Naked celebrities: a new social statement?

[Matthew Jabour]

Recently, Chelsea Handler and Kiera Knightley both posted topless photos to make a statement. That statement, of course, was, 'Look at me!'

No, seriously, Handler posted hers to complain that Instagram is sexist for not allowing female nudity (?), while Knightley did so because she was sick of being photoshopped all the time.

Now, no matter the cause, I think we can all agree that, of all the ways for female celebrities to attract attention to themselves, getting naked and taking pictures of themselves is certainly a mutually beneficial one. So perhaps this could become a new thing?

Think about it. Whenever a celebrity wants to make a point, instead of waiting for hackers to find their naked selfies, they can just upload them straight to the Huffington Post with the caption: 'This is about global warming,' or something of that ilk. If more celebrities can do that, I guarantee the world's eyes will be on them. (The world's hands, of course, will be on something completely different.)

 

[BathorysGraveland2]

They should be free to do so if they so wish, yes, but it shouldn't be encouraged either. It's a pretty raw precedent to set that woman should solve problems by getting their tits out. Pretty objectifying and, dare I say it, almost dehumanising. As long as they feel that's their only option, of course.

So if a woman wants to achieve something by getting her tits out, that's fine. Anyone who'd oppose her is a **** in my mind. But no woman should feel as if that's the only way, or the best way, at achieving things.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Yeah, no, sticking "think about it" in front of an awful idea doesn't stop it being an awful idea.

And "instead of waiting for hackers to find their naked selfies"? Seriously?

 

[Itdoesthatsometimes]

If you have become aware of the issues, then yep everybody wins. I am not a woman or a celebrity, but I am tempted to post a pic of me without a top to bring awareness to your issues. I've got one of me in my underwear from a different post. Would you like that one?

 

[Itdoesthatsometimes]

Why would people photoshop Keira Knightley if there are perfectly fine topless recordings of her out of a movie? And there it has actual aesthetic and is pleasant to look at (well, in my twisted mind. I like spankings...)

On Topic: Yeah. Social statements can be done this way. People are still somehow shocked to see female breasts, why not use that shock?

The photoshoping she was referring to was the touch ups that publications (magazines) do before releasing photos. The social statement was about the fictional representation of what beauty is.

 

[Itdoesthatsometimes]

The photoshoping she was referring to was the touch ups that publications (magazines) do before releasing photos. The social statement was about the fictional representation of what beauty is.

Thanks for the clarifications. Sadly, OP lacked in this department and I don't follow anything around this issue. Frankly, I only know about the movie because I saw it *durr* and I have a theory regarding nudity, famous actors and origin of the movie.

No problem, I thought it was that type of photoshopping too when I first read that sentence.

 

[OneCatch]

Think about it. Whenever a celebrity wants to make a point, instead of waiting for hackers to find their naked selfies, they can just upload them straight to the Huffington Post with the caption: 'This is about global warming,' or something of that ilk. If more celebrities can do that, I guarantee the world's eyes will be on them.

I might take this idea seriously if you were to post some naked pics of yourself in support of it!

Obviously it's up to people what they publish, nude or otherwise. But I'm not sure that, were it to become a trend, naked pictures are going to be a particularly useful campaigning tool outside of feminist or gender related campaigns based directly around clothing, modesty, or similar (public breastfeeding, the whole Slutwalk thing, etc).
And as someone else posted, relegating female protest to "Show us your tits" probably isn't a great idea.

 

[Lilani]

No, seriously, Handler posted hers to complain that Instagram is sexist for not allowing female nudity (?), while Knightley did so because she was sick of being photoshopped all the time.

Er...you realize these are both legitimate issues, right? The embargo on female toplessness has been a social issue for decades now. And photoshopping is something that happens to celebrities, but due to the nature of photo shoots is completely out of their hands (basically, once they do the shoot the photos belong to whomever is given permission to use them, and they can do nearly whatever they want from there).

And, as Pluvia said...

Wow.

Hopefully you realise how sexist it is to suggest women should get their tits out if they want people to listen to them.

Emma Watson has made some very profound statements on feminism recently. She did not, however, do that with her tits, because that would not have been appropriate for the audience she had been given to speak to. Chelsea Handler's statement was about a ban of female "nudity" and her audience was Twitter, so that was appropriate. And Kiera Knightley's statement was about images of her body being altered and her audience was also the online world, so that was also appropriate. This also takes advantage of how viral such photos are on the Internet.

