Zorral Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 Tell us how mad men are to control women? Men, many of whom have demonstrated pathetically in the last few years how completely ignorant they are of menstruation, reproduction, fertility, pregnancy, childbirth and all that happens after childbirth. https://www.rawstory.com/youngkin-administration-opposes-shielding-menstrual-app-data-from-search-warrants/ Not even Margaret Atwood could foresee this, though to be fair, The Handmaid's Tale was before digitization of everything. Ser Scot A Ellison 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ants Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 On 2/15/2023 at 12:36 PM, Zorral said: Tell us how mad men are to control women? Men, many of whom have demonstrated pathetically in the last few years how completely ignorant they are of menstruation, reproduction, fertility, pregnancy, childbirth and all that happens after childbirth. https://www.rawstory.com/youngkin-administration-opposes-shielding-menstrual-app-data-from-search-warrants/ Not even Margaret Atwood could foresee this, though to be fair, The Handmaid's Tale was before digitization of everything. To be honest, I don’t see this as unusual or terribly bad. I see it as the natural extension of the Republican decision to criminalise abortion. If you’ve decided to do that then why would you create a carve out for this information in respect of search warrants? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 16 minutes ago, ants said: I don’t see this as unusual or terribly bad. Reichlican surveillance of the most personal and private matters opens the way to surveilling every male's masturbation, married or not, in the name of saving the notbabies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ants Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 8 minutes ago, Zorral said: Reichlican surveillance of the most personal and private matters opens the way to surveilling every male's masturbation, married or not, in the name of saving the notbabies. It's not surveillance. The only thing the bill stopped was search warrants. Those already have a lot of controls in place (such as showing probable cause) and apply equal to men's information as to woman's. So the government or police can't just request the data without just cause. If you're going to criminalise abortion, which I'm totally against, then this is a natural follow on decision to block this. And if you're not criminalising abortion, I'm still not sure why this information shouldn't be available if needed for a criminal inquiry and probable cause could be shown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywin et al. Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 11 minutes ago, ants said: And if you're not criminalising abortion, I'm still not sure why this information shouldn't be available if needed for a criminal inquiry and probable cause could be shown. What possible benefit would that have compared to how badly it could be abused? It's another example of searching for a problem that doesn't exist with the main goal being to harass women. Jace, Extat 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ants Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 The main reason you would want this to remain covered is in the case of a crime where the information became necessary. E.g. where the timing of when a woman became aware she was pregnant was somehow important in establishing motive for a murder. I assume it would be incredibly rare that it would be invoked, as I assume it is incredibly rare now for any jurisdiction where abortion isn't illegal. Any searchable information whether it is financial, information on affairs, medical information, etc. can be abused. That is why there are processes and protections such as requiring probably cause and judge sign-off for search warrants and other information. Those protection don't always work, but that doesn't mean all search warrants should be banned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry of the Lawn Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 10 hours ago, ants said: It's not surveillance. The only thing the bill stopped was search warrants. Those already have a lot of controls in place (such as showing probable cause) and apply equal to men's information as to woman's. So the government or police can't just request the data without just cause. If you're going to criminalise abortion, which I'm totally against, then this is a natural follow on decision to block this. And if you're not criminalising abortion, I'm still not sure why this information shouldn't be available if needed for a criminal inquiry and probable cause could be shown. This is naive. Some companies have been sharing protected data with law enforcement without warrants all the time. https://www.theverge.com/2022/7/26/23279562/arlo-apple-wyze-eufy-google-ring-security-camera-foortage-warrant For all the whining about the second amendment (which has largely been strengthened over the last 20 years) the 1st and 4th have been pared back heavily in practice if not in case law. Same with the 6th (something like 95% of criminal convictions are plea bargains). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaston de Foix Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 On 2/14/2023 at 8:36 PM, Zorral said: Tell us how mad men are to control women? Men, many of whom have demonstrated pathetically in the last few years how completely ignorant they are of menstruation, reproduction, fertility, pregnancy, childbirth and all that happens after childbirth. https://www.rawstory.com/youngkin-administration-opposes-shielding-menstrual-app-data-from-search-warrants/ Not even Margaret Atwood could foresee this, though to be fair, The Handmaid's Tale was before digitization of everything. My big problem with these menstrual apps is that they share/sell this incredibly personal data without any form of consent or regulation right now anyway. They just don't have the internal legal controls to protect customer information. Within a few days of the app telling my wife to get a pregnancy test, we were getting ads on Youtube for pregnancy tests, maternity wear etc etc. I don't want Big Brother poking his nose into my house and wife's health, and I don't want Walmart either. Fragile Bird, ants, Jace, Extat and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 14 hours ago, ants said: I'm still not sure why this information shouldn't be available if needed for a criminal inquiry Hello? What possible criminal inquiry does information regarding a woman's periods assist? Other than attempts to prove her having a criminal abortion, or using other contraception hmmmmmmmmmmmmm? Jace, Extat and Larry of the Lawn 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 1 hour ago, Zorral said: Hello? What possible criminal inquiry does information regarding a woman's periods assist? Other than attempts to prove her having a criminal abortion, or using other contraception hmmmmmmmmmmmmm? Oh come on, we all know women are crazy when they have their cycle, right? Tywin et al. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 33 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said: we all know women are crazy when they have their cycle, right? I knew this would be the answer! Fragile Bird 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 4 hours ago, Zorral said: Hello? What possible criminal inquiry does information regarding a woman's periods assist? Other than attempts to prove her having a criminal abortion, or using other contraception hmmmmmmmmmmmmm? 2 hours ago, Fragile Bird said: Oh come on, we all know women are crazy when they have their cycle, right? 1 hour ago, Zorral said: I knew this would be the answer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 Sometime perhaps someone will successfully explain to me why racist, neo nazis, neo fascists, authoritarian, bigots, haters of women, immigrants and everyone who isn't a white xtian authoritarian male, who express these beliefs in just about everything they write and they say, even in videos, twitters, etc. get very very very violently offended and angry when people say they and what they express are racist, etc. They believe all this toxic garbage, think They are are very clever in Their thought and expressions, so why are They so determined not to own the actual words that go with what They are? And, o yes, there is something very wrong with us who hear what They say to us and about us to call what They say what it is They say. Jace, Extat and LongRider 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywin et al. Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 You can't explain why the party of Jesus hates the teachings of Jesus. It just is what it is at this point for most of them. LongRider, Jace, Extat, Prince of the North and 1 other 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ants Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 19 hours ago, Larry of the Lake said: This is naive. Some companies have been sharing protected data with law enforcement without warrants all the time. https://www.theverge.com/2022/7/26/23279562/arlo-apple-wyze-eufy-google-ring-security-camera-foortage-warrant For all the whining about the second amendment (which has largely been strengthened over the last 20 years) the 1st and 4th have been pared back heavily in practice if not in case law. Same with the 6th (something like 95% of criminal convictions are plea bargains). Which is an issue when you share any private information. 15 hours ago, Zorral said: Hello? What possible criminal inquiry does information regarding a woman's periods assist? Other than attempts to prove her having a criminal abortion, or using other contraception hmmmmmmmmmmmmm? I gave an example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 22 hours ago, Zorral said: Hello? What possible criminal inquiry does information regarding a woman's periods assist? Other than attempts to prove her having a criminal abortion, or using other contraception hmmmmmmmmmmmmm? To play devil's advocate: Consider a case where the police believe that a boyfriend murdered his girlfriend, and they think the motive is that he found out she was pregnant and he didn't want to deal with it (absolutely a situation that has sadly occurred). Having data showing that the girlfriend knew she was pregnant would help with proving that cases. ants 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Fez said: aving data showing that the girlfriend knew she was pregnant would help with proving that cases. That information can be gained in other ways, particularly from autopsy, which would be performed in such cases. Moreover, there is no way to prove the woman did think she was pregnant, unless she left a written record, a text, had spoken about her suspicions to a friend or anyone else. Despite it being digital there is no more guarantee every single individual woman will be always paying attention, any more than every single woman is always paying attention to her cycles w/o digital prompting. Many things get in the way, if one is actually living a life with jobs, travel, money troubles, other kids, final exams, a dissertation to write. As per usual this kind of thing dramatizes how little most men know about women and what it is to have these cycles -- much less even reproduction, contraception, pregnancy, childbirth, and child rearing -- much less women's sexuality and what satisfies them! Such an argument in no way justifies having all women surveilled and all women's personal health data available to any and all, not even to law enforcement, because making such interpolations is not provable physical evidence that she told her boyfriend she was pregnant so he killed her. Edited February 17 by Zorral LongRider, Jace, Extat and Ser Scot A Ellison 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 Whew, this would be more fun to read if these people were at least off the air. Read at least through the email that Sidney Powell received from a ghost. ants 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted February 17 Author Share Posted February 17 12 minutes ago, Week said: Whew, this would be more fun to read if these people were at least off the air. Read at least through the email that Sidney Powell received from a ghost. Thank you for that link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 25 minutes ago, Week said: this would be more fun to read if these people were at least off the air. One of our friends is among the attorney teams who are working for the Dominion case. He said last week, with all modesty, "O I'm on it because I know a lot about digital operations, and can do data run and pull out stuff," as though being an attorney who is a crackerjack at knowing the pertinent case law and other pertinent law has nothing to do with being part of the teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts