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

[Karthak]

Daniel O'Brien speaks truth: http://www.cracked.com/blog/what-our-reaction-to-nude-celeb-leaks-says-about-us/

These women did nothing wrong. The only people involved who did wrong were the assbags who stole private photos and posted them on the net. I hope the court system drops the hammer on those creeps.

 

[Lightknight]

People can take whatever damn photos they want. As I've said elsewhere, the only thing that these people did wrong was use Apple products. Had they not used Iphones that automatically sync to Icloud, I can assume most of these photos would not be in circulation. Most likely, but not certainly, photos of this nature were taken, sent to one person or two, and then deleted from local storage. I doubt most people would want these photos kept in the cloud. Bottom line, people should stop buying crapple; people should also stop blaming these women though. There is nothing wrong with what they did, aside from buying a terrible brand.

Apple wasn't at fault. Not only is there a good indication that several of these pictures came from elsewhere, but the access to their apple accounts was reportedly from people getting their credentials which can happen through normal hacking reconnaissance. It is far easier to gain access to specific individuals than it is to hack a hack aware network. Like robbing a gas station instead of fort Knox or a bank.

Honestly, where they made a mistake is entirely subjective. I'm of the opinion that you shouldn't create something you couldn't bear to get out. Like taking a picture of you committing a crime, for example. It was unwise to create "evidence" that they couldn't afford to lose. These are professionals whose entire livelihood is centered around their image. The thought that they weren't careful with their image means they made a professional mistake.People make professional mistakes all the time in the name of love. Doesn't make it not a mistake.

As I've reiterated multiple times here. They are no more responsible for being hacked than we would be if our bank accounts got hacked. But for the pictures existing at all? The evidence? That's their fault. I know it can seem calloused to point out what an victim did wrong. Like it's saying they deserved this to happen, because they didn't. What they did was something risky, that does not equate to guilt. What we need to take away from this situation is that you shouldn't make yourself vulnerable if the risk of being caught isn't worth the benefit.

Should people be able to take pictures of themselves? Sure. But just like I wouldn't withdraw all of my money, put it in my wallet, and walk down harlem streets at night, so too shouldn't other people put themselves at unnecessary risk. Especially not celebrities who have a much higher risk to begin with.

Do not make the mistake of putting yourself into a star's shoes. Being a public figure is FAR riskier here. For them, this was like walking down a bad street while counting hundred dollar bills. They are a known and desirable target. But, if you personally couldn't bear to see that picture of you doing blow off a hooker's navel exposed then consider not taking out the camera. You aren't going to be held accountable for 'evidence' that doesn't exist. Not that these stars did anything illegal. I just mean evidence as in items you wouldn't want counted against you.

 

[clippen05]

People can take whatever damn photos they want. As I've said elsewhere, the only thing that these people did wrong was use Apple products. Had they not used Iphones that automatically sync to Icloud, I can assume most of these photos would not be in circulation. Most likely, but not certainly, photos of this nature were taken, sent to one person or two, and then deleted from local storage. I doubt most people would want these photos kept in the cloud. Bottom line, people should stop buying crapple; people should also stop blaming these women though. There is nothing wrong with what they did, aside from buying a terrible brand.

Apple wasn't at fault. Not only is there a good indication that several of these pictures came from elsewhere, but the access to their apple accounts was reportedly from people getting their credentials which can happen through normal hacking reconnaissance. It is far easier to gain access to specific individuals than it is to hack a hack aware network. Like robbing a gas station instead of fort Knox or a bank.

Honestly, where they made a mistake is entirely subjective. I'm of the opinion that you shouldn't create something you couldn't bear to get out. Like taking a picture of you committing a crime, for example. It was unwise to create "evidence" that they couldn't afford to lose. These are professionals whose entire livelihood is centered around their image. The thought that they weren't careful with their image means they made a professional mistake.People make professional mistakes all the time in the name of love. Doesn't make it not a mistake.

As I've reiterated multiple times here. They are no more responsible for being hacked than we would be if our bank accounts got hacked. But for the pictures existing at all? The evidence? That's their fault. I know it can seem calloused to point out what an victim did wrong. Like it's saying they deserved this to happen, because they didn't. What they did was something risky, that does not equate to guilt. What we need to take away from this situation is that you shouldn't make yourself vulnerable if the risk of being caught isn't worth the benefit.

Should people be able to take pictures of themselves? Sure. But just like I wouldn't withdraw all of my money, put it in my wallet, and walk down harlem streets at night, so too shouldn't other people put themselves at unnecessary risk. Especially not celebrities who have a much higher risk to begin with.

Do not make the mistake of putting yourself into a star's shoes. Being a public figure is FAR riskier here. For them, this was like walking down a bad street while counting hundred dollar bills. They are a known and desirable target. But, if you personally couldn't bear to see that picture of you doing blow off a hooker's navel exposed then consider not taking out the camera. You aren't going to be held accountable for 'evidence' that doesn't exist. Not that these stars did anything illegal. I just mean evidence as in items you wouldn't want counted against you.

I'm not blaming their security, that's the thing. I'm blaming ICloud by default saving EVERY photo, text, whatever, you take to the cloud. Do you honestly think these actresses wanted their nudes saved to the cloud? Well, had they used literally any other service and phone, this would not have happened.

 

[Kuredan]

In response to the OP, as well as the title of the post (which people seem to have gotten away from), taken as a whole, it was an imprudent action. While people have the right to make whatever choices in life that they wish, they don't have a right to be free from the consequences. This not to imply that the consequence is deserved, merely that it is a risk associated with the choice.

Nude photos have a variety of consequences. If they are for yourself, it may make you feel more confident in your sexuality and body or it may have the opposite effect. At this level they only effect you and you have the greatest measure of control over the exposure. If they are an old school Polaroid you can burn them, or if they're on a device you can delete them, though has shown not to be 100% effective. If you are taking them for someone else, the photos may titillate them or cause any other reaction imaginable. You cannot control this reaction and now you have entrusted these photos to someone else, who may do with them as they wish. Their choice may be informed by their relation to you, but you have a lesser expectation of control than if you alone have the pictures. You might upload these private photos to a private computer or network. You now have even less control over the exposure because there are more potential access points to this data. A cloud network has the least amount of security as it is being accessed by the greatest number of people.

To me, prudence is a measure of action versus potential effect and the desirability of effect. Therefore, taking an action that has a higher risk and where that risk is more deleterious, is an example of an imprudent act.

Sadly, in that light, Ms. Lawrence's actions were not prudent. This does not discount that someone viciously robbed her of privacy and dignity and is guilty of a serious crime. These effects are not her fault and they do not reflect a value judgement on the taking of nude photos (eg. that she "deserves" this scandal because taking nude photos is wrong). She had every right to do that. Others may not share that view and see nude photos as a taboo or morally wrong. You can't control others' reactions. In the placing of these photos in a cloud there lies an increased risk they they will be exposed and subject to others' reactions. If that consequence is undesirable, then an action that increases the likelihood of said consequence is clearly seen as imprudent.

My heart goes out to people who suffer the worst consequences of vicious breaches of privacy. It is a sad commentary on the state of modern life when can no longer have a reasonable expectation of privacy in something as intimate as the devices we own. Bear in mind, this wasn't facebook: an application begging you to expose your secrets. This was a "secure" cloud service for a personal device. To me it almost seems as though the world is hostile to us in any other state but our "game face". Those moments of relaxed attitudes and freedom are now a danger to our reputation when they are mixed with modern technology. There is no digital room to find out who we are and what we may want from life because this vulnerability is a commodity to capitalized on if we ever get under the cross-hairs of an especially motivated hacker. Doxxing behavior, stolen work, cyber bullying, and leaked photos are just the beginning of what we'll see the more we integrate our lives with the internet. That's just sad.

 

[Lightknight]

I'm not blaming their security, that's the thing. I'm blaming ICloud by default saving EVERY photo, text, whatever, you take to the cloud. Do you honestly think these actresses wanted their nudes saved to the cloud? Well, had they used literally any other service and phone, this would not have happened.

Fair enough. I'll have to take your word for it that this isn't a feature they turned on.

 

[Aurion]

I'm not blaming their security, that's the thing. I'm blaming ICloud by default saving EVERY photo, text, whatever, you take to the cloud. Do you honestly think these actresses wanted their nudes saved to the cloud? Well, had they used literally any other service and phone, this would not have happened.

Fair enough. I'll have to take your word for it that this isn't a feature they turned on.

Opt-out is how a surprising amount of companies do it now, as opposed to opt-in. After all, they didn't do anything wrong- you can opt out at any time, and they get to brag about how many people use ! Everyone wins!