Whether or not a celebrity shows their tits and for whatever reasons should be completely on their terms. When Jennifer Lawrence's nudes were stolen and released on the Internet, she said to distribute and view these private photos was essentially a form of sexual assault. And I kind of agree with her. People say "you shouldn't put things online if you don't want them to be seen," however the same could literally be said of anything that has ever been stolen. "If you didn't want it stolen, you shouldn't have put it someplace where it could have been stolen." Well basically any place but a bank vault is "a place it could have been stolen," so it's a rather unreasonable expectation for everybody to go that far for every little thing they don't want made public. Which means that whole line of logic is just victim blaming.

And to say "they should just post nudes themselves instead of waiting for hackers to get them" is like saying a person with an expensive house should just open it up to hoodlums as opposed to waiting for them to break in. If somebody wants to do that, good for them, but if they don't then the expectation shouldn't be there and the blame shouldn't be placed at their feet if something happens. Or to put it more dramatically, it's like saying a woman at a party should make sure she hooks up with a man consensually as soon as possible so she doesn't get raped later.

 

[Lokis Maliki]

No, seriously, Handler posted hers to complain that Instagram is sexist for not allowing female nudity (?), while Knightley did so because she was sick of being photoshopped all the time.

Er...you realize these are both legitimate issues, right? The embargo on female toplessness has been a social issue for decades now. And photoshopping is something that happens to celebrities, but due to the nature of photo shoots is completely out of their hands (basically, once they do the shoot the photos belong to whomever is given permission to use them, and they can do nearly whatever they want from there).

And, as Pluvia said...

Wow.

Hopefully you realise how sexist it is to suggest women should get their tits out if they want people to listen to them.

Emma Watson has made some very profound statements on feminism recently. She did not, however, do that with her tits, because that would not have been appropriate for the audience she had been given to speak to. Chelsea Handler's statement was about a ban of female "nudity" and her audience was Twitter, so that was appropriate. And Kiera Knightley's statement was about images of her body being altered and her audience was also the online world, so that was also appropriate. This also takes advantage of how viral such photos are on the Internet.

Whether or not a celebrity shows their tits and for whatever reasons should be completely on their terms. When Jennifer Lawrence's nudes were stolen and released on the Internet, she said to distribute and view these private photos was essentially a form of sexual assault. And I kind of agree with her. People say "you shouldn't put things online if you don't want them to be seen," however the same could literally be said of anything that has ever been stolen. "If you didn't want it stolen, you shouldn't have put it someplace where it could have been stolen." Well basically any place but a bank vault is "a place it could have been stolen," so it's a rather unreasonable expectation for everybody to go that far for every little thing they don't want made public. Which means that whole line of logic is just victim blaming.

And to say "they should just post nudes themselves instead of waiting for hackers to get them" is like saying a person with an expensive house should just open it up to hoodlums as opposed to waiting for them to break in. If somebody wants to do that, good for them, but if they don't then the expectation shouldn't be there and the blame shouldn't be placed at their feet if something happens. Or to put it more dramatically, it's like saying a woman at a party should make sure she hooks up with a man consensually as soon as possible so she doesn't get raped later.

agreed. there have been a couple of videos out recently. one shot in new york and the other in new zealand, and both involved models walking the street. how women are treated in public in each video is dramatically different. there is a serious issue with women and their right to their bodies and mental space in the public sphere.

culture sexualizes women and then uses laws to control woman's sexuality. stores sell costumes for four year olds that are sexualized. look up male and female anything in that age range. media reinforces cultural norms towards beauty and helplessness (see godzilla etc). public dialogue about how women are treated are often attacked through the use of 'boys will be boys' etc. taking back that control of their image in society is a worthwhile goal. brave of them both to do so.

 

[JimB]

Let me break down where you said people shouldn't show off their nudes.

Your breakdown doesn't really work. DANGER- MUST SILENCE is objecting to the idea that women should be encouraged to post nude photos not because they want to, but because hackers want to and hackers control us all so the women may as well beat the hackers to the punch, so let's see them nurples, ladies! Shake 'em for freedom!

This implies that we are both forcing people to show off their nudes and that at the same time, because there is already a large market of pornography on the internet, women shouldn't be allowed to show off their nudes even if they want to.

It really doesn't. It says the attitude that celebrities who are going to get their pictures stolen anyway should be worried about how easily we can masturbate to them and should willingly publish higher quality masturbation material is kinda fucked up.

And then you go off on some sperg about basic privacy when storing nude images on a cloud service is beyond retarded as a security standpoint.

