I have mixed feelings about that. There should be a legal consequence. I'm not sure if this is the right one. It sounds like the law needs to catch up.

I don't think that they...or anyone is actually suggesting that. I that what they're suggesting is that throwing criminal charges at either of those kids is pretty seriously fucked up. I'm not disputing that they shouldn't record it, much less distribute it. And if one party made the recording without the other's…

I agree with some kind of prohibition on distribution. But as the law exists, it is illegal to have a private, durable record of your own life. Or to share that private, durable record with an intimate partner. I don't think those prohibitions make sense.

1. I think it's wrong to film someone unknowingly.

They should have some charges, but possession child pornography shouldn't be one of them. The idea behind making possession of child pornography this MAJOR CRIME is because it's supposed to be a proxy for child molestation, but something where you could have better success rates of finding and convicting child…

Or, if the sex act is legal, it should be legal to film it (with the consent of all parties involved, of course, which was not the case here so either way they should be charged for filming the girl without her knowledge or consent).

The fact that they distributed the film makes them pieces of shit, regardless of whether they had consent to make it in the first place.

Guessing he wasn't fired for the pic itself, but because it became public that he had an affair with a married woman (who used to be in porn).

Because militarization of the police.

Yes, but unless she has money, it's a waste of time (and his money).

I consider the financial expectations that are placed on women in bridal parties to be excessive, unreasonable and sexist

IME, the older I get the less money I'm expected to shell out as a member of a bridal party. All of the brides-to-be I know in my thirties would be mortified to have multiple showers with the same attendees (exceptions made for if family in another state want to throw a thing; you're not asking the same people to…

So women spending far too much money on events surrounding a wedding is sexist? No, it's silly and wasteful and it's entirely preventable but this aint me and the boys ensuring you can't come into the club house or ensuring you won't get the promotion or the deserved raise because of your gender, this is keeping up…

Huh? I was raised Mormon and I have never, ever heard that Mormons are supposed to shun excommunicated family members or friends, nor have I ever seen it happen. I'm sure there are some harsh Mormons who do that, but I don't think that is encouraged by the church or any sort of official policy. I have a lot, a LOT, of…

She looks perfectly fine to me.

Yes, are we sure about this picture? Maybe it's some kind of costume worn by non-policewomen. Because that looks ridiculous (the short skirt and the heels, but especially the heels).

Ugh, you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

Only women have fully-formed breasts, huh. Then what's with all the dudes with tits bigger than mine bouncing around in public?

That isn't really the point though. You don't sue someone over saying something "hurtful". Even if it's a shitty thing to say about someone.

Her likeness? She has no case against Rivers, because if it's true it isn't defamation. And indeed, Stewart had an affair with her director which was highly publicised.