243

A candidate in a high-stakes legislative contest in Virginia had sex with her husband in live videos posted on a pornographic website and asked viewers to pay them money in return for carrying out specific sex acts.

Screenshots of Susanna Gibson on the website were shared with The Associated Press. The campaign for Gibson, a Democrat running for a seat in the Virginia House of Delegates in a district just outside Richmond, issued a statement Monday in which it denounced the sharing of the videos as a violation of the law and her privacy. Gibson called the exposure of the videos “the worst gutter politics.”

“It won’t intimidate me and it won’t silence me,” she said in the statement. “My political opponents and their Republican allies have proven they’re willing to commit a sex crime to attack me and my family because there’s no line they won’t cross to silence women when they speak up.”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 207 points 1 year ago

I could not care less about such a thing when it comes to a candidate and I wish no one else would either.

[-] originalfrozenbanana@lemm.ee 149 points 1 year ago

She’s being accused of…having sex with her husband lmfao

Now let’s cut to a montage of all the elected men who fucked around on their spouses and had no consequences

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 40 points 1 year ago

Let's start with Trump. Although he may actually face some consequences on that front for once.

[-] rayyyy@kbin.social 80 points 1 year ago

If she was anti porn it would be an issue. If she bill herself as a "good Christian", it would be an issue. If it was legal, so what? Porn-loving self professed Christians likely won't vote for her though.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] rhacer@lemmy.world 175 points 1 year ago

Where's the problem? She and her husband were obviously consenting, the viewers were consenting.

Who the hell cares.

[-] CluckN@lemmy.world 78 points 1 year ago

Who cares

Old people and strict Catholics who unfortunately make up 120% of voters.

[-] tetris11@kbin.social 34 points 1 year ago

that statistic cannot be accurate. And yet it is.... yet it is...

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] utopianfiat@lemmy.world 57 points 1 year ago

The real controversy is that somehow Wapo and AP decided to assist a GOP operative in violating Virginia's revenge porn laws

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] waz@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

I'm pleased to find this as the top comment. It summarizes my reaction perfectly.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 123 points 1 year ago

Seems fine. Sex workers are allowed to have political opinions. These were consenting adults. This wasn't infidelity, because it was a married couple. There's really no controversy here, unless you think sex is intrinsically a bad thing, in which case you're probably repressing yourself and everyone else

[-] TheFriar@lemm.ee 54 points 1 year ago

Not to mention this is 2023. A candidate who is naked on the internet was bound to happen and we’ve been saying it for over a decade. Okay, it happened. Can we move on and discuss the outrageous problems we as a country and as an entire species are facing? That’s be great.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

When Mary Carey ran for governor of California, she didn't get many votes, but people treated her like a serious candidate. And she was (is?) a porn star.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 69 points 1 year ago

I don't see the problem here.

[-] Smytty@lemmy.world 65 points 1 year ago

Oh gosh this is absolutely terrible.

Where?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago

I'm betting OnlyFans and I have no idea why the AP is being so prudish about it.

[-] SpunkyBarnes@geddit.social 12 points 1 year ago

Chaturbate is mentioned.

[-] jeffw@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

The issue is that the videos were deleted from the original site and are now being hosted elsewhere without her consent.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] blackstampede@sh.itjust.works 59 points 1 year ago

The videos were pretty standard sex between her and her husband. Honestly, it'd be cool if they just owned it- respond to gotcha questions at debates etc with a shrug and a "yeah, so?" explain how to tip through the various platforms and then give people links. Seems like reacting as if it's shameful just gives right-wing scolds leverage.

[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 57 points 1 year ago

The only difference between this and other sex scandals that Republicans have ignored is that in this case the woman consented. I'm therefore forced to conclude that they believe consent is the problem. Men can rape all they want because men are dumb animals who just grab women by the pussy and have no actual moral agency, and a woman being raped isn't an issue because she didn't want to do it and is therefore "morally intact". Sex is only a scandal if it's not straight, or if the woman consents. Both of those represent wilfull violations of the rules of their death cult, and must be punished.

[-] TruTollTroll@lemmy.world 49 points 1 year ago

They (the GOP) Had no problems with Melania Trump's naked photos and infact praised her for being so "bold and beautiful" 🤮🤢 but they have a problem with a ("one") Man and ("One") women who are married to each other hosting naked photos of themselves.... and they do not realize the leopards feasting on their faces? Or is that shock and adrenaline keeping them from noticing lmao 🤣😂 fuck the hypocritical GOP fascist..

[-] hdnsmbt@feddit.de 45 points 1 year ago

So? Oh no, someone's having a sex life? Get fucked, prudes. Literally. It'll help you loosen up a bit.

[-] guitarsarereal@sh.itjust.works 38 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Did she break the law doing it? Hurt her husband? Hurt others? Did she scam people?

So she and her husband needed some side income and figured out a way to legally and non-harmfully monetize something they were already doing? So... you're telling me she and her husband are, uh, enterprising? Probably Millennials? Horny for each other? Cool? What's the story? Are the Republicans just going to breathlessly read off her resume now while their base hyperventilates?

[-] utopianfiat@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

Someone here did break the law: The GOP operative source and the Wapo and AP who are obstructing justice by hiding their identity

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] CADmonkey@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago

What's the issue here? Other than GQP weirdos upset that they can't get laid?

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Astroturfed@lemmy.world 34 points 1 year ago
[-] fruitleatherpostcard@lemm.ee 28 points 1 year ago

Yet if she was advocating for guns and straight-up shooting political competitors, and a GOP, she’d be feted as ‘standing up for American values’.

[-] HulkSmashBurgers@reddthat.com 25 points 1 year ago

I hope that one day our culture moves past this sexual shame bullshit so that grown adults doing completely legal things with each other don't have to worry about shamed for crap like this.

[-] ShittyRedditWasBetter@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago

Oh God, how dare we elect a sexual deviant!

[-] bababooey@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

Someone’s about to get a ton more monthly subscribers

[-] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 24 points 1 year ago

Erections have consequences.

[-] Enigma@sh.itjust.works 24 points 1 year ago

People are going to have to start getting over themselves. As time goes on, there are going to be more and more candidates with similar shit. Younger Millennials/older gen z are going to have a lot who were on Onlyfans. Eventually someone is going to add it to their donate links. As long as it’s consensual, who gives a fuck.

[-] _number8_@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

so???

this is a good strategy!

[-] BonfireOvDreams@lemmy.ml 20 points 1 year ago

Imagine caring at all

[-] SuddenlyBlowGreen@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

Conservatives are judt weirded out because their sex scandals involve rape/children.

[-] Sharpiemarker@feddit.de 19 points 1 year ago
[-] weedazz@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

Lol we live in a post trump post bobert world, y'all really think there is anything that would shock me about this story

[-] SpunkyBarnes@geddit.social 13 points 1 year ago
[-] eek2121@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

okay? a man and woman (or man/man, or woman/woman, or…) should be able to do what they want, as long as enthusiastic consent is given.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2023
243 points (90.9% liked)

politics

19248 readers
2179 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS