Unsuspecting women post nude selfies in solidarity with Jennifer Lawrence

Lucyfur

icecold1066 wrote: »

That is naive at best.

She is competing against untainted hayseed actresses who are pouring in front Iowa and Wyoming and Tennessee all the time.

Why would a studio risk losing millions on a movie because the leading actress has been photographed with cum on her face when you can replace her with some other girl?

The same thing happens with male stars who are outted as gay. It is a career killer.

MOD

You've stated your point and how you feel. Several times over. If you don't like the opinions of others, take a step back from the thread and don't post.

paperclip2

icecold1066 wrote: »

The excitement of Hustle was that she was a sweetheart actress playing a whore. Not a "whore" for real. She has crossed the psychological line and has become used goods.

To you maybe, and you are, of course, entitled to your opinion, (although you do seem to be taking the fact that JLaw has sex remarkably personally ). But don't make the mistake of thinking that everyone shares the same view you do. Some will of course, but many wont. And as we're sharing opinions mine would be along the lines of #SoWhat. Young woman enjoys healthy sex life with other consenting adults. In other news water flows downhill.

Jennifer Lawrence is an actress but she's also a human being and entitled to do what she wants in private. I don't buy this 'Oh she's a role model! Won't someone please think of the children!' hype Or the argument that she's in the public eye so everything she does is fair game for pervs and voyeurs.

What she does behind closed doors is her business and deserving of privacy as much as what you or I do behind ours. As long as it isn't illegal or harming anyone then its nobodies business.

There is massive hypocrisy in holding a celebrity or someone in the public eye to some perceived higher moral standard than the rest of society. From what I've seen Jennifer Lawrence was never in the running to become the next Mary Whitehouse so pontificating about her being a 'whore' and 'used-goods' and that her career is over is laughable.

Chances are that most people who work with her found her sound, hard working and good at her job. That can count for far more with directors and producers than whether or not she gave her boyfriend head.

icecold1066

paperclip2 wrote: »

To you maybe, and you are, of course, entitled to your opinion. But don't make the mistake of thinking that everyone shares the same view you do. Some will of course, but many wont. And as we're sharing opinions mine would be along the lines of #SoWhat. Young woman enjoys healthy sex life with other consenting adults. In other news water flows downhill.

Jennifer Lawrence is an actress but she's also a human being and entitled to do what she wants in private. I don't buy this 'Oh she's a role model! Won't someone please think of the children!' hype Or the argument that she's in the public eye so everything she does is fair game for pervs and voyeurs.

What she does behind closed doors is her business and deserving of privacy as much as what you or I do behind ours. As long as it isn't illegal or harming anyone then its nobodies business.

There is massive hypocrisy in holding a celebrity or someone in the public eye to some perceived higher moral standard than the rest of society. From what I've seen Jennifer Lawrence was never in the running to become the next Mary Whitehouse so pontificating about her being a 'whore' and 'used-goods' and that her career is over is laughable.

Chances are that most people who work with her found her sound, hard working and good at her job. That can count for far more with directors and producers than whether or not she gave her boyfriend head.

Whether people pay to go see her movies is all that matters.

If this leak means her next movie bombs then she is gone.

Millions are poured into these movies and if she is the weak link then that's it. Say goodbye JLaw.

Wibbs

MissFlitworth wrote: »

I think a lot of younger people will identify with what's happened to Jennifer Lawrence, learning that what you thought was private is surely not has been an experience that a few people I know in their early 20s have had to go through.

+1000. On this case? The "hackers" and disseminators of the images are one hundred percent in the wrong and responsible. The women involved are victims and no mistake. And I really can't understand how anyone is "judging" them. They're young women apparently getting nekkid and having sexy time with partners, big effin deal.

Though I would hope that what does come out of this is that what you think is secure and private often isn't. Increasingly privacy is being eroded by the interwebs and social media(often if not usually with our help) and if it gets out there it's out there forever. I think people need to be educated more on navigating this new world. I'd start in school. Things have changed massively in the last decade, imagine how it might be in another decades time and that database on you is being built up now as we speak.

paperclip2

icecold1066 wrote: »

Whether people pay to go see her movies is all that matters.

