You can think Katie Hill made her mistakes in this obviously, but that doesn't mean it isn't revenge porn. How is that even really debatable?
(D)Katie Hill - NSFW
- Thread starter UCFWayne
- Start date
You can think Katie Hill made her mistakes in this obviously, but that doesn't mean it isn't revenge porn. How is that even really debatable?
Even if that is the case (which are we clear on that? I am only reading that on some pretty biased conservative sites) they are still being brought to light now after she won a seat in congress to destroy her career. I am sorry that is revenge porn.
Funny, I thought abusing her power to f**k her subordinates and breaking House Ethics Rules put in place after #MeToo is why her career was ruined now?
The double standard here is just too much. I guess sexually preying on younger workplace subordinates is OK if it falls under the LGBT mantra.
What world are you living in? She resigned and has admitted the relationship with the aide was wrong, nobody is defending that. That doesn't mean the leaking of the photos isn't revenge porn. These are two separate concepts.
I don't know where the photos are coming from but it IS confirmed that a lot of these were already posted onto websites well before this woman even ran for office. Are you telling me that the woman who was having such weird orgies all the time that it caused a roommate to leave the residence for good wasn't on board with sharing her nudes on Reddit?
Again, the photos did not "ruin her career", they merely ended up proving that she abused her office to prey on young women for sex. If this were a man in question we wouldn't even be having this debate.
I thought the correct response to banging a woman in a position of power was to brag about it and hope that one day a douche would post a thread on a message board titled "where were these congresswoman when I was a campaign aide."
Or do we suddenly care about women abusing a position of power to have sex with someone? Because I think you're the one who started the teacher thread and were cool with child rape as long as it was an attractive woman doing the raping to a child and not a consenting adult.
https://ucf.forums.rivals.com/threads/goat-where-were-these-teachers-when-i-was-in-school.51038/
When the story first broke, I read on the Daily Mail website that there were many photos of her online (some of which have now resurfaced) that were put on F**kMyWife and other wife sharing forums back in 2015-2016. One of the craziest things I found about them was not the nudity, the sex acts, or the bong using, but the fact her face was clearly visible!!!
How in God's Name she ever thought no one would ever connect the dots is beyond stupid!
How in God's Name she ever thought no one would ever connect the dots is beyond stupid!
Oh you suddenly care about things like that? The guy who refused to ever admit that he voted for and supported a rapist and his wife for President when confronted with that fact, while ignorantly declaring Kavanaugh a rapist with no facts to remotely support the claim?
I know you've dug in so you're going to be a typical total douchebag as usual.
I was waiting for Wayne to post the source because I already had it. It's from the Washington Examiner (LOL)
"It was reported that Hill, 32, who is openly bisexual, and Heslep posted a picture of the nude congresswoman in an online “wife-sharing” thread in 2016, as well as a thread titled “WouldYouF---MyWife?”"
Do we see an issue here? Anyone? No one sees a problem saying she posted these pictures herself so they can't be revenge porn?
Would you F--- My Wife?
Would you F--- MY WIFE?
On the very first page of your thread one of the women you and wayne were salivating over had sex with a middle school kid. That's between 11-14 years old.
Wayne was like "I'd give my son a high five" y'all are legit weirdos when you are more concerned over a consensual relationship vs child rape.
Democrats pass new ethics rules after #MeToo
Democrat breaks those rules passed by Democrats by sleeping with subordinates
Democrat resigns due to realization that she broke ethics rules passed by Democrats
Shook Chicken throws a shit fit and starts attacking conservatives on a message board like a douche. Par for the course.
Democrat breaks those rules passed by Democrats by sleeping with subordinates
Democrat resigns due to realization that she broke ethics rules passed by Democrats
Shook Chicken throws a shit fit and starts attacking conservatives on a message board like a douche. Par for the course.
Democrats pass new ethics rules after #MeToo
Good.
Democrat breaks those rules passed by Democrats by sleeping with subordinates
Allegedly.
Democrat resigns due to realization that she broke ethics rules passed by Democrats
Good.
Shook Chicken throws a shit fit and starts attacking conservatives on a message board like a douche. Par for the course.
85 mad that his support of child rapist is used against him while he attacks non-child rapists.
Nope. But since they were posted on 'hook-up' forums, one would assume that she was equally aware of what was going on since she...um, 'participated.'
Nope. But since they were posted on 'hook-up' forums, one would assume that she was equally aware of what was going on since she...um, 'participated.'
It took Shook Chicken to show up in full douche form to make Shookster look like the voice of reason.
