Central City Police Captain David Singh!
Central City Police Captain David Singh!
I am apparently having a rocking chair on my Angelfire porch shaking my cane and sipping my whiskey mood with the internet the last couple of days.
…I need to make a graphic to represent this feel, it comes up often enough.
The fact that there’s even a debate on whether upskirting is wrong on Boston.com right now fills me with rage.
Although it is good that the legislature is working to make a new law to actually make it illegal since the court had to declare that the wording of the current law doesn’t actually do that since it specifies that the victim has to be nude. And for the record I have nothing against the judge since he included in his statement a line to to the effect of “now hurry up and fix it so this doesn’t happen again.” He clearly didn’t agree with it but as the law stands it’s not illegal and part of his job is to send stuff back to the lawmakers when there are loopholes like that so they can fix it.
Massachusetts highest court ruled Wednesday that it is not illegal to secretly photograph underneath a person’s clothing, a practice known as “upskirting.”For fuck’s sake.
So someone do it to the ruling judge.
Stop it. All of you stop it (that includes CNN). That isn’t what the judge said. What the judge said was “as the law they tried to prosecute the guy is written, it doesn’t apply here.” The law was for a different circumstance, and there wasn’t one for this circumstance, and the Supreme Judicial Court is pretty much tied to the law. You still have to work within WHAT THE LAW ACTUALLY SAYS.
So. The law was bad, the SJC said “This totally sucks, but we’re stuck.” They did not say “hey, go ahead do whatever, because we don’t give a fuck” and they did not say “Hey, we don’t see why anyone is upset.”
The legislature immediately did what they are supposed to do, and wrote a law making upskirt photos illegal, the governor signed it about an hour ago, so it’s not like it’s a free-for-all here.
Look, I know reading comprehension is hard and taking the time to actually get the full story on a situation is a pain in the ass, but maaaaaaybe look beyond the soundbite headlines and actually read why judges rule the way they do? Sometimes it’s not because they are assholes.
Three branches of government, people. Legislative makes the laws. Executive enforces the laws. Judicial places judgement based upon said laws.
Laws in their specificality get made because a situation comes up where they’re necessary. Changing or removing them is the same way.
FFS people on this website and jumping to the worst case assumptions without all of the facts.
Botsford said that the prosecutors — trying the case of a man who was using his cell phone to take pictures and video from underneath the skirts and dresses of women on public transit — had a “reasonable” point. But she said that Massachusetts law did not “address” the problem.
"At the core of the Commonwealth’s argument to the contrary is the proposition that a woman, and in particular a woman riding on a public trolley, has a reasonable expectation of privacy in not having a stranger secretly take photographs up her skirt. The proposition is eminently reasonable, but [the law] in its current form does not address it.”
The judge basically said, yes it should be illegal, but technically it isn’t the way the prosecutors went after this, and what is actually illegal is what I have to make my ruling on — not what I believe to be reasonable and right. Might want to fix that, lawmakers.
Oh, and hey. They just passed a law to rectify the legal loophole: Upskirt Ban Signed into Law
I make a point of not responding who people who reblog with comments that appear as if they haven’t actually read and comprehended what they’re purportedly responding to.
Oscar nominees Best Animated Feature 2014
Earlier today this article was brought to my attention, in which it becomes clear that some of the Academy voters have little to no respect for the animation industry. They openly admit not having watched the nominated films and/or claiming that animated films are for kids, so they didn’t vote. Even the ones shown in the article that did vote barely motivated their choice.
I find this extremely disrespectful of the animators who poured their heart and soul into making these movies, only to have their work be pushed aside without a second glance by the judges of one of the most prominent and well known film awards out there. As an aspiring animator, I am deeply insulted.
Please note that in this post I am expressing no opinion on whether Frozen should have won or not. I think it’s a wonderful film, just as all the other nominees. I am simply saying that we deserve better.
What they did is disrespectful to the creators of every single one of these films, even Frozen. By barely motivating their choice, they make it look like they voted for Frozen simply because of Disney’s status in the industry. Because it’s Disney, and it made a lot of money, so it had to be at least somewhat good. To me it seems like some of the voters just defaulted to voting for the Disney film, and nobody likes to win by default.
Don’t get me wrong, I too have been guilty of loving Disney simply because it’s Disney, but there is so much more beautiful animation out there and it deserves to be taken into consideration. And if Frozen won, it should have won because the majority of the voters thought it was the best film, not because part of the voters was too lazy to even watch the nominated films.
I’ve seen this going around and I need to speak up.
First of all, the Academy is made up of almost 6,000 members. For initial voting, you vote for whatever you are: directors for directors, actors for actors, etc. There are exceptions like best foreign film and best animated film which are done by a cross functional committee [source here]. Then after the initial voting, the ballots are sent to all 6,000 active members to vote in all categories. Are you going to tell me that these 7 anonymous academy awards members are representative of the 6,000 members? I work in marketing. I know how this works. The Hollywood Reporter is only showing you what they want you to see.
Secondly, let’s really analyze this:
Anon #1: Abstained from voting because disinterested (this I think is the only really disrespectful response)
Anon #2: Didn’t see all of them (should have seen all of them but I respect they abstained from voting)
Anon #3: Nowhere did it say this person did not see all of the movies. None.
Anon #4: Nowhere did it say this person did not see all of the movies. None.
Anon #5: Saw all of them. Liked them all. Did not vote.
Anon #6: Nowhere did it say this person did not see all of the movies. None.
Anon #7: Did not see them all, didn’t vote.
Would you prefer them to vote on if they didn’t see the movies? No, that would definitely be a tragedy.
Lastly, we have to remember that you can’t expect all those who vote to have seen all the movies. Let’s consider the best picture category. Did YOU see all of them? I doubt it. Even though they are targeted to moviegoers like yourself and myself, I didn’t even see all of them (although 7 out of 9 ain’t bad). If you were to be randomly sent a ballot to vote on best picture or best animated feature, would you say that you saw them all? I highly doubt it. The ballots are sent to members by a given time and by then the member must have seen all the films by that time. I would like to see the Hollywood Reporter do a random 7-anon interviews for best picture and see what the results are. I doubt they are going to be very different than best animated feature.
If you are unaware how the voting process works for animated feature, here are all the details. Basically, a cross-functional committee screens the list of however many animated films. From this list of 16+, they narrow it down to the top 5. Those in this committee have to see 66% of the films. So if there are 16 nominations they have to see at least 11 films to be able to nominate the Top 5. Then, the ballots are distributed to the 6,000 active members (ballots are only sent to active members) to vote on everything, including best animated feature. This process is exactly the same process used for Foreign Films as well.