Yeah, I agree, this chain has mostly been about the awkward parts of it. I didn’t mean to imply you invaded her privacy, someone may have in the pursuit of the information, but I certainly didn’t mean to imply that was you.
Regardless, whether her privacy was invaded or not, the information is now out there about her, and that is what I had assumed you were referring to. The misunderstanding stems from my comments; specifically that when such a question is raised, some may seek that information quite enthusiastically, even if obtaining it means that you’re invading their privacy. I don’t know if that’s what occurred, but the fervent pursuit of relatively trivial information, damaging someone’s right to privacy in the process is questionable at best. I’m just trying to make a comment on the ethics and morals of those that desire information for no better reason than to have it about someone they don’t even know.
I would rather not think that people would simply disregard her rights just to have a trivial question answered, but I don’t have that much faith in humanity.
I’m certain you’re fine and you’ve done nothing wrong in this instance. I apologize if my words implied any differently. That was not my intention.
Thats fair enough and a valid point! I do have a tendency to use the internet to double check facts, but in cases such that it might intrude on privacy, I try to keep it to a basic search so that I can minimize that risk. In this case it was just confusion on the presenting gender of a person from a meme, and so I double checked if I was the one in the wrong, turns out I was right in a way I wasnt expecting. I hope you have a pleasant day as well!
Yeah, I agree, this chain has mostly been about the awkward parts of it. I didn’t mean to imply you invaded her privacy, someone may have in the pursuit of the information, but I certainly didn’t mean to imply that was you.
Regardless, whether her privacy was invaded or not, the information is now out there about her, and that is what I had assumed you were referring to. The misunderstanding stems from my comments; specifically that when such a question is raised, some may seek that information quite enthusiastically, even if obtaining it means that you’re invading their privacy. I don’t know if that’s what occurred, but the fervent pursuit of relatively trivial information, damaging someone’s right to privacy in the process is questionable at best. I’m just trying to make a comment on the ethics and morals of those that desire information for no better reason than to have it about someone they don’t even know.
I would rather not think that people would simply disregard her rights just to have a trivial question answered, but I don’t have that much faith in humanity.
I’m certain you’re fine and you’ve done nothing wrong in this instance. I apologize if my words implied any differently. That was not my intention.
I hope you have a wonderful day.
Thats fair enough and a valid point! I do have a tendency to use the internet to double check facts, but in cases such that it might intrude on privacy, I try to keep it to a basic search so that I can minimize that risk. In this case it was just confusion on the presenting gender of a person from a meme, and so I double checked if I was the one in the wrong, turns out I was right in a way I wasnt expecting. I hope you have a pleasant day as well!