I think that's a pretty big assumption.Nope. But since they were posted on 'hook-up' forums, one would assume that she was equally aware of what was going on since she...um, 'participated.'
thank you for posting this. i was busy enjoying my lunch.
chicken is extra shook this morning. someone mustve peed in his cheerios.
This by itself tells us pretty much all we need to know about the woman. I don't care about the sexual stuff, but this level of hypocrisy is pretty damning.
You don't care about the sexual stuff??? Come on, Crazy!!! Really?
Personally, I find 'Family Values' politicians caught in some tawdry affair or involved in some cringe-worthy, kinky sh*t to always be The Most Damning Level of Hypocrisy!
I don't mean to be argumentative over this point but I think it's a much bigger assumption to assume she wasn't involved.
Who were all the people she was photographed nude with and/or engaged in sex? One, we know, was a Congressional staffer who worked for her. But what about all the others? Are we to assume they were all personal friends who just decided one day to hook-up with her?
I don't claim to be the smartest person in the world but if I were this Congresswoman, I might begin to wonder how my husband was finding me all my willing sex partners.
Why would or should I care about someone else's sexual life? Its when a politician comes out and condemns the exact same thing that they themselves are doing is when I get a little bit outraged.You don't care about the sexual stuff??? Come on, Crazy!!! Really?
Personally, I find 'Family Values' politicians caught in some tawdry affair or involved in some cringe-worthy, kinky sh*t to always be The Most Damning Level of Hypocrisy!
There are literally laws in place due to people posting peoples nudes online without their consent and/or knowledge. If this happens enough for their to be laws against it, then it is certainly possible she wasn't aware of what was going on.
I don't know about all the others and how that came to be, but neither do you. In fact, when you say "all the others" who exactly are you even referring to? Yeah, it seems they have had a relationship with a female in the past, back in 2010, but that in and of itself is hardly scandalous. And I don't think 1 other person can be referred to as "all the others", so if that isn't what you are referring to then fill in some details if you don't mind.
Last edited:
I agree it's possible...just unlikely given the circumstances.
If this story was really about the husband doing this behind her back and without her knowledge, then she has every right to file a claim against him. But all indications are that this activity was something they shared, at least until she had her affairs behind his back.
Nobody is doubting they liked to have another girl involved at times. She ran as an openly bisexual candidate. But there is nothing scandalous in that. That also doesn't equate to her consenting to have nude pictures put online. I am unsure why you are acting as if being bisexual and wanting to put her nudes online are somehow related. They aren't. Many people take pictures or videos they assume are going to remain private, that then don't remain private.
They included other people in their sexual life. Doesn't it stand to reason that they would both be involved in posting on a website asking for other people to be involved in their sexual life? Maybe not, but it isn't the highest of hurdles to jump over to form that conclusion. Either way, I don't really care. If she sues him then it will be a good indicator of the premise being false but if all she wants to do is go to the court of public opinion then questions will remain.
It isn't a high hurdle to jump over to wonder if they were put up without her consent either. Again, there are laws against that for a reason, and that reason is because it happens quite often.
I don't disagree. If your theory is true then I hope she sues him. She has more than enough to prove damages in a civil case on top of it being a criminal charge.
A roommate living with Hill and her husband (which is weird in itself) said he had to leave the residence due to the fact that her, the husband, and this staffer would often be having bizarre orgy sex in the living room for him to witness.
It isn't my theory. This is what she is saying, and I was just disagreeing with Shookster that it is obvious she was involved putting the pictures online. It is certainly possible, but I don't think it is obvious.
I'm not saying anything about her bisexuality. If she and her husband wanted to bring someone else into their relationship, that's strictly their business as far as I'm concerned.
My ONLY issue was with her playing the 'poor me, I'm a victim' card. How can these photos be revenge porn' when they've been online on public forums dating back in 2015 and 2016.
We've both agreed that maybe she had no clue they were put on swingers websites back then. But when I think of the laws on the books against publishing private photos, I think of young married women who allowed their husbands to take pictures in private. Then when they get divorced, angry hubbie publishes those private pics on a website.
In THIS case, the pictures were often taken in group settings that involved three or more people. As a public figure, what in the world was she thinking when she allowed photos to be taken of her in a number of compromising or embarrassing situations? We need laws to keep protect women from personal betrayals, not from their own horrendously bad judgement.
You most certainly are saying things about this. Your whole reasoning is because they had an alternative lifestyle, for lack of a better word, that somehow that means she must have known her pictures were on this website, and we simply don't know if that is true.
You can say it was bad judgment, but that doesn't justify someone putting her pictures online (if that is what happened). People make mistakes all the time, that doesn't justify it if they are victims of crimes.
