Who else is appalled by "Creepshots"?

  • 78 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for NarcissistLoser
#1 Posted by NarcissistLoser (39 posts) -
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/world/michael-brutsch-exposed-as-the-reddits-violentacrez-the-worlds-worst-internet-troll/story-fnddckzi-1226495497037 Okay so a "creepshot" is where guys take photos of non-consenting women (although it can be males/females of males/females) however usually it is men taking photos of usually unsuspecting women but I digress. This reddit came into fire when a teacher photographed a young female student and put a photo on Creepshots. So basically the reddit got shut down when someone compiled information about various creepshot users and posted then on a tumblr http://predditors.tumblr.com/ One of the mods closed it out of fear that he would be "outed". The man responsible for the subreddit was also responsible for various other controversial ones. I would like to note that I never really go to reddit and only investigated this when I read about it. Do you feel that Creepshots are wrong. Personally I find them to be distasteful and despicable. I think they make real photographers have a harder job for one and more importantly it is a violation of human being to objectify them with the shots imo. I am glad that the reddit is gone.
Avatar image for Overlord93
#2 Posted by Overlord93 (12602 posts) -
Yet half the people complaining probably go home and read a magazine, look at pictures taken of celebrities and business figures without their consent, and gossip over news articles filled with more images, often a lot more inciminating that just a casual photograph. Seriously, when I walk down the street I take millions of ultra high rez moving shots of people. They're called eyes. Seriously, unless they're hiding cameras in the stalls I couldn't give a fvck.
Avatar image for NarcissistLoser
#3 Posted by NarcissistLoser (39 posts) -
[QUOTE="Overlord93"]Yet half the people complaining probably go home and read a magazine, look at pictures taken of celebrities and business figures without their consent, and gossip over news articles filled with more images, often a lot more inciminating that just a casual photograph. Seriously, when I walk down the street I take millions of ultra high rez moving shots of people. They're called eyes. Seriously, unless they're hiding cameras in the stalls I couldn't give a fvck.

Um most people do not read celebrity gossip. There is a difference between using your eyes and actually taking a photo which lasts and sharing with the world
Avatar image for Overlord93
#4 Posted by Overlord93 (12602 posts) -
[QUOTE="NarcissistLoser"][QUOTE="Overlord93"]Yet half the people complaining probably go home and read a magazine, look at pictures taken of celebrities and business figures without their consent, and gossip over news articles filled with more images, often a lot more inciminating that just a casual photograph. Seriously, when I walk down the street I take millions of ultra high rez moving shots of people. They're called eyes. Seriously, unless they're hiding cameras in the stalls I couldn't give a fvck.

Um most people do not read celebrity gossip. There is a difference between using your eyes and actually taking a photo which lasts and sharing with the world

What about when we inevitably get eye cameras? What then?
Avatar image for NarcissistLoser
#5 Posted by NarcissistLoser (39 posts) -
[QUOTE="Overlord93"][QUOTE="NarcissistLoser"][QUOTE="Overlord93"]Yet half the people complaining probably go home and read a magazine, look at pictures taken of celebrities and business figures without their consent, and gossip over news articles filled with more images, often a lot more inciminating that just a casual photograph. Seriously, when I walk down the street I take millions of ultra high rez moving shots of people. They're called eyes. Seriously, unless they're hiding cameras in the stalls I couldn't give a fvck.

Um most people do not read celebrity gossip. There is a difference between using your eyes and actually taking a photo which lasts and sharing with the world

What about when we inevitably get eye cameras? What then?

So you think women should be objectified further?
Avatar image for DaJuicyMan
#6 Posted by DaJuicyMan (3553 posts) -
[QUOTE="Overlord93"][QUOTE="NarcissistLoser"][QUOTE="Overlord93"]Yet half the people complaining probably go home and read a magazine, look at pictures taken of celebrities and business figures without their consent, and gossip over news articles filled with more images, often a lot more inciminating that just a casual photograph. Seriously, when I walk down the street I take millions of ultra high rez moving shots of people. They're called eyes. Seriously, unless they're hiding cameras in the stalls I couldn't give a fvck.

Um most people do not read celebrity gossip. There is a difference between using your eyes and actually taking a photo which lasts and sharing with the world

What about when we inevitably get eye cameras? What then?

...Wtf are you going on about?
Avatar image for Overlord93
#7 Posted by Overlord93 (12602 posts) -
[QUOTE="NarcissistLoser"][QUOTE="Overlord93"][QUOTE="NarcissistLoser"] Um most people do not read celebrity gossip. There is a difference between using your eyes and actually taking a photo which lasts and sharing with the world

What about when we inevitably get eye cameras? What then?

So you think women should be objectified further?

