Erin Andrews and spy cams

I seriously doubt that a majority of public restrooms in the usa are wired for video. Have you seen most of the folks who use public restrooms? Theres a good chance any camera will be found by someone after copper wiring.

It has become quite trendy to generate publicity by posting a sleazy vid - if she did it wouldnt be the first OR the last.



I did notice that she didnt "out" herself in this situation... ESPN was asked if the "nude female sports reporter" vid was one of their employees. ESPN said "No, thats Erin Andrews". After this was when Andrews and her lawyer confirmed it and started the legal stuff.

I am familiar with Erin Andrews and some of her sports reporting, and I dont think she intends to be working Fox Baseball in five years. Sports reporters are meat to Fox, and admitting she was in the vid would serve to see who was sympathetic and might get her a gig as well as a chance to litigate.

Did she do it intentionally? Not likely, but I do think she is using it to her full advantage - as well she should considering the situation.

Frankly, Im surprised anyone even cared, and I would have to think that this has helped skyrocket her name recognition!

 

That's not correct. The scumbag who took the video knew who it was. Why the hell do you think he posted it? It was already creating a stir on the internet before she confirmed it was her.

It took courage for her to meet it head-on, but she did because the media (not to mention people in forums like this) would reveal it anyway and accuse her of "trying to cover it up" if she didn't.

"Something profitable" out of being humiliated by being posted on disgusting web sites? You've got a strange sense of peoples' values.

 

And how would you know? Have you been in them? Have you looked for the cams? Do you even know what to look for and where to look?

Oh, is that right? So where are these "trends" happening? What other national reporter has posted a "sleazy vid" of themselves? Don't just make ridiculous baseless blanket statements, give me some names. I'd like to know what other nationally-known news or sports reporters have posted videos of themselves, as you so flippantly claim.

So are you implying that she posted it herself?

A totally unfounded and baseless assertion.

 

That's not what I said, at all. My point was this: the fact that I haven't been in women's restrooms or been the victim of such activities does not disqualify me from speaking on the subject, because even if I was a woman and it had happened to me, I wouldn't know about it: therefore, I wouldn't know any more about it than I do now. So, in short, being a woman does not as such make anyone more knowledgeable about the subject.

Anyway, whatever you may think, most women have never been subject to anything like this. If you were to take a poll, I guarantee it would reflect this. All I'm saying is that it's a massive stretch to say that most public restrooms have cameras in them; you're twisting my words to a disgusting degree.

 

You all continue to attempt to divert attention from what is the salient point here ... that a crime was committed, and a young woman courageously intends to risk public humiliation in order to prosecute. Instead of commending her for her courage, you boys choose to consider the crime an irrelevant sideshow. I commend her because I know what she's going through. None of you do. Nor, apparently, are you capable of comprehending it.

No, she wasn't physically harmed, but what if she had been? What if she had been assaulted or raped, and chose to come forth with her story? Is that more publicity-seeking too?

So go ahead ... crack your sophomoric, frat-boy jokes. Elbow each other in the ribs and snicker over your beers because you think a woman who refuses to be a victim is simply seeking publicity. And congratulations ... it's neanderthal attitudes like yours that encourage other women to keep quiet about these crimes. Pat yourselves on the back, boys ... one more scumbag will go free because a woman chose not to report the crime in order to spare herself being subjected to your kind of backwoods insinuations. You ought to be ashamed.

And I have to say I'm disappointed that no other women chose to take part in this thread. You girls rise up in indignation when websites post polls about women's looks, but you suddenly clam up about crimes of violation? I only hope you are never the victim of one of these lowlife spycam dudes, although I venture to guess that it's entirely possible you already have been, without even realizing it.

That's all I have to say about this. Henceforth, you all with be talking amongst yourselves.

 

Ahhww fucking hell Caliente don't make this into an sexist issue because that's not what it is. Everyone knows that a crime had taken place and that Ms Andrews could have fought the case without public attention.

Eh discussion is pointless if you refuse to review the points of the other discussing, yes it would seem we are both talking to brick walls.

Really wish i read ^ that earlier before I posted a rebuttal

C'mon Caliente, don't play stupid. Obviously the perpetrator knew who he was recording, both you and I know when I say "no one knew" that I am talking about the general public. Had Erin, or her attorney, not come out and stated that it was in fact her in the video, no one would have known (general public). After all, the video had been on the internet for quite some time before anyone even made the assumption it was Erin Andrews. And even then we would have continued to doubt its validity had her identity not been confirmed.

This was not a sex tape, but a celebrity naked is nothing new. Unlike Paris Hilton, Kim Kardashian or Pamela Anderson, who all knew they were being taped, Erin didn't even know someone was watching her, let alone taping her. Andrew has nothing to be ashamed of (no pun intended) her privacy was invaded and taken advantage of noone can fault her for that nor an attempt to cover up such an invasion of her privacy. IMHO Andrews (or ESPN) are trying to capitalize (gain popularity) on the video since its distribution is uncontrollable, and really that's the best hand she was dealt other than keeping hush hush where her identity and humiliation (public of course) was questionable at best.

For example, If someone took a naked picture of you without your blessing and posted it on the internet, would you let it be known that such an image is available just a few mouse clicks away or have the authorities handle it quietly?!

 

This is why I usually stay out of feminist forums: emotions run much higher than logic.

