5 Reasons We're Having Big Problems Stopping Revenge Porn

And, no, "Just don't take nude pictures of yourself!" isn't a solution, wise guy. The fact that people share intimate photos with loved ones isn't the problem here -- if you'd deny a Marine stationed overseas the chance to wank to his or her boo, you objectively hate freedom. The real problem is that even when it comes to the grossest of the gross the Internet has to offer, there's just no way to stop it from being uploaded. In fact, about 50,000 child porn pictures are shared every single fucking day because we sadly only have a very limited way of tracking it and taking it down. Illegal images can only be detected after they're already online and only if law enforcement already has an image to match it with; otherwise they wouldn't know what to search for.

The only hope we have of preventing revenge porn from being uploaded is to make the punishment so severe it hinders people from being tempted to do it in the first place. Of course, that still wouldn't stop people from seeking it out, because ...

So, we can't stop revenge porn from being uploaded in the first place, but surely we can let people know that it's not cool to look at it, right? Just ask Jennifer Lawrence how that works out.

The truth is, there will always be people willing to look, because the Internet at large is obsessed with voyeurism, turning even innocent things into X-rated breeding grounds. If you don't believe us, type "rule 34" into Google (THIS IS A JOKE, PLEASE DON'T).

What's the first thing that springs to mind when you think about Chatroulette, the site that lets you video chat with a random stranger online? If your first thought wasn't "dicks galore," then you obviously haven't been on the Internet long. In fact, it's gotten so out of hand that Andrey Ternovskiy, Chatroulette's creator who started the site with only the best PG-rated intentions, had to step in and add a button to report perverts. He admits he is embarrassed about how his site has become synonymous with schlong shows and said he wants a "clean site." Which sounds incredibly naive of him, but to be fair, he was just a kid when he created the site.

What's truly amazing is that, despite no advertising being done on Ternovskiy's part, Chatroulette nearly exploded overnight, going from 500 daily visitors to 50,000 in just a month. We were inexplicably drawn to its innovativeness, then jumped at the chance to turn it into voyeur porn. Even more disturbing is that the dick-exposers of Chatroulette apparently aren't under some delusion that everyone loves a fat guy's tiny dong -- they actually enjoy knowing they are inflicting their salami swords on non-consenting eyes.

And if you think the trend of latching onto something and turning it into voyeur porn was a fluke with Chatroulette, prepare to be disappointed: It happened again. The PlayStation 4 has many exciting, new features associated with its built-in camera, one of them being the PlayStation Playroom, which had the intended use of recording gamers as they play while being watched by a small robot for some reason. Guess how people used it instead.

Naturally, it didn't take long until some asshat turned the Playroom into revenge porn, undressing his unconscious wife for anyone who happened to be watching their livestream to see. Of course, this news story took off like a wildfire, becoming an even bigger story than the Playroom itself. The outcry that followed brought even more attention to revenge porn, which brings us to ...

Of course you do, specifically because she tried to have her lawyers take those pictures down, causing the media and public to only want to view and circulate them more. Hell, we're doing it right now. Once someone tries to avert attention from something, a little thing called the Streisand effect comes into play -- trying to have something removed after the fact only draws more attention to it, especially if you're famous, and especially if it's on the Internet.

With revenge porn, the problem becomes even worse, because the sites are actually going out of their way to create a Streisand effect and cash in on it. For instance, the creator of revenge porn website Ugotposted.com, Kevin Bollaert, didn't just post nude images and videos of women sent in by ex-lovers, he also included their real names, Facebook pages, and sometimes even their home addresses. When the women tried to have their images removed, he would oblige, but only after charging them a fee of $350, because that's the type of stand-up guy he is.

Another webmaster who is intimately familiar with this effect is Craig Brittain, creator of the revenge porn site IsAnybodyDown.com, which also extorted women. After being arrested and exposed as an absolute jerk, Brittain felt like his privacy was being invaded and sent Google takedown notices for the sites that published images of his face. Like this one:

Unfortunately, the fact that both these guys have been charged with crimes provides little reparation or comfort to the victims who already had their lives ruined. Once the offending images or videos are online, the damage has been done, and deleting the sites doesn't mean they're gone forever -- as we all know, the Internet never forgets. Of course, this is assuming you even manage to get the asshole convicted in the first place ...

And while in 2013 California took a small step by enacting a law that deems any distribution of nude videos or pictures with the intent of causing harm as disorderly conduct, First Amendment advocates were worried it would hinder their right to bear lawful nudes. Other people wonder: What is the exact definition of revenge porn? Would a teenager who tweeted a picture of Kate's Uptons from the nude celebrity hack count? People fear that having the law too broad, without precise lines, will lead to over-criminalization and in turn no one will end up being prosecuted because then nearly everyone would be guilty. And then we might as well legalize The Purge.

While California is the first state to take a stand against revenge porn, we shouldn't get too excited about other states following suit or any federal laws coming into play. For example, the Supreme Court struck down a law banning crush porn, citing free speech. If you've never heard of "crush porn," consider yourself a lucky bastard. Let's just say it involves women's high heels and very small, vulnerable animals.

The law, which would have banned the trafficking of any videos that depicted the bloodshed and torture of animals, was deemed too "broad." Some people were afraid it would outlaw bullfighting or hunting videos, and what would the Internet be without those?

And the list goes on:

Before you attempt to console yourself with the thought that the subscriber base for these subreddits must be small: Each one actually has hundreds if not thousands of subscribers.

As long as there are still places like those on the Internet allowing people to anonymously share disturbing content, there will always be people feeling entitled to illegal activity and believing it falls under free speech. Anyway, here's a picture of kittens playing in the grass to cheer you up.

Whoops, wrong pic.

Also be sure to read 5 Horrifying Ways An Ex Can Ruin Your Life With Nude Photos and 7 Hilariously Predictable Porn Trends From Across The Globe