Don't hate the player.
Avatar image for perfect_blue
#8 Posted by Perfect_Blue (29631 posts) -

I don''t care. *shrugs*

Avatar image for undergroundLPx
#9 Posted by undergroundLPx (710 posts) -

Regardless of specifics, fact is, it is wrong to take photos of anyone without their consent. Glad they caught him.

Avatar image for Oleg_Huzwog
#10 Posted by Oleg_Huzwog (21885 posts) -

Regardless of specifics, fact is, it is wrong to take photos of anyone without their consent. Glad they caught him.

undergroundLPx

That's a rather broad statement. What if it's a crowd shot?

Avatar image for undergroundLPx
#11 Posted by undergroundLPx (710 posts) -

[QUOTE="undergroundLPx"]

Regardless of specifics, fact is, it is wrong to take photos of anyone without their consent. Glad they caught him.

Oleg_Huzwog

That's a rather broad statement. What if it's a crowd shot?

Still wrong.

Avatar image for Oleg_Huzwog
#12 Posted by Oleg_Huzwog (21885 posts) -

[QUOTE="Oleg_Huzwog"]

[QUOTE="undergroundLPx"]

Regardless of specifics, fact is, it is wrong to take photos of anyone without their consent. Glad they caught him.

undergroundLPx

That's a rather broad statement. What if it's a crowd shot?

Still wrong.

Explicit consent? Or can we assume the simple act of being out in public carries with it a degree of implicit consent?

Avatar image for JML897
#13 Posted by JML897 (33134 posts) -
I think it's hilarious that reddit moderators are getting pissed at Gawker for exposing this guy. What a bunch of hypocrites.
Avatar image for Cyanide4Suicid3
#14 Posted by Cyanide4Suicid3 (733 posts) -

[QUOTE="Oleg_Huzwog"]

[QUOTE="undergroundLPx"]

Regardless of specifics, fact is, it is wrong to take photos of anyone without their consent. Glad they caught him.

undergroundLPx

That's a rather broad statement. What if it's a crowd shot?

Still wrong.

Because Im sure youve never taken a photo with a group of friends and ended up getting a stranger in the background...
Avatar image for ujjval16
#15 Posted by ujjval16 (1669 posts) -

I don't really care. If someone took a picture of me in my house or something that would be a different story, but if it's in public, then I don't really care.

Avatar image for Blue-Sky
#16 Posted by Blue-Sky (10379 posts) -

Answer this. How is it ok to take picture of someone that's funny, (like people of wallmart)but it's appaling to take a picture of someone that's attractive?

I'm not saying either is right, but it's hypocritcal to be outraged about one, and passive about the other.

Avatar image for bnarmz
#17 Posted by bnarmz (1372 posts) -
Taking unsuspecting pics of people and posting them without the person's permission is a foul. You not only cause potential defamation of someone's character, you are doing it in hopes of making a name for yourself. That is one of the lowest things anyone can do for self gain.
Avatar image for Strakha
#18 Posted by Strakha (1824 posts) -

I'm against it as it's widely know photos steal your soul. It's wrong to take someone soul unless you have a contract, even the devil won't take a soul without one.

Avatar image for GhettoBlastin92
#19 Posted by GhettoBlastin92 (1231 posts) -
Meh, the world is a creepy messed up place, whats new.
Avatar image for MrGeezer
#20 Posted by MrGeezer (59072 posts) -
Wait...I'm confused about what "creepshots" are, exactly. So these aren't like, hidden upskirt shots or anything like that, they're simply plain old candid photographs of girls in public?
Avatar image for ghoklebutter
#21 Posted by ghoklebutter (19327 posts) -
Taking unsuspecting pics of people and posting them without the person's permission is a foul. bnarmz
This.
Avatar image for JML897
#22 Posted by JML897 (33134 posts) -
Wait...I'm confused about what "creepshots" are, exactly. So these aren't like, hidden upskirt shots or anything like that, they're simply plain old candid photographs of girls in public?MrGeezer
Sometimes they're upskirts
Avatar image for MrGeezer
#23 Posted by MrGeezer (59072 posts) -
[QUOTE="JML897"] Sometimes they're upskirts

Well that's obviously wrong and illegal. But if we're just talking about something like taking a picture of a girl walking down the street, I don't particularly see the big deal.
Avatar image for Niff_T
#24 Posted by Niff_T (6052 posts) -

I am glad that the reddit is gone.NarcissistLoser

lol Too bad there are a bunch more subreddits that offer the same sort of material or stuff much worse.

This one just happened to get negative publicity, which forced reddit's moderators into doing some damage control. Meanwhile worse subreddits are left open.

Avatar image for Big_Pecks
#25 Posted by Big_Pecks (5971 posts) -

Most of reddit is appalling.

