More With MJ

More With MJ Contact information, map and directions, contact form, opening hours, services, ratings, photos, videos and announcements from More With MJ, Digital creator, New York, NY.

10/02/2026

So one of the Cornell 7 sued Cornell back in March. Not Jane Doe. Him. And nobody's talking about it.

He's "John Doe" in the court file (NY law keeps student names out of these, his and hers). Cornell charged him with s*xual assault and s*xual exploitation after the Chi Phi party. 12 day hearing. 1,732 pages of transcript. He was found not responsible on both.
But the panel found him responsible for attempted s*xual exploitation, mostly because of the group chat. 1:42am someone posts about "free p***y" in the alumni room. He replies "the alumni s**t is not a bit. first hand pov not a bit." Then walks to the room.

His punishment was a no contact order, a class, and a reflection paper. That's it. Remember the "essays" line in Jane Doe's lawsuit? This is what that looks like on paper.

He sued over THAT. Said it was a bait and switch because they never charged him with attempt. Also complained a panelist was watching testimony from her car. His lawyer literally emailed asking them to watch her eyes, her shoulders, and "the reflection in her glasses." I can't make this up, it's on the docket.

Judge tossed it Sept 23. He appealed Sept 25. Then the DA reopened the case, the AG became special prosecutor, and the judge unsealed a lot on Wednesday.

Everything here is public. John Doe v. Cornell University, Tompkins County, Index No. EF2026-0292. Names stay redacted. Don't be weird in the comments.

10/01/2026

There was more to that Snapchat transcript.

The transcript records someone saying "type" and then Jane Doe's picture being sent to the group chat.

The next line: “Shop still open?”

Imagine finding out men talked about you like that. Treated you like that?

Then being told to consider what speaking up could do to THEIR futures.

She has a future, too. Where is that fu***ng concern for hers?


Stand with Jane Doe.

09/28/2026

At least 1 in 4.

Some of the women sharing this story are telling you something without telling you everything.

You may think you’re discussing strangers at Cornell. Someone reading your comment may be deciding whether she could ever tell you what happened to her.

The women in your life should not have to disclose their own trauma before you give a s**t about how you talk about someone else’s.

Don’t ever let your voice be the reason a woman decides it’s safer to stay silent.

All of these. A man attempted to harm (or worse) Amy Acton, she stayed to help others, and the way it was initially repo...
09/07/2026

All of these. A man attempted to harm (or worse) Amy Acton, she stayed to help others, and the way it was initially reported was, unsurprisingly, unacceptable…

08/30/2026

Thank you to to Olivia Rodrigo and every artist who agreed to perform for free at Daisy Chain Fields, helping generate a $10 million donation to ten nonprofits supporting women and girls. This was matched to be $20 million total!

An all-women lineup. Women using their talent and power to protect other women.

Turns out the cure for literally anything is scream-singing “Pink Pony Club” with 45,000 strangers.

🌼💜🌼🌼💜🌼🌼💜🌼🌼💜🌼🌼💜🌼

06/19/2026

Planned Parenthood is a lot more than the thing its critics pretend it is.

Women deserve facts.

WOMEN DESERVE ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE.

06/18/2026

A dad took his daughters into a women’s bathroom and people called the police.

On this day in 1919, Congress approved the 19th Amendment, declaring that the right to vote could not be denied based on...
06/04/2026

On this day in 1919, Congress approved the 19th Amendment, declaring that the right to vote could not be denied based on s*x.

The women in this carousel did not fight this hard so we could treat their rights like a historical footnote.

They fought for the ballot. They fought to be heard, to be counted, and to have power over their own lives.

And in 2026, too much of that is being questioned again.

So read their words.

Feel the weight of what they gave, then can we please go do something with it?

Two men were charged under a brand new AI deepfake law. One had 240 AI p**n albums. The other targeted high school gradu...
05/26/2026

Two men were charged under a brand new AI deepfake law.

One had 240 AI p**n albums.
The other targeted high school graduates.

Here is the full breakdown.

Signed in 2025, the Take It Down Act makes AI-generated deepfake p**nography a federal crime.

- Creating or publishing explicit AI-generated images of real people without consent now carries up to 2 years in federal prison.

- Platforms must remove reported content within 48 hours.

- The law passed with bipartisan support.

Defendant 1, Cornelius Shannon:

Cornelius Shannon, 51, published over 240 albums of AI-generated p**nography targeting female politicians, musicians, and celebrities.

Shannon, of New Jersey, posted the content publicly.