 

[weirdee]

For the OP:

The title is still focusing on questioning the actions of the easiest to focus on and most visible target in the matter instead of considering the implications of these constantly occurring incidents and how we should actually address them (less famous women are exposed without consent like this daily on the deepweb, which you can find yourself at your own risk if you don't believe me). Trying to focus on this one aspect (even if you say you are considering the other aspects, this thread existing at this moment with this question as the title is indicative that this is your focus) implies several unpleasant conclusions, such as wanting to have tidy closure to this situation as per the just world scenario [http://feministing.com/2014/08/19/fatal-hypothesis-how-belief-in-a-just-world-is-killing-us/] hypothesizes, or that since women are the majority (if not all) of the targets of this activity, given our past and current societal context, would lead us to believe that most men could not ever truly empathize due to never having felt this violated and robbed of agency in their own lives followed by the public condemning them for something that the public could not imagine they would ever be targeted for, and this is the question they choose to ask. After all, they have not really been the target, yet it seems very easy to pass judgment on the matter. The solution that we are invited to consider, as this question proposes, is to enforce more standards on women, especially any successful woman. Sure, you could say that "everybody" needs to be careful, but who is suffering the consequences here? Of this entire list I am looking at of roughly 100 people, there's only one guy, and it's at the bottom, paired with another woman. But that's just a crazy coincidence, right?

Regardless of your conscious intent of wanting to answer a 'simple' question on the internet, I have to wonder if you actually are interested in figuring out this situation for your own understanding, or if you are just seeking out approval and/or reinforcement of your present viewpoint, in what is largely a setting sympathetic to this line of questioning.

You are not a terrible person, but you are still affected by what society has taught you to believe.

 

[Maphysto]

If you upload something online, you are accepting the risk of it getting stolen.

If you get in your car and drive down the road, you accept the risk of being killed by a drunk driver. Does this mean you're the one at fault for being hit by a drunk driver?

EDIT: While it may have been a poor decision on her part to upload the photos, that still doesn't make it her fault they were stolen. It makes it the fault of the person who stole them. Because he, y'know, STOLE THEM. He deliberately took a course of action to violate her privacy and take something that wasn't his. That means he is in the wrong and she is in the right.

What you're doing is victim blaming. I feel like the term has been parroted by so many people for so many different reasons that it's lost its meaning in most people's minds, so I'll elaborate on exactly what I mean: You're looking at a situation in which someone was clearly wronged, and you're pointing the finger at the person who was wronged. You're saying "It's your fault that someone did something bad to you."

Does that honestly seem right to you? Do you really think that it's her fault that someone violated her privacy? Because if so, then I just don't know what to say to you.

 

[Vault101]

Having testicles is not a stupid, poorly-planned decision that leaves you totally vulnerable to an already existing population that wants to take advantage of you.

Deciding to achieving celebrity status and uploading nude photographs of yourself onto a poorly secured cloud is.

Neither person DESERVES what happened to them, but that's just not a fitting parable to juxtapose.

do you not leave the house without wearing a groin gaurd?

 

[McKitten]

It is perfectly possible to disapprove of actions while at the same time having the opinion that they are an individuals right. I disapprove of people taking (certain) drugs and think that it is an unwise decision they shouldn't make. But that doesn't mean that i think they shouldn't be allowed to, it is their decision, and they have the right to make a bad one. The hacking case is not that different even if there's also a criminal in the picture as well. You have the right to park your car with the key in the ignition on the street, and it is your decision alone whether you choose to do it. And if the car gets stolen, it's still a crime, not making crime hard isn't the same as giving permission. But that doesn't mean that making it easy for criminals is not a bad idea.
Yeah, in a perfect world no-one should ever have to think about how to not be an easy victim of crimes. But acting like this is a perfect world is also not the height of common sense.

On another note, dear Gygax stop it with the "People should be able to take Private Photos" nonsense. People are able to take private photos. It's not illegal. And it is already illegal to steal them. This is not some censorship or legislation or even "this demands action" issue. What the hacker did already is a crime. And crimes happen. You don't go around after every burglary wringing hands and crying "peoples homes should be safe". Crimes happen, always will, and unless there's some sort of rampant hacking epidemic going on that's counter to all other downwards trending crimes, the police are already doing a pretty good job about it.