Avatar image for brucewayne69
#26 Posted by brucewayne69 (2864 posts) -
Wait...I'm confused about what "creepshots" are, exactly. So these aren't like, hidden upskirt shots or anything like that, they're simply plain old candid photographs of girls in public?MrGeezer
If a girl has a nice body or something in the line ahead of you, and you stealthily take a pic with your iphone, it's a creepshot.
Avatar image for mingmao3046
#27 Posted by mingmao3046 (2683 posts) -
i dont see anything real wrong with it...they are in public.
Avatar image for shadowkiller11
#28 Posted by shadowkiller11 (7956 posts) -

Answer this. How is it ok to take picture of someone that's funny, (like people of wallmart)but it's appaling to take a picture of someone that's attractive?

I'm not saying either is right, but it's hypocritcal to be outraged about one, and passive about the other.

Blue-Sky
This, weather it's not right or wrong is debatable but it's most certainly hypocritical. An extreme example is looking at an attractive girl but because she didn't give you consent you get in trouble for it. I don't like creep shots but it's too broad to really do anything about and it would be political correctness gone mad.
Avatar image for Fightingfan
#29 Posted by Fightingfan (38011 posts) -
Ahaha what a loser.
Avatar image for branketra
#30 Posted by BranKetra (51726 posts) -
Creepy stuff.
Avatar image for t3hrubikscube
#31 Posted by t3hrubikscube (20416 posts) -
It's gross. I have a problem with it.
Avatar image for mingmao3046
#32 Posted by mingmao3046 (2683 posts) -
It's gross. I have a problem with it. t3hrubikscube
why? they are in public. if someone was taking pics of me (be it a girl or a gay guy), i would be flattered
Avatar image for ghoklebutter
#33 Posted by ghoklebutter (19327 posts) -
[QUOTE="t3hrubikscube"]It's gross. I have a problem with it. mingmao3046
why? they are in public. if someone was taking pics of me (be it a girl or a gay guy), i would be flattered

Not everyone is like you.
Avatar image for coolbeans90
#34 Posted by coolbeans90 (21305 posts) -

[QUOTE="Oleg_Huzwog"]

[QUOTE="undergroundLPx"]

Regardless of specifics, fact is, it is wrong to take photos of anyone without their consent. Glad they caught him.

undergroundLPx

That's a rather broad statement. What if it's a crowd shot?

Still wrong.

HHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Avatar image for Niff_T
#35 Posted by Niff_T (6052 posts) -

Not everyone is like you.ghoklebutter

This is a really hard concept for some people to grasp.

Avatar image for MrGeezer
#36 Posted by MrGeezer (59072 posts) -
[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"][QUOTE="mingmao3046"] why? they are in public. if someone was taking pics of me (be it a girl or a gay guy), i would be flattered

Not everyone is like you.

Regardless, you can't go out in public and expect that photographing you is off-limits. If you catch someone photographing you without your permission, then you can certainly ask them to stop, but they're free to just keep on shooting. Having said that, this guy's main gripe seems to be that people discovered his online identity. His problem seems to be that now that people know about his "creepshots" (among other stuff he's posted online), that he's worried about losing his job. And to that I say, tough luck. He should have thought about that before taking those "creepshots" and then posting them online. People can photograph whatever they want, but they're responsible for it. If the images he's making and displaying are deliberately intended to piss people off, if he's too scared of the consequences to attach his name to his photographs and his online content, then it's a bit too late to start crying about losing his job.
Avatar image for WSGRandomPerson
#37 Posted by WSGRandomPerson (13694 posts) -
First time ever hearing about "creepshots," but I think taking sexually explicit photos of someone without his/her consent is wrong.
Avatar image for MrGeezer
#38 Posted by MrGeezer (59072 posts) -
First time ever hearing about "creepshots," but I think taking sexually explicit photos of someone without his/her consent is wrong.WSGRandomPerson
I doubt they're that sexually explicit if they were taken in public.
Avatar image for thenarutolover
#39 Posted by thenarutolover (56 posts) -
I support Creepshots... and if you want a politician who will not take away your Freedom, your Liberty to take them... Vote Romney. Thats all.
Avatar image for silly_pants
#40 Posted by silly_pants (233 posts) -
I support Creepshots... and if you want a politician who will not take away your Freedom, your Liberty to take them... Vote Romney. Thats all.thenarutolover
Yeah, no. You and the GOP can go **** themselves for mistreating women.
Avatar image for silly_pants
#41 Posted by silly_pants (233 posts) -
[QUOTE="mingmao3046"][QUOTE="t3hrubikscube"]It's gross. I have a problem with it. ghoklebutter
why? they are in public. if someone was taking pics of me (be it a girl or a gay guy), i would be flattered

Not everyone is like you.

