Was it prudent of Jennifer Lawrence to take pictures of herself nude in the first place? Y/N?

[Verlander]

Yeah, but if your moral standards are "I'll take it, but then overreact when someone sees it" you loose my respect. Just a personal opinion though.

If your moral standards are "when a woman is sexually violated it's her own fault" you lose my respect. Just a personal opinion though.

Lucky I didn't say that then.

snip

Have you ever heard a leaked phone conversation, judged someone on something they did in their private life? Do you judge "celebrities" like Mel Gibson, despite having never met him? Have you got an opinion on Donald Sterling? Do you support Wikileaks, or have you seen people being gunned down by police on videos? All of this footage is released without consent, for better or worse, and nearly all of it is far more damaging and serious to the people involved than "nudies" are to these celebrities. Do you know what would be worse? If the only copy of a photo of a dead relative was destroyed, or the record of the birth of a child, NOT an image of the body that you take everywhere. It's a fucking body, we've all got one.

I'm sure that these ladies feel violated, and I feel sorry for anyone who is the victim of crime. However, to judge me for dismissing prudishness while fitting any of the above criteria either makes you a hypocrite, (or someone with very twisted morals).

 

[LetalisK]

Was it prudent? Probably not. Does that matter? Also, probably not.

 

[Batou667]

I'm not going to say J-Law had it coming, or deserved it, or shouldn't have taken photos in the first place.

However...

I don't think it's particularly surprising to hear she got hacked. It almost has a grim inevitability about it. One of the hottest female stars in Hollywood at the moment, I expect she has paparazzi camped outside her house 24/7 with telephoto lenses in the hopes of seeing half a nipple in the reflection of her TV when she wears a low-cut top around the house. Actual, bona-fide, nude photos represent the freaking MOTHER LODE. As much as J-Law has the same basic right to privacy as the rest of us, truth be told shes significantly different to the rest of us by dint of being a fabulously wealthy and successful, attractive young celebrity. She's going to attract a lot more attention, some of it unwanted.

To reiterate, what happened wasn't her fault, but it's not entirely remarkable that people put a lot of effort into seeing her nekkid.

 

[Verlander]

Do you support Wikileaks, or have you seen people being gunned down by police on videos?

What do Wikileaks and police shootings have to do with each other?

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/or_1?q=Or

All of this footage is released without consent, for better or worse, and nearly all of it is far more damaging and serious to the people involved than "nudies" are to these celebrities.

You don't get to make that call for the victims.

Haha, you hypocrite, you're making this call for them! When you talk about them being violated, but many of them have shrugged the leak off.

Do you know what would be worse? If the only copy of a photo of a dead relative was destroyed, or the record of the birth of a child, NOT an image of the body that you take everywhere. It's a fucking body, we've all got one.

Again, this is not even remotely your call to make.

Again, you're a hypocrite, you're making this call yourself.

I'm sure that these ladies feel violated, and I feel sorry for anyone who is the victim of crime. However, to judge me for dismissing prudishness while fitting any of the above criteria either makes you a hypocrite, (or someone with very twisted morals).

Prudishness does not extend to being upset that a nude image of you was stolen. So your argument falls apart utterly.

Prudishness extends to your feelings about the content of what is stolen, you know, "the call I'm not qualified to make" (but you are). So the argument stands, even if you don't quite understand it.

 

[Verlander]

Prude -

A person who is excessively or priggishly attentive to propriety or decorum.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prude

If you consider it excessively attentive to decorum to not wish your nude body be shared with perverted assholes, you are simply wrong.

No, I simply have a different opinion to you. I consider it to be far less of a crime than many others committed in the same way. A body is a body, and the second people get over that we'll live in a happier world.

I've never defended the crime, I just disagree with the reaction to it.

 

[Verlander]

snip

Congratulations, you seized on a word that's only tangentially important to the discussion, and looked it up in a dictionary. Don't apply for your qualification in research just yet, you didn't bother to use multiple sources:

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/prude

The US English definition isn't much different. People here are attaching more value to the sexual content than they would if it were violent content. People had a field day when the video of Beyonces sister attacking Jay Z came out. People watch in their thousands as someone is beheaded or shot dead in the street - arguably the most personal moment someone can have, and definitely broadcast without their permission - but suddenly everyone's saying that we shouldn't look at nudie pics, or that it's a huge violation. Double fucking standards. These celebs are victims, sure, but it's not going to change their lives. It's not altering anything.

If you still feel the need to place a greater value on images of a naked body over the far more intrusive violations that are leaked to the public every single day, then further conversation is pointless.

