A candidate in a high-stakes legislative contest in Virginia had sex with her husband in live videos posted on a pornographic website and asked viewers to pay them money in return for carrying out specific sex acts.
Screenshots of Susanna Gibson on the website were shared with The Associated Press. The campaign for Gibson, a Democrat running for a seat in the Virginia House of Delegates in a district just outside Richmond, issued a statement Monday in which it denounced the sharing of the videos as a violation of the law and her privacy. Gibson called the exposure of the videos “the worst gutter politics.”
“It won’t intimidate me and it won’t silence me,” she said in the statement. “My political opponents and their Republican allies have proven they’re willing to commit a sex crime to attack me and my family because there’s no line they won’t cross to silence women when they speak up.”
I could not care less about such a thing when it comes to a candidate and I wish no one else would either.
She’s being accused of…having sex with her husband lmfao
Now let’s cut to a montage of all the elected men who fucked around on their spouses and had no consequences
Let’s start with Trump. Although he may actually face some consequences on that front for once.
If she was anti porn it would be an issue. If she bill herself as a “good Christian”, it would be an issue. If it was legal, so what? Porn-loving self professed Christians likely won’t vote for her though.
i think it’s a positive
Where’s the problem? She and her husband were obviously consenting, the viewers were consenting.
Who the hell cares.
Who cares
Old people and strict Catholics who unfortunately make up 120% of voters.
that statistic cannot be accurate. And yet it is… yet it is…
That’s gerrymandering and corporate lobbying for you.
The real controversy is that somehow Wapo and AP decided to assist a GOP operative in violating Virginia’s revenge porn laws
Chaturbate TOS:
You may not, download, reproduce, sell, rent, perform, or link to any content made available through the Platform, except as expressly permitted by the Community Member and/or Independent Broadcaster, as appropriate, responsible for such content or otherwise as permitted by the rules of the Platform.
Virginia revenge porn law:
Any person who, with the intent to coerce, harass, or intimidate, maliciously disseminates or sells any videographic or still image created by any means whatsoever that depicts another person who is totally nude, or in a state of undress so as to expose the genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or female breast, where such person knows or has reason to know that he is not licensed or authorized to disseminate or sell such videographic or still image is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.
It’s clear from the TOS that unless Mrs. Gibson expressly permitted dissemination of the materials, that the sites on which they were reposted AND the GOP operative “had reason to know” that they were not licensed or authorized to disseminate the content. That said, it’s hard to prove malintent in a political context. GOP operative could simply argue that there was a public interest in this information being shared.
I’m pleased to find this as the top comment. It summarizes my reaction perfectly.
It was pretty vanilla sex between a married couple without a condom, the only kind of sex God likes. You’d think the Republicans would be thrilled.
Seems fine. Sex workers are allowed to have political opinions. These were consenting adults. This wasn’t infidelity, because it was a married couple. There’s really no controversy here, unless you think sex is intrinsically a bad thing, in which case you’re probably repressing yourself and everyone else
Not to mention this is 2023. A candidate who is naked on the internet was bound to happen and we’ve been saying it for over a decade. Okay, it happened. Can we move on and discuss the outrageous problems we as a country and as an entire species are facing? That’s be great.
When Mary Carey ran for governor of California, she didn’t get many votes, but people treated her like a serious candidate. And she was (is?) a porn star.
There were 153 people in that race and she came in 10th.
And yet she was still treated like a real candidate despite her history.
That’s what I’m saying, she got more votes than 143 people in that race. And at the time, it wasn’t history, she was a working porn star.
Oh, got it.
I don’t see the problem here.
Oh gosh this is absolutely terrible.
Where?
I’m betting OnlyFans and I have no idea why the AP is being so prudish about it.
Chaturbate is mentioned.
The issue is that the videos were deleted from the original site and are now being hosted elsewhere without her consent.
That’s shit is more plain than unsalted butter.
The videos were pretty standard sex between her and her husband. Honestly, it’d be cool if they just owned it- respond to gotcha questions at debates etc with a shrug and a “yeah, so?” explain how to tip through the various platforms and then give people links. Seems like reacting as if it’s shameful just gives right-wing scolds leverage.
The only difference between this and other sex scandals that Republicans have ignored is that in this case the woman consented. I’m therefore forced to conclude that they believe consent is the problem. Men can rape all they want because men are dumb animals who just grab women by the pussy and have no actual moral agency, and a woman being raped isn’t an issue because she didn’t want to do it and is therefore “morally intact”. Sex is only a scandal if it’s not straight, or if the woman consents. Both of those represent wilfull violations of the rules of their death cult, and must be punished.
They (the GOP) Had no problems with Melania Trump’s naked photos and infact praised her for being so “bold and beautiful” 🤮🤢 but they have a problem with a (“one”) Man and (“One”) women who are married to each other hosting naked photos of themselves… and they do not realize the leopards feasting on their faces? Or is that shock and adrenaline keeping them from noticing lmao 🤣😂 fuck the hypocritical GOP fascist…
So? Oh no, someone’s having a sex life? Get fucked, prudes. Literally. It’ll help you loosen up a bit.
Did she break the law doing it? Hurt her husband? Hurt others? Did she scam people?
So she and her husband needed some side income and figured out a way to legally and non-harmfully monetize something they were already doing? So… you’re telling me she and her husband are, uh, enterprising? Probably Millennials? Horny for each other? Cool? What’s the story? Are the Republicans just going to breathlessly read off her resume now while their base hyperventilates?
Someone here did break the law: The GOP operative source and the Wapo and AP who are obstructing justice by hiding their identity
She probably didn’t break a law, but that may also depend on when and where this happened. Virginia passed a low that went into effect recently banning websites from showing content “not appropriate for children” without age verification. I doubt a user posting a video is responsible for it though, and the website may have required it (but some do not still).
That law came into effect two months ago, so if she was violating the law, it was by posting in the last two months on a non-compliant website which she would have had to personally run (since liability for that would fall on the site owners, as you alluded to).
So, uh, it’s basically guaranteed she didn’t break the law and nobody’s alluding to actual lawbreaking.
What’s the issue here? Other than GQP weirdos upset that they can’t get laid?
While it’s perfectly legal to record your own sex tape and sell access, I can’t imagine how stupid you have to be in order to run for office and think it won’t become public and negatively affect your campaign.
She should have come forward with the information when she first decided to run. She would have been able to control the message.
Muricans…
Yet if she was advocating for guns and straight-up shooting political competitors, and a GOP, she’d be feted as ‘standing up for American values’.
Oh God, how dare we elect a sexual deviant!
Erections have consequences.
