Explicit Deepfake Scandal Shuts Down Pennsylvania School (arstechnica.com) 118
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: An AI-generated nude photo scandal has shut down a Pennsylvania private school. On Monday, classes were canceled after parents forced leaders to either resign or face a lawsuit potentially seeking criminal penalties and accusing the school of skipping mandatory reporting of the harmful images. The outcry erupted after a single student created sexually explicit AI images of nearly 50 female classmates at Lancaster Country Day School, Lancaster Online reported. Head of School Matt Micciche seemingly first learned of the problem in November 2023, when a student anonymously reported the explicit deepfakes through a school portal run by the state attorney's general office called "Safe2Say Something." But Micciche allegedly did nothing, allowing more students to be targeted for months until police were tipped off in mid-2024.
Cops arrested the student accused of creating the harmful content in August. The student's phone was seized as cops investigated the origins of the AI-generated images. But that arrest was not enough justice for parents who were shocked by the school's failure to uphold mandatory reporting responsibilities following any suspicion of child abuse. They filed a court summons threatening to sue last week unless the school leaders responsible for the mishandled response resigned within 48 hours. This tactic successfully pushed Micciche and the school board's president, Angela Ang-Alhadeff, to "part ways" with the school, both resigning effective late Friday, Lancaster Online reported.
In a statement announcing that classes were canceled Monday, Lancaster Country Day School -- which, according to Wikipedia, serves about 600 students in pre-kindergarten through high school -- offered support during this "difficult time" for the community. Parents do not seem ready to drop the suit, as the school leaders seemingly dragged their feet and resigned two days after their deadline. The parents' lawyer, Matthew Faranda-Diedrich, told Lancaster Online Monday that "the lawsuit would still be pursued despite executive changes." Classes are planned to resume on Tuesday, Lancaster Online reported. But students seem unlikely to let the incident go without further action to help girls feel safe at school. Last week, more than half the school walked out, MSN reported, forcing classes to be canceled as students and some faculty members called for resignations and additional changes from remaining leadership.
Cops arrested the student accused of creating the harmful content in August. The student's phone was seized as cops investigated the origins of the AI-generated images. But that arrest was not enough justice for parents who were shocked by the school's failure to uphold mandatory reporting responsibilities following any suspicion of child abuse. They filed a court summons threatening to sue last week unless the school leaders responsible for the mishandled response resigned within 48 hours. This tactic successfully pushed Micciche and the school board's president, Angela Ang-Alhadeff, to "part ways" with the school, both resigning effective late Friday, Lancaster Online reported.
In a statement announcing that classes were canceled Monday, Lancaster Country Day School -- which, according to Wikipedia, serves about 600 students in pre-kindergarten through high school -- offered support during this "difficult time" for the community. Parents do not seem ready to drop the suit, as the school leaders seemingly dragged their feet and resigned two days after their deadline. The parents' lawyer, Matthew Faranda-Diedrich, told Lancaster Online Monday that "the lawsuit would still be pursued despite executive changes." Classes are planned to resume on Tuesday, Lancaster Online reported. But students seem unlikely to let the incident go without further action to help girls feel safe at school. Last week, more than half the school walked out, MSN reported, forcing classes to be canceled as students and some faculty members called for resignations and additional changes from remaining leadership.
Never too young to be a creep (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Which is probably why administrators were reluctant to report anything. Given the area, they tend to see reporting laws as something for getting brown kids into the prison system, NOT something to 'ruin the lives' of little white boys. If it had been a dark skinned kid making deepfakes of white classmates, he would probably be in juvenile detention.
Witness the rapist Brock Turner and his dad [stanforddaily.com] who, at sentencing, said the rapist shouldn't have his future ruined for 20 minutes of action:
His life will never be the one that he dreamed about and worked so hard to achieve. That is a steep price to pay for 20 minutes of action out of his 20 plus years of life.
Maybe not Re:Never too young to be a creep (Score:3, Interesting)
And now this person is going to end up on the registry.
I don't know Pennsylvania's laws, but many US states have special laws for young (typically under 18 or under 21) first-time sex offenders so they aren't automatically put on the sex-offender registry and which allow them to get removed much earlier if they are forced to register.
Re: (Score:2)
This could just be dumb kid shit (Score:4, Insightful)
It's one of those things where at a certain point when we as a civilization have made it so easy to commit a crime I have a hard time wanting to bring the full force of law down on somebody.