 

[Timmaaaah]

It wasn't prudent. I mean come on, she's a celebrity. If naked pictures of her exist, people are going to want them. I don't know why she took them in the first place. I know I am never going to take nudes of myself... It all ends up on the internet eventually.
Still, it's a bit shitty that her privacy was violated though I don't actually know what her reaction to the leak was.

 

[Malpraxis]

No, it wasn't prudent at all.
She has a right to do so, but it's not a wise idea when you know thousands of people will want to see them, and no online storage is secure.

Heck, I don't take nudes of myself and I'm a hairy dude and nobody besides a couple of weird people would be interested in looking at them. I know that they may come back to bite me in the ass down the line.
It is not fair at all. But life isn't fair.

 

[vIRL Nightmare]

First, it sucks to have this happen to anyone. I certainly understand why she (but lets not forget all the others this happened to and how little they care in comparison)would be distraught over this. Second I feel like I shouldn't have to tell grown adults to not take fucking naked pictures of themselves. That should be common fucking sense.

No I don't feel bad for anyone in this situation. If I went around taking naked photos of my self and somebody spread that shit over the internet I could lose all credibility as an engineer over something stupid. Stupid, yeah that is a good word for this situation. Stupid for taking the pictures, and stupid that everyone is making a huge deal over this.

Seriously the sooner they stop making a big deal about the whole situation the sooner it disappears into the aether to be forgotten or remembered as one of the hundreds of celebrities that had some uncomfortable exposure. This isn't the first time this has happened and no one has ever cared so much about it until now.

Any of the actors that had their dirty laundry spread across the field needs to lift their chins stop feeling sorry for themselves and remind themselves that A) it is in fact as much their fault for taking FUCKING NUDE PHOTOS as it is the fault of the creeps that found and spread them, and B) This whole scandal is actually going to end up helping their careers, a thing most people cant say. The sooner everyone stops making it out to be the most hateful hate crime of the century and move on, the sooner no one will care. We have famous individuals commit actual horrible things and get away with it all the time so somebody seeing your jingle jangles or your lady bits really isn't that tragic a thing, especially in a society so saturated with new media each day that it's going to be forgotten quite quickly unless they decide to keep bring the situation up.

Maybe I'm being unfair but god damn it why would anyone think taking nude photos of yourself is a good idea? I don't care if it is a smart phone, a 90s kodak, or an old timey camera. It's a bad idea and no one should have to tell anyone that. What causes such a lapse in judgement for anyone, especially a famous individual to think oh I'm going to make some naked pictures of myself even though I never want it to come to the light of day. Also we live in a society were the human body is slowly but surely becoming less an obscene thing, we have movie's like watchment with floppy blue dicks floating around and honestly few people cared that much. The whole situation isn't any special deal at all and will be out of sight and mine in a couple weeks unless we keep hearing these news stories about how the FBI is having time and resources spent on finding a pervert somewhere because someone with a lot of money had their feelings hurt.

I just, I can't even comprehend the train og thought, the logic in thinking, "Hm I'm hugely famous and not a fucking pornstar so I'm just going to take some naked pictures of myself with a device that has internet access after nary a few months ago most news sites were plastered with things like heart-bleed and how not secure anything was. If they wanted the nude images as a form of art then they should have no need to be hurt or offended to this degree, if the photos were made for any reason other than art then I just can't understand why anyone would think this was a good idea.

In consideration of these people I personally didn't take the time to look at any of the photos that I'm sure isn't anything special. However I damn near had an aneurysm from the stupidity of it all when for almost a week now all I've heard is how the poor victims have been bullied by the evil internet creepers when hypocritically when the major news media can spill this shit it's a delicious story. Seriously who here remembers the Hulk Hogan video that was plastered everywhere by the news outlets? It's fucking hypocritical and stupid.

 

[otakon17]

I am not victim blaming here. She didn't invite this leak to happen by doing so, but I feel she did expose herself without thinking of the possible consequences. It is a simple thing not to take pictures of yourself and then send them over a network to a phone that could possibly be stolen. Especially considering she's a celebrity and in the United States there is an unhealthy obsession with them in my opinion generally. You can't do things like this as a public figure if only to avoid possibly incriminating yourself.

I close with the following points:
1. She did not invite this invasion of privacy by taking these photographs. No one(save certain situations) has the right to do this kind of thing.
2. I am not blaming her for what happened to her. The one responsible is the asshole that got a hold of them.
3. I am NOT condoning the actions of said asshole.
4. And to all those that downloaded said pictures and use "Well she shouldn't have taken them in the first place.", fuck off that's not the point of the argument to justify your invasion of a woman's privacy.

