to think that if I shared an explicit picture of myself with a stranger and then they used that to blackmail to release client information, I would be sacked?

[cakeorwine]

I guess people know what we are talking about.

William Wragg: Jeremy Hunt praises MP's apology over dating app incident - BBC News

If you send an explicit picture of yourself to a stranger, you are asking for danger.

If I did that and I was blackmailed into releasing personal information on other people, I would be sacked,

But hey, it's an accident. Nothing to see here.

And as for MPs who then were contacted by a stranger and then sent their own explicit pictures, what is there to say?

Thank you.

It seems extraordinary to go to these lengths when hiring people who need security clearance and then to allow any old politician the same access on the basis of their party putting them in that position.

Exactly. That I have a huge problem with.

Mate, I'm right here.

What's quite clear from this thread is that there are people with moral objections to what Wragg did, and also people who don't understand that sending explicit pictures is widespread and normal sexual behaviour regardless of what you think is 'common sense'.

I remember the subject of security vetting being discussed on the podcast Death of a Codebreaker about the GCHQ worker found dead at his London home in bizarre circumstances.

The conclusion was that the vetting services aren’t interested in your sexual behaviour as long as it’s legal, you’re open and honest about it and you’re not leaving yourself open to blackmail.

There's not a lot that can be done about it though is there? I mean, if we can have Boris Johnson as Prime Minister appointing dodgy Russians to the House of Lords, some MP sending dick pics is quite low down the list of concerns.

And even John Major had an affair with Edwina Currie.

From the list upthread it looks like the whips would look on potential blackmail issues as useful material to get MPs to vote the right way, rather than a disciplinary issue.

What is clear - and what I don't think you understand - is that if you are concerned that an intimate picture of you might get out and the potential implications of that, then don't send an intimate picture.

Regardless of whether it's normal for people to do or not - the simple message is - if you don't want an intimate picture of yourself out there, then don't send one.

Yes thanks, I do understand it.

It is, however, not a crime, or wrong for people to engage in it.

This. I mean it’s simple. Whether it’s common or not. Would we do it? No way, not in case they ever got out. We aren’t in jobs we’d want that. Basic common sense. This is something that people in jobs with a risk of blackmail have to consider or they don’t work again in that field. Why should politicians get away with it?

Also it’s something that should be taught to young adults. It’s basic internet and personal safety. Don’t just send nudes to anyone. You’ve really got to trust that person. Once it’s out there - it’s out there. Even if you trust the person they may end up in the wider world.

I think I have however, found my answer. This wasn’t a genuine enquiry about what is deemed risky behaviour. It was someone trying to make it into a Grindr issue or meeting people in a non conventional way. You’re prudes who have an issue with Grindr and sex. No intention of wanting to understand.

Hopefully they don’t teach internet safety.

Correct
It's neither a crime or wrong to engage in it - as long as you are prepared to face the potential consequences of your actions, especially if you are in a responsible position.

So I messaged a gay friend, in his mid 30s, who I know uses Grindr to ask him what he thought of it. His response was, it happens but that only a fucking idiot sends dick pics to a total stranger. His point was that if you haven't met someone in real life you don't even know they are an adult and that's not a risk he or his friends want to take.

You and me both, why would anyone think that it was acceptable?

A 14 year old girl was coerced into sending topless pics to a Snapchat user. The user tried to blackmail her into sending more pics. She didn't so the user shared to her friends. The girl reported it to the police and in turn received a warning for sharing images. The Snapchat user's information was given to the police. They made no follow up. Compare this to the current situation

This wasn’t a genuine enquiry about what is deemed risky behaviour. It was someone trying to make it into a Grindr issue or meeting people in a non conventional way. You’re prudes who have an issue with Grindr and sex. No intention of wanting to understand.

Er, yes it was?

I didn't say you were a prude who has an issue with Grindr and sex either?

It is though bloody stupid, and despite copious evidence to the contrary I had hoped are elective representatives weren't bloody stupid.

⬆️ this, exactly why isn’t he being sacked instead of trying to rewrite the narrative into one where he is being so courageous. Sometimes, I can’t believe what these MP’s will try and get us to believe! I also think there is probably a lot more to this.

This. Same goes for finances. It doesn’t matter if you’re in debt as long as you’re honest about it. My bloke used my friend as a character referee for his DV, they were intrigued as she’s an alcohol and drug counsellor.

This. It’s the honesty aspect or chances of risky behaviour. So for example: someone in debt because of life reasons and managing fine. Someone who is in unmanageable debt through a gambling problem not fine.

They don’t care about your sexuality or preferences (legal). It becomes an issue when you hide it as you can be blackmailed. Likewise if you’re risky. If you’re in and out of loads of relationships. That would be assessed as the risk is higher for you to fall into this kind of honey trap. Likewise if you’re having an affair you’re a blackmail risk.

Internet usage. If you’re posting your nudes to anyone who asks you’re again a blackmail risk. It’s all about the risk and how honest you are.

Why people can’t see that is baffling.

It’s not a moral judgement it’s a common sense one . If you want to send someone an explicit picture then that’s up to you but like everything else in life actions have consequences. I always say to my children that if they would not be happy to put their hand up and admit to something then they need to examine their motives and assess whether they should actually go ahead . And this is the same .

It’s not about whether I think it’s immoral , it’s about whether despite the fact that it is legal it is compromising to you as an individual . Clearly WW felt that it was something that he should hide at all costs ( giving out others confidential information is a high price ) so that assessment in itself should have made him think twice . And yes someone in public office should apply not just their own moral code but also the seven principles of public life as set out by Nolan. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-7-principles-of-public-life/the-7-principles-of-public-life--2

From a purely practical point of view, a massive public show of support from Tory HQ is probably the best way of stopping the blackmailer from releasing anything - no reputable newspaper is going to print anything incriminating now are they, when it will be clear they will have obtained it from a blackmailer.

Anyone who does will be immediately jumped on for supporting a blackmailer.

On the other hand interest has been raised and if there is other risky behaviour someone else might be prompted to sell the story.

Oh, this "minor" incident.....
Just another clear symptom of how low the quality of our politicians has come to be? I think, if they really try, they can actually sink a bit lower.
Maybe wait to get a bit of back lash from public opinion, discuss it in parlament, have a vote involving some breach of something somewhere, maybe involving the Speaker, re-definition of data breach may be due, some moving speeches about forgivibg, the bravery of coming out clean, inclusivity, blah blah blah...
That can take two weeks or so.....
That is 2 weeks without talking about the state of the country. The never ending GP waiting lists, NHS waiting lists, state of council services.....

We do mot care about his sexuality, his pictures or the other guys pictures, in the meantime is legal.
The "minor" issue is with... giving other MPs (I believe a cabinet minister's too) phone number to a blackmailer. Anyone having a legal and security problem with this bit?

Sorry, do not care

Its one thing sending pictures of your penis to a total stranger, in the hope of getting some form of sexual gratification.... thats extremely poor judgement, especially given he has scrutinised the on-line safety bill... and by putting himself forward as an MP, believed he was suitable to make laws governing us all.

Wragg however, gave into blackmail.

You re in teaching aren't you, so what would happen to you in similar circumstances, giving out other staff members contact details under threats?

this is very true

we can still enjoy calling him a wanker though