Jennifer Lawrence does a 180

I'm not even going to post a link to the lady with a snake. But isn't it some bullcrap when this lady and others came out and basically called anyone who stumbled upon her crudely shot nudes sex offenders. Well she's more than willing to pose nude when there is money involved. What a double standard, and what a loss for any kind of messages like; not invading a person's privacy or the violation of stolen nude pictures. When there's bank involved she's all game, but don't dare look at her nude body if you're not paying.

Complete and utter horsecrap from the feminazis who conveniently won't have any comment on this because one of theirs is getting paid to strut their stuff.

There is a difference between consenting to nude photography and having private images stolen and published without consent.

These ladies ran their mouth how sacred their body is. Then the object of their protest, goes right ahead and does it again in even more stunning clarity for $$$. They should put some damn clothes on and stop blaming their boyfriends.

How would you feel if someone took all your private pictures and spread them around the net? Like, I understand they did it to themselves in the sense of taking the pictures in the first place, rather than just not doing it at all, but there is a certain level of legal privacy that they are entitled to.

And as far as I can remember, JLaw already retracted those statements (that and she isn't very smart to begin with when it comes to commenting on things) and basically just ignored the whole ordeal.

Tell me about it OP. Bill Gates gives tons of money to charity but suddenly when I'm taking money from his bank account it's "stealing" and a "felony."

You're comparing a stripper to an executive.

That picture was taken before the nude leak.

facepalm

His analogy is sound. Your logic is heavily flawed.

well shes got nothing to lose now. people have seen her naked. might as well make some money this time.

It is called consent.

People should be able to take private sexual photos and don't have them stolen and made public, it's simple respect and it's nobody's business what others do in private as long as they are not hurting anybody. On the other hand it's funny that all these celebrities sexually tease people all the time and they earn money because of it :P

It's called publicity. Own the moment, then when the moment changes own the new moment.

It is funny though, Celebrities crying fowl Over nude photo's that they put on cloud servers across the world themselves . I'm not even willing to bring my cellphone across a boarder let alone be posting nude photo's on services that don't actually run in my phone but some other companies servers. If shit gets stolen in this day and age from your technology, it's generally your own damn fault. She may just be an actor but ignorance is no excuse for leaving your dirty laundry laying around the web for any teenager with a brain to find.

/thread

@Gamertag-TFTW: why is privacy and control of it so hard for you to understand

I won't complain about seeing JL nude.

The OP is clearly a kid, don't waste the energy.

^ This. all day long. What else needs to be said~

^^^This.

This thread is a load of dildos.

I love you all who understand the concept of consent.

REALLY?!?!?!? WHERE?!?!?!?

OPRAH WINFREY IS GIVING OUT FREE DILDOS FOR EVARYBADY!!!1

So, your theory is that she has no right to complain about her hacked photos being plastered all over the internet because she consented to posing nude prior to the pictures being leaked. That theory is almost as brainless as a man that rapes his ex-girlfriend claiming that he shouldn't be charged because she consented to having sex with him when they were still together.

Even if it was somebody like Jesse Jane or some other porn star getting hacked that still doesn't make it right. The fact that people claim that celebrities gave up all rights to privacy and shouldn't complain when hackers steal their stuff and post it on the internet is just stupid.

You and your stupid thread made the Internet a bit dumber. Good for you!

As others have said there is a difference between consent and having your shit stolen. The difference isn't money as the TC said, it's the fact that she said it was ok to do in the first place.

If I were going to post nude, I'd like to coordinate such a project with professional photographers and make sure I agree to the shoot and maybe the images they choose to publish, rather than having my private photos taken off my phone. There'd nothing hypocritical about wanting to preserve my sense of privacy.

This reminds me of that whole "If you consent to sex once you've consented for life" thing.

Why do some people not understand how consent works? It isn't complicated.

@SaintLeonidas: It's called securing your data. No one in 2015 should think they have any privacy on there devices/services. It's extremely niev to think anyone that uses a Cellphone has any privacy. A litte encryption can go a long way and even then most of its crackable by governments . And for being a millionaire you'd think she could afford someone to do this kind of shit for her.

I am not condoning the theif. But if you left a safe open in a busy bad neighbour hood street corner(the Internet) and everyone wants to see what you've got in it because your famous and rich. Expect someone to reach in and take your shit.

Hey, she realized she could make money on it :P

Like a trillion dollars, maybe? :p

Yes. Maybe something like. If she negotiate well.

I wouldn't compare the nude hacks to leaving a safe wide open in a bad neighborhood. That would imply that she used no security whatsoever to secure her online account. A closer comparison would probably be leaving the safe locked in a decent neighborhood but having a weak combination (the problem with celebrity online accounts is the fact that the password reset questions are usually things you can find by going onto their Wikipedia page).