I do not condone this turn of events and do not blame her for them. I simply feel that if she should not have taken compromising pictures of herself in the first place.

EDIT: In light of EVERYONE saying I am victim blaming, I have changed the title of the topic to more accurately reflect my view on the matter.

Yes, it was prudent as we have no idea the reason as to why she did it. Nor should we be privy to that. So I think it's safe to assume that she acts with agency one can expect one to utilize in the process of actions. I also think it's safe to say that you are a troll for this trollish post. There is no possible situation that could have come from this post that would lead to this post being worthwhile in any sense of the word.

This isn't a troll post, I just think it was pretty reckless to take pictures of yourself nude, regardless of who you are and upload them from your phone to the "cloud". It's not very prudent to huff paint but people do it anyway for the high, it's not prudent to drive way faster than the speed limit but people do it to get places quicker/for the high, it's not very prudent to eat really spicy food, but do it anyway for the flavor. Point I'm making, even if you CAN do something, doesn't mean you should do it. Taking nude photos of yourself, regardless of medium, is risky as there is always the chance of someone not meant to, finding them. Putting them out digitally in any form, doubly so.

I never said she wasn't allowed to take the photos, why does everyone keep inserting that into their rebuttal?

 

[RoBi3.0]

Telling someone they shouldn't have taken nudes of themselves because they were stolen make as much sense as telling someone who has had their shoes stolen that they shouldn't have owned shoes in the first place if they didn't want them stole.

 

[vIRL Nightmare]

I just, I can't even comprehend the train og thought, the logic in thinking, "Hm I'm hugely famous and not a fucking pornstar so I'm just going to take some naked pictures of myself with a device that has internet access after nary a few months ago most news sites were plastered with things like heart-bleed and how not secure anything was. If they wanted the nude images as a form of art then they should have no need to be hurt or offended to this degree, if the photos were made for any reason other than art then I just can't understand why anyone would think this was a good idea.

Or, or, hear me out here - or they just wanted to be a bit sexy with themselves or a partner. Maybe, rather than type out seven paragraphs concerning what you think of the victims of a crime, you should either say nothing, condemn the criminals, or offer advice - such as, "if you have nudes, I'd take them out of the cloud to be safe."

Here's some advice. Don't do it ever for any reason through any means. It is a very poor life decision to not consider the consequences of your actions because you wanted a little sexy time when you can alternatively do so in the presence of your intended individual. There is no reason for anyone to be surprised about this. Nudes and sex videos have been a thing for a very long time, decades easily and though you are not as wrong as the creep that stole your pictures you are still in the wrong by ignorance because we like to say ignorance isn't an excuse for everything else so why be contrary to that on this specific case other than it is obvious media viewer bait.

That said I did give my input my advice if you will multiple times. That advice being don't do it and don't be so upset when you fail to consider possible consequences of your actions.

 

[chstens]

The best way I can express my opinion on this matter is "Oh my god who cares."

 

[TheEndlessSleep]

Clearly the person who leaked these pics is scum, but people need to stop accusing people of 'victim blaming' when they make points like this.

I don't trust the internet as far as I could throw it, and frankly, neither should anybody. I wouldn't put something this private anywhere near the net because I know that it's full of weirdos looking for exactly this kind of thing.

Obviously, nobody is planning to have their privacy invaded, and I think it's sad that we live in a world where this horrible stuff is entirely possible.

However, at the end of the day, we all know the risks (and it's naive to think you are not at risk of this stuff; no matter how safe you THINK you are etc...), and there is always a factor of personal responsibility when it comes to security of personal information.

 

[TheEndlessSleep]

What the fuck just happened... why did it post my comment 7 times?

 

[somonels]

Prudent? What she does in private, or in her case anywhere, is none of my concern or care.

There is a false assumption of privacy on the internet. The internet is NEVER private, let alone the diddly cloud. Anything you put there is liable to be manipulated/removed/copied. There was NO invasion of privacy, just a breach of trust, software intrusion and copyright infringement.

She put the pictures in a sack and gave it to a guy who promised not to peek or share it with anyone else. Someone else got their grubby hands on it, made copies, and put the sack back. That's what happened in the analog world.