Yeah, kind of like how me storing my phone in my car is retarded, since any asshole with a ball peen hammer can just smash the window and grab it. Clearly in that situation, I am the person who has given up my right to privacy, not the criminal who did illegal things to take something that does not belong to him.

 

[Itdoesthatsometimes]

The fact that you see someone seeing someone else in their natural form as evil and shameful,

No, now you're making shit up like Kalezian did. I never said anything remotely related to a judgement on seeing someone else in their natural form.

I'm very pro-nudity. I'm merely anti-stealing-other-people's-stuff-and-justifying-it-with-bullshit-misogyny-or-victim-blaming.

It's about taking that power away.

Yeah, no. That's rubbish. You take power away from hackers by throwing them in jail. You don't take power away from them by inviting them to whack it while you give them everything they wanted in the first place.

Kinda like how I invited people to take a stance against hackers by posting their credit card information here. No one seems to have "taken the power away from the hackers" by sharing their credit card information. Gee, I wonder why that would be.

Your analogy is ridiculous. Nudity has power because we give it power. Nobody can loose or gain nudity. Credit card info will leave you without cash, because someone can take it. Nudity isn't something you can take away from someone, you don't have less nudity if you post nude pics. This isn't a "thing" one can "steal". You could post millions of naked pictures of yourself and you would have exactly 0 less nudity. You wouldn't loose anything actually.

Money has power because we give it power. Someone can run up your credit, losing you 0 money. You actually did not lose anything.

 

[JimB]

How is this about misogyny or victim blaming?

It's about misogyny when people judge the stolen property not on how it affects the victims, but on how men can fap to it; it's about victim-blaming when someone calls the victims retarded for putting their personal property on a cloud instead of calling names the thief who stole the property. Those are both things that have happened in this thread. It's kind of disgusting.

 

[Verlander]

You could write books on "Celebrity Nudes"... maybe one day I will.

The interesting thing about celebrity nudes is that it represents a sexual side to the individual, and opposed to the objectified side to all actors and performers that we see on screen. At some point in their history, they made the decision to take that photograph... they're human too! And so of course it follows that this power (because owning your own sexuality is a power) can be used to promote concepts and ideas. After all, photography and content is just an alternative way of communicating.

However, you need to be careful. There shouldn't be some repository for this, and it shouldn't ever be expected of a celebrity. The strength is in someone choosing to do this, rather than it being "part of the job". When that happens, we loose the significance, the communication, the impact of the image... and be left with women posing as objects once more.

 

[Itdoesthatsometimes]

The fact that you see someone seeing someone else in their natural form as evil and shameful,

No, now you're making shit up like Kalezian did. I never said anything remotely related to a judgement on seeing someone else in their natural form.

I'm very pro-nudity. I'm merely anti-stealing-other-people's-stuff-and-justifying-it-with-bullshit-misogyny-or-victim-blaming.

It's about taking that power away.

Yeah, no. That's rubbish. You take power away from hackers by throwing them in jail. You don't take power away from them by inviting them to whack it while you give them everything they wanted in the first place.

Kinda like how I invited people to take a stance against hackers by posting their credit card information here. No one seems to have "taken the power away from the hackers" by sharing their credit card information. Gee, I wonder why that would be.

Your analogy is ridiculous. Nudity has power because we give it power. Nobody can loose or gain nudity. Credit card info will leave you without cash, because someone can take it. Nudity isn't something you can take away from someone, you don't have less nudity if you post nude pics. This isn't a "thing" one can "steal". You could post millions of naked pictures of yourself and you would have exactly 0 less nudity. You wouldn't loose anything actually.

Money has power because we give it power. Someone can run up your credit, losing you 0 money. You actually did not lose anything.

lolwat.
Someone can run up your credit card and you won't loose money? Where did you learn economics?

What part of it aren't you getting?

 

[DANEgerous]

Honestly the thing that I find most shocking is that is is news worthy or attention seeking, don't get me wrong it is and it is the latter more than the former but if you told me "I saw (X) celebrity naked!" my thoughts are big deal I saw a squeal. In fact there it is look! While I have never been a nudest in any way I also simply do not understand the shock value of it particularly in the age of the internet where is is just so damn easy to find porn. Back when all those celebrity nudes got leaked off the Apple servers I did not go look for them and still haven't, I have searched for porn since then may have found a few but in the end I just have to wonder why we care?

So yeah, I do not see this as attention whoring nor slutty nor shameful I do not even see it as abnormal and I certainly do not see it is sexist. This is at worst a celebrity making porn. And that never ever happens amiright?

