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?

He posted the dick pics himself - to a stranger. Following your logic anyone having sex anywhere, any time, with anyone opens themselves to blackmail. Sending intimate pictures to a stranger is hardly the same thing.

The dick pics are an error of judgement; the handing over of MPs' and HoC employees' private details to anonymous blackmailers is a national security issue.

He wasn't doing anything wrong.

The reason he could be blackmailed was (presumably) because the pictures were intimate. He wasn't cheating on a wife. He's openly gay.

So I'm not defending any scenarios where what he was doing was wrong.

Having sex with someone could always lead to blackmail. Because people don't want intimate images of themselves spread.

Of course having sex opens you to blackmail.

Have you heard of revenge porn?

Let me know when the real @noblegiraffe has regained her account, will you?

That doesn't seem to be addressing my actual argument.

That having sex is normal. That sharing explicit images is normal.

BOTH of these things can open you up to blackmail. Not because there's anything wrong with either of these things, but because both involve positions we'd rather not be seen publicly in.

@noblegiraffe

I don't give a monkeys that he did sex stuff. I care that he gave out confidential information. If the sex stuff is, as you and I agree, his own business, he should be sacked for becoming complicit in the blackmail. No pearl clutching involved.

Sharing explicit images isn’t normal. Even if it were that isn’t the issue here, is it? The real issue is that Wragg compounded his idiocy by compromising his colleagues’ safety and security when he was blackmailed. What excuse have you dreamt up for that?

Victim, my arse.

Sharing explicit images isn’t normal.

I think you are behind the times here. Particularly when it comes to gay men on Grindr.

I haven't tried to excuse his giving up of his colleague's details. I've said it was unacceptable. I said he should have gone to the police or whips instead.

Are you saying he wasn't blackmailed? Or that he deserved to be blackmailed?

If you are in certain Civil Service roles (and in the security services) you have to undergo developed vetting which includes discussing your sex life, sexual preferences, porn usage etc and everything else that could be used as blackmail against you
You also have to nominate various friends from points in your life to confirm for you including them being asked questions about your sex life and history. I've been interviewed as reference about my friends' sex lives as they have developed vetting.
They always say that it isn't the sex that it is problem but any secrecy as that makes you blackmailable. They have to declare new relationships and have re-vetted every few years including the sex interviews...
They are told they must report anything that could be blackmail or things they have done to put them at higher risk of being blackmailed immediately.

They would absolutely be fired for releasing sensitive information and for failing to report the attempts at blackmail.

He should have the whip removed and he should do the decent thing and resign from his seat immediately.

@noblegiraffe , can't decide if you are being goady or deliberately obtuse.

Am just surprised, really.

Oh come off it. I am not giving a gay pass. If Theresa may sent a vag pic out under her own name and started being blackmailed by Russia then that would be fucking ridiculous. So this is also ridiculous.

He is a victim, of blackmail, and catfishing. Like many victims of crime he's arguably made it easy for the perpetrator by making foolish choices, but that doesn't mean it's his fault.

What is his fault is what he did next.

Some victims of crime react to their situation in unforgivable ways, and he's one of them.

I’m not a gay man and I’m not on Grindr so I have no idea. I’m not behind the times, I have single women friends who automatically block men who send them indecent images. It is not universally expected or acceptable. And celibacy isn’t the only alternative. You’d expect an MP to be scrupulously careful. I have no idea why anyone would seek to defend Wragg.

He is a victim, of blackmail, and catfishing.

He really isn’t. He’s a fucking idiot who keeps his brain in his trousers.

I have single women friends who automatically block men who send them indecent images.

So? William Wragg is fine with men sending him indecent images. That doesn't make your friends right and him wrong.

It seems that you are making a moral judgement.

In what way is what happened to him not blackmail?

Being a victim of crime and being a fucking idiot are not mutually exclusive. Far from it.

I don't deny that people send explicit images to each other - men and women. I don't think it's normal in that if you asked the adult population as a whole, rather than a select part of it, if it was something they did, a majority would not do it.

However, if you are in a position of responsibility, such as a teacher, doctor, MP, security role then you are held to a higher standard - that is reality. To help you with this you are trained to understand the risks that you might face - one of these is blackmail.

To avoid blackmail you limit risk - so you should be very careful about all personal information you give to strangers.

If something happens, you have a responsibility to be honest and admit this to limit the harm your foolish (but not illegal) actions have led to. If you do not do this, and instead compound the harm by throwing colleagues under the bus then I do not think that you should be in a position of responsibility any more.

It might be normal to exchange explicit pictures, but if you're an MP surely you would know that explicit pictures you share can be reshared. We expect school children to understand this.

And knowing explicit pictures can be reshared, you surely then don't share them, no matter how much you want to because it makes you vulnerable to blackmail or even just embarrassment.

And then surely as an MP you don't give in to blackmail.

This is basic stuff. No matter how normal it is. You'd also be more careful in all your relationships and behaviour. No casual sex for example, no getting drunk in public, no peeing at the side of the road...

Do we actually know for certain he was blackmailed because of pictures he sent or was it because of pictures he received ?

He says pics he sent. How would blackmail work the other way round?

I don't deny that people send explicit images to each other - men and women. I don't think it's normal in that if you asked the adult population as a whole, rather than a select part of it, if it was something they did, a majority would not do it.

17% of children aged 15+ have send nude pictures/videos, and that's when it's illegal to do so.

Even if you think a majority of adults wouldn't do it (and I suspect age plays a large part here), that doesn't mean that it's not normal.

The only reason I ask is because how does it play out if you send a dickpic ? who makes the call that it is deffo your dick in the pic ? I have seen literally hundreds of the things and I can honestly say only a handful are truly memorable, the rest are vaguely penis looking !