And my point is that people probably will. Not everyone will be put off by this 'scandal'. Chances are that she'll probably get a few new fans because of this. What's the old saying; There's no such thing as bad publicity.

There are a lot of 'if's' in both our hypotheses. It will be interesting to see who is right over the long-term but society has become so permissive that its a bit like; 'Oh another sex tape. Yawn. Next'

meeeeh

Sex video is the only reason Paris Hilton was so famous. Jenifer Lawrence is not a star of 7th Heaven (I think Jessica Biel did a shoot with PLayboy to get out of it) for this to impact her career.

Anyway the tabloid culture and hacking are both sides of the same coin and utterly despicable. But I also think (or maybe) that people are a bit tired of this kind of nonsense and there is now more backslash against the hackers than against people in the photos. A bit like the outrage when the Schumacher's medical documents were stolen earlier this year.

But mean streak in me does find it funny that some people could be tricked to post naked selfies of themselves in solidarity.

Morgase

paperclip2 wrote: »

And my point is that people probably will. Not everyone will be put off by this 'scandal'. Chances are that she'll probably get a few new fans because of this. What's the old saying; There's no such thing as bad publicity.

True - I didn't really know who she is before now (I imagined the Hunger Games films to be a bit teenagery, maybe I'm wrong in that!) but if she starred in a film that was more to my taste I certainly wouldn't be put off watching it. As you suggest, I'd nearly be more inclined to support her!

Wibbs

meeeeh wrote: »

But mean streak in me does find it funny that some people could be tricked to post naked selfies of themselves in solidarity.

I have to admit I Lol'd at that alright.

When this broke there was a rumour going around that this kinda naked celeb stuff has been "traded" between onanists on the dark web and this release into the wild was one of these saddos leaking it. That was a scary thought. However it now looks like it was a hole in Apple's icloud setup and an exploit of that was uploaded over the last weekend and even the most crosseyed idiot could use it. That's an even scarier thought for me. All this with a hack that was open for less than 48 hours.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

I was talking about this with friends of mine yesterday (all of us in our early to mid twenties) and the conversation was about the fact that J.Law is in incredible shape, and do you think she does yoga, and she stays in some grotty looking hotels that's strange so on and so forth. There were two straight lads and one lesbian there and I'm pretty sure they would have laughed in the face of anyone who suggested that she's "ruined" in their eyes now, I certainly would. My god is she a beautiful looking woman, seeing incontrovertible proof of things I'd pretty much figured out (she has nipples! she's not a virgin! she's sucked at least one dick!) hasn't turned me off her in the least. I haven't talked to anyone who thinks that her, or anyone, having nudey pictures on their phone is a big deal.

I do feel sorry for her because it's a horrible invasion of privacy and although she has nothing to feel ashamed of it's going to be a natural reaction to feel embarrassed. She comes across as a very confident, sensible person though, I'm sure she'll get over it. She's also one of the most bankable, well regarded actresses working right now (iirc the last Hunger Games film was the first film with a female lead to top the box office for as long as it did in a couple of decades), I'd say we'll be waiting a while to see her show up on I'm A Celebrity :rolleyes: Other actresses though, the disney ones and ones in Glee and stuff, they might actually take big hits to their careers over this, it's mostly them I feel bad for.

Timberrrrrrrr

icecold1066 wrote: »

Whether people pay to go see her movies is all that matters.

If this leak means her next movie bombs then she is gone.

Millions are poured into these movies and if she is the weak link then that's it. Say goodbye JLaw.

Why would her next movie "bomb"? Are you of the mind hat suddenly millions of people will refuse to see her movies because she gave her BF a blow job (something that i would guess the majority of women do at some stage in a relationship)?

