Opinion | Katie Hill: Susanna Gibsons personal life is none of your business

Katie Hill, a Democrat, represented California’s 25th district in the House from January to November 2019.

I had just put my son to bed when my Twitter mentions started lighting up with things like “Maybe @KatieHill4CA can help her out” and “Another Democrat @KatieHill4CA 2.0.”

I knew immediately what this meant. My heart sank when I read the headline: “Va. Dem. House candidate performed sex online with husband for tips.” Another woman running for office was at the start of a news cycle that would unravel her most intimate moments.

It’s been almost four years since my own public humiliation that led to my resignation from Congress. Hoping to reclaim my dignity and prevent the same thing from happening to others, I sued the Republican operatives who published nude photos of me — surreptitiously taken by a vindictive ex — and I lost. Before the case even had a chance to go to trial, a dismissive judge ruled that images of my body were a matter of public interest.

Advertisement

That ruling was devastating, and it hurts women seeking or holding public office everywhere. Now, opposition-research firms and bad actors have the green light to use intimate photos and videos for political attacks — no matter whether we consented to them being shared or, in my case, even taken in the first place.

Sadly, it was only a matter of time before they did it again. When a Republican operative got their hands on footage of Susanna Gibson and her husband having sex, they pounced. They shared it not only with newspapers such as The Post but also with partisan rags and tabloids that have no shame in reposting or linking to the videos. They went straight for the humiliation tactics that had worked so effectively before — tactics that keep countless young women on the sidelines, removing their power and opportunity to make change.

The truth is that many people have created some kind of intimate content. Several surveys over the past decade have found that a majority of millennials have either taken or received a naked photo, and nearly 40 percent of Gen Z has done the same.

Advertisement

But choosing to share that content with select people — whether texting with a partner or live-streaming with the understanding that it will disappear and only be seen by those present at the time (as was intended in Gibson’s case) — is a far cry from consenting to those photos or videos being published for the world to see.

Here’s the reality: It is unlikely that our next generation of political candidates — raised on iPads since they were toddlers — won’t have something online to haunt them. In this world, young, viable candidates will avoid public service because of consensual (and legal) sexual decisions they’ve made in their personal lives, decisions they might have come to regret.

The justice system has failed to protect the basic right to sexual privacy for anybody holding or interested in holding public office. It is on the political and journalistic world, then, to think carefully about the costs of going down this particular road, especially as the age of deep fakes and artificial intelligence trickery is upon us. In my view, action starts by condemning and avoiding publications that share the images — and by speaking out when these tactics are used against candidates.

We can’t let this keep us out of the arena. We will keep running, and we will win. I hope Susanna Gibson does just that.

ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7uK3SoaCnn6Sku7G70q1lnKedZLyxtc2ipqerX2d9c3%2BOaXBoamFkwLa%2FwKelmmWXnq%2B0u81mrqillaN6o7vDopysZZuWwaqxjKGgpaRf