While I wouldn't suggest putting anything sensitive on a cloud account that could devastate your life if put into the hands of thieves, it isn't unreasonable to expect companies you pay to secure your data to keep it secure as long as you aren't a dumbass and make your passwords super easy to crack.

You certainly didn't do a good job in responding to my post...unless you wanted to sound even more moronic. The photos on these people's devices were password protected and secure. But those that stole them were able to bypass such security features. So your dumbass analogy makes no sense. This is more like saying a store with a security alarm and safe is to blame for not having their valuables stored in an impenetrable vault when a thief with the ability to cut the alarm and crack the safe steals from them. Everyone should feel safe and be able to store what ever the **** they want on secure cloud servers and private devices without the fear of pathetic hackers cracking into them and stealing what they have saved. To even insinuate that the women in this case are in ANYWAY to blame for this is wrong and just plain stupid.

......so, you're mad..

The key difference is that she willingly did the snake photo whereas the "leaked/stolen" photos were things she didn't mean to be publicly available. Hence those viewing nude/revealing images of a person that that person does not want to be seen is in a sense violating her privacy.

Of course taking digital images of yourself naked is pretty stupid given the propensity of those images to spread, and someone in the public eye should be even more wary.

@SaintLeonidas: Password protected means nothing in 2015 it's the equivalent of a child lock. If all you've done is password lock your phone and accounts then I have zero sympathy If your shit gets put.on the Web. These woman know they are targets, and if they weren't willing to go beyond the first and easiest to crack layer of securtya password. Then I can't see reason to think they have anything to be mad about because they didn't take.steps to.not have it happen In the first place.

It's 2015 if you think a password is adequate security then your behind about 10 years. Again ignorance isn't a good excuse to leaving your nude photos unencrypted in 2015.

Also encryption is not hackable by 99.99% of the population if the right ones are used. Right now manly only governments say they can hack and get by them. So saying it's useless when every company with a decent security team has it implemented is ridiculous.

Take Sony for example. Yes they got hacked, but when you leave the passwords for all your servers on txt documents unencrypted on a computer of a low level employee, it's kind of your own damn fault.

Don't make it easy and this shit wouldn't happen. We don't live in 1995 it's time people started acting like it with their technology and the data it holds.

Yeah, this wall of text added nothing to this debate. You are putting the blame on victims because they don't have enough security to counteract against people whose pathetic lives revolves around trying to get around that security. Again, beyond moronic to even think people who do protect their private information are to blame when people illegally hack into and steal said information. This idea that everyone needs high tech encryption and it is your own fault for not having it - instead of putting the blame, focus and crack down on the hackers - is just plain dumb. There is no other side to it. To continue to bring it up is, again, moronic.

To put it another way, if an actress agrees to be naked in a film scene, that isn't an open invitation for fans to sneak into her house and watch her in the shower.

@SaintLeonidas: You do realize every modern cellphone has encryption built in... So it's not that hard to implement in fact its as easy as switching your phones password. Ya so real high tech there, takes so much knowledge to do.

Hackers hack it's part of the world we live in. If your unwilling to accept that and take pprecautions then no one should give a shit when you cry about what you could have prevented with 5 minutes of your time.

You are literally just saying the same shit over and over "well, they didn't protect their private info enough so it's their fault." You are probably the type that thinks that if a girl is dressed in revealing clothing - it is her own fault if some guy takes that as an invitation to try to rape them.

Not all of us are certified in Security+ and know many of the ways hackers can bypass security measures made to protect your data. Especially a celebrity that reasonably expects the company that she is paying money to to keep her private photos out of the hands of hackers. While there are people out there that do things that don't make a lot of sense in terms of keeping their data secure (having one of your password reset questions being your first car when you have your first car plastered all over your Facebook page with the public settings on isn't very smart) there are others that are intelligent but ignorant of how easy it is to hack into accounts.

Should we blame the victim because they wasn't taught all of the ways to protect their data? Many organizations that have people working for them that have bachelors and masters degrees are hiring people to teach them how not to become a victim because not everybody out there knows what such terms as phishing, vishing, keylogging, etc. mean, let alone the countermeasures. Maybe they should start teaching it in school with the amount of identity theft going on. It's also unlikely people understand how to make a long, hard to crack password. It doesn't hurt to use at least sixteen characters for a password protecting something you really don't want compromised such as a bank account.

No that's rape. Don't dress like a whoré and it might not of happened. But its still rape. Just like it's still theft, but if you leave your shit guarded maybe it wouldn't of happened. Not taking precautions for such things is like inviting the aasholes of the world to come do what they want.

Well, there you have it folks.

@SaintLeonidas: I didn't say it was her fault. I said not dressing like a whoré might of prevented it all together. Two completely different things.

@Gamertag-TFTW: it is hypocrisy, but the difference is that this time she consented for it to be shared

Least surprising post in this thread.

Nope, you're wrong. Yours was...

You're not surprised that I said "Least surprising post in this thread."??