Ethics of anonymous sex stories

[TwoBrains]

Apologies in advance if this isn't the right place for this kind of conversation, but this subforum seems to have tolerated sexuality-centered threads before, so I thought it'd be alright. Although this might be a comparatively frivolous matter to discuss, I've had it stuck in my brain for a while and wanted to find an ethics-centered forum like this where I could get some fresh perspectives on it.

So what I've been mulling over is this: if person A publishes a completely anonymous account of their sexual experiences with person B, likewise anonymous, but doesn't ask for B's consent before doing so, can that be considered to constitute a violation of B's sexual privacy? And, if person C then masturbates to said story, can C then be considered to have participated in some kind of indirect sexual violation or exploitation of B, given how C has acquired these details of B's intimate life without B's consent? Or does the anonymity present effectively eliminate those concerns of wrongdoing against B on A and C's part, making the situation different than if, say, A had posted naked/sexual photographs of B instead and C had masturbated to them?

 

[Jeeves]

if person A publishes a completely anonymous account of their sexual experiences with person B, likewise anonymous, but doesn't ask for B's consent before doing so, can that be considered to constitute a violation of B's sexual privacy?

Yes.

And, if person C then masturbates to said story, can C then be considered to have participated in some kind of indirect sexual violation or exploitation of B, given how C has acquired these details of B's intimate life without B's consent?

Yes, but only if C knows that B had not consented.

Or does the anonymity present effectively eliminate those concerns of wrongdoing against B on A and C's part

Anonymity may provide A with legal protection, because the onus would be on B to prove that B was the subject of the published material and pose a convincing challenge to A to show that B consented to publication. In either case, both A and B must lose their anonymity in the courts.
Morally, of course, A is just as guilty as if the published material contained B's identity.
C may be pathetic, but is not legally* and morally liable: he's merely using a commercially available sexual aid.
(*unless C is obviously under the legal age)

 

[Write4U]

Ask yourself why you would want to spread an account of such intimate behavior.
Sounds to me like a deviant desire to "display".

Remember Trump bragging about his sexual exploits? Are you a Trump fan?

 

[wegs]

Hmm, it doesn’t seem to be a violation of privacy if all the specific names etc are left out of the story. Unless there are photos that one could self-identify, it would be challenging to prove that person A is referring to person B, if the names etc are changed or left out of the story.

But, there is still that ick factor of sharing something sexual that perhaps you just shouldn’t be, and it becomes material for others to use unbeknownst to “Person B.”

 

[Tiassa]

So what I've been mulling over is this: if person A publishes a completely anonymous account of their sexual experiences with person B, likewise anonymous, but doesn't ask for B's consent before doing so, can that be considered to constitute a violation of B's sexual privacy? And, if person C then masturbates to said story, can C then be considered to have participated in some kind of indirect sexual violation or exploitation of B, given how C has acquired these details of B's intimate life without B's consent? Or does the anonymity present effectively eliminate those concerns of wrongdoing against B on A and C's part, making the situation different than if, say, A had posted naked/sexual photographs of B instead and C had masturbated to them?

This starts out reading like a genuine thought-police question.

There are far too many factors to account for vis à vis self-gratification, and anonymous sex stories are not all alike in form or purpose.

Meanwhile, for some measure of test, we should also note the circumstances themselves are strangely broad. There is a story that has circulated here, before, in other discussions, an article in which an author describes being young and actually looking forward to losing her virginity only to be raped very nearly to death by her longest male friend. I forget if we know who she is, but he is anonymous to our reading. That might not be what you're after, but even still:

• Wrongdoing on A's part? That sounds like a sick joke.

• Wrongdoing on C's part? I'm not certain how we might construe wrongdoing under law, as such, but the prospect of someone masturbating to that story describes a person attending problematic priorities.​

To the other, it's true I don't know what goes on at intersections of hotwifery or tradwifery with cuckoldry. Those stories, when I encounter them, run like the generic, poorly-written, typal hotletter tales of old.

Perhaps you're referring to something else; there are many ways to classify "sex stories". The ski-boxer's third, I suppose, is to point out that the question of who is wanking to what just reeks like catastrophe.

A more definitive answer is photographs, which have fairly straightforward rules about model consent. In this case, a downstream consumer who picked up the photos from an easily accessible website would not necessarily share legal liability. Going out of one's way to acquire secretly-distributed photos might suggest cognizance of guilt about one's actions.

Framing the general inquiry in the context of photos, though, it's true, the story and circumstance I recalled are a different issue. Now we wonder at A's reason for distributing the information, and C's reason for acquiring it. That is, it sounds like you're describing distribution intended as pornography. Moreover, in this context there are particular liability risks that do not necessarily require C's awareness: If the information C possesses describes or constitutes certain manners of crime, then C will, in many jurisdictions, bear some particular legal liability. Moreover, if one is using this material as stimulation to masturbation, that would pretty much cancel any pretense of innocence for having collected the information according to other, allegedly more legitimate priorities.

 

[DaveC426913]

So what I've been mulling over is this: if person A publishes a completely anonymous account of their sexual experiences with person B, likewise anonymous, but doesn't ask for B's consent before doing so, can that be considered to constitute a violation of B's sexual privacy?

Barring the author confessing, how would anyone go about determining that it was, in fact, a truthful account of actual events with person B? Does it include verifiable facts, such as events, dates and locations? If person B is never implicated, how does it invade their privacy? They'd first have to implicate themselves by confirming it was them.

 

[Jeeves]

Barring the author confessing, how would anyone go about determining that it was, in fact, a truthful account of actual events with person B?

They couldn't. But A knows and is betraying another person's most intimate experience, whether anyone else knows it or not.

Does it include verifiable facts, such as events, dates and locations?

If it's a factual account of sufficient detail to excite and uninvolved third party, it must contain description of physical attributes and proclivities particular to person B; if B unwittingly meets and has a relationship with one of the readers, that person might well recognize the characteristics and identify B, not knowing that B didn't consent to publication, whereupon D feels their own privacy threatened and breaks off the relationship. Subsequently, neither B nor D ever feel secure in an intimate relationship for the rest of their lives. Maybe that's a remote risk in New York City; it's more realistic in Idaho Falls and a dead cert in Blakesburg, IA.

If person B is never implicated, how does it invade their privacy?

The same way blabbing out a friend's secret does: A is sharing with others something that B never intended to share.

They'd first have to implicate themselves by confirming it was them.

Legally, one couldn't make a case without revealing both identities. Morally, it's perfectly simple: A done B wrong.

 

[DaveC426913]

They couldn't. But A knows and is betraying another person's most intimate experience, whether anyone else knows it or not.

How are they betraying someone's privacy, if the events are decoupled from the person?

That's how a lot fiction is written.

If it's a factual account of sufficient detail to excite and uninvolved third party, it must contain description of physical attributes and proclivities particular to person B; if B unwittingly meets and has a relationship with one of the readers, that person might well recognize the characteristics and identify B, not knowing that B didn't consent to publication, whereupon D feels their own privacy threatened and breaks off the relationship. Subsequently, neither B nor D ever feel secure in an intimate relationship for the rest of their lives. Maybe that's a remote risk in New York City; it's more realistic in Idaho Falls and a dead cert in Blakesburg, IA.

That's quite a string of assumptions people are making. Not really violating person B's privacy; really it's inference on their part.


All person A is really doing is writing about their own experiences. They get to do that. I'm not sure that that in-and-of-itself violates B's privacy.

Legally, one couldn't make a case without revealing both identities. Morally, it's perfectly simple: A done B wrong.

Well, there would be a lot less fiction out there if authors didn't write about events inspired by their own lives.

 

[DaveC426913]

I think what we need here is a solid working definition of 'privacy' - what constitutes an individual's privacy, and what does not.

It seems to be kind of assumed that anything I do that I don't tell others about is deemed my private business, but that's not true.

 

[Michael 345]

I think what we need here is a solid working definition of 'privacy' - what constitutes an individual's privacy, and what does not.

It seems to be kind of assumed that anything I do that I don't tell others about is deemed my private business, but that's not true.

I'd say you private business is what you do not wish to have disclosed

If A (in original post) puts out details of something which they did in their life with NO identifying linkage to B there is no invasion of privacy

A may have done such stuff with numerous others. As, has already been stated, B would need to establish HOW the information identified them, and was not describing, potentially, numerous others

If A HAS managed to describe their encounter with B without identifying B, it's creepy of A to cause discomfort to B, but that's life

It seems to be now we should live our lives as if it was being filmed as a box office feature for showing next week on world wide TV

Don't want what you do shown on world wide TV, don't do it

 

[Jeeves]

How are they betraying someone's privacy, if the events are decoupled from the person?

Events never become "decoupled" from a person who lived them. You can withhold their name and address, but their experience remains their own.

That's how a lot fiction is written.

And the writers who do not change enough particulars that the person who participated doesn't recognize the event is doing wrong to that other person.

That's quite a string of assumptions people are making.

I was not making assumptions; I was assessing a factor of risk.