*Claps*, so true.
Avatar image for thenarutolover
#42 Posted by thenarutolover (56 posts) -
[QUOTE="thenarutolover"]I support Creepshots... and if you want a politician who will not take away your Freedom, your Liberty to take them... Vote Romney. Thats all.silly_pants
Yeah, no. You and the GOP can go **** themselves for mistreating women.

We do not mistreat women... Read your stats, married women are more likely to be Republican. We feed women, clothe them, provide them with kids, sex, etc. Just because we do not like killing fetuses which are 100% definitely considered children just like sperm does not make us dislike women. They can be very pretty sometimes.
Avatar image for muller39
#43 Posted by muller39 (14953 posts) -

Never heard of it till now.

Avatar image for Lucky_Krystal
#44 Posted by Lucky_Krystal (1390 posts) -

[QUOTE="WSGRandomPerson"]First time ever hearing about "creepshots," but I think taking sexually explicit photos of someone without his/her consent is wrong.MrGeezer
I doubt they're that sexually explicit if they were taken in public.

They may not be explicit but they can still be innapropriate, like upskirt shots or pictures of the person bending over.

I remember hearing someone tell a story about how she cosplayed as Miss Marvel when she was 17 at a comic con convention. Some creep took a picture of her while she was bending over to pick something up and posted it on some weird site. If you wanna take pictures of people doing things like walking or standing thats not dirty and they are cool with it, then thats fine. But taking creepy upskirt shots or pictures of underage girls bending over is just plain weird (among other things).

Avatar image for ghoklebutter
#45 Posted by ghoklebutter (19327 posts) -

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"]Not everyone is like you.Niff_T

This is a really hard concept for some people to grasp.

Only for people who lack empathy.
Avatar image for MrGeezer
#46 Posted by MrGeezer (59072 posts) -

They may not be explicit but they can still be innapropriate, like upskirt shots or pictures of the person bending over.

I remember hearing someone tell a story about how she cosplayed as Miss Marvel when she was 17 at a comic con convention. Some creep took a picture of her while she was bending over to pick something up and posted it on some weird site. If you wanna take pictures of people doing things like walking or standing thats not dirty and they are cool with it, then thats fine. But taking creepy upskirt shots or pictures of underage girls bending over is just plain weird (among other things).

Lucky_Krystal
Inappropriate isn't even the issue, since there's no law against being creepy. You can say that it's creepy all you like, but people have every right to take a picture of you bending over in public.
Avatar image for ghoklebutter
#47 Posted by ghoklebutter (19327 posts) -
[QUOTE="Lucky_Krystal"]

They may not be explicit but they can still be innapropriate, like upskirt shots or pictures of the person bending over.

I remember hearing someone tell a story about how she cosplayed as Miss Marvel when she was 17 at a comic con convention. Some creep took a picture of her while she was bending over to pick something up and posted it on some weird site. If you wanna take pictures of people doing things like walking or standing thats not dirty and they are cool with it, then thats fine. But taking creepy upskirt shots or pictures of underage girls bending over is just plain weird (among other things).

MrGeezer
Inappropriate isn't even the issue, since there's no law against being creepy. You can say that it's creepy all you like, but people have every right to take a picture of you bending over in public.

Whether it's a right or not, doing that is not free from blame.
Avatar image for Gen007
#48 Posted by Gen007 (11006 posts) -

The whole creepshot/creeplife thing thing has been around since before this guy and will continue to be after him and i dont see the big deal. It isn't porn or upskirt shots for the most part at least. If your a female and dress and carry yourself in a respectful way there is no "creepshot" to be had really. It isn't illegal and shouldn't be.

Avatar image for ghoklebutter
#49 Posted by ghoklebutter (19327 posts) -

If your a female and dress and carry yourself in a respectful way there is no "creepshot" to be had really.

Gen007
Or the person who wants to do a creepshot can just back off.
Avatar image for MrGeezer
#50 Posted by MrGeezer (59072 posts) -
[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"] Whether it's a right or not, doing that is not free from blame.

And I already addressed that. Whatever one chooses to photograph, they're responsible for it. If you ever take a photograph and then have to keep your identity secret when showing it out of fear of getting fired, then that's probably a pretty freaking good indication that you shouldn't be taking the picture. People absolutely have the right to call the dude out on his "creepshots", and that extends to his employer firing his ass once his identity has become public. But as far as the shots themselves, I'm not concerned (aside from the upskirt stuff). You go out in public in revealing clothes and then bend over in plain sight, don't start whining when someone takes a look or snaps a photo. As far as I'm concerned, that's like walking down the street in clothes that show heavy cleavage, and then complaining when you catch people staring.