Maggie Dennis <mdennis(a)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