While you're right that most everything that you post on the internet (including are little posts here) becomes permanently public, I don't think she's completely to blame for all of her unwanted exposure.
I agree that (most) everything (ever) posted on the internet has become permanently public although a lot of stuff, certainly older stuff, gets increasingly difficult to find unless one (very) specifically knows what to look for AND where to look for it.
I also agree that she is NOT completely to blame for all of her unwanted exposure.
Blame, in my opinion, is even a too strong word, she has not caused any harm so there's nothing to blame her for.
She does however, at least in part, have responsibility in what she posts, visible to the general public, on her "social-media" site(s).
Contrary to what the (theoretical) "legal" belief is, the "practical" reality is --- once it's out there, it's "everyone's" property unless there is conclusive evidence that harm is done---.
The last bit, "the conclusive evidence of harm", is the bit that the lawyers love.
Sure, she appears to be a pretty sociable lady who gets out and about quite a bit and is not shy about taking photos in a public or private setting but she is never really scantily dressed or overly provocative in my opinion. She is just so well endowed that it is almost impossible to dress down and hide her huge hooters. Plus it is obvious that she is a bit of an attention getter but still how those pics end up on porno sites is out of her control.
I am sure she is a (very) sociable person who certainly gets out and about, the pictures prove it and she's certainly not shy where pictures are concerned and eventhough she's never really scantily or overly provocatively dressed, you and I both are in agreement there, it can not be said, at the same time, that she is making a great effort in "dressing down".
I'd say the way she dressed in the pic with Al Sharpton was about "maximum effort", abeit futile.
Wearing a neon pink T-shirt with the text "Black Girls Rock" would attract attention even when the wearer was "flat chested" let alone when lady in question is wearing it.
Super tight, body hugging dresses, horizontally striped or even black, like the one you posted also don't do much if if your goal is to avoid the attention/focus on the boobs.
Again, you and I agree that she obviously likes the attention it gets her.
And, yes, again I have to agree, her pics ending up on porno sites is out of her control but I do want to make the footnote "if you don't want it out there don't post it on the internet"
[also see my previous remark(s)]
So I can understand her frustration.She apparently bought more than she bargained for when she innocently posted her shots on social media sites.
I can certainly understand the frustration too BUT considering the line of work she's in, she can't be so naïve that she'd think nothing would happen with those pics.
Similarly, I find it hard to combine the "attention-liking" part and "innocently posted".
Especially when I see her dressed in an outfit with an obviously "custom made" top (bolero) that does nothing else but accentuate her top heavy look.
(an example of that is in Liam's reply; #18 in this thread; where she looks absolutely spectacular in those colors i.m.o.)
I think most of the posting of her stuff is being done by other guys and not herself. Never underestimate what a few corrupt individuals can cause and disrupt other peoples lives on the internet or any other sphere.
I have to disagree there.
Nearly all of the stuff seen here, has been on her "social-media" site at one time or another.
Like I said in my previous post, at a certain point in time, she blocked a lot of her albums at her "social media" site as far as the "general public" goes but then the pics were out already and had been spread.
I agree with your "never underestimate...etc" statement.
Kind Regards,
DollyNood
P.S. ending this rant with -----
One pic at the time because of posting rules.
My $0.02: she qualifies as a national treasure.
I totally agree :-P