It drew millions of views before federal charges were filed.

The U.S. Attorney said he "used cutting-edge digital technology to create images that degraded and violated" dozens of women.

Shannon's full account hit 2.4 million views.

One victim's content alone crossed 300,000 views.

A single video of another victim had been viewed 13,600 times and re-posted to other profiles seven times.

Each re-post is a new audience.
Each view is a person who saw a real woman violated without her knowledge.

Defendant 2, Arturo Hernandez:

Arturo Hernandez, 20, targeted private women too, including recent high school graduates.
Hernandez, of Texas, went beyond public figures.

His content included women with no public profile and no way of knowing their images were being used.

Recent high school graduates.
Women living their regular lives.

One of Hernandez's albums contained 60 videos of women the title identifies as recent graduates.

The videos work by taking non-explicit, publicly available photos of real women and morphing them into AI-generated s*xually explicit videos.

Not celebrities. Not public figures.

Women whose graduation photos existed online and became source material without their knowledge or consent.

These arrests are part of a growing wave.
The Take It Down Act already produced its first conviction.

An Ohio man became the first person convicted under the law after pleading guilty to generating child s*xual abuse material.

Two Pennsylvania teenage boys received probation for creating explicit AI images of their classmates at a private school. Just probation.

This did not happen in a hidden corner of the internet. It happened on a mainstream adult content platform built for creators.

Both men published on a site designed for creators to upload and share explicit content publicly.

Shannon's account had 2.4 million profile views. The platform infrastructure existed.
The content was available.
The law is now the only thing with teeth.

Three Tennessee teenagers are suing Elon Musk's xAI, claiming Grok turned their real photos into explicit s*xual images.

The lawsuit seeks class action status, representing what the filing calls thousands of similarly victimized minors.
The same tool marketed to the public morphed real photos of real teenagers into s*xually explicit content.
That case is still pending.

The 48-Hour Rule:

Once reported, platforms must remove deepfake content within 48 hours.
Failure to comply carries its own penalties.

The Take It Down Act gives victims a real removal mechanism, not just a report button that goes nowhere.

Legal accountability now falls on the platforms too. That is new.

Why It Matters:

The U.S. Attorney said it clearly: posting deepfake p**nography is not a victimless crime.

Women had their images used to generate explicit content that reached millions of people.

Female politicians. Celebrities. Private women. High school graduates.

The Harm List:

The FBI spoke directly with victims.

This is what they described:

- Loss of dignity from having someone else manipulate and profit from your image.

- Psychological harm from knowing the material is widespread and that people you interact with may have seen it.

- Fear that family members, including children, will encounter it.

- Financial harm from lost opportunities.

- For those whose source images were taken when they were minors: the knowledge that images of their childhood are circulating for others' profit.

The law exists.
More people need to know it does.

If you or someone you know has been victimized by deepfake content, report it to the platform and to law enforcement.

The Take It Down Act gives victims legal tools they did not have before. Use them.

05/22/2026

I know that real people support Justin Baldoni. That's fine. They are allowed. No hate towards them. This is not about them.

But this?

This is not organic.

I want you to look at these comments and the accounts that made them on the post about Blake Lively being at Fendi. Really look at them. Listen to them.

Then I want you to ask yourself a question...

When was the last time you saw this volume of identical, formulaic, hostile commentary on a post about Justin Baldoni? On a post about Wayfarer Studios? On a post about TAG PR?

You haven’t. Because it doesn’t happen there.

It happens on posts about Blake Lively. Anytime you can comment on her posts.

At a scale and uniformity that does not occur organically on the internet. The comments always have a ton of likes.

If you don’t believe Justin Baldoni and his team ran a campaign, honestly, fine. Then who did? Because someone is. The comments are right here. The pattern is right here. The accounts are right here. They didn’t appear on their own and they aren’t sustaining themselves on their own.

Read Blake Lively’s expert report. Read the analysis of the inauthentic engagement. Read the scenario planning documents. Read the texts.

Then come back here and look at these comments again.

And tell me, with a straight face, that this is real people having real reactions?

You can disagree about whether you like Blake Lively. That’s not the question. The question is whether what you are looking at on your screen is authentic human behavior or a coordinated operation designed to look like authentic human behavior.

The expert analysis says it’s the second one.

So does the pattern. So does the scale. So does the timing. So do the now-multiple lawsuits filed by unrelated plaintiffs describing the same playbook.

I really want to know why this is happening if it's not a campaign. Thought?

Address

New York, NY

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when More With MJ posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Shortcuts

Share