Also if our country and our society didn't have such a fucked up opinion of nudity this wouldn't be an issue. The reason this is so damaging is because the assumption is that if you can find nude pictures of a girl then that girl is of low moral character and should be ostracized.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
>"Kids do not always understand the consequences of their actions or the gravity of them relative to our society"
Indeed. They don't understand a LOT of stuff. Which is why children shouldn't be carrying around phones/tablets/whatever with full internet access. There is an entire world of insanity, and allowing kids access to however, whenever, and wherever it is incredibly irresponsible.
Maybe I am missing something, I read the summary and articles, and there is nothing about what HAPPENED with the ima
Dude he could have done it without a phone (Score:2)
Unless you are going to watch absolutely everything kids do 24/7 then they're going to get into some shit. I think there are probably better solutions that are full-on orwellian police state for anyone under 18...
And again none of this would be an issue if we didn't treat women who have pictures of themselves naked as horrible people that need to be punished.
Re: (Score:2)
>"Unless you are going to watch absolutely everything kids do 24/7"
They won't have constant unrestricted access to the internet, unless someone GIVES it to them. Usually in the form of an unrestricted phone, tablet, or computer with no supervision. If it was the norm that kids shouldn't have such devices (or that they are special devices only, designed for kids, with appropriate whitelists only), then it wouldn't be a big deal. Instead, I see kids walking around all over with unrestricted devices. It
Again police state shit (Score:2)
Your completely bypassing my main point which is that the only reason this crime is so serious is that a devalues the women on a fundamental level. It does that because having a couple of fake pictures o
Re: (Score:2)
They won't have constant unrestricted access to the internet, unless someone GIVES it to them.
Or, you know, they mow a few lawns, buy a $50 smartphone from Walmart, and hop onto the neighbor's unsecure wi-fi. It's not that hard to get online these days, and kids face a lot of social pressure to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
Make internet devices, likes tons of other stuff, not sellable to minors. Again, if it was the norm that kids don't have such devices, there would be no social pressure.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe kids should get relationship and sex education from a young age, so they do understand this stuff.
I don't mean teaching 6 year olds the mechanics of sex, I mean teach them about things like consent and respect for each others privacy.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe, but that doesn't address stalking, grooming, violent text and video, bullying, and tons of other stuff that is all over the internet and that such communication enables.
Kids should ideally have locked-down devices that operate on a whitelist, and allow only non-group communication to/from only parent-approved contacts.
Re: (Score:2)
Teenagers are dumb, but they aren't *that* dumb. This guy absolutely knew that he would be causing a lot of pain for a lot of people. If he didn't, at the very least he should be in an therapy.
Re: (Score:1)
Nice try making it a bool so US puritans can be lumped with the sane.
The restrictions aren't the problem (Score:2, Interesting)
That's a good mental exercise ask yourself what it would be like if instead of doing this to the girls he done it to boys. It would be viewed as a much l
Re: (Score:2)
>That's a good mental exercise ask yourself what it would be like if instead of doing this to the girls he done it to boys. It would be viewed as a much less serious crime
That is much more due to the misandry in today's society than anything else. Men are less valued. We have a shorter lifespan, higher suicide rates and work in more dangerous occupations than women. We are the throw away side.
If a man is abused, or sexual photos released, it's "not a big deal" and they should just "suck it up".
Dear God no, again you miss the point (Score:2)
A guy that fucks a lot of women is a Playboy. A girl that fucks a lot of guys is a slut. See the difference?
This all goes back to when we turned women into property. We did that so guys like you, that basically have zero property, would feel like you "own" their wives and wouldn't get upset when the King or a CEO or whatever took your house. It was a trick to fool you into feeling a sense of ownership without actually giving
Re:Never too young to be a creep (Score:4, Insightful)
And now this person is going to end up on the registry. Goodbye future and hello ankle monitor whenever he or she gets out of lockup.
Don't forget to say hello to Matt Gaetz. This person will be able to be Attorney General someday.
A GOP DEI hire includes child molesters.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If no charges are brought and the law not involved....I don't think you really have a case.
Innocent until proven guilty? Is that not a thing with you anymore?
