this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2023
243 points (90.9% liked)

politics

18073 readers
3166 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

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.”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FlyingSquid 207 points 9 months ago (3 children)

I could not care less about such a thing when it comes to a candidate and I wish no one else would either.

[–] [email protected] 149 points 9 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] FlyingSquid 40 points 9 months ago

Let's start with Trump. Although he may actually face some consequences on that front for once.

[–] [email protected] 80 points 9 months ago

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] rhacer 175 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Where's the problem? She and her husband were obviously consenting, the viewers were consenting.

Who the hell cares.

[–] CluckN 78 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Who cares

Old people and strict Catholics who unfortunately make up 120% of voters.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 9 months ago (1 children)

that statistic cannot be accurate. And yet it is.... yet it is...

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] utopianfiat 57 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The real controversy is that somehow Wapo and AP decided to assist a GOP operative in violating Virginia's revenge porn laws

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 123 points 9 months ago (2 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 54 points 9 months ago

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.

[–] FlyingSquid 24 points 9 months ago (4 children)

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.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] YoBuckStopsHere 69 points 9 months ago

I don't see the problem here.

[–] Smytty 65 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Oh gosh this is absolutely terrible.

Where?

[–] FlyingSquid 23 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I'm betting OnlyFans and I have no idea why the AP is being so prudish about it.

[–] jeffw 13 points 9 months ago

The issue is that the videos were deleted from the original site and are now being hosted elsewhere without her consent.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 9 months ago

Chaturbate is mentioned.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 59 points 9 months ago

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.

[–] [email protected] 57 points 9 months ago

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.

[–] TruTollTroll 49 points 9 months ago

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..

[–] [email protected] 46 points 9 months ago

So? Oh no, someone's having a sex life? Get fucked, prudes. Literally. It'll help you loosen up a bit.

[–] CADmonkey 35 points 9 months ago (2 children)

What's the issue here? Other than GQP weirdos upset that they can't get laid?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Astroturfed 34 points 9 months ago
[–] [email protected] 28 points 9 months ago

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’.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 9 months ago

I hope that one day our culture moves past this sexual shame bullshit so that grown adults doing completely legal things with each other don't have to worry about shamed for crap like this.

[–] ShittyRedditWasBetter 25 points 9 months ago

Oh God, how dare we elect a sexual deviant!

[–] [email protected] 24 points 9 months ago

Erections have consequences.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 9 months ago

People are going to have to start getting over themselves. As time goes on, there are going to be more and more candidates with similar shit. Younger Millennials/older gen z are going to have a lot who were on Onlyfans. Eventually someone is going to add it to their donate links. As long as it’s consensual, who gives a fuck.

[–] bababooey 24 points 9 months ago

Someone’s about to get a ton more monthly subscribers

[–] _number8_ 22 points 9 months ago

so???

this is a good strategy!

[–] SuddenlyBlowGreen 20 points 9 months ago

Conservatives are judt weirded out because their sex scandals involve rape/children.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 9 months ago

Imagine caring at all

[–] [email protected] 19 points 9 months ago
[–] weedazz 18 points 9 months ago

Lol we live in a post trump post bobert world, y'all really think there is anything that would shock me about this story

[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago (3 children)
[–] FlyingSquid 10 points 9 months ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] eek2121 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

okay? a man and woman (or man/man, or woman/woman, or…) should be able to do what they want, as long as enthusiastic consent is given.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›