My point is when people use this argument "Well abusive couples just shouldn't be couples!" it is a way to dismiss the danger of never ending surveillance that makes an INCREDIBLY problematic leap of condemning people falling into abusive relationships to simply suffer, tough luck... and it demonstrates a callous, ineffective and frankly worrying understanding of how abusive relationships formed in general.
supersquirrel
Not war crimes, this is a GENOCIDE not a war.
Do we all really think this is a great idea when fascism and toxic masculinity are catastrophically growing globally like a late stage mestastized cancer?
Do you think enabling all those men to abusively control their spouses is just the forward march of technological progress?
The US is the most selfconfident, "personally successful so me and my family are fine :)" country about to go into a second great depression on earth.
Further most people don't know they are in abusive relationships even if it is obvious to others around them so the casually dismissive argument "well abusive couples shouldn't use it" is a trash argument.
People will abuse it, and those same people would've found some other way to abuse the trust in their relationships anyway.
The WHOLE point of this thread is that NO this is a new entirely more persistent tool of abuse.
No it really isn't, privacy is a nuanced thing.
Wait isn't that unsafe!
But well I kinda wanna surprise here and for that I need to drive somewhere where I normally don't go, so now I gotta find an excuse just incase she checks my location. Or I just turn of my Phone for an hour or two
Eww this is just weird you have to think about that.
Bullshit, why would they follow the law here? The penalties are hilariously tiny compared to the profits.
NO surveillance is truly constant, that would defeat the point of surveillance which is to create the ever present possibility that someone is watching so you begin to subconciously assume you are always being watched.
Yes and the consequences are horrific.