MissFlitworth

Wibbs wrote: »

Though I would hope that what does come out of this is that what you think is secure and private often isn't. Increasingly privacy is being eroded by the interwebs and social media(often if not usually with our help) and if it gets out there it's out there forever. I think people need to be educated more on navigating this new world. I'd start in school. Things have changed massively in the last decade, imagine how it might be in another decades time and that database on you is being built up now as we speak.

Yes, absolutely, kids need to start learning this stuff in school. I know very few teenagers and even I have had 2 conversations with different kids that went "But Snapchat doesn't save photos..." and "But my profile is on private.." People can be clueless about online privacy and the permanency of digital images and I hope that this happening will help erode that cluelessness a bit. Although, I'd consider myself fairly clued in and I didn't stop to think that images I had in a cloud based storage could be at risk.

There are a lot of teenagers out there every day who have this happen to them so I hope that Jennifer Lawrence carries on and continues to be successful, even just to show those kids & young adults that there's life after having your most intimate moments broadcast to an audience you never intended them for.

Lucyfur

MOD

The OP is taking a few days off from the forum so please don't quote them directly.

Ta

Stepping Stone

I don't judge them for taking photos/ making videos but I do judge them for being so stupid and lax about security.

They are in the public eye, money is easily made from anything remotely connected with them. If photographers can make money from photos of one of them ordering a coffee, obviously a huge amount of money is going to made from nude photos!

They are all old enough and wealthy enough to get proper advice on security. That does not in any way excuse someone stealing them, but I must say that they have all been stupid.

Also, unsuspecting women posting in solidarity with Jennifer Lawrence....:rolleyes:

catallus

Stepping Stone wrote: »

I don't judge them for taking photos/ making videos but I do judge them for being so stupid and lax about security.

They weren't stupid or lax; this was a concerted effort to steal images from servers; if we can't rely on secure systems then we all might as well turn off the computers and just head back to the 90's.

Stepping Stone wrote: »

Also, unsuspecting women posting in solidarity with Jennifer Lawrence....:rolleyes:

There are plenty of women (and men:mad:) who are only too willing to post nudie images of themselves online; Everyone has a choice, it's just that some weirdos online like to use that as a basis for a narrative which portrays those people as unwilling victims: this is the basis of titillating pornography.

Anyways, without wanting to drag this thing off-topic I'd like to say this; the people who were involved in the crime here of stealing private property from servers are being tracked down as we speak and will hopefully be brought to book.

This is only possible due to the powers and resources of law-enforcement which allow them to track people on the internet; think about that the next time anyone says nobody should have oversight, or that nobody should be able to track anyone online.

Inanna

catallus wrote: »

They weren't stupid or lax; this was a concerted effort to steal images from servers; if we can't rely on secure systems then we all might as well turn off the computers and just head back to the 90's.

You can't totally rely on secure systems because no security system can always be effective all the time. What you can do is minimise the risk to yourself by not uploading sensitive data or being careful of where you do so. Some systems are, after all, more secure than others.

Because hey, we live in an imperfect world! Empty platitudes aren't going to stop bad people from doing illegal things. We already criminalise them, the other thing that should be doing is educating the public on the reasonable precautions they can take to protect themselves.

Stepping Stone

catallus wrote: »

They weren't stupid or lax; this was a concerted effort to steal images from servers; if we can't rely on secure systems then we all might as well turn off the computers and just head back to the 90s.

This is ridiculous. We are constantly being reminded that nothing is that secure. Phishing/ hacking/ viruses/ scams....there are very regular reminders. Common sense is all that is needed.

I have an iPhone for work. It automatically backs up any photos that I take, because I set it to. They are all work related.

My private phone is android. It is automatically linked to Dropbox and to Google+. I have set it to not automatically upload though. My work photos are directly linked to work and are not sensitive. Anything confidential gets photographed on a camera and downloaded directly. I choose which photos and videos from my phone get backed up. It is really easy to do.

Life has become more convenient but it also means that you have to step up and take responsibility for what you do with technology.

None of this excuses the theft of confidential information but there will always, no matter what happens, be people who will take advantage of every situation. You have to be aware of the dangers.

