In Virginia, Susanna Gibson, NP, a candidate for the state legislature, was discovered to have had livestream sex acts with her husband. "Susanna Gibson encouraged viewers to send her tips—“raising money for a good cause,” she told them—in exchange for performing whatever sex acts the tipper desired. The couple had more than 5,700 followers on Chaturbate."
"The district is one of the few true toss-ups in November's election . . . No matter how the residents of Virginia's 57th District feel about their would-be delegate doing sex work on a public platform, this revelation sure does complicate the election campaign Gibson, a nurse practitioner, is currently running against Republican David Owen, a retiree and former homebuilder . . . What's worse, Gibson dramatically outspent her Republican competitor in their respective primaries, putting her at a major financial disadvantage going into the general election. In the Democratic primary earlier this year, Gibson spent $300,000 of the $377,000 she has raised to beat rival Democrat Bob Shippee, while Owen, the Republican, spent just half his funds, since he had no primary opponent."
Regardless of Ms. Gibson's politics, this shows an appalling lack of judgment. Part of me finds this funny, but it also is upsetting, as NPs have been fighting so hard for respect. She can do what she wants, but to think this would not be discovered if she ran for office? Unbelievable.
She contends these videos were recorded without her consent and were mined from the dark web. The media previously reported that she posted her videos to a public site, but we all know how the media likes to embellish the truth when they want.
I don't particularly feel like searching for Media on Google, can anyone give any evidence that she purposely posted sex acts online?
I don't particularly feel like searching for Media on Google, can anyone give any evidence that she purposely posted sex acts online?
As for whether she "purposely posted" these videos online; she didn't. Several sources previously reported that her and her husband live-streamed these acts on an adult website that was accessible to all. Some of which were subsequently archived on another adult website, also accessible to all, without her or her husband's consent. An act prohibited by Virginia statute
As this was widely reported in both local and national media, there's really no need to search Google for Media. And, nowhere in the article that @NRSKarenRN posted earlier today, which you quoted, does Ms. Gibson deny that she and her husband did in fact do this.
As for whether she "purposely posted" these videos online; she didn't. Several sources previously reported that her and her husband live-streamed these acts on an adult website that was accessible to all. Some of which were subsequently archived on another adult website, also accessible to all, without her or her husband's consent. An act prohibited by Virginia statute
As this was widely reported in both local and national media, there's really no need to search Google for Media. And, nowhere in the article that @NRSKarenRN posted earlier today, which you quoted, does Ms. Gibson deny that she and her husband did in fact do this.
She states the videos were non consensually recorded and distributed. Googling this would only turn up articles that are biased either way, unless one was searching for the actual videos which would tend to show whether she was really doing this for tips or not.
Specializes in Psychiatric and Mental Health NP (PMHNP).
chare said:
As for whether she "purposely posted" these videos online; she didn't. Several sources previously reported that her and her husband live-streamed these acts on an adult website that was accessible to all. Some of which were subsequently archived on another adult website, also accessible to all, without her or her husband's consent. An act prohibited by Virginia statute
While it may have been prohibited by VA statute, it was still an incredibly stupid thing for her to do AFTER she announced her political candidacy! Not only that, she asked for tips! Once that cat was let out of the bag, it damaged her politically. It probably also damaged her professionally.
She demonstrated very poor judgment. Unauthorized, and even illegal, victimization of women by private nude photos and videos being leaked has been an issue for as long as it's been possible to do that. Women, especially professionals, should be aware of the risks and simply not post nude photos or videos online ANYWHERE. Women who have sent nude photos to their SO have also been victimized when those are shared online after a break up.
This is a chilling story about 4 women who took down the man who did this to them. But, what agony until they did and it was very difficult to take him down:
She contends these videos were recorded without her consent and were mined from the dark web. The media previously reported that she posted her videos to a public site, but we all know how the media likes to embellish the truth when they want.
I don't particularly feel like searching for Media on Google, can anyone give any evidence that she purposely posted sex acts online?
She posted the videos on Chaturbate - a publicly accessible Media site. What probably happened was she posted it and then took it down at some point assuming that once she takes it down it's gone forever. The rest of the world knows that's not how the internet works.
She's complaining not that the original video was not consensual, but that others posting the video elsewhere made it some sort of non-consensual sex crime. That logic is ridiculous. That's equivalent to writing an article for The Washington Post and then complaining that The New York Times also ran the story.
So ultimately it's not about the initial video (which to be fair is a personal choice and one I support with the understanding that actions may have lasting consequences) but that it caught up with her after she tried to hide it. This isn't a private photo that someone posted online (eg revenge Media). This whole sob story of her being a victim comes across as her trying to push off responsibility. She did it. Own it.
She posted the videos on Chaturbate - a publicly accessible Media site. What probably happened was she posted it and then took it down at some point assuming that once she takes it down it's gone forever. The rest of the world knows that's not how the internet works.
She's complaining not that the original video was not consensual, but that others posting the video elsewhere made it some sort of non-consensual sex crime. That logic is ridiculous. That's equivalent to writing an article for The Washington Post and then complaining that The New York Times also ran the story.
So ultimately it's not about the initial video (which to be fair is a personal choice and one I support with the understanding that actions may have lasting consequences) but that it caught up with her after she tried to hide it. This isn't a private photo that someone posted online (eg revenge Media). This whole sob story of her being a victim comes across as her trying to push off responsibility. She did it. Own it.
FiremedicMike, BSN, RN, EMT-P
596 Posts
She contends these videos were recorded without her consent and were mined from the dark web. The media previously reported that she posted her videos to a public site, but we all know how the media likes to embellish the truth when they want.
I don't particularly feel like searching for Media on Google, can anyone give any evidence that she purposely posted sex acts online?