"I downloaded this app called Parallel Live which makes it look like you have tens of thousands of people watching. Instantly, I became the life of the party."
I don’t think that someone’s behavior choice is comparable to their clothing choice
I completely agree, but victim blaming across choices and especially towards women and POC individuals is part of the reason we have really shitty reporting of fraudsters. Creating an environment which discourages them from speaking up is harmful to society as a whole.
everyone in this case is trying to take advantage of someone
We don’t know this, and we shouldn’t assume this of the victim. I think it’s a reasonable hypothesis, but focusing on talking about the victim here when there are actors which are clearly out to harm or take advantage of others is harmful framing. If this is a discussion you wish to have, I personally believe the appropriate framing is necessary - we must acknowledge the existing structure of power and how it silences certain people and also blames them before talking about potentially problematic behavior. But even then, it’s kind of jumping to conclusions about the victim here and I’m not so certain it’s a discussion that should even be entertained.
victim blaming across choices and especially towards women and POC individuals
I don’t know about the US, here in Spain the love scams, and fame scams, are a thing across all genders and orientations, with low reporting of scams in general being attributed mainly to shame of the victims for having fallen for a scam.
People like to think they’re smarter than most other people, and the more sure they are of that, the easier they are to fool. I think it’s no wonder they don’t want to acknowledge it afterwards.
everyone in this case is trying to take advantage of someone
We don’t know this, and we shouldn’t assume this of the victim.
I don’t see how else it could work… but I’m open to hearing alternatives?
we must acknowledge the existing structure of power and how it silences certain people and also blames them
Fair.
A relevant aspect I can think of, is the part about it being fine to lie to have sex between “consenting” adults. How can there be consent, when one or both parties are misleading the other? Sounds like an officially codified permission to abuse.
I don’t get what people see in fame or clout, it looks like lying and argument of authority to me. The fact that anyone would pursue or get influenced by either, seems to me like ingrained predisposition to getting abused (by authority figures). Not sure how much of that is inherent, and how much social.
A clearly perverse incentive in the whole scheme, is money… but that’s kind of unavoidable in any money based society.
The elephant in the room, is sex itself: how can it, on one side, make someone pay and lie for it, and on the other side be used as a bargaining chip. Is it a purely hormonal catalyst for the whole scheme, or a proxy for a power play?
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !technology@beehaw.org
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
I completely agree, but victim blaming across choices and especially towards women and POC individuals is part of the reason we have really shitty reporting of fraudsters. Creating an environment which discourages them from speaking up is harmful to society as a whole.
We don’t know this, and we shouldn’t assume this of the victim. I think it’s a reasonable hypothesis, but focusing on talking about the victim here when there are actors which are clearly out to harm or take advantage of others is harmful framing. If this is a discussion you wish to have, I personally believe the appropriate framing is necessary - we must acknowledge the existing structure of power and how it silences certain people and also blames them before talking about potentially problematic behavior. But even then, it’s kind of jumping to conclusions about the victim here and I’m not so certain it’s a discussion that should even be entertained.
I don’t know about the US, here in Spain the love scams, and fame scams, are a thing across all genders and orientations, with low reporting of scams in general being attributed mainly to shame of the victims for having fallen for a scam.
People like to think they’re smarter than most other people, and the more sure they are of that, the easier they are to fool. I think it’s no wonder they don’t want to acknowledge it afterwards.
I don’t see how else it could work… but I’m open to hearing alternatives?
Fair.
A relevant aspect I can think of, is the part about it being fine to lie to have sex between “consenting” adults. How can there be consent, when one or both parties are misleading the other? Sounds like an officially codified permission to abuse.
I don’t get what people see in fame or clout, it looks like lying and argument of authority to me. The fact that anyone would pursue or get influenced by either, seems to me like ingrained predisposition to getting abused (by authority figures). Not sure how much of that is inherent, and how much social.
A clearly perverse incentive in the whole scheme, is money… but that’s kind of unavoidable in any money based society.
The elephant in the room, is sex itself: how can it, on one side, make someone pay and lie for it, and on the other side be used as a bargaining chip. Is it a purely hormonal catalyst for the whole scheme, or a proxy for a power play?