Confessing Society, Confessing Cis-tem Rethinking Consent through Intimate Images of Trans* People in the Media Alexandre Baril As a trans person and trans scholar who has specialized in trans* issues, over the past decade I have received more than ive hundred media requests to participate in a wide variety of reports, television features, ilms, documentaries, variety shows, and so on. Although these requests cannot be reduced to a homogeneous mass, they have mostly been strongly motivated by an insatiable curiosity about my transition and guided by the desire to “show” my bodily transformation and “tell” this intimate story to the public. Media professionals’ “will to know” about trans* people oten translates into stereotypical media representations focused on autobiographical stories of transitions and visual representations, including intimate images. 1 Like many trans* people, during the irst few years of my transition, I participated in media projects involving the immortalization of intimate images (images of nudity) of my transition, for which it becomes impossible to withdraw consent, because consent to the distribution of images in the media, contrary to sexual consent, is a singular and irrevocable event. Unfortunately, I am not the only person dealing with the painful issues related to the public distribution of intimate images against my will. In January 2016 Judge David Stinson of the Ontario Superior Court rendered an unprecedented decision concerning the distribution of intimate photographic and video images, Jane Doe v. N.D. 2 Judge Stinson ordered a man to pay $141,708 in damages to his ex-wife ater posting a video of her on a pornographic website and sending it to acquaintances without her consent. he judge repeatedly refers to the fact that “in many ways [this case] is analogous to a sexual assault.” 3 Following current trends in Canada to reform legislation concerning revenge porn, sexual violence, and bullying in social media, the decision refers to