RedXIV

And if someone stole your camera, laptop or phone, and then leaked the photos, it would be different?

catallus

Let's be clear about what happened here.

This wasn't some fool who was browsing pictures of lolcats and found the pics.

It was some guy who went to great lengths to find descriptors and traffic from peoples phones/computers/emails, located the areas where the information was stored, used their expertise to break into a privately owned server, downloaded information and shared it with the public.

So being blase about it and saying, "well, you shouldn't take pics of yourself cos these guys are out there, so suck it up" just isn't good enough.

Lyaiera

A really good article on this.

Jennifer Lawrence Nude Photo Leak Isn't A "Scandal." It's A Sex Crime.

As most of you probably know, someone somewhere dumped a deluge of purported nude photographs of a number of female celebrities online yesterday. The victims include the likes of Kate Upton, Victoria Justice, Ariana Grande, Kirsten Dunst, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Krysten Ritter, Yvonne Strahovski, and Teresa Palmer. But the focal point for this story has been Hunger Games/American Hustle actress Jennifer Lawrence, since the Oscar winning actress is perhaps the most famous actress on the planet right now. Without going into sordid details ( Justice and Grande have claimed their respective photos are fake, others have confirmed they are real), I’d like to make two very specific points. Ms. Lawrence and the other victims have absolutely nothing to apologize for in terms of the contents of the photos or the nature in which they were leaked. The story itself should not be addressed as if it were a scandal, but rather what it is: A sex crime involving theft of personal property and the exploitation of the female body.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2014/09/01/jennifer-lawrence-nude-photo-leak-isnt-a-scandal-its-a-sex-crime/

Stepping Stone

RedXIV wrote: »

And if someone stole your camera, laptop or phone, and then leaked the photos, it would be different?

Perhaps I am unusually security conscious, but I store nothing on my laptop, my work laptop is encrypted and gets wiped regularly. My camera gets cleared, my phones are, as I say, treated as potential easy access points.

I have plenty files but if a nobody like me goes to pains to protect them, I am shocked that famous people, who are surrounded by people paid to advise and protect them have allowed sensitive photos and videos to a cloud.

Let me put it this way. Photographers hide I bushes to take photos of them. It is not at all a stretch of the imagination to think that someone would dedicate massive amounts of time to hacking their clouds. This isn't even the first time that there have been images of celebrities accessed using online accounts.

This doesn't excuse the theft and violation but a but of common sense wouldn't go astray.

HeyyMeow

It sounds like people are blaming these celebrities for behaving like normal human beings. Why should they always have to go to extreme lengths so they can have a somewhat normal life. Of course there are paparazzi following them around in public but that's where it stops. If the paparazzi broke into the celeb's house to take a photo it's not the celeb's fault for not protecting their house and having more security.

Da Shins Kelly

I seriously doubt Jennifer Lawrence's career is going to be destroyed over this. She's one of the most well-liked people in Hollywood right now. I don't think I know many people who have anything but good things to say about her, and many people are completely supportive of her and the others who were targeted over this. I don't think that the knowledge that she has performed oral sex is going to change that. Sometimes women her age give blow jobs! Is that really so shocking? People need to get over this idea that sexuality, and more specifically, female sexuality is somehow so scandalous and that a woman's image should be tainted forever just because it is known that she's sexually active.

in fact, I can see Jennifer Lawrence coming out of this stronger and with more support than ever. I've heard more people disapproving of the leak than supporting it.

Wibbs

HeyyMeow wrote: »

It sounds like people are blaming these celebrities for behaving like normal human beings.

I certainly don't, so let's get that outa the way first. Their personal photos were stolen and spread about the net by scumbags and onanists. It is entirely the fault of said scumbags and onanists. However one can hold that opinion and also suggest people, all people should be careful about what they put out on the airwaves.

Why should they always have to go to extreme lengths so they can have a somewhat normal life.

It's in the nature of the beast. On the one hand we have the idyllic world that should be and on the other we have the sad reality that actually exists. The reality is that the richer, or the more powerful, or the more famous you are the more you have to lose and the more people will be out to take it from you. A billionaire's house has way more security than a student's bedsit. They are a bigger target than a student's bedsit. They have more to lose by not taking precautions against such loss. In an idyllic world Bill Gates wouldn't have locks on his doors, but he does, because it's not.

Same goes for celebrities. They are a bigger target than the rest of us for all sorts of scumbags, from the paps trying to get pics through long lenses, to stalkers going through their bins, to crazed fans even killing them(QV John Lennon) and in this case a naked photo of a celeb, particularly a woman celeb is a huge target. I mean just look at how this exploded on the web. How many times have these pics been copied? Millions of times wouldn't surprise me. Which should be all we need to know about how many sad **** exist out there. They already take precautions with security around them and their property and now it seems they have to attend to security around their electronic/online life too.

I'd say that to anyone though, celeb or not. The landscape of privacy and the nature of it has changed rapidly in the last decade, more rapidly than many realise or have had time to adjust to. Indeed many are happy to hand over their privacy to ArseBook, Twatter, GPS phones, tagged photos, etc, even paying to have their DNA data uploaded to a database(beyond daft IMH), just to be part of the new landscape. We're a social animal so this stuff plugs right into that. It's bad enough now, but imagine in another decade's time? That's a scary thought.

What I'm hoping comes out of this current invasion of privacy is that all of us, celebs and non celebs will be more careful about how we regard and guard our privacy. Like I say this incident proves how unidyllic the world we live in is and shows how many scumbags there are out there.

As for it being called a "sex crime"? Last year another bunch of celebs(Mel Gibson was one IIRC) were targeted by a hacker nerd and their financial details were uploaded to the web. It wasn't a bank robbery, it was an invasion of privacy by theft. Just like this is. It's much more personal yes and hopefully the full weight of the law falls upon the onanists who stole these photos, but "sex crime" is a stretch and a bit histrionic IMH.

meeeeh

HeyyMeow wrote: »

It sounds like people are blaming these celebrities for behaving like normal human beings. Why should they always have to go to extreme lengths so they can have a somewhat normal life. Of course there are paparazzi following them around in public but that's where it stops. If the paparazzi broke into the celeb's house to take a photo it's not the celeb's fault for not protecting their house and having more security.

Who says that paparazzi are any better. Max Mosley is one of the few that decided to fight back. Unfortunately he is not pretty or likable so there were very few sympathetic articles written claiming he is a sex crime victim.

Anyway everybody is entitled to privacy but people have to be realistic about the security of their data. It is not fair in the same way as is not fair for the children of some important or rich people to be kept behind locked doors because they are in danger of being abducted etc. unfortunately these things get prosecuted only when there is already a victim.

Wibbs

meeeeh wrote: »

Who says that paparazzi are any better.

Exactly. Outside of the Z list "celebs" that pay for beautifully framed shots of them in bikinis with their "boyfriend" and working the system, the papped shots of those who don't are everywhere and are read and commented on voraciously. Those are stolen personal moments too. And it has to be said the majority of that stuff isn't aimed primarily at a male readership. In the last few days we've had male saddos uploading and spreading personal photos of these women, but go into a newsagents 365 days of the year and you'll be met with magazine after magazine of stolen moments of celebs, showing their private lives, musing on same and often pointing out their flaws and few enough bat an eyelid. There does seem to be a dissonance around this whole area. We the audience need to look to ourselves too. If there wasn't a market for naked celebs or celebs in general how much of this stuff would get published? Put it another way if a pap had snapped any of the women in this leak in a similar state of undress or sexual congress he or she would have been able to command a 5 figure sum, because this stuff has an audience and a bloody wide one.

Max Mosley is one of the few that decided to fight back. Unfortunately he is not pretty or likable so there were very few sympathetic articles written claiming he is a sex crime victim.

+1.

