THE FAPPENING (9/11 for Celebrity Privacy) (NSFW) (Obviously) ITT: NO TITTIES

[angry.bob]

These women say they took these pictures with the expectation that they would not be public.  They say they do not want them to be public now.  A pretty simple rule seems to cover it: If she says no, respect it - always.

Putting aside legalities, viewing these photos is disrespectful and discourteous to these women.  It'd be a nicer world if more people were willing to put courtesy and respect higher on their priorities.

While I can't really argue with anything you said, I really like looking at as many naked women as time allows. In addition, some of these women have careful manicured public personas of "purity and morality" and are never reluctant to criticize other celebrity's behavior or judgement. So that adds the delicious schadenfreude element to it. The only things better to me than naked women and wallowing in schadenfreude is combining the two into some kind of shameful Reeses cup.

[Samwise]

Let's be honest with ourselves here.  A regular Reeses cup is kind of shameful already.

[Ginaz]

Let's be honest with ourselves here.  A regular Reeses cup is kind of shameful already.

Shut your mouth!   There's few things better in this world than chocolate and peanut butter combined together.

[Mithas]

I'm not a big chocolate fan. I am less of a peanut butter fan. Something happens when you combine them that makes them some kind of super food. I will take a Reese's Peanut Butter Cup over any other kind of candy.

[Cyrrex]

If I had a choice between eating a peanut butter cup and a handful of cat diarrhea, I would choose the peanut butter cup.  But I would not be happy about it.

I am having a hard time summoning the guilt over looking at any of these pics.  I know I should, though.  I think the problem here is that I am growing weary of this world full of shameless, narcissistic social media.  Combine this with the narcissism of the average celebrity, and their careless stupidity of taking these dumb selfies with some expectation that we need to bask in their relative glory on all other occasions, but turn a blind eye when they feel they are being violated....I don't know.  I can live with and understand any of these things individually, but the combination of it all just doesn't manage to register on my gives-a-shit meter.  Maybe stop being such a huge attention whore.

Put more cynically, every single one of these women is famous almost exclusively because they give men and/or teenage boys boners.  It shouldn't surprise anyone that those same males will jump at the chance to see them naked.  If you are one of the most famous people in the world, maybe you shouldn't be taking selfies with your tits hanging out. 

Note: that doesn't make the act of stealing the photos any less criminal. 

[Pagz]

Putting peanut butter in chocolate is the real crime.

[apocrypha]

Put more cynically, every single one of these women is famous almost exclusively because they give men and/or teenage boys boners.

And this is the problem. They are accomplished, successful and famous actresses, singers, gymnasts, yet their worth is reduced to being masturbation material because they're women.

Men, even good-looking, famous men, are not reduced in this way. They are recognised for their abilities and achievements and if they're good-looking too then that's icing. Women, regardless of their success or skills are reduced to something for men to wank over.

[Cyrrex]

I don't think this is univerally true, I was talking specifically about these women.  For better or worse, it is the truth.  JLaw is a slight exception because she is considered down to earth and charming.  And yet, we wank even harder as a result. 

And there are plenty of male actors/celebrities that are famous specifically because women want to bang them, although I find it far less likely that women would ever try to take advantage of it in the same way.  So I don't think you are right about that at all.

[Miasma]

One of the tastiest treats are fresh peanut butter cups.  One of the worst are stale peanut butter cups.  Most are stale and the peanut butter has turned into some sort of chalk like substance.  I don't even buy Reese anymore because 9/10 times I'm dissapointed.

Godiva used to make essentially the same thing but with almond butter and it was fantastic but then they started putting fucking rock salt on top for some sick reason and destroyed it.

[Ironwood]

Put more cynically, every single one of these women is famous almost exclusively because they give men and/or teenage boys boners.

And this is the problem. They are accomplished, successful and famous actresses, singers, gymnasts, yet their worth is reduced to being masturbation material because they're women.

Men, even good-looking, famous men, are not reduced in this way. They are recognised for their abilities and achievements and if they're good-looking too then that's icing. Women, regardless of their success or skills are reduced to something for men to wank over.

You have not heard my wife on the matter of Chris Hemsworth.

[angry.bob]

And this is the problem. They are accomplished, successful and famous actresses, singers, gymnasts, yet their worth is reduced to being masturbation material because they're women.

