Blog: You would think this would be a big deal amongst the small crowd of passionate anti-revenge porn advocates, as it was a huge victory for a woman harmed. Isn’t that what it’s all about?
In what might be Michigan’s first revenge-pornography case resulting in a monetary judgment, a woman was awarded $500,000 this week after her ex-boyfriend posted nude photographs of her on multiple Internet sites.
Half a mil is a lot of money, but that’s not all. The woman’s lawyer, Kyle Bristow, did a great job taking down this miscreant.
According to court records from the Oakland County (Mich.) Circuit Court, Judge Martha Anderson awarded the sum Wednesday, which is set to accrue interest over time. Anderson also granted a permanent injunction against the ex-boyfriend, forcing him to immediately destroy and never republish the photos to third-party websites. If he does, Bristow said, he can be held in contempt and face prison or additional fines.
Unsurprisingly, Bristow’s client, whom he declined to name to protect her privacy, was thrilled by the outcome. You know who wasn’t thrilled? Of course you do. When asked whether she was involved in this huge victory, as she made no mention of it despite the fact that the anti-revenge porn forces will laud themselves for anything. Again, Mary Anne Franks responded:
No wonder there was total silence by the teary-eyed advocates about this big win. First, the win had nothing whatsoever to do with their effort to criminalize revenge porn. Ironically, the USA Today reporter, in a stab at thoroughness, connected dots that had no connection:
And although the number of sites has dwindled since then, Bristow said many revenge-porn photos are still posted on Tumblr, a popular social networking site.
Within the past year, a number of states — including Michigan — have passed laws that criminalize revenge pornography. According to the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative, a non-profit that advocates for legal and technological ways to fight online abuse, 34 states and the District of Columbia have revenge porn laws.
What the reporter didn’t grasp was that this win was not because of these laws, but despite them. The laws were not merely unnecessary, but failed. Bristow, on the other hand, prevailed without resort to criminal laws at the expense of the First Amendment.
Franks obviously realized it, as this story gave her team a spanking as to to its ineffectiveness. Not that it will prevent the next level of harm at the hands of Rep. Jackie Speier, who would undermine the Section 230 safe harbor in the process of making Franks relevant.
But the worst offense in the great win was Bristow himself. Not just that he’s male (ugh, patriarchy). Not just that he managed to pull off a victory that Franks keeps insisting isn’t possible without her. Not just because the CCRI, which wants to pretend its heroines are the saviors of womanhood on the internets, had nothing to do with it. No, there was an evil far worse than any of these.
Kyle Bristow is a conservative! There is no crime worse than not being progressive, and Bristow committed it.
According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, he’s a hate group person.* His thought-crimes caused the State Bar of Michigan to withdraw its honorable mention of a short story he wrote and apologize to readers. Apparently, it wasn’t so bad that they didn’t award him a prize, until someone explained to them that it was “embedded with racist cues and symbolism.”