Re: Never too young to be a creep (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, those 30 something "felonies" in NYC...were looking to be vacated anyway, the appeals court had signaled that the prosecutors were almost malfeasant in their actions....they actually were closing begging mostly to not have their licenses barred.
It appears that most everything was going to be thrown out even if he didn't become pr
Re: (Score:2)
He could grow up to head the DOJ one day. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/a... [pbs.org]
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not so willing to give this guy a free pass because "he's just a kid." Teenagers are very much smart enough to know that their actions can hurt people, and hurt them severely. Too many parents have bought into the crap that "oh my little 17-year-old is so sweet and innocent, he could never do such a horrible thing!" Yeah, yeah they can.
You get what I pay for (Score:2)
Where's the abuse? (Score:3, Insightful)
Regardless how anyone feels about the content, I know as a father of two teenage daughters, I would want the death penalty, the right to free speech and free expression must be upheld. What is the difference between a generated picture of a naked teenager, vs, Romeo and Juliet? Would those same parents demand Romeo and Juliet get removed, and people resign?
Just so there's absolutely no confusion, I'm only coming at this from a free speech / freedom of expression context. I do not defend generating sexual fakes of others.
Re:Where's the abuse? (Score:5, Insightful)
The creator's rights - whatever you may imagine them to be - end where the rights of the girls in question begin - and even the most strident libertarian has to agree that the girls - as minors, if for no other reason - have a right to NOT be publicly exploited in such a way.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not going to defend distributing the images because I think it's gross AF, but fundamentally, if th
Re: (Score:2)
But they weren't *entirely generated* because they depicted real recognizable people.
You might find this interesting...
https://www.owe.com/resources/... [owe.com]
Any one of the criteria noted can elevate the use of someones likeness to illegal; this case easily satisfies multiple critera.
And the fact that its porn and involves minors, makes the arguments even more compelling.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The argument the generator needs to make, is simple, “It might look like X, but it's not, the work was created without any input of a similar character or person.” The fact it happens to
Re: (Score:2)
and this is not entirely fictitious because they are based on real people.
There are more than 7 billion people on this planet. Any realistic face that is drawn is certain to look like someone. Are you absolutely certain that you want to go full Gestapo down this path?
Re: (Score:2)
In Australia, depictions of Bart and Lisa Simpson can be considered "child porn". That isn't the case in the US. In the US, there has to be an identified victim.
I can't see someone getting criminally arrested and/or convicted for copy/pasting a picture of a celebrity's head onto an image of a naked body. And this kid did basically the same thing. It all sounds too much like "art" and a 1st Amendment nightmare. Sure, it can be a school policy not to do that, or distribute those kinds of things. Many have hon
Re:Where's the abuse? (Score:5, Insightful)
if they're generated images, then they can't rise to the level of abuse, since the majority of the content is fake
They are invasions of privacy. While we usually think of privacy as protecting disclosures of sensitive information, that's only just one kind of privacy intrusion. The legal and ethical issues of privacy are actually considerably broader. They have to do with a whole host of issues relating to your right to personal autonomy.
For example if you are in a public place people are free to observe you, or even in most jurisdiction to film you. But if someone follows you around observing you to the point that it would interfere with a reasonable person's ability to conduct their lives, it's well established in US law [nytimes.com] that that's a privacy intrusion, even though it doesn't involve disclosing privileged information.
Your neighbor shining a spotlight into your bedroom at night is a privacy intrusion, even if he doesn't *look* into your bedroom, because it interferes with your ability to choose when you sleep.
Privacy intrusions are actions that interfere with personal liberties. While none of us are entitled to what we would regard as a good reputation with other people, we do have a reasonable expectation of that impression being ours to establish. Suppose your neighbor put up a website in which he published *fiction* in which he depicted you as a child sex abuser, and then he posted QR codes to this all around the neighborhood. You would feel wronged even though he disclaimed the stories as fiction, and you would be right to feel wronged *even if the stories were fiction*, because every time you met a neighbor their reaction to you is colored by that fictional story.
That's what these sexually explicit deepfakes do: they take away the power of people who are *not* public figures to control their public image. When these girls meet people at school who have seen these deepfakes, those deepfakes will dominate the reaction people have of them in a way that can't be undone, short of moving away. If they're released onto the Internet they may never be able to outrun them.
Re: (Score:2)
I say this as a person whose nickname for ~4 years, during high school, was “child porn” because several jocks spread a rumour that I was into it. I just ignored it, and after ~4 years, it died because everyone realized it was clear
Re: (Score:2)
It's conceivable to organize society to deal with balancing freedom of expression and privacy in many different ways, but the way *our* society is organized, in general there are prohibitions against prior restraint by the government, but the government absolutely can punish speech which harms other people. This gets complicated with lots of corner cases and things that don't work out quite the way we want as opposed to "absolutist" free speech where nothing you say ever has consequences, but that has its
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Right. If you created the deepfakes for your own exclusive use, and took reasonable precautions to avoid them falling into other peoples' hands, it'd be icky, but it wouldn't be a privacy intrusion.
But we're talking about a situation where distribution was the whole point. That distribution is so damaging that it literally can't be repaired.
Re: (Score:2)
It's also a violation of personal copyright and defamation. And harassment.
Re: (Score:2)
^^THIS^^
There are lots of free speech issues and complexity both legal and moral when it comes to is an drawing or generated images actually CASM and what is art/speech and all that.
Maybe the answer to everything isnt the criminal justice system? Maybe the place to deal with this is civil court system.
Re: (Score:3)
Aren't most nude deep fakes just photoshopping someone's head on someone else's nude body. So isnt the original nude photo considered child porn? The "AI" part is just automating it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If someone generated AI “deep fakes”, then what abuse took place? While those images are generally distasteful, rude, offensive, and invasive, if they're generated images, then they can't rise to the level of abuse, since the majority of the content is fake, and therefore protected until freedom of expression / speech.
Today I learned Michelangelo & Leonardo da Vinci are criminals because they created images of people without clothes on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
because they created images of people without clothes on
I suppose if the people Michelangelo and da Vinci depicted file a complaint, then yes. They are criminals.
Re: (Score:2)
because they created images of people without clothes on
I suppose if the people Michelangelo and da Vinci depicted file a complaint, then yes. They are criminals.
Oh, for fucks sake. Do NOT do that shit. Please. Bad enough the woke mob wants to persecute your “crimes” from childhood. Last fucking thing we need is for someone to suggest we drag The Hague with us through the time warp.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
then they can't rise to the level of abuse
They can, if they depict a particular individual in a manner so as to make them identifiable. The abuse is subjecting that person to a kind of public exposure which they did not consent to (or can not, being under age).
it's why people can publish child sexual novels
Are the characters in these novels identifiable actual people? Or invented personas?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
While those images are generally distasteful, rude, offensive, and invasive, if they're generated images, then they can't rise to the level of abuse, since the majority of the content is fake, and therefore protected until freedom of expression / speech. This idea has been fought before, it's why people can publish child sexual novels, and why organizations like NAMBLA can exist.
Freedom of speech is not freedom of consequence and specifically for your example the "idea has been fought before" had the distinction of being a fantasy with fantasy elements.
If you want to AI generate kiddy porn, go for it.
If you want to AI generate kiddy porn which looks like a very specific person then expect to spend some time learning the value of free speech from prison.
If someone generated AI “deep fakes”, then what abuse took place?
Apparently you think abuse is only abuse if it is physical. You have a lot to learn both legally as well as how to develop empathy
Re: (Score:2)
If you say no, but identify it as free speech / free expression, then you have some kind of in
Re: (Score:1)
What is the difference between a generated picture of a naked teenager, vs, Romeo and Juliet?
He used the faces of real persons.
Are you daft?
the right to free speech and free expression must be upheld.
That does not mean what you think it means.
Get an education.
Re: (Score:2)
The only argument you have to make is that it's protected speech because it's art, a
Re: (Score:1)
Romeo and Juliet where not kids.
And making photos of other people and using them for art without their consent: is illegal - privacy violation and copyright violation.
And you seriously should read up about free speech and free expression.
If you think you can take photos from me and use me as a "dress man" without getting sued: good luck!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
the right to free speech and free expression must be upheld
Unless, of course, you say something truly horrific, like "this is actually Hunter Biden's laptop" ...
Or make fun of [imgur.com] the orange buffoon [imgur.com].
Is anyone surprised? (Score:2)
Not I.
Everything that can be used to create porn will be used to create porn.
Even if something is only hinting at nudity there are those that will find it offensive and call it porn. *
Hormones do lower intelligence on all teenagers.
And these large artificial neural models that are open for all to use lowers the bar substantially for a horny and/or bullied teenager to do this.
This might not have been done out of spite or with ill intent. "Don't attribute to..."
*generally speaking of what "AI" models can prod
Great way to frame someone else... (Score:1)
I can see little Billy making a bunch of deepfakes, and being smart enough to use an encrypted virtual machine, VPN, or even use a bogus credit card to use a VM service to make the deepfakes. From there, find a way to throw them on the computer of someone he is bullying, either by copying pictures while the computer is unattended or just making a USB drive with the target's name and address on it, throwing it in their backpack, then calling the principal that they were looking at pr0n on their computer.
Bam
Re: (Score:2)
Given the sheer amount and utter reliance this bullying has on many computing systems, I’d say the case for mandatory audit capture and usage recording of all computing systems is becoming quite necessary. Mass surveillance is already well-justified in school settings.
Hell, at least planting marijuana took some effort with finding a dealer that would sell to underage. Making AI images in a virtual machine is trivial
I wouldn’t call that entire attack and level of effort “trivial”. Took you a paragraph just to describe it and included financial crime. Ironically, planting marijuana is now trivial due to cannabis laws and accessib
Is this about intent, or format? (Score:4, Interesting)
A person generating hyperrealistic nude images without consent using the eeeevil “AI” to do it? Society says burn them at the stake.
Now tell me what happens when society stumbles across an inspiring artist. One who creates hyperrealistic images using that 300-year old John Wick technology. Also known as a fucking pencil. What happens to said artist when you find dozens of hyperrealistic nude images, created without consent? Is that still a deviant who deserves to be destroyed, or is that merely an inspiring artist?
(The father in me? Sure. Especially if it were my kid. Question still stands. Because society created it.)
Re:Is this about intent, or format? (Score:4, Interesting)
I had a girlfriend back when I was a teenager who was an excellent artist. She ended up making a living doing airbrushed motorcycle helmets and such, t-shirts, whatever. But pencil drawings were really her forte. She made me look like some kind of Adonis, which I wasn't and am not.
The naked self-portraits she drew in a mirror were something to behold. Much better than any photographic porn you could imagine. She had a beautiful form, even taking into account the love I still feel for her (she died of cervical cancer around 2001). But her pencil drawings were more memorable than the real thing. And now that i'm thinking about it, we were both underage at the time. I have one photograph of her left, her poking her head around a tree somewhat playfully. But I can still remember those drawings...
Her mom found them after she left home. Wasn't so bothered by the nudes, but apparently she'd written some stuff that sounded pseudo-suicidal in a notebook and that freaked her out. Not that I remember her as being particularly suicidal, just very experimental.
Re: (Score:2)
You probably should stop shooting weapons at a nuclear power if you don't want WW3. I didn't make the rules, i'm just cognizant of them.
Re: (Score:2)
It's more than just the act of creating them in this instance, it's the act of distributing them. It's an evolving area of the law in many jurisdictions, but generally speaking the harm caused by distributing them is at least an aggravating factor.
There is also the intent of creating them. In the UK things that would be perfectly legal for most people to own, like a catalogue of children's clothing, can be illegal if collected for the purpose of titillation. In practice I doubt that there would be a prosecu
Re: (Score:2)
using that 300-year old John Wick technology.
Hm. Joker technology would have conjured a more interesting image, but John Wick kind of works.
There is an easy solution to "explicit deepfakes" (Score:2)
Did nothing? (Score:2)
But Micciche allegedly did nothing
I'll venture a guess that he was doing .... something.
Re:\o/ (Score:5, Funny)
It doesn't mean only that, but in this context it's implicit.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Its images of kids. Do we REALLY need to know the details of the photos? Whether the kid responsible was using AI to "undess" or do much worse, its going to be massively harmful shit to the mental wellbeing of the girls involved.
I worked a number of years at the DOJ, the effect this sort of stuff has on children is horrifying. In one case we had a 12 year old girl who was abused and had photos taken of her. She suicided mid trial, causing the judge to have to call a mistrial due to technicalities regarding
Re:\o/ (Score:5, Insightful)
Do we REALLY need to know the details of the photos
do you? you're the only one talking about that. for sure not the person you are responding to, who surely also understood well enough what was implied and was just sprinkling sarcasm on yet another headline of poor quality prose, which en passant is just routine procedure on slashdot. (somewhat pedantic if you will, but being pedantic is a venerable local tradition too)
then you go on ranting about how damaging such deepfakes can be (something nobody would really question, i guess) and colorized that obvious assessment by producing some anecdotal experience of a completely different and extreme example of (actual) child abuse? and then this ...