Men, even good-looking, famous men, are not reduced in this way. They are recognised for their abilities and achievements and if they're good-looking too then that's icing. Women, regardless of their success or skills are reduced to something for men to wank over.

No, they are reduced because they are outside our monkeysphere (Dunbar;s number) and are reduced to a one-dimensional concept, "attractive female actress" being about the most complicated it gets. Men are not reduced the same way for a couple of reasons, the biggest being that females are not sexually stimulated in the anything close to the same ways as men. Even women who report a high level of visual arousal are nowhere near the level of a man while being tested during brain scans.

As far as famous men not being reduced at all by women, fucking please. If you want to tell me that Paul Walker or Ryan Gosling have/had careers because of their deep acting talents I'm all ears.

It always cracks me up when people try to pretend that we're not animals evolved enough to be not completely driven by instinct and hormones. I;m sure Khaldun will swoop in here any second to post a nine paragraph opinion on why I'm wrong, but men are made to like looking at whatever they think is sexy and get boners so they can make babies. It's just a nice bonus that we're evolved enough to add a layer of self-control and consensuality on top of it. Biologically it wasn't that long ago that it wasn't the norm.

[Yegolev]

If you're going to start bringing in human biology and other scientific facts, things are going to get ugly.

[Paelos]

Yall are really overthinking why dudes want to look at naked chicks.

[Yegolev]

Also agree.

[jgsugden]

Almost every heterosexual male understands the urges and draw. Doing the right thing sometimes requires resisting temptation.

A lot of people daydream about being a hero and protecting others in the face of a challenge. If you think it is wrong to look at these women, but find the draw of them to be strong, here is a small chance to show you can rise above and be a better person. Not a hero, but maybe someone that could be one if called upon.

[Paelos]

I'm all for moral objections on stuff, and that's your POV, which is fine.

I totally disagree that there is a moral imperative here to respect the privacy of people who make their money off promoting their image. The photos exist because these adults feel that taking pictures of their naked bodies is acceptable to them. They are obviously okay with their nudity. They are okay with those pictures existing.

What they are not okay with is the audience, to which I say too fucking bad. Once you reach a certain status of celebrity by your own self-promotion and choice, you no longer have control over your image. That's the advantage and privilege of being a private individual.

I don't feel bad about celebrities losing control of their boundaries on their phone. This is a learning point for all celebrities hopefully. Phones are not secure. Do not take naked pictures of yourself. People find this shit everyday and they are looking for it.

EDIT: To take it further, I think the moral objection to something like the Erin Andrews pictures holds more weight. Erin was photographed by a third party against her will, because the dude was spying on her. At no point did she consent to any of that. These people consented to the naked pictures by taking them themselves.

[Ironwood]

That's wrong.

[Paelos]

Didn't expect many to agree. I hold celebrities to a reap what you sow standard. You want to be famous? There's a dark side to it, and you have to be careful.

Like I said, they don't have any problems with those pictures. They have a problem with them getting out. Yet, they make money on promoting themselves publically. If anything it creates a grey area to me I don't worry about as a moral issue.

[Threash]

And this is the problem. They are accomplished, successful and famous actresses, singers, gymnasts, yet their worth is reduced to being masturbation material because they're women.

Bullshit, just cause i've fapped to jlaws pictures doesn't mean i no longer like in x-men or the hunger games.

[Yegolev]

[Draegan]

I respond to everyone's post with: "Tits".

[Maven]

And this is the problem. They are accomplished, successful and famous actresses, singers, gymnasts, yet their worth is reduced to being masturbation material because they're women.

Bullshit, just cause i've fapped to jlaws pictures doesn't mean i no longer like in x-men or the hunger games.

Question: can we separate the body (image) from the talent (work) from the personality (personhood)?

This is the 'Great Inner Conflict' when I think of my female friends. The part of me that looks upon them as beautiful and someone who'd I like to sleep with is, I'd *like* to believe, separate from the part of me that cherishes their personality and personhood. But by all appearances they are one and the same.

My International Political Economy class touched upon this issue and how it raises concerns about the ubiquitous of this data being in the cloud and available to hackers with the right know-how. I've had to interact with people who think privacy and ownership of data were these silly things. These are people who I'd have no trouble ending in a heartbeat.

[Speedy Cerviche]

I'm all for moral objections on stuff, and that's your POV, which is fine.

