Maggie Dennis mdennis@wikimedia.org wrote:
In the time I've worked at the Wikimedia Foundation, I have (unsurprisingly, given its reported prevalence) come across this kind of harassment in my work with Support and Safety (formerly Community Advocacy). There have been cases where perfectly harmless pictures of the individuals have been doctored to be sexualized and cases where existing pornographic pictures that were not the individual were selected and misattributed as being them. I have personally been involved in complaints of this happening to both men and women.
[…]
That was not asked and reported by the Harassment Survey, though. Question #6 as per https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Harassment_survey_2015/Questions was:
| How many times have you experienced incidents like the ones | described below while working on any of the Wikimedia | projects?
| […]
| - Sexually explicit or sexualised photos of me have been | published without my consent
| […]
Even subsuming the second alternative as "revenge porn" is very problematic as in the public perception and that of the courts it is a breach of the implicit confidentiality under which (real) images were originally produced.
Tim