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

[alandavidson]

Yeah, I completely agree. I mean, if you think about it, how could any of these female celebrities think that this is any fault but their own?

These women should know that because they were born with breasts and ovaries that they should be vigilant and paranoid, and if they make one wrong move, they are to blame. How could they have not known they are targets? Haven't we been telling them that their entire lives? If they go out to a club they are soley responsible for keeping track of their drinks to make sure no one drugs them. When they dress, it must be in such a way that doesn't cause a man to lust, and thus provoke a sexual assault. Their words and actions mustn't be flirty or provocative, or else they might risk turning someone on, and then become a victim because they weren't careful enough. And if they take pictures of themselves nude, then they should know that someone will find those pictures and spread them across the internet.

And these women are to blame because they should have known better than to expect privacy and human decency. What were they thinking?



(For anyone who didn't get it, the above is sarcasm)

 

[Brian Tams]

By my estimation, exactly 4 groups of people deserve blame here.

1. The Hackers
2. The people who reposted the pictures ad nauseam
3. The shallow people who actively searched for them, which encourages the people in points 1 & 2 to keep doing what they're doing
4. The providers of the security that got hacked.

I feel bad for the celebrities. Those were supposed to be private.

That being said, this is a good cautionary tale; the internet is an insecure place.

 

[giles]

This isn't about laying blame, we know that the culprits that spread the data out are to blame. The point of the whole discussion is:

Was it prudent of her to take pictures of herself in that manner in the first place?

Forget it. You won't have a discussion like that here because most people can't differentiate between proper risk-reward-assessment and "victim blaming", at least when the topic comes up after something happened. Source? This thread. Look at everyone jumping at the chance to wag their finger at you, oh what a mean victim blamer you are!
I mean do these people not lock their front door? There's no reason for people to lock their doors, it's not their fault when they get robbed, it's the thieves who are at fault!
Fucking hell.

On the original question: No, I don't think it's smart for a celebrity to keep photos of their private parts around. It's completely in their right to take nude pictures and it's in no way "their own fault" if they get stolen, but it's not smart from a risk reward standpoint. Celebrities are already a target for weirdos and "hackers" like this.
If you're a hollywood actor you are selling your looks in some way and having everyone see you naked is damaging to your career. It's like keeping all your life's savings in a big box with a dollar sign on your kitchen table. Sure, you can do that, but the expected loss of it getting stolen and ruining your life kinda outweighs the benefit of you exercising your god given right to keep money in obvious boxes.

 

[KazeAizen]

Here, let me tell you my response in image form:

[img=https://38.media.tumblr.com/23bada4f7d151707df3ad8e889940159/tumblr_nbaxr1Gvcg1qel5vuo1_500.png]https://38.media.tumblr.com/23bada4f7d151707df3ad8e889940159/tumblr_nbaxr1Gvcg1qel5vuo1_500.png[/img]

Now stop.

My good sir or madam. You have won the internet today. Take this imaginary cake and cookie from me.

 

[Daverson]

No. In my mind, there's no difference between saying "I've got some private pictures I don't want everyone looking at" and "I've got some private genitals that I don't want everyone looking at". And only an arsehole would try to claim that someone's status as a celebrity should magically invalidate their right to privacy.

However

I do think it's a bit hypocritical to spend your entire life perpetuating and profiting from the stereotype that a woman's self-worth can only be judged based on her looks, then act like it's some massive outrage when some creep decides to go above and beyond to "get a better view".

I'm sure some of these women didn't deserve this, and I certainly don't condone the actions of the hackers. But I'm finding it really difficult to feel any sympathy here.