The staff who let this go on should have been more than just let go , they should be charged as accomplices.
do you have more information? because the details about the case, the tip-off and the reaction are extremely vague, not to say completely absent in the usual display of crap yellow journalism. but you still want a lot of people in jail (because "children!!!!111") so you surely must have a clear understanding of what exactly happened here and what those peple did wrong in particular when receiving some unspecified info on aparently one random (and likely unidentified) kid producing some deepfake about another kid. so i'm curious, what are the exact charges you would press, and on what evidence?
anyway, nice to witness this little miracle happen yet again:
- someone responded to a comment completely missing the point ... ... got moderated +4 insightful!
- then proceeded to state the obvious
- then went off in an inflamed rant about something completely unrelated
- then insisted on some random people being burned at a stake to calm that gratuituous rage aaand
-
isn't that something? clickbait magic, extreme collective reading comprehension breakdown and mob mentality at its finest!
thanks all for the show! :o)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Don't want to be sexist (Score:5, Interesting)
You might be surprised about what percentage of school administration believes that they either are the law, or that they are above it. The math teacher/football coach at the high school I attended sexually harassed his entire football team regularly for decades before they eventually fired him for losing too many football games.
Re: (Score:2)
Varies by state, but yeah, pretty much.
Re:Don't want to be sexist (Score:4, Informative)
I thought it was required for people in authority to report these incidents and it was a crime not to.
Didn't read the article, did you?
But that arrest was not enough justice for parents who were shocked by the school's failure to uphold mandatory reporting responsibilities following any suspicion of child abuse.
Re: (Score:2)
The arrest happened some 10 months after the first report by a student and only a month after the police was directly involved. It is unclear who contacted the police directly and why it was this late.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Or a "mean girl"
Privacy laws Re:Don't want to be sexist (Score:1)
The gender of the alleged criminal probably hasn't been released.
Re:Privacy laws Re:Don't want to be sexist (Score:5, Informative)
The gender of the alleged criminal probably hasn't been released.
Yes, it has [lancasteronline.com]:
In a June email to upper school families,the alleged perpetrator was identified by the school as a ninth-grade student and referred to using male pronouns.
The student and his family were informed then he would no longer be enrolled at Country Day.
Yeah, but you seem to be. (Score:2)
How likely is it that a girl would make or fake pornographic images of other girls in her neighborhood and show them around? Among whom? Other girls? Some boys?
(Is there even one precedent that would have become known?)
Anyway, an article on Lancaster Online [lancasteronline.com] from August clearly refers to “the boy” as the perpetrator. He was also 9th grade, so you were right or close with the "14 y.o. boy". You should have stopped there, before starting to ideologize it...
Re: (Score:2)
How likely is it that a girl ...
It's called "bullying" and girls do it just as much as boys: Adults don't admit that inconvenient truth. As women move into traditionally male areas, they will also copy male misbehaviour. Would that include extreme sexual harassment? I don't know, because we don't talk about toxic femininity.
Re: (Score:2)
It's obvious that "girls do bullying". That was not the question, and it is not even clear whether the original intent in the discussed case was primarily sexual (as in jerk-off template) or primarily harassment or a combination of both. It obviously became harassment, though.
And "girls do bullying" is not at all new, as you claim, and it has nothing to do with your "traditionally male areas", either, that's pure ideology again. You would have seen that already in, like, convent schools for girls in the mid
Re: (Score:2)
And then, "we don't talk about toxic femininity" (what we really should define before even talking about it, it isn't widely used in the meaning you seem to give it) is a straight-out ideological lie, as you're proving yourself. Some, like you, try to make stuff like that the subject everywhere they go, even when there's not the slightest reason.
Sexism plus masculism.
You want a definition of toxic femininity? OK. Let’s see if this socially acceptable bullshit fits.
