Naked celebrities: a new social statement?

[Thaluikhain]

But that's just it. It's sexual assault, not theft. Those are different crimes. The nude photos are much more akin to a sex crime than larsony, that's all i'm trying to get at here. Yes, they're doing it without the consent of the person in the photo, and yes that's wrong, but it's sexual harassment if anything, not theft. I never said anything was justified, only that it's not theft. In the case of the celebrities in the original OP, it's justified because it's their decision.

By comparison, we speak of theft of intellectual property, in regards to piracy and patents and so on.

 

[Ihateregistering1]

This isn't really "new" in the slightest. Remember "I'd rather be naked than wear fur"? Tons of celebrities did nude photos to protest wearing fur, it's just another way to draw attention to your cause.

 

[bumbledog]

This isn't really "new" in the slightest. Remember "I'd rather be naked than wear fur"? Tons of celebrities did nude photos to protest wearing fur, it's just another way to draw attention to your cause.

Good example. This is another example where celebrity nudity in particular is a powerful tool of influence. I'm just not sure why yet.

Keep trying to steer the discussion back on topic, maybe they'll stop bickering.

 

[JimB]

Stolen property? Really?

Yes. It did not belong to the thieves, and the thieves took it anyway.

I'm sorry, but this whole ordeal really strikes me as overly dramatic. People saw you in your natural form, holy fucking shit we have a crisis! Men might be feeling good and having orgasms because of this, holy shit the pure evil, shut it down now!

I may have missed a post, but so far I do not believe anyone has said that. It seems to be a straw man you have erected.

 

[NiPah]

Let's try and make this argument a bit more rational by taking the "little fireman in the shiny purple helmet" out of the equation.

"There's no way to stop really determined hackers from getting your credit card information, so it would be really great if more people just decided to take the wind out of their sails and showed they aren't ashamed of their financial information by posting their credit card number and expiration date in this thread."

I look forward to everyone demonstrating how great it is to be unashamed of our inability to get justice from cyber-criminals.

Had to look up what the hell you were on about with the "little fireman in the shiny purple helmet" comment, ah you're referring to the male penis, I'm guessing further referring to male sexuality.

So if I'm following you, you believe having nude photos leaked online is tantamount to having credit card information leaked only without male sexual desire?

Honestly I can't agree with this statement at all, credit information can be changed and thus eliminating any risks of misuse of lost information, the same can't be said with one's body. Also it could be argued that use of nude photos vs. use of credit card information is detrimental to the victim in a different way, contrasting the two would be extremely hard.

I'm also a bit interested in your solution to having nude photos of yourself leaked, purely a hypothetical, but do you have any ideas for ways of combating the loss of personal information besides releasing it beforehand?

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

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.

Instagram is sexist for not allowing female nudity because it allows males to be topless.

In fact, ALL laws that allow men to go around with their nips out, but not women, are sexist.

Sexist means treating the sexes differently. If one kind of nipple is illegal and the other kind is legal, that is sexist - by definition.

For that matter, beauty photoshopping is a disgusting practice an I applaud anyone who attempts who calls it out.

So yeah, basically I thoroughly support both Ms. Handler and Ms. Knightley for their efforts. Bravo to both.

 

[Daverson]

I think we're looking at this the wrong way. If we remove the taboo from stuff like just being naked, people will just find new, more daring taboos, like, say, being naked, but with a leek on your head. Then there'll just be leaked pictures of celebrities wearing leeks, and every other movie poster will the head of leek "tactfully" photoshopped in.

What we should be be doing, is making completely inane stuff, like leeks, taboo. That way, women will be free to post their naked bodies all over the internet without feeling threatened, because 4chan will be plotting to hack their fridges and get lewd pictures of their leeks to leak all over the internet.

LEEKS!

...I may have been slightly Welsh when I wrote this. I will not apologize for this.

 

[COMaestro]

Stolen property? Really?

Yes. It did not belong to the thieves, and the thieves took it anyway.

Taking it away would imply the owner doesn't have it anymore. That isn't the case. Piracy =/= theft, sexual harassment =/= theft.

I'm sorry, but this whole ordeal really strikes me as overly dramatic. People saw you in your natural form, holy fucking shit we have a crisis! Men might be feeling good and having orgasms because of this, holy shit the pure evil, shut it down now!
I may have missed a post, but so far I do not believe anyone has said that. It seems to be a straw man you have erected.

How about, instead of just saying i'm strawmannging things, you explain the argument to me.

On what grounds do celelbrity nudes being stolen upset you, because i've tried very hard to pry this information out of all of you, and you seem very reluctant to disclose it. The two points i brought up were an attempt to argue the illigitimacy of what i honestly thought the problems might be, that is, people seeing you in your natural form (people seeing nude pictures, and an appeal to privacy), or men getting off to it (sexual harassment). If these are not your qualms with the ordeal, please tell me what your qualms with it are, so we can have a discussion like normal people instead of just constantly calling my desperate attempt to figure out what the fuck you people are trying to say as "STRAWMAN" "ONLY IN UR HED".

You can start by telling me what aspect of nude photos being leaked without the consent of the person in the photos upsets you.