 

[alandavidson]

On the original question: No, I don't think it's smart for a celebrity to keep photos of their private parts around. It's completely in their right to take nude pictures and it's in no way "their own fault" if they get stolen, but it's not smart from a risk reward standpoint. Celebrities are already a target for weirdos and "hackers" like this.
If you're a hollywood actor you are selling your looks in some way and having everyone see you naked is damaging to your career. It's like keeping all your life's savings in a big box with a dollar sign on your kitchen table. Sure, you can do that, but the expected loss of it getting stolen and ruining your life kinda outweighs the benefit of you exercising your god given right to keep money in boxes.

I'm sorry, for a minute had this really stupid thought that celebrities were people who enjoyed the same rights, freedoms, and expectations as everyone else. Thanks for reminding me that's so far from the truth. What the hell was I thinking?

 

[ForumSafari]

Practical:
Well them not taking the photos would have been better but human beings are vain so obviously the first thing people are going to do with a camera and a hot body is combine the two. Realistically you can't expect human beings to treat technology with the respect and foresight it deserves.

However, then uploading them to a third party service is pure idiocy. There is no excuse for that, you should be able to imagine how bad leaked nudes would make you feel and plan a security solution around that. not knowing how it works is no excuse, if you don't understand a machine don't point it at your naked body.

Moral:
The celebrities (by which I mean Jennifer Lawrence and all the others no one gives a fuck about) had no duty of care to make sure they didn't upload these photos to the cloud and the people that took them are entirely at fault.

Whimsical:
I think a lot of the 'victim blaming' 'violation' stuff is only because they/she's a woman. If she'd been a man it'd be a mixture of 'lol what a retard' and 'lol what an amusing page 7 story' as judged by previous times this has happened. They didn't deserve to have what happened to them happen, it is morally wrong of these people to do what they did. However, the celebrities in question also behaved like complete and utter retards. Don't upload sensitive pictures to the Cloud, it's a bad idea in the same way that me taking my bags of money for a walk through the ghetto is stupid.

 

[Lightknight]

Here, let me tell you my response in image form:

[img=https://38.media.tumblr.com/23bada4f7d151707df3ad8e889940159/tumblr_nbaxr1Gvcg1qel5vuo1_500.png]https://38.media.tumblr.com/23bada4f7d151707df3ad8e889940159/tumblr_nbaxr1Gvcg1qel5vuo1_500.png[/img]

Now stop.

My good sir or madam. You have won the internet today. Take this imaginary cake and cookie from me.

The guy in the cartoon is partially responsible for getting kicked in the balls because he was being a dick to the wrong person.

 

[giles]

I'm sorry, for a minute had this really stupid thought that celebrities were people who enjoyed the same rights, freedoms, and expectations as everyone else. Thanks for reminding me that's so far from the truth. What the hell was I thinking?

Whoa what a clever one liner that misses the point entirely. Thanks for reminding me that we can't have a grown up discussion around here. What the hell was I thinking?


I would give you more of an answer and expand on my point about how a celebrity has the same "rights, freedoms and expectations as everyone else" but has a unique standpoint when it comes to risk assessment of taking nude pictures (which is WAY more than your post deserves), but I feel like I would essentially just be repeating myself. Read my original post again.

 

[Blow_Pop]

Who cares?

Seriously.

Sometimes you look good naked and want to take photos so you can remind yourself of this fact. For that reason alone, yes it was prudent of her to do so (whether or not that was her actual reason for them). And OP, you still kind of come off as victim blaming.

There is never a reason to expose someone's private photos to everyone or anyone else that you don't have express permission to do so with.

If someone says hey, send these photos along to x because I lost their number or whatever, then yes send them to THAT person ONLY.

There's no reason why someone should be condemned for taking "risque" photos of themselves. But that's just my 2 cents on the matter.

And personally I haven't seen them, nor do I care to see them. I don't like her for my own reasons but that doesn't mean that I think she deserves what happened because that's a fucked up thing to do. Celebrity or not.

 

[Panda Pandemic]

Have to agree with the people who say that it's like saying we shouldn't own things. No problem with the stuff existing at all. The unfortunate thing is the storage spot was not as secure as people may usually think and others took advantage of that.

 

[Lieju]

This situation is so filled with ridiculous irony.

So let's get this straight - people whose large degree of wealth is based on other people looking at idealized (makeup, helpful lighting, camera angles, photoshopping, editing, etc) versions of their often nearly-naked bodies are upset that now people are looking at non-idealized versions of their nearly-naked or fully naked bodies.

This is the core of what's happening here. It's not about privacy - it's about controlling the way one's body is perceived. These are, except for the posing and whatever minor day-to-day enhancements these women are using at the time, NATURAL images of the women. This is the problem for them, not the "lack of privacy".

So because they consented to having certain pictures of them taken (in most cases not NUDE ones) then spreading any private pictures is suddenly a OK?

This is some pretty shitty logic.

Giving consent on something doesn't mean it's always okay!

You can't go and force someone to have sex with you and make it magically okay because she consented to having sex with other people.

That's exactly the same kind of logic at play here.

It doesn't matter if they're natural images or whatnot.

It's their choice if they want to show off their body, not yours, no matter how natural you find it.

And it's nice how you know what those women think, how they don't want privacy or anything.
After all, if your job involves being on the public eye, why would you want to have a private life???

 

[Cronenberg1]

I agree that taking nude photos and keeping them in places where someone could steel them is not a good idea and should be discouraged, but I absolutely do not agree with using these instances to express those worries. Was it maybe a bad idea? sure but that doesn't matter anymore because it already happened. Not everyone makes perfect decisions 100% of the time. There is a time and place for talking about keeping you're privacy safe, but this is not the time or place. So go home captain hindsight your opinion is not needed here.

 

[omega 616]

I hate this site for that shit, "I am not victim blaming here" ... "yes you are!". How about you just believe the guy/gal and take him/her at their word?

I think taking nude pics of yourself is stupid, if you do want to do it ... crop your face out of the shot!

What I honestly don't get is wanting to look at a celeb nude, she has boobs and a vagina ... like just about every woman out there! There is also terabytes upon terabytes of steamable porn to watched, why are you looking at stills? Have we not moved on from googling "lady naughty parts" at this point? That was back in the times of dial up and images loads millimeters at a time, probably took 10 minutes to get one image!

On top of that, the internet "loves Jennifer Lawrence" and then effectively sits in a tree outside her bedroom, taking pictures to show the world ... that's not love! That's, at most, lust! At worst fucking creepy stalking.

But, of course, all the neck beards and children out there have a chance to see a person they know naked and they foam at the mouth to see them!

I am very against people doing this to other people ... I have been sent rude pics and I could NEVER show those to anybody. They were sent to me in trust, I could never break that trust, they are VERY private and intimate. Even if that person hurts me, I couldn't lower myself to do that to somebody.

 

[ForumSafari]

But, of course, all the neck beards and children out there have a chance to see a person they know naked and they foam at the mouth to see them!

I work IT at a small business and I got to discussing this. It turns out that roughly the same number of both men and women where I work downloaded them. This should come as no surprise if you've ever seen gossip mags of course.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

From what i read picture from iphones are automatically saved on the iCloud. So if the phone didnt have that stupid feature then her photos would be safe on her phone. They also said that the iCloud had crappy security protection also. They need a law that any company that is storing personal details of customers needs to have a minimum protection level on it. I dont want this next bit to sound like victim blaming, because its not meant to be, but being that she is famous i think under those situations she should maybe be careful what she saves. Its not her fault, but being famous makes her a larger target than a normal girl working in a supermarket.

 

[nightmare_gorilla]

my feelings on the whole thing are a little muddled. What these women do with their own bodies is their own business suggesting we have any right to judge what another human being does with their own body is idiotic it's the same as telling a Ferrari collector what he should be doing with his cars. dude, they belong to another person you can't tell him what to do with them.

