Everyone is known to now what has emerged from the discovery of the Facebook group “My wife”. Several crimes have been discovered, a large number of photographs taken and widespread without the consent of the women portrayed, sometimes even minors; It is a partially problematic catchment area, because in search of the stolen shot and a continuous rundown of female bodies to weigh. The public reaction was enormous and has led to many complaints to the postal police, who therefore intervened and now will proceed with the investigations.

No doubt about the problem of consent and violation

It once again arises, therefore, the obvious and primary question of the dissemination of images without the consent of the subject, serious in general and very problematic on the internet, but particularly if it comes to nude images or concerning the intimate sphere; Or even of images on the beach, in swimsuit, then used to comment on the woman’s body, in a disrespectful and often humiliating way for her. To this are connected the dynamics that are the backdrop to the man-woman relationship, which we observe to be based, in these contexts, on a desire for domination and reduction of the woman to an object without will.

On these two aspects there is no discussion, except on the causes and possible solutions: they are unquestionably wrong and dangerous, and nobody could support the opposite. However, unfortunately, the fact that the actions performed by many members of the group are to be condemned without appeal made us feel a little too free to season them at will; This is especially now that the first days have passed, and therefore to continue relaunching the topic you have to go further and further on the declarations.

This does not justify the distortions of the news

From the beginning, the news was widespread incorrectly, with different distortions compared to reality. First of all, the number of members, reported as 32,000, but in reality, given that about 8,000 users came after the scandal, to get an idea, to collect material, to condemn. And below the connection between the number of members and the number of men who violated a woman’s privacy: it was said that we have 32,000 violent men around on the loose, and potentially as many women victims of their husbands or strangers. Finally, it was not said anywhere that the group was very varied, and that many users did not share a good thing, or that there were also women who participated in a game with husbands, or who were numerous false photos, of models or actresses passed off as someone’s wife.

Reporting this information with precision instead of inventing them would certainly not mean diminishing the phenomenon: it is not difficult to reiterate that where there is no consent there is willful misconduct or fault, while contextualizing that number and truthfully describing the type of content and users. You shouldn’t even ask the question, on the contrary, because that’s how news should be given. What need is there to inflate the story, when is it already serious of his own? Why make a distorted perception to the public, instead of informing it correctly by highlighting the problematic crimes and behaviors?

As always, we aim to obtain reactions

We probably fear that if we do not bring the public to the maximum scandal, making it lose its sense of proportions, this will not be receptive, it will not be hit, it will not begin to pull stones in the form of comments. Let’s not forget that any news event, any fact that becomes publicly known, is always a huge monetization tool, a generator of interactions and views: from a news they start podcasts, videos, interventions, television programs, which obviously must be kept up by the exaggeration and elucubration without criteria.

Thus, we end up putting different things in the same cauldron, generating confusion and unnecessary violence. A juicy element was in fact voyeurism: these men like that others look at their partner and get excited. And given that in this group where they spread non -consensual images there are men who have this sexual fantasy, it is clear that all men who have this sexual fantasy have the habit of spreading images without consent, and who knows what else, on the same line. It is therefore also clear that those sexual tastes are sick, depraved, dangerous, unfortunate: they now begin to waste the diagnoses of psychiatrists of questionable professional ethics, the reflections of Sunday psychoanalysts, the fine analysis of those who until yesterday not even knew about the existence of certain practices.

Judgment becomes moral and affects sexuality rather than violence

The public utility of all this noise on the Kink of others is zero. If anything, the damage it can cause, at least for two very important reasons is high. The first is that they identify themselves as dangerous subjects who are not at all, simply on the basis of their sexual tastes, which can be very well put into practice without violating anyone in any way; Therefore, a stigma (or rather, strengthens it) is generated) in the air, which affects not only the people who are the object (which is not pleasant, I assure you), but also all the people who could tomorrow expand their sexual experiences. The second, of course, is that we end up talking no longer about the problem of consent and violence, but of the perversions (indeed, “depravations”): it goes out that if you have fetish you are a dangerous patriarchal misogynist (because not being jealous of his wife has now become patriarchal, in spite of all conferences on the culture of possession), consent or not. Instead, it is only and only the consent that counts, together with respect for the dignity and health of the other: any sexual practice must be conducted in complete safety and making sure that those involved is aware and certain of what they do. What then is what you do, when nobody gets up, should be irrelevant.