photo by Neus via Flickr Creative Commons

The most recent example of “holy crap how misogynistic is our legal system?!” comes to us from Oregon.

Earlier this week, lawmakers in the Oregon Senate unanimously passed a bill which would help close a loophole currently allowing “upskirt” photographs of women to remain in the “terrifyingly legal” category.

That's right, ladies and gentlemen. It's 2015 and the question of whether it's okay to snap a picture of a female's genital region without her knowledge or consent is up for debate. I'm not talking about a crotch shot of Paris Hilton getting out of a car with a censor bar on the cover of the latest celebrity gossip magazine (which also isn't okay). I'm talking about boys and men snapping photos of girls or women with their cell phone cameras for (ahem) personal use or uncensored distribution on the Internet and social media.

This legal battle started in Oregon in February, when a judge ruled that a 61-year-old man who took pictures up a 13-year-old girl’s skirt in Target committed no crime. NY Daily News reported that prosecutors accused the man, Patrick Buono, of attempting to engage in criminal conduct and charged him with invasion of privacy and attempted encouraging child sex abuse. Defense attorney Mark Lawrence filed for an acquittal in the case, saying Buono had not broken any Oregon laws.

According to the Washington Times, Lawrence argued that his client took the photos in a public place. Privacy law bans clandestine photography in bathrooms, locker rooms, dressing rooms and tanning booths, but apparently not an aisle in Target. Lawrence also argued that the privacy law specifies nudity, while the girl was wearing underwear.

I can't think of a reason an old man would want a picture of a (pre)pubescent girl's underwear which aren't sexual in nature. The NY Times reported that the judge even admitted that “the act was lewd and appalling.” He also argued, however, that it didn't violate the state's existing voyeurism laws because the girl was clothed and in a public place.

I understand that adding a layer of what might be perceived to be morality to the law is tricky. Usually, that morality is what is diminishing women's rights by introducing abortion bans or limiting access to birth control. But in this case, the law as it stands is allowing men to basically legally sexually assault women without their knowledge. I think most women in our culture are raised to be careful walking up open staircases in skirts and to beware of dance partners with hand mirrors. But in the age of smartphones, what was once a fleeting glance can be turned into a permanent record.

This issue came back to the purview of the Oregon court thanks to a local teacher’s union. TheHuffington Post reports that the union proposed the measure after a student took so-called “upskirt” cellphone photos of educator Dana Lovejoy and shared them with classmates on social media. Lovejoy told lawmakers that during one of her classes last May, a middle school student stuck a camera phone under her skirt as she leaned over to help other students.

"Upon learning what happened I felt immediately in shock and violated. Not only was I photographed without my consent, not only was it of my genital area, but the majority of the school had seen it before I was even aware it existed," Lovejoy told the House Committee on Judiciary. "Our laws have not kept up with technology," she added.

We live in an age of ever-advancing technology, and it is true that the law and social norms seem to have difficulty keeping pace with the unanticipated issues which can arise as a result. We live in a society where hackers release celebrity nude photos or sex tapes, where teenagers are sexting, where women with unpopular opinions on the Internet fear threats of violence and doxxing, and where boys sexually assault women and record the incident to share with friends.

We need to make sure that technology is not used as a misogynistic truncheon which makes it easier to slut-shame women and perpetuate sexual violence against them. What does privacy mean in the age of the Internet? How can we assure technological advances benefit everyone, and not just the most privileged classes of society?

All, however, isn't lost yet. The Huffington Post added that several states — including Kentucky, Florida, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania — have passed measures outlawing clandestine upskirt photos, and a similar bill has stalled in the Wisconsin Senate. Since it apparently isn't already clear that these photos are unethical and exploitative, hopefully soon they will at least be illegal.

Unfortunately, it seems outlawing upskirt photos can only be an uphill battle here in Texas. Last fall, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals threw out a piece of Texas legislation which had already made such photos illegal, claiming photos are “inherently expressive” and thereforeprotected by the First Amendment.

The presiding judge, Sharon Keller argued, "Protecting someone who appears in public from being the object of sexual thoughts seems to be the sort of 'paternalistic interest in regulating the defendant's mind' that the First Amendment was designed to guard against." It’s difficult to swallow the idea that a female judge - even in Texas - would make such a ruling. Perhaps Keller believes her robes are long enough to protect her if she ever has to bend over while in court. Hopefully conservatives other states won’t follow Texas’ lead when their measures come up for debate.

So far, the Oregon Senate has unanimously passed their bill, which would make it a misdemeanor in the state to surreptitiously take photos up women's dresses without their consent. The proposal must now make it through the House. One can only hope it passes and more states choose to address this loophole, making the world a safer place for women regardless of what they choose to wear to work or shopping at Target.

This article was originally published by The Horn on 05/28/2015.