whilst victimising another.

And not a lie regarding your opinions Andrew merely an observation.
I could well be wrong, but unless you are "TonyDaDub"
The Twitter link you posted without comment?

Well buddy,... That was someone else's opinion wasn't it?

It actually amazes me that victims' groups aren't distancing themselves from the copyright bandwagoners, to be honest. It must be extremely insulting and hurtful to a victim of having their intimate images shared publicly without their consent, to see people hijacking their cause for purely financially motivated reasons. F*ck them and what they're doing. The revenge porn issue is a serious one which needs to be addressed and those seeking to use it to sneak new copyright laws in through the back door are creating a serious risk of the whole issue being totally undermined and ridiculed in the eyes of the general public.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It must be extremely insulting and hurtful to a victim of having their intimate images shared publicly without their consent, to see people hijacking their cause for purely financially motivated reasons

The behaviour of the latter may well have dissuaded the former from coming forward and weirdly nobody seems to be making that point publicly.

MAybe we need a ''Now you're talking to a teenage OnlyFans model'' thread.

It could be an in sight to that mind set .