On the other hand. Hollywood has made itself a nice cottage industry of selling us sex without the sex. Kate upton is a swimsuit model she takes topless photos all the time but with sand or her hands or something covering the nipples, how many photographers and their production crews have seen the chick naked? enough that I could give two shits about her naked body appearing online. and honestly what exactly is the difference between a hacker digging through your icloud drive or a TMZ photographer sneaking through the bushes? one seems to be illegal while the other makes a very comfortable living. the people decrying this as an invasion of privacy are the same people who go buy people magazine and watch entertainment tonight. we have a cult of the celebrity in this country. I went to the grocery store today and the magazine rack just full of "who's she sleeping with now?" "you'll never believe who we caught having a quiet getaway in a 'love motel'!!!!" by my way of thinking there is more honesty in just blasting nudes across the internet haphazardly than stalking these people for a "legitimate" publication and monetizing someone else's personal life. not that I think hackers are particularly good but I just see the two as kind of equally disgusting.

and I mean aside from probably Jennifer Lawrence almost all these women will see an uptick in their career as a result of these. doesn't make it right but I didn't know who half of them were myself. so I dunno tend to kinda think "meh who gives a crap I can understand being bothered when your friends and family see it but some random internet jackholes i don't see how it really truly affects your life that much.

 

[briankoontz]

This is one of the most horrid things I've read on this site in a long time and considering the shit that's been floating around here lately that's saying a fucking lot.

Well, why don't you tell me what you *really* think while you're at it?

In an ideal world the positive effects of this would have been explained to the women beforehand and their consent gained. But these women are indebted to the very forces that are hurt by this, and they most likely would have not been willing to bite the hands that feed them, as their reaction to the released photos indicates.

It's a lot like the Edward Snowden leaks. In an ideal world Snowden could have just asked the American government for permission to release the information, but as we all know the American government would have concluded by that request that this must be the most naive fool in the history of humanity and either fired him or locked him up. So Snowden did what was best for THE PEOPLE although it opposed powerful forces in the world.

These released photos have no negative impact on the personal lives of these women. I respect these women more NOW due to the positive effects that the photos have on the fans of these women, although of course the releaser of the photos gets most of the credit. If your argument is that "well now these women will fear taking naked photos of themselves" why fear it? It's already helped people and more of them would just help people more. If these women actually care about the well being of people dominated by the glamour industry then they can take part in destroying that industry by releasing non-glamoured images of themselves.

The "negative" effect on the women is their loss of value to the glamour industry. Sports Illustrated, Hollywood, Maxim are all hurt by these images so these women will suffer a lessening of their value to these forces as a result. Noone in their right mind should mind that at all.

I can't help you if you simply view the situation in a very different way from how I do. I've explained my position.

What I really like is for our two views on this matter to be put to the test. So IF, let's say, what I want happens and more images of this type are released, then a couple years later we can more clearly experience what the effects of the releases were. And if it's true that, let's say, Sports Illustrated, Hollywood, and Maxim are making more profit than ever while everyone is running around sexually assaulting female celebrities then I'll stand corrected.

But that's not what's going to happen. These images will result in an increase of respect for the women involved and a decrease of interest (and therefore profitability) in agents of the glamour industry.

These releases, just like the Snowden releases, have benefited *the people*, despite your current inability to see that.

 

[omega 616]

But, of course, all the neck beards and children out there have a chance to see a person they know naked and they foam at the mouth to see them!

I work IT at a small business and I got to discussing this. It turns out that roughly the same number of both men and women where I work downloaded them. This should come as no surprise if you've ever seen gossip mags of course.

Not surprised in the least, women buy gossip mags in droves and they just LOVE to rip down celebs! Look at how fat X got, look at this stupid shot of Hugh Jackman leaving the water, look at Y's bingo wings etc.

 

[spartan231490]

Of course not. In this day and age, it's imprudent for ANYONE to take nudes, for a celebrity to take them is foolish at the least.