I'm going to try to address a few of the questions regarding people's statements that you have expressed in this thread, as far as I understand them.

Danger Must Silence says that women have a right to privacy. Everyone has a right to privacy and it is wrong when it is violated. HOWEVER, you keep assuming he is referring to Kiera and Chelsea (the women in the OP) where he is actually referring to any woman who has had nude photos of them stolen (yes, STOLEN) and posted without permission. Kiera and Chelsea DID give permission for these particular photos to be posted, thus their privacy is not being violated here. Hackers who work to steal nude photos of women for their own gratification are violating the privacy of these women, which is wrong because it goes against the wishes of the women involved. Just as much as someone stealing your credit card information (or for a better example that you may not equate with money, your identity, since you would still have your identity, right?) would be against your wishes.

There's nothing wrong with a woman being naked, or even guys getting off on seeing it, but it IS wrong when the woman did not give her permission for that photo to be available to anyone to see. Those who are comfortable enough to show off their body have every right to do so, however by the same token those who are NOT that comfortable have the right to not have their body displayed for all to see. So for some people, being shown naked by these stolen photos IS a personal crisis, as it was something that made them feel exposed, vulnerable, and objectified. Think of your deepest, darkest secret that you refuse to tell anyone. If I managed to learn that secret and posted it here and other places online for everyone to see, how would you feel about it? Would your reaction be "overly dramatic?"

As for stealing, let's look at a definition: take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it. Sure, this does look mostly like it refers to physical property. However, laws currently don't have a good distinction between physical and virtual property, short of intellectual property. Still, if we boil the definition down to it's basics: take something without permission or legal right then I don't see how something being digital in format prevents someone taking it without permission from being theft.

Your comparison of the nude photos to a bad review of a movie does not work. The actress CHOSE to be part of a movie, having read the script ahead of time and made an informed decision to be in the film knowing that it would be shown to the public. If the movie sucks, sure, it could affect her income in the form of less roles offered to her, but she made the choice to be in the public eye by doing the movie. Nude photos that are stolen and spread around can affect the roles the actress can get (I believe Disney has refused to hire actresses due to such things in the past), thereby affecting her income, yet it was done without her approval.

Hope this helps some, and that I am interpreting everyone's positions correctly.

 

[JimB]

Stolen property? Really?

Yes. It did not belong to the thieves, and the thieves took it anyway.

Taking it away would imply the owner doesn't have it anymore.

I did not say the thieves took it away. I said the thieves took it anyway. If you want to split hairs and claim this is piracy, then fine, but since piracy is just a subsection of thievery anyway, I don't understand what you think you gain by doing so.

How about, instead of just saying I'm strawmanning things, you explain the argument to me.

If you're asking why I haven't done so before now, that's because you never asked me and because I'm frankly not certain I can explain this in terms you will understand, given your history of reading things that aren't there; but if you want, I will try again.

On what grounds do celebrity nudes being stolen upset you, because I've tried very hard to pry this information out of all of you, and you seem very reluctant to disclose it.

It offends my sense of justice when a thief is allowed to keep his prize. Some asshole saw something that was not his, said, "I want that," and took it without its owner's permission. That grates against something very close to the core of me. Rather further away from the core of me but still pretty fucking upsetting is the offense I take when people blame victims for being stolen from rather than thieves for stealing.

The two points I brought up were an attempt to argue the illegitimacy of what I honestly thought the problems might be; that is, people seeing you in your natural form (people seeing nude pictures, and an appeal to privacy),

It should be my decision how much of myself is revealed to the world, not the decision of a thief.

or men getting off to it (sexual harassment).

At least one person in this thread has argued that the stolen images are bad because they don't meet his standards for masturbating to. He does not seem to understand that the stolen images are bad because they are stolen, or that it is supremely fucked up that he judges the impact of a crime not by how the victim is affected but by how much semen he can personally ejaculate while receiving copies of the stolen property. I further object to people trying to dismiss how fucked up this is by saying that if someone doesn't like such statements, then that person condemns male sexuality, as if male sexuality is what we're talking about rather than crimes that have been committed, minimized, and are currently being encouraged.

 

[Popido]

At what part do these naked photos become public domain's property? Once something is out there, its out there.

Tabloid sites which usually make headlines with nakes pictures have lawyers letting them keep publishing these pictures. And this combined with internet, quickly pushes these pictures into public domain status. Atleast on consense.

Can't say I understand the topless issue. If it's okay for women to walk around topless, then it should be okay to force EVERY WOMAN to be topless in certain situations. School's swimming pool could, for example, have a rule where no one can't wear anything extra, for hygiene reasons, and the school provides the swimsuits. In that situation, if being topless is allowed because complaining about it was seen sexist, every girl would be forced to show their breasts.

If it then becomes a personal issue, where the girls should be allowed to hide their breast if they want to, then it also applies to boys. But what exactly is it that boys should hide? Nipples? So then that applies to girls, where piece of tape is enough to hide nipples.

And then this slippery slope slips into personal idea how much skin showing people consider as acceptable, because nobody knows fuck about what they want.