I totally disagree that there is a moral imperative here to respect the privacy of people who make their money off promoting their image. The photos exist because these adults feel that taking pictures of their naked bodies is acceptable to them. They are obviously okay with their nudity. They are okay with those pictures existing.

What they are not okay with is the audience, to which I say too fucking bad. Once you reach a certain status of celebrity by your own self-promotion and choice, you no longer have control over your image. That's the advantage and privilege of being a private individual.

I don't feel bad about celebrities losing control of their boundaries on their phone. This is a learning point for all celebrities hopefully. Phones are not secure. Do not take naked pictures of yourself. People find this shit everyday and they are looking for it.

EDIT: To take it further, I think the moral objection to something like the Erin Andrews pictures holds more weight. Erin was photographed by a third party against her will, because the dude was spying on her. At no point did she consent to any of that. These people consented to the naked pictures by taking them themselves.

I believe that famous people have a debt to everyone.  If celebrities didn't want people pawing through their garbage and saying they're gay, they shouldn't have tried to express themselves creatively.

[HaemishM]

Put more cynically, every single one of these women is famous almost exclusively because they give men and/or teenage boys boners.

And this is the problem. They are accomplished, successful and famous actresses, singers, gymnasts, yet their worth is reduced to being masturbation material because they're women.

Men, even good-looking, famous men, are not reduced in this way. They are recognised for their abilities and achievements and if they're good-looking too then that's icing. Women, regardless of their success or skills are reduced to something for men to wank over.

Let's be very clear about something. If I was to rely on knowing about Kate Upton's "abilities and achievements," I would NEVER EVER EVER HAVE EVER HEARD HER NAME. I don't even know what she does for a living other than I am occasionally linked to pictures or videos of her frooging. There is absolutely nothing I know about Kate Upton besides the fact that she has a pretty face and quite possibly one of the greatest set of Praise-the-Lord-Natural breasts I've ever seen. To my knowledge, she has created all her fame and income from being unbelievably physically attractive. I'm ok that she has the ability to do that. She has created a market for the ogling of her body and has made a decent living from that. So absolutely no one should feel bad about the desire to see her tits except perhaps those who have no desire to see tits.

She and other celebrities on this list have drawn a line at not showing their bare tits and I respect that. I don't think it's necessary as most of them have nothing to be ashamed of, but I'm certainly ok with them drawing the line at not showing nudes. But no one should be under any illusion that just because they don't want to show it, that doesn't mean people don't want to see it. As a result, part of the responsibility of the nudes existing in the first place is from an inability to stop taking nude pictures of oneself. Even moreso, they are responsible for the security of said photos when they take them - which means if you use a phone to take pictures you want no one else ever to see anywhere, understand how that tech works and use it responsibly. If it was a film camera, you'd know to destroy the negatives or the film canister. I'm not giving you any breaks because you didn't know that your phone stored those photos somewhere else. Learn the tech and use it responsibly. In this, Apple is also complicit because seriously... no one should be able to brute force passwords like this in this day and age.

The crime here is the people who illegally accessed these accounts, stole the pictures and then publicized them. Not the people who wanted to and did view them, like myself. The market was created, the desire is human, and the technology makes it easy. I'm not the one hacking passwords, I'm not the one stealing files, and I'm not the one paying for either. Maybe I should feel ashamed at the invasion of privacy - yeah, I get that. There's a little shame in that. But to the ones calling it a "psychic attack, or akin to rape" - please shut the fuck up. If that's the case, I'd be considered a rapist every single day because there's not a day goes by that I don't see an attractive woman and look a second longer than I need to in order to appreciate her physical beauty.

[Ginaz]

I'm all for moral objections on stuff, and that's your POV, which is fine.

I totally disagree that there is a moral imperative here to respect the privacy of people who make their money off promoting their image. The photos exist because these adults feel that taking pictures of their naked bodies is acceptable to them. They are obviously okay with their nudity. They are okay with those pictures existing.

What they are not okay with is the audience, to which I say too fucking bad. Once you reach a certain status of celebrity by your own self-promotion and choice, you no longer have control over your image. That's the advantage and privilege of being a private individual.

I don't feel bad about celebrities losing control of their boundaries on their phone. This is a learning point for all celebrities hopefully. Phones are not secure. Do not take naked pictures of yourself. People find this shit everyday and they are looking for it.