Cheat on their partner or spouse, blatantly lie about it for the better part of two decades for the purposes of stealing a grand felony of money via child support, support and defend laws that will put that innocent partner/spouse in fucking jail for non-compliance, and then have the sheer unmitigated gall to start a ‘Believe All Women’ movement while vehemently opposing ANY form of account
Re: (Score:2)
How likely is it that a girl would make or fake pornographic images of other girls in her neighborhood and show them around? Among whom? Other girls? Some boys?
Tell you what. How about we make mandatory DNA testing a Federal law in America for every birth and case of divorce/child support, and make it retroactive for a decade or two.
After the insane screeching dies down and the test results come in, then we can talk about how “likely” gendered assumptions are.
Also depends on how much money (Score:4, Interesting)
My next door neighbor sent their kids to a private school back in the day and it was absolutely brutal for them.
Except for the really really expensive private schools you also have to keep your grades way way up. The way those charter schools end up looking better than public schools is that any kid who falls below a high b or sometimes even an A average Just gets kick right out of the school. Since the public schools can't do that they end up looking worse when they're actually doing right by the kids.
Oh and in Arizona where they did universal School vouchers 90% of them are going to extremely wealthy parents who were already sending their kids to private school. In other words it's just a taxpayers handing wealthy people money. And it seems to have blown a half billion dollar hole in their budget.
Re: (Score:1)
> They're just going to eventually drop out from the bullying.
This seems like a personal mission to try to badmouth various institutions. The criticism from anecdata is not credible.
The majority cannot drop out from being bullied. It's statistically less likely than you are implying. This is not an a redress of the behavior, but it is a logical inconsistency with the premise.
I went to both public and private schools growing up. I enjoyed public school more and I learned more in private school. I had frie
The majority aren't poor kids. (Score:3)
Like I said 90% of school voucher program funding goes to rich people who were already sending their kids to private schools. If you support school voucher you are literally just giving rich people money out of your pocket. You're a sucker.
Re: Also depends on how much money (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh and in Arizona where they did universal School vouchers 90% of them are going to extremely wealthy parents who were already sending their kids to private school. In other words it's just a taxpayers handing wealthy people money. And it seems to have blown a half billion dollar hole in their budget.
It didn't matter if you voted Democrat or Republican, this was going to happen and nobody was going to stop it and here we are.
It was a Republican plan in Arizona (Score:2)
Both sides are not the same. And if you're American you're about to find that out the hard way.
Re: (Score:2)
The kids parents have. Do yourself a favor if you're not of the right social cast Don't send your kid to a private school. They're just going to eventually drop out from the bullying.
I think it depends. There are plenty of Montessori or Waldorf schools out there that are perfectly benign, and a lot of kids benefit from that kind of environment. I think it is the elite prep or finishing schools that are more insidious.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Unless the boy was white, in which case they would probably do exactly what they did.. nothing. School administrators who report white boys tend to find themselves on the wrong end of parental outrage for ruining his life for 'just being a boy!'.. Lancaster is a deep red county, meaning 'tough on crime' and 'reporting' laws are NOT designed for little white boys, only getting those scary dark ones into prison where they belong.
I’m not sure when people are going to stop believing the race-baiting bullshit, but after a black President survived the full eight years in public office, one would think that message was clear. By your accounts, we should have found Obama hanging from Washington’s cherry tree the day after his Inauguration.
Kills me whoever thought this was insightful. The fuck did you gain from this? How to be a better racist? Little white boys are about to become the minority in America. Guess we’l
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Is pasting a kids face on a drawing a nude adult enough to call it child porn?
yes.
Some states also categorize sexual cartoons or paintings of completely made up children as child pornography, and there have been prosecutions for possession of japanese cartoons depicting "under-age" characters engaged in sex. Since until quite recently (2023), the age of consent in Japan was 13, there was quite a lot of "Japanese school girl fantasy" type artwork out there. It was pretty gross to see some old guy reading that stuff on the train when I lived there.
Re: (Score:2)
Has Japan finally started cracking down on that material?
He's dead! (Score:2)
Hahaah come on man the guy is dead and he provided us with years of entertainment.
Before I had to remind myself he did actually say creepy stuff and he did have the potential to follow through one day.
But now it's like dude lived his dream of "working until he drops dead" ... fate being mean enough to even kill him right before the weekend. Zero chance he can exploit foreigners in retirement now.
I try and avoid talking about the things that should have embarrassed Chris but for some reason didn't. He was d