 

[mecegirl]

On a related note why does this never or rarely happen to guys? Do they just not take nude selfies? Or does the internet just not care. Because I would imagine that even guys would like to find out what a celebrity is working with because we're petty like that and everytime we find out we're bigger than someone we do a little dance inside.

Well I do know that some dudes send unsolicited pictures of their penises to women that they are interested in. Which generally doesn't impress the women being sent the pictures because they didn't ask for them. I don't know if any of those women have chosen to re-post/resend those unsolicited pictures over the internet. In my experience we just complain to our friends about how weird/gross it is.

Like what happened between a friend and I two days ago..Though the funniest thing was that the guy has a crush on another female friend of ours. So we wonder if he's trying to get sex on the side untill he has the courage to ask that one girl out. Either way it didn't work.

With celebrity men I don't know...I do wish that there were more playboy-ish spreads for male celebrities though. I mean fair is fair.

 

[Verlander]

I didn't notice any kind of link to your own nude images.

I'm pretty sure that's against forum rules. It's definitely not permissable on my work computer, but hey, after we've finished arguing we can trade like pokemon cards. Or something.

Moreover, if it is prudish to not wish your nude, sexualized body be seen by strangers, where can one find images of yours? Or are you prudish? Turnabout and all.

If being prude is something that causes you to "lose all respect" for someone, should you not make sure to not be prude? Or is your argument not based on truth.

I'm not hiding mine, but it's irrelevant to the discussion at hand

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Obviously she can take whatever pictures she want and she should be ok to put them where ever she or anyone else wants but unfortunately you shouldn't be putting stuff like that on the internet in any form. While it is an invasion of privacy for these people I hope this event serves as a kind of Titanic and people learn that you just have to be more careful about what you put on the internet. It isn't exactly fair but it seems to be the only way to avoid this.

 

[ForumSafari]

False. The victims had their personal, private items stored on a private, password protected server that was hacked. It's nothing like "throwing it in a random street." That's either a blatant lie, or a grave misunderstanding of the situation.

What it is though is putting sensitive documents in the care of a company whose security you can't audit, whose compensation for leaks is either woefully inadequate or completely waived, who offer no client side encryption and who have been known to cock up security in the past. The truism of using the cloud is that you need to make sure of your own security yourself, because whatever they offer you as compensation will be utterly inadequate.

 

[Verlander]

I didn't notice any kind of link to your own nude images.

I'm pretty sure that's against forum rules. It's definitely not permissable on my work computer, but hey, after we've finished arguing we can trade like pokemon cards. Or something.

Moreover, if it is prudish to not wish your nude, sexualized body be seen by strangers, where can one find images of yours? Or are you prudish? Turnabout and all.

If being prude is something that causes you to "lose all respect" for someone, should you not make sure to not be prude? Or is your argument not based on truth.

I'm not hiding mine, but it's irrelevant to the discussion at hand

I will hold you to it. I will also assume I may share them with anyone I feel fit, including your family members, and make it publicly available?

Also -

Try not to use fallacious arguments.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_relative_privation

Haha, your argument seems to hinge on the idea that I'm in someway a hypocrite. I'm not. The photos are in the public sphere already, as I mentioned in my first post on this page. The difference is that I'm an unimportant person who no one recognises.

 

[anti movie bob]

So someone gets something stolen from them, and it's their fault? I guess people who get their houses robbed shouldn't have bought the house or put nice stuff inside for criminals to steal, its their fault? I guess people who get mugged on the street shouldn't have been on the street at that moment in time, it's their fault? I guess people who get beheaded by ISIS shouldn't have been captured by them, it's their fault? Jesus this forum sometimes

 

[anti movie bob]

Also people are pissed that the government is spying on everybody, yet this shit is acceptable?

 

[mecegirl]

There are so many pictures of naked women on the internet. Pictures of naked women on the internet taken with their consent, and shared with their consent. Some for free, others at a price, but all consensual. So whats the fucking point in hacking into someone elses account? What does violating someones privacy add to the viewing of nudes?

 

[ForumSafari]

I assume then that you do not use a bank or own any credit cards. Banks have been robbed, credit cards have been stolen and scanned from a distance.

I inspect each ATM for skimmers before use, actively use ATMs within businesses where possible, pay by cash if possible, audit my bank statements, use anti-fraud measures properly and know what kind of figures my bank ensures my transactions for. There is a compromise there but it's minor.

In fact, why are you on the internet? The internet is used to steal people's identities all the time. Do you know the security measures each site you visit employs? Maybe it's too much of a risk to even try browsing. You mustn't be a hypocrite.