Not really violating person B's privacy; really it's inference on their part.

On the readers' part, yes, possibly; it would depend on how accurate the depiction was and how familiar the readers were with persons A and B. Remember, if A's identity is known, it's not that difficult to figure out who their sexual partners may have been. And, even if the readers are not certain, how people act on their inferences, on innuendo and supposition, even on mere suspicion, can harm the unwitting target.

All person A is really doing is writing about their own experiences.

If A stopped there, no problem. But when A describes another person's body, records their words and reports their actions, it's not just all his own experience anymore.

Well, there would be a lot less fiction out there if authors didn't write about events inspired by their own lives.

And the world might be all the better for it! But there is a big difference between "inspired by" and verbatim account.

I think what we need here is a solid working definition of 'privacy' - what constitutes an individual's privacy, and what does not.

Most of us reasonably expect that what we do in our bedroom, behind closed doors is private. most of us reasonably assume that intimate bodily functions which are routinely performed in a secluded place are private.

It seems to be kind of assumed that anything I do that I don't tell others about is deemed my private business, but that's not true.

If you do it on the street, it's not private. If you do it in a parking lot, it's not private. If you do it on a streetcar, it's not private. If you do it in your bedroom, any bathroom, a medical facility, a polling booth, a bank manager's office, or even your own office with the door locked, it's private.
This is not a difficult concept!

 

[DaveC426913]

I'd say you private business is what you do not wish to have disclosed

Well no. As soon as you leave your house, your right to privacy is dramatically reduced.
There is no law that can protect you from being aught in someone's camera lens.

If A (in original post) puts out details of something which they did in their life with NO identifying linkage to B there is no invasion of privacy

This was kind of my point.

Since the details are anonymous then, by definition, they can't be invading a particular person's privacy.

 

[DaveC426913]

Events never become "decoupled" from a person who lived them.

But we are not talking about the events themselves - they are in the past. We are talking about the recounting of the events. And that can be decoupled from the secondary persons in the events.

And the writers who do not change enough particulars that the person who participated doesn't recognize the event is doing wrong to that other person.

This does not support your claim, it is simply a restatement of your claim.

I was not making assumptions; I was assessing a factor of risk.

Not you. I meant the hypothetical people you ascribed actions and thoughts to. In our scenario they made inferences and assumptions.

On the readers' part, yes, possibly; it would depend on how accurate the depiction was and how familiar the readers were with persons A and B. Remember, if A's identity is known, it's not that difficult to figure out who their sexual partners may have been. And, even if the readers are not certain, how people act on their inferences, on innuendo and supposition, even on mere suspicion, can harm the unwitting target.

If A stopped there, no problem.

But when A describes another person's body, records their words and reports their actions, it's not just all his own experience anymore.

Agree. But the above is equivocation - a concession. You are acknowledging that it is not always true that privacy is violated. The circumstances matter.

My point is that the OP's scenario is not in-and-of-itself an invasion. Only once you start applying requirements-to-be-met, are you able to say it crosses the line.

But there is a big difference between "inspired by" and verbatim account.

Aye. And there's the room for situational judgement of privacy.

Most of us reasonably expect that what we do in our bedroom, behind closed doors is private. most of us reasonably assume that intimate bodily functions which are routinely performed in a secluded place are private.

If you do it on the street, it's not private. If you do it in a parking lot, it's not private. If you do it on a streetcar, it's not private. If you do it in your bedroom, any bathroom, a medical facility, a polling booth, a bank manager's office, or even your own office with the door locked, it's private.

This is not a difficult concept!

It's not a difficult concept - but it is a straw man.

The question at-hand is that if someone wrote down their take on events (a far cry from literally catching someone in flagrante delicto, as your scenario suggests) and did not include any identifiers, is that violating a specific person's privacy. And we haven't answered that.

 

[Michael 345]

There is no law that can protect you from being aught in someone's camera lens.

Well you can certainly question a deliberate capture of your presence but true not a accidental capture

 

[Jeeves]

The question at-hand is that if someone wrote down their take on events

What is "their take"? The OP scenario refers to a record of a sexual experience involving another person. Not one participant's impressions of having sex, but a specific shared experience, which that other person - seeing as they did it behind closed doors - had a reasonable expectation of doing in private, and did not consent to having made public .