Anyway everybody is entitled to privacy but people have to be realistic about the security of their data. It is not fair in the same way as is not fair for the children of some important or rich people to be kept behind locked doors because they are in danger of being abducted etc. unfortunately these things get prosecuted only when there is already a victim.

Nail on head IMH.

Lyaiera

From The Guardian today.

Investigations into the targeted hacking of celebrities’ iPhone accounts have turned into a child abuse case after it emerged that the US Olympic gymnast McKayla Maroney, one of the alleged victims, was under 18 at the time some nude photos were taken.

Under US and other laws, it is illegal to own or share sexual images of another person under 18. With the FBI already investigating the leak, that means that the gang behind the widespread targeted hacking of female celebrities - including Maroney and others – could be facing far more serious charges than those relating to the original theft of the photos.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/sep/03/celebrity-icloud-hacking-turns-into-child-abuse-case-over-maroney-pictures

I wonder if people are going to continue saying this is ok, despite it being child pornography, just because the woman is famous?

This whole event is showing us some really scary things about a lot of people's attitude to women.

Lyaiera

Good for this charity, turning down immoral money.

Prostate Cancer Foundation doesn't want money from Redditors who looked at stolen celebrity photos

Reddit users raised more than $5,000 yesterday for the Prostate Cancer Foundation, only to have the donation denied. The money was raised by users on the subdomain r/TheFappening, which on August 31 published more than 100 nude photos of celebrities such as Jennifer Lawrence, Kate Upton, and Kirsten Dunst. These photos were hacked off of their iCloud accounts without their permission.

http://www.vox.com/xpress/2014/9/3/6101103/prostate-cancer-foundation-returns-donation-after-celebrity-attack

Bafucin

Lyaiera wrote: »

From The Guardian today.



I wonder if people are going to continue saying this is ok, despite it being child pornography, just because the woman is famous?

This whole event is showing us some really scary things about a lot of people's attitude to women.

The truth is there are some psychopaths out there whose entire psychopathy revolves around apathy and bitterness towards women.

Sexism is crazy. To be a real sexist or a misogynist you have to be crazy.

I have had certain women say 'I hate men', I realize that is their issue. I think with men and women who feel this way it is usually tempered with common sense or some level of sanity. With many it's not.

Think about why he did this. Jennifer Lawrence is beautiful,popular, successful and who is he? Nothing. He is not liked and most likely a very bitter weird person.

I think it's saying more about men who have severe personality disorders and general losers on the net.

The saying goes the bigger your E penis the smaller you are in real life.

Most hackers work ethical hacking for security etc. There are some genuine heroes who are outside the system. But the rest of them are very strange.

What puzzles me is how some people can possibly see this guy as a hero or a jokster?

He is the biggest loser. Cyber Stalks a woman he could never hope to see naked and leaks a photograph that obviously breaches her personal privacy. He is a bitter annoying twat. This is the only way he can get attention. By posting naked photos of beautiful women that he had to steal.

I don't think her career will be destroyed. But that's really not the point.

Wibbs

Lyaiera wrote: »

I wonder if people are going to continue saying this is ok,

Who is saying it's OK? Outside of a bunch of 4Chan porn mongers and virgins there has been widespread condemnation and "ah here that's not on" going on. Social media is tripping over itself to show support to the degree that other women are stripping off and posting naked pics in solidarity that was based on some troll's post. And now because they're celebs the Feds are getting right on the case, yet many more hundreds of women's private pics have been passed around saddos in the interwebs, but they weren't famous so... In a way this might get them working on some of the "ordinary" women who've been targeted on revenge porn type sites.

despite it being child pornography, just because the woman is famous?

Obviously none of this is OK, but jumping on the child pornography bus is again a tad OTT. If she was/is under 18 she is considered a child under US law, the images themselves would be legal somewhere like Spain or even here(if she was 17 at the time).

Lyaiera

Did you read the After Hours' threads on this Wibbs? A few of them were locked and maybe deleted. The attitude of a lot of people in them was truly sickening. And I said so at the time.

And if it takes a celebrity case to highlight these people's behaviour, then good.