Of course I know their security, in fact I actively audit it and restrict insecure cross site linking and scripts. I also look at a site and decide what data I feel I can trust it with. For instance, this account dead-ends onto a temporary mail account that will have cycled out of existence by now and isn't connected to any of my other accounts. This is common for all of my forum accounts.

I'm not a hypocrite, I'm a professional. In fact the cloud is kind of one of my areas. I would never use a cloud based storage service without encrypting the data before it was uploaded unless I had a bulletproof, airtight liability declaration with substantial reparations. You know what? I was writing my dissertation and wanted to back it up so I spent an afternoon reading usage policies. None satisfied me so I didn't use them...and that was for a document that could potentially cost me a year of university, not potentially ruin my life.

Or we teach people that women have a right to their own body, we make it harder for hackers to steal, and we focus on the criminals and not on what you think a victim of a sex crime should have done and you get to continue using the internet.

And by 'we' I guess you mean people like me, not people like you. Because, no offense, but I don't see your input being particularly useful.

The fact is that this was a morally and legally wrong thing of those people to do BUT that you need to take basic protective measures when it comes to your life and property. For some reason it's only embarrassing stuff, and specifically embarrassing stuff involving women (because as per most things no one cares when it happens to men, as this did incidentally) where people are afraid to give this advice. The fact is that if you blindly trust a service you can't begin to understand based on an assumption it'll be fine, and trust it with life changing data, you are a moron. You don't deserve to have anythign bad happen but you are a moron and you could have done more to prevent it.

 

[ForumSafari]

Woah, you take your cards into public? But anyone could steal them from you. Why don't you have them locked away where no one could ever find them? Is it because you deem the risk small enough and the rewards of using the cards large enough to continue their use? Because that would be interesting.

They have a second factor of authentication needed for transactions which has never been committed to my storage, any other form of transaction is ensured such that it can be declared fraudulent. Any breach of security on the bank's behalf that leads to losses will be fully compensated. The risk is so low that it is statistically insignificant given the lack of potential losses. The worst that would happen is a few days of inconvenience on my behalf whilst a new card was issued.

Citation needed. Show me evidence that "no one cares" when something happens to men.

Two men were on the list of hacked accounts...but this is being made all about women. because let's face it, no one cares about them.

 

[Hoplon]

I'd like to point out here, that some people have probably spent more time trying to blame the victims of a crime, then talking of the criminals and their responsibility. I've had to defend women whose private, personal items were stolen, because apparently the real issue here is their responsibility, and not the responsibility of the host servers that were hacked, not the responsibility of the criminals that broke the law, and not the responsibility of the people sharing nude images of women against their consent.

Clearly, discussing how much guilt the victims should own is far more important than anything else. They are women after all.

If she was told it's secure she was lied to.

It's is an image used a lot in Network security, but the only secure computer is one disconnected from the internet, disassembled and locked in a safe. All these things are computers. Never ever assume they are secure.

That said I am not blaming her, she's an actress, not a network admin. But personally i would never recommend storing anything sensitive on a connected device of any kind.

 

[Hoplon]

One of the most disgusting issues here (aside from the theft itself) is how people are talking about it. It's not sympathy or empathy. It's not a suggestion to avoid that server until it is safe. It's not a kind word and some tips you might have on securing your images. It's addressed as what they did wrong. It's pointing the finger at them and telling them what they should have done. It's grotesque.

I agree, she didn't do anything wrong, not in taking the photos, not is storing them. They leaked because some one went after them. She didn't tweet them. Had she known they weren't in a secure place she probably would have wiped them.

 

[RA92]

One of the most disgusting issues here (aside from the theft itself) is how people are talking about it. It's not sympathy or empathy. It's not a suggestion to avoid that server until it is safe. It's not a kind word and some tips you might have on securing your images. It's addressed as what they did wrong. It's pointing the finger at them and telling them what they should have done. It's grotesque.

With that kind of attitude (both this and the other sex scandal thread), I think a large portion of the Escapist audience needs to be redirected to gossip magazine sites. There they'll find themselves in the company of people scrutinizing public figures and trying to find faults to feel better about themselves.

 

[carnex]

One of the most disgusting issues here (aside from the theft itself) is how people are talking about it. It's not sympathy or empathy. It's not a suggestion to avoid that server until it is safe. It's not a kind word and some tips you might have on securing your images. It's addressed as what they did wrong. It's pointing the finger at them and telling them what they should have done. It's grotesque.

And on the other hand I'm wondering how people can not see that all the awareness this issue can be best used to educate people so that they don't become victims in the future.

Sympathy and empathy are great and important but they don't fix anything outside victim's psyche and even that varies from case to case.

What is more worth, not risking to hurt victim's feelings or educating countless people so that they have less chance of becoming a victim in future?