(a far cry from literally catching someone in flagrante delicto, as your scenario suggests)

I didn't suggest that: I referred to an accurate physical description, an accurate record of words and actions. I also made clear that whether readers are likely to recognize the person being thus describes depends very much on the size of the subject-pool and how well the writer - and his or her personal history - is known by the readers.

and did not include any identifiers,

Dates and locations are not the only identifiers.
I'm pretty sure you wouldn't like accidentally overhearing your proctologist tell somebody about draining an anonymous sebaceous cyst on an anonymous perineum, and incidentally noting the very unusual tattoo on your anonymous arm, which everyone can see -- or could, until you overheard this conversation. Now you know that every time you wear a teeshirt in public, some stranger might be snickering over that no-longer-private affliction.

is that violating a specific person's privacy. And we haven't answered that.

Even if nobody else twigged, and identity could never be proven, the specific person might read it and feel betrayed. So would you.
What's admissible in court is not the same as what's acceptable in interpersonal relations.

 

[Write4U]

"This is a work of fiction. Names, characters, places and incidents either are products of the author’s imagination or are used fictitiously. Any resemblance to actual events or locales or persons, living or dead, is entirely coincidental."

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ThisIsAWorkOfFiction#

 

[Jeeves]

Sure. Now, convince your ex-wife.

 

[Hipparchia]

if person A publishes a completely anonymous account of their sexual experiences with person B, likewise anonymous, but doesn't ask for B's consent before doing so, can that be considered to constitute a violation of B's sexual privacy?

It is an interesting question. On reflection I think an important word in your question is "their". A clinical, objective, "eye-in-the-sky" description of the experience might arguably be an invasion of B's privacy, but this - if I understand you correctly - is about A's experience. Now A and B were having sex together, but are we seriously suggesting they had the same experience? I hope not. They had linked experiences, but not the same experience. A is reporting on his or her experience (and perhaps his or her perception of their partner's experience), so how can that invade B's privacy. It cannot.

What is "their take"? The OP scenario refers to a record of a sexual experience involving another person. Not one participant's impressions of having sex, but a specific shared experience, which that other person - seeing as they did it behind closed doors - had a reasonable expectation of doing in private, and did not consent to having made public .

No. The OP scenario is one person's interpretation or their perceptio of their own sexual experience, not a record of that experience. And when it comes to sex on a planet with several billion adults do you really think a description of thatA<>B experience is really going to be unique?

 

[Tiassa]

General questions

1) What is the "interpretive" value or effect of photographs?

2) How much is your response to the topic inquiry affected by the thought of someone using the information as masturbatory stimulation?

3) In what ways does your assessment account for the presence and effect of the wanker?

4) Does your assessment consider other people beyond A, B, and, namely, C?

†​

A testimonial hopefully never recited:

• When she asked, 'Why won't you put the camera down long enough to fuck me?' I told her, 'I'm interpreting my sexual experience!' So she got all pissed off and yelled, 'Then you can interpret by yourself, wanker!' and left."​

To a certain degree, it seems clear people are responding to different interpretations of what the topic post implies, but what are they actually referring to?

Avant-garde art? Revenge porn? Rape report?

Once upon a time, some two-bit masculinist tried to convince me that being able to hire a woman to stomp on his testicels akin to certain stillshot pornography somehow meant men were disempowered. And in that context, it is easy enough to wonder who would be sitting around, poring through the whisper lists of rapist bosses, sexual harassers with little dicks, and wannabe puas who don't know how to fuck, in search of masturbatory stimulation.

I confess, part of me is fascinated, in the moment, by the things people are trying so hard to not say.

 

[Jeeves]

1) What is the "interpretive" value or effect of photographs?

In the current example, none: no photographs were mentioned in the OP.

2) How much is your response to the topic inquiry affected by the thought of someone using the information as masturbatory stimulation?

None.

3) In what ways does your assessment account for the presence and effect of the wanker?

None. (eta) On reflection, I may have inferred that A published the material for commercial distribution, i.e. material gain, which would add a second level of culpability (defrauding B of their share of the profit) to his already reprehensible action.

4) Does your assessment consider other people beyond A, B,

Yes, their subsequent potential partners, families and possibly their community.

, namely, C?

No. Unless he knows that B did not consent to publication, or that B is legally off-limits, he's not involved.

My response is based on the single, very simple definition of the violation of privacy:
Revealing, in any form, to any third party, any intimate or personal information (which, as i said, is anything reasonable people can reasonably expect to remain private) without the subject's consent.
All the weird shit people might do just doesn't figure into that simple principle. It's not restricted to sex; the same would be equally true of a trusted professional, close friend or family member broadcasting information acquired in confidence.

I suppose I should add that there are circumstances in which violating someone's privacy is necessary, justified or the lesser available evil. But no such conditions were mentioned.