And so that's not taken the wrong way, women are not overly emotional or irrational, but it seems a good percent of feminists are. When an issue can't be discussed by two parties who disagree without one resorting to these kinds of tactics, there's no hope of any intelligent discourse taking place.

 

At what point did I specify "reporters"?
What basis have you to say that I made a flippant claim?
Why do I have to supply you with anything?
Where did I imply that she posted it herself?

before you answer....

Its people like you who give feminists a bad name. Most of the respondents in this thread were at least partly on your side until you attacked and alienated them. IF that was your goal.....Good job on that!


I considered it counterproductive to have pointed out your blanket statements, instead focusing on the discussion you started. Im sorry if you arent used to that. I wasnt taking sides, I was just adding to your discussion, if you didnt want me to participate you could have let me know nicely.


I never implied anything, you have drawn your accusations against me from reading what you want to instead of what is actually there. I can see that giving anyone the benefit of the doubt isnt something you give creedence to, but I would suggest that a little of it goes a long way.


Since you read what you wanted to instead of what I posted, you are obviously unprepared for a discussion about it. I stated my opinion and you have twisted it and thrown it back at me instead of having intelligent discussion. I will then take the lesson that this is how all your posts are.

I will be adding you to my ignore list, and I ask that you do the same of my nick, caliente. Thanks!

 

Slow down and reread what I stated (emphasis and coloring added).

I stated that the laws have already been passed but it was not that long ago that such things (CCTV, etc.) were not included in the laws regarding peeping Toms.

In fact there were some docudramas made that influenced some of these laws being rewritten which is why I made the following point (emphasis added):

I then stated that she may be able to draw attention to the subject and gain help in the form of prevention (emphasis added):

For clarificaton, the emphasis of my point on what may become of the situation (as a result of the publicity) was related to policies and procedures of companies/hotels and awareness of society in general rather than new laws being passed.

 

Sorry you felt like you need to go back and highlight your post but you seem to not understand. Hidden camera technology is nothing new its been around for quite sometime now, so as you might have figured crimes like the Andrews case have been around for a while now as well. My point stands, nothing new will come of this video or because of the famous victim. Laws and procedures have long been in place to rationally punish these crimes the same as hiring and business techniques which try to lower crimes such as this in places where you would expect a certain level of privacy.

Now unless a camera that can see through walls becomes easily available to the public I doubt anything new will come of these creep peep-tom videos.

 

Yeah the video was terrible quality; you only see some low resolution side-boob and .08 seconds of nipple.
Chick was only hired to be a hot body for them to occasionally put the camera on; and now she's shocked -SHOCKED- that people are oggling that body.

Oh, and she is just publicity-whoring. Until this story, even people who watched her on TV could not care less - now she's being googled, called, requested for talk shows, etc. I'd go so far as to say it's pretty darn convenient that she was standing naked in juuuust the right place for that camera to see her. As if she knew just where the camera was. Interesting.

 

This thread went from good to stupidity. Now what I dont get is when this peeping tom went in and filmed everything, HOW could she have not seen him? Or was it already in there?

If thats the case, then shes doing it for publicity. If the cam was already in there and she didnt know it then most likely the creeper didnt know who she was and was just trying to get nude action for the web. Big fucking news there. I bet you see that every day and one woman thinks shes going to change that? Which I dont even know her

And about the cams in bathrooms. PLEASE! dont you look around? I know I do! and people wont install hidden cams in bathrooms. THEY REPORT POLICE. its just another dramatic story to talk about

We will always have perverts. Both women AND men

 

First, I understand perfectly fine. Don't be a smart ass and tell me that I don't.

Secondly, I felt I had to go back and highlight my post because you stated that I said things that I did not. Funny how you manged to overlook that I explicitly pointed out how wrong you were in my post.

I think we have different concepts of what been around for a while means. But, that does not mean that laws are in place to take care of the "crime". Actually, without the laws it isn't a crime so those "crimes" haven't been around very long at all.

I think I should once again add highlights to te next quote...

I think you are starting to show how naive you are regarding this topic.

Laws ad procedures have long been in place?

Ever heard of Susan Wilson? She found out that she was being spied upon by an electronic/video peeping tom in the late 90s. About 10 years ago. She was quite surprised to discover that he could not be prosecuted because there were no laws that he had broken with the videotaping. I think maybe he was convicted of breaking and entering, but nothing else.

Also...

From ABC NEWS

19 states out of 50.

Wow, they sure have this topic covered with laws on the books. /sarcasm

Furthermore, just as you can claim confidence that laws have it covered when only 19 states actually should have such laws in place, you can claim that all those hotels have exceptional practices in place to safeguard privacy. With your proven record of being wrong here, I am not willing to take you at your word without proof of some sort other than your opinion.

So, no. Your point does not stand.

The point is that we are not supposed to wave our hands in the air pretending to be David Copperfield and say "aw shucks, nothing happened." We are supposed to make a point to see that things do happen and are accomplished. Claiming to be knowledgeable on a topic you know nothing about and telling others that nothing can be done is the useless thing in my opinion.

To counter this, public awareness regarding shortcomings in the legal system is an important first step in correcting the problem.

Denial is a step backwards.

 

The bitch should be proud to know, I havent seen her tits, video, or whatever shes crying about.. Unless someone post it here for me to see, I could careless. And if you do post it here, I could still careless..

Id be more shocked to see the Human Arm up Elmos ass..