 

[Something Amyss]

Er...you realize these are both legitimate issues, right? The embargo on female toplessness has been a social issue for decades now. And photoshopping is something that happens to celebrities, but due to the nature of photo shoots is completely out of their hands (basically, once they do the shoot the photos belong to whomever is given permission to use them, and they can do nearly whatever they want from there).

Indeed, and it's sort of annoying to see this boiled down to "look at me!"

 

[Teoes]

Though if you really want to prove that you aren't afraid of the consequences of posting private information online, you're going to have to post more than a dick pic, because that's not nearly as much as what gets exposed when a celebrity nude picture is stolen. You need to post a full frontal nude shot, with your real world full name so that we can track you down, and you need to work in the public eye so that everyone around you will know who you are and have the chance of your nude pics getting back to them.

..and then it's still not the same, as he'd be posting it willingly. The whole point that people are failing to grasp here, is that these people did not want the pictures distributed in the public eye. It's not about your, my, his, or anyone's views on nudity and sexuality, it's about people not wanting this shit taken and passed around; and their rights and wishes being respected.

I almost took someone off my ignore list to argue with them there, then I remembered why they were on ignore in the first place. Your patience so far is commendable.

 

[Itdoesthatsometimes]

Though if you really want to prove that you aren't afraid of the consequences of posting private information online, you're going to have to post more than a dick pic, because that's not nearly as much as what gets exposed when a celebrity nude picture is stolen. You need to post a full frontal nude shot, with your real world full name so that we can track you down, and you need to work in the public eye so that everyone around you will know who you are and have the chance of your nude pics getting back to them.

..and then it's still not the same, as he'd be posting it willingly. The whole point that people are failing to grasp here, is that these people did not want the pictures distributed in the public eye. It's not about your, my, his, or anyone's views on nudity and sexuality, it's about people not wanting this shit taken and passed around; and their rights and wishes being respected.

I almost took someone off my ignore list to argue with them there, then I remembered why they were on ignore in the first place. Your patience so far is commendable.

Except the celebrities in the OP actually DO want their pictures distributed in the public eye, or, y'know, they wouldn't go distribute pictures in the public eye ala OP. You get an F in reading comprehension.

I can respect people's wishes for privacy, but when people voluntarily put out nudes intending people to see them (ala OP), a plea for their privacy really doesn't make much sense anymore.

I am pretty sure he was referring to ignoring you. And I am pretty sure he was referring to the women that had their accounts hacked.

 

[Lilani]

The fact that you see someone seeing someone else in their natural form as evil and shameful,

No, now you're making shit up like Kalezian did. I never said anything remotely related to a judgement on seeing someone else in their natural form.

I'm very pro-nudity. I'm merely anti-stealing-other-people's-stuff-and-justifying-it-with-bullshit-misogyny-or-victim-blaming.

It's about taking that power away.

Yeah, no. That's rubbish. You take power away from hackers by throwing them in jail. You don't take power away from them by inviting them to whack it while you give them everything they wanted in the first place.

Kinda like how I invited people to take a stance against hackers by posting their credit card information here. No one seems to have "taken the power away from the hackers" by sharing their credit card information. Gee, I wonder why that would be.

Your analogy is ridiculous. Nudity has power because we give it power. Nobody can loose or gain nudity. Credit card info will leave you without cash, because someone can take it. Nudity isn't something you can take away from someone, you don't have less nudity if you post nude pics. This isn't a "thing" one can "steal". You could post millions of naked pictures of yourself and you would have exactly 0 less nudity. You wouldn't loose anything actually.

Money has power because we give it power. Someone can run up your credit, losing you 0 money. You actually did not lose anything.

lolwat.
Someone can run up your credit card and you won't loose money? Where did you learn economics?

It has nothing to do with economics, that's how identity theft protection works. If you can prove the charges weren't yours, the bank is obligated th clear the charges. Correcting problems like this is easier with credit cards than debit cards because credit cards pay out in credit, not cash. If someone runs up charges on your credit card, you haven't technically lost money yet because no money has been taken from your bank account. If someone runs up charges on your debit card, money has been taken out. That is what they meant by it doesn't lose you money. You're in debt, but you haven't lost money. There is a slight difference between the two.

 

[Teoes]

I am pretty sure he was referring to ignoring you. And I am pretty sure he was referring to the women that had their accounts hacked.

Right on both counts! You get an A in Reading Comprehension.

[sub][sub]The above post is intended as a joke and in no way meant to be patronising. Please do not hate me, flame me, kill my dog or post nudey pics of me online.[/sub][/sub]