Thursday, May 21, 2009

Get over it

Since when is having sex part of a doctor's profession? Or a "grave abuse of human rights?"

Hayden Kho -- doctor, model, and Vicki Belo's erstwhile boytoy -- may be a douchebag. He may engage in behavior that some people might call immoral or perverted. But did he do anything to cast aspersions on the medical profession? Enough to warrant calling for his license? 

If he secretly videotaped, say, a breast exam in his clinic and distributed it online, then he's doing something that betrays doctor-patient confidentiality. If he anaesthesized patients and had sex with them (videotaped or not), then that's rape. 

But making a sex tape isn't illegal. Distributing it, perhaps, but then again someone has to prove that it wasn't stolen from the guy's computer. So why all the fuss?

The video was done with both parties consenting. It wasn't a hidden camera thing. The couple did it for kicks. It's unfortunate that it got distributed publicly, but hey, that's a danger inherent in a digital, connected world. 

Oh, and Bong Revilla, before you start calling Kho a pervert and threaten to bring down your brand of moral justice on the guy, can you again give us a head count how many half-brothers and sisters you have? Ang lagay eh, masama lang ba yun pag kinunan na ng camera?

Get over it. 


Danny Boy, FCD said...

I've seen Kho's sex videos. I doubt it was taken with the full knowledge of the women involved. His trysts with "Maricar Reyes" and a "Brazilian model" are taken with a video camera hidden inside a half-open closet, close to or on the floor. The women never looked at the camera and there's nothing to suggest that they knew they were being taped. So I don't think the sex vids with those two women are consensual.

The case with Katrina's video is that there are two main videos. In one, we have Katrina and Hayden dancing near-naked and she knows she's being taped. The second video (the money shot) is from a different angle (facing the bed) and is off-center. As with the two other women, Katrina doesn't seem to notice or acknowledge the camera. She has admitted that she's the woman in the video. This does not imply that she knew she was being taped at the time of the illicit affair.

My opinion is very much like yours. But seeing as the women are taped without their knowledge and consent, I can't say that Kho's actions are fully within the law.

I have made "scandal" videos myself but my sex partner knows and agrees to it. She even suggests that I upload it to an online porn site (which I did). As long as it's consensual, there is no problem. But once one party is not in the know, I don't think it's all right anymore.

Does Kho deserve to be stripped of his license? I don't know. I've seen doctors act unethically before (taking "soft bribes" from med-reps), yet I can hardly muster the outrage to have the doc's license revoked. Is Kho liable of any crime? Perhaps, but IANAL. Is this issue being blown out of proportion? Definitely.

missingpoints said...

It's the headline in today's Inquirer. Meanwhile, the first local case of swine flu has been confirmed.

mojacko said...

Bong Revilla on Hayden cam: Ang babae, binabahay, hindi binababoy! Binubuntis, di bini-video!!!

But for legislative purposes, penge ng kopya for me and my dad and for Jolo...

Skepticologist said...

It's a total waste of time for the Senate to hold hearing on this particular case. Isn't there a court where cases of this kind are handled?

All I can say is, Kho was an ass for taking videos without his partners' permission, and Katrina has the right to file a case against him for taking the video.

BUT... Katrina cannot file a case against Kho for the spread of the videos, because she has to prove that it was Kho who spread it in the first place. That's another matter.

And LMAO at Bong Revilla. Calling Kho a pervert of the highest degree? Hello pot, meet kettle. How many mistresses does this jerk have? At least Kho is not married.