But I thought you said that the problem wasn’t that she was being photographed without her permission?

“The problem isn’t so much that she’s being photographed without her express permission”

So which is it? Are you trying to argue that is or that isn’t? You’re making contradicting statements.

And yes she is driving the interaction, she chose to go to a game in a public venue. I don’t think anyone kidnapped her or coerced her into going to the game. I haven’t heard that yet. It is a choice she made. Whether or not she is benefiting from it is irrelevant.

Going out in public is implicit consent to be viewed in public both legally and as a matter of how society and words work because that is the fundamental difference between the concepts and the words “public” and “private”. That includes being photographed or recorded. Thats the only “context” that matters.

No amount of additional “context” or her personal preferences changes the meaning of words or societal concepts such as being in public.

This is why the other quote I quoted of you is apt. There seems to be a flawed view here that a person has some sort of ability to bend the public space to suit their own desires or preferences and force others to comply. That’s simply not the case. It’s not how society works. Anyone that thinks this way has a fundamental misunderstanding of our society and is going to be sorely disappointed with and resistant to accepting the truth of how our society actually does function in this regard.

When you enter a public space you are accepting that you are giving up privacy and control of the environment you find yourself in. You don’t have to like it but that is the price of being in public. Her or your wishes, express or implied, simply do not matter. This isn’t a legal concept this just how society and words work.