EDIT: To take it further, I think the moral objection to something like the Erin Andrews pictures holds more weight. Erin was photographed by a third party against her will, because the dude was spying on her. At no point did she consent to any of that. These people consented to the naked pictures by taking them themselves.

I believe that famous people have a debt to everyone.  If celebrities didn't want people pawing through their garbage and saying they're gay, they shouldn't have tried to express themselves creatively.

What?

[Ginaz]

Put more cynically, every single one of these women is famous almost exclusively because they give men and/or teenage boys boners.

And this is the problem. They are accomplished, successful and famous actresses, singers, gymnasts, yet their worth is reduced to being masturbation material because they're women.

Men, even good-looking, famous men, are not reduced in this way. They are recognised for their abilities and achievements and if they're good-looking too then that's icing. Women, regardless of their success or skills are reduced to something for men to wank over.

Counter point, many of those women aren't "talented".  A lot of them are just famous for how they look.

[Ruvaldt]

I'm pretty sure that was sarcasm, but it's really hard to say since it's Speedy.

[Ginaz]

I'm pretty sure that was sarcasm, but it's really hard to say since it's Speedy.

I hope so.

[Samwise]

Question: can we separate the body (image) from the talent (work) from the personality (personhood)?

This is the 'Great Inner Conflict' when I think of my female friends. The part of me that looks upon them as beautiful and someone who'd I like to sleep with is, I'd *like* to believe, separate from the part of me that cherishes their personality and personhood. But by all appearances they are one and the same.

With regards to your significant other (if any), is the part of you that's physically attracted to them separate from the part of you that cherishes their personality?  Does that sort of compartmentalization seem healthy in that context?

That's what gets me about the concept that physical attraction somehow reduces or degrades the object of that attraction.  In every relationship you've ever had, every time you looked at the other person with lust in your heart, you were degrading them as a human being?  That's some weird fucked in the head Puritanical bullshit, and I would suggest that anyone who feels that way should work on unfucking their head.

If we accept that physical attraction isn't inherently evil and degrading, I don't know why it'd be specifically evil and degrading with respect to friends or casual acquaintances or strangers.  What matters is the way you act on it and how you let it color your interactions with those people.  I don't see that there's anything wrong with thinking privately to yourself that you'd like to bang someone as long as that doesn't translate into actions that negatively impact them (e.g. eyebanging them while they're trying to have an unrelated conversation with you).

With regard to what a bunch of people said about celebrities, I don't think celebrities deserve more or less respect than any other human being.  That also seems pretty fucked up to me.  But they do fall in the category of "complete stranger who I will never ever interact with in any way".  So the odds that me eyebanging them in a movie theater or on TV or over the Internet is in any way going to have the effect of making them personally uncomfortable seems less than zero.  The people who stole and released and distributed the photos had a very obvious negative impact on those people's lives, and that's vile.  If I were the only person in the world with access to that stuff you couldn't pay me enough to release it.  TBH I don't think all the public media hand-wringing, even though sympathetic on its face, is doing them huge favors either (though maybe they feel differently and it's a source of comfort, I dunno), because if it were me I'd want everyone to just stfu about it and stop treating it like a shameful scandal (because the more you treat it like something shameful THE MORE SHAME THERE IS).  But given that it's out there, I don't think looking at it or not has any moral dimension if there's no actual harm caused.  Pretty much where I fall on the piracy issue too.  I just don't think putting stuff in your brain can in and of itself be evil.  Unless you have a problem where putting that stuff in your brain is going to make you cause harm to other people, of course, in which case, yes, by all means, exercise appropriate discretion.

If there were saucy photos of me floating around out there, and for all I know there are, I'd give zero fucks whether someone in Bumfuck, Oklahoma is whacking off to them in the privacy of his or her own trailer.  The only point at which I'd start to care would be if there were an uptick in people I deal with on a daily basis trailing off in mid-sentence to imagine committing deviant sexual acts upon my person.  Shrug.

[Paelos]

The crime here is the people who illegally accessed these accounts, stole the pictures and then publicized them.

I agree with that. They stole something.

I still don't feel bad for the celebrities. Never will.

[Ironwood]

You're a bad fucking Christian.

[HaemishM]

Christians like Kate Upton's sweater puppies too. 

[Ironwood]

I'm pretty sure that was sarcasm, but it's really hard to say since it's Speedy.

Wow, so much this.

[Speedy Cerviche]

Have none of you rubes watched the Simpsons?

[Ironwood]

phew