If you’re a straight guy looking for “fapping” material, the internet is your friend. It’s awash in freely available pictures of naked women of every size, shape, color, age, or hairstyle you prefer. And if you want more than pictures, the internet is happy to oblige, offering up videos featuring women of every description engaging in every sex act you can imagine, and then some.
You might think this would be enough.
But for some straight dudes, it evidently isn’t. They don’t just want to look at the mind-bogglingly enormous selection of women out there who have agreed to pose naked, or even perform explicit sex acts, on camera.
No, they also want to look at women who haven’t agreed to have their nude photos put on the internet. Hence the popularity of “ex-girlfriend” or “revenge porn” sites, filled with pictures that are (or at least purport to be) of ex-girlfriends who never wanted the pictures they shared with their then-boyfriends posted for the world to see.
Hence the popularity of “leaked” celebrity nudes.
The latest celebrity nudes scandal revolves around a gigantic collection of personal pictures stolen from the supposedly secure online accounts of an assortment of female celebs (and a couple of guys).
The most famous of the celebs in this current batch are Jennifer Lawrence – Jlaw – and Kate Upton; there are many others, including alleged pics of comedian Aubrey Plaza and gymnast McKayla Maroney, which internet “detectives” are scurrying to prove are real. Maroney is only 18; if the alleged pics of her are real, and weren’t taken very recently, they’re arguably child porn.
The pics were first released by an anon on internet cesspool 4chan, and they have found a welcome home on the slightly more respectable internet cesspool Reddit, where they have been posted and reposted, sometimes retouched and color-corrected, and celebrated with enthusiasm by hundreds of thousands of Redditors.
Indeed, the leaks have inspired a new subreddit, TheFappening, which has managed to gain 100,000 subscribers in a day. Evidently Reddit’s admins have no problem with a subreddit distributing stolen celebrity pics, including some that may well be child porn.
Naturally, Reddit being Reddit, some of new members of TheFappening are trying to distract from their odiousness by suggesting that those downloading Jlaw’s stolen pics also … donate to a charity fighting prostate cancer. Either that or start up their own prostate cancer fund – to make sure they get credit for their donations.
![TheJanders 224 points 2 hours ago Holy shit the news would be amazing.. "Spreaders of leaked celebrity nude photos raise millions for prostate cancer!" permalink save report give gold reply [–]BiGBANGTH3ORY 47 points an hour ago If any group of people could make that happen it would be the Reddit Army and r/TheFappening permalink save parent report give gold reply [–]TheJanders 34 points an hour ago I shall donate! However we should make our own fund so we can 1.Tell how much we have raised on our own, and 2. Get credit](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/prostate.png?resize=487%2C327&ssl=1)
Sorry, guys, that doesn’t make what you’ve done ok. And if you’re truly concerned about prostate cancer, why on earth did you wait until you needed some good PR to launch a fundraising effort?
Over on the Men’s Rights subreddit, meanwhile, one concerned fellow attempts to stand up for the hidden victims in the scandal: men. No, really.
Even some of the commenters feel obliged to point out that, er, the hacker almost certainly is a dude — not just because the leak originated at 4chan, or because the overwhelming majority of the pics are of women, but also because, you know, women can’t STEM.
![dfgdfgsd444 -4 points 7 hours ago Implying women know shit about computahs. permalink save give gold [–]ConanTheHynerian 2 points 6 hours ago* I know you're probably just joking but statistically, it's a fact that men hold most of the STEM degrees so maybe it is fair to say that most women don't know about computers and the hacker was probably a man. permalink save parent give gold [–]FlyBunnyy 1 point 3 hours ago Why is this getting downvoted? permalink save parent give gold [–]elwahrio 1 point 2 hours ago Because it sounds misogynistic](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/womencantstem.png?resize=379%2C479&ssl=1)
The strangest reaction to the scandal from an MRA that I’ve run across so far comes from the new Twitter account of A Voice for Men’s PR gal Janet Bloomfied (the one she created, in violation of Twitter’s rules, to get around her recent ban). After mocking celebs for taking private selfies or posing for their partners, Bloomfield posted a topless, headless picture of, presumably, herself, commenting “Is this me? Maybe. I text nothing I don’t want shared. #DontBeDumb.”
Apparently Bloomfield doesn’t quite understand the difference between posting nude photos of yourself and posting pictures of other people that have been obtained and posted without their consent. This isn’t particularly surprising, as MRAs in general seem to have trouble understanding the finer points (and the blindingly obvious points) of consent.
The enthusiasm with which so many male Redditors – and skeezy dudes in general – have greeted this latest leak of celebrity pics makes one wonder if it is not the celebrity of the women in question that is the draw but the lack of consent. After all, there are plenty of other celebrity nudes out there that the celebrities in question consented to have taken and published.
For a lot of those downloading and/or posting the pics of JLaw and Kate Upton and the rest, I suspect the real thrill comes not from seeing the nude bodies of these particular celebs – which, after all, are pretty similar to the nude bodies of porn actresses that can be found everywhere online – but from the violation of privacy that these pictures represent.
There is a real sadism here, driven in part, I suspect, by resentment that many female celebrities don’t agree to appear nude in their movies or to pose nude or topless for magazines. Sharing these stolen nudes is a way to punish JLaw and other female celebs who have so far refused to share every inch of their bodies with their male, er, fans.
It’s a toxic stew of entitlement, resentment, and misogyny. And no amount of donations to prostate cancer research will make up for it.
When, exactly, is objectification OK? When is it ever OK to reduce a human being to the status of object? Please clarify for me, qikqik.
Catching Fire is Menstruation Dude did get some pushback, and this is his defense:
Honestly, getting stabbed could also fit most of those “arguments” (except the one about the pregnancy, faking which would require her to hide her periods if she’s having them). Blood from wounds is much redder than period blood, and it is also passive.
From here:
http://np.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/2f644b/popping_dat_pussy_jennifer_lawrence_and_smv_in/
Actually, no. The argument is that it’s illegal and that it’s a violation of privacy to hack into someone’s phone or computer and put the personal information that you obtain from that hacking out into the public eye. The fact that 4Chan is allowing images that were undoubtedly illegally attained is a huge part of the problem.
You’re understating the problem once again. Granted, viewing people as objects is always a bad thing, and I have no idea why you’re trying to argue that it isn’t, but the problem here is much bigger. The hacker is showing people her naked body without her permission. They’ve more or less stripped her publicly without her consent so that anyone can see her nude if they want to. That’s a sex crime, hon. That’s beyond objectification.
So if you gave your key to your neighbor and asked them to feed your dog, and your neighbor gave your key to me, it would really be conflating the issue to think I might need you to give me consent to go in your house. I mean, you already gave consent. Consent is automatically disseminated to everyone.
Yes, Belladonna, yes. And if you want to steal shit, it’s not really stealing because quikquik gave the key to zir neighbor and that was clearly consent to having zir stuff stolen.
Matt Forney was mentioned upthread. I went to the article” how to crush a girl’s self- esteem.”
This guy fills me with horrormirth. He’s so revolting that he’s funny.
His site literally seems to contain how-to’s in setting up an abusive relationship.
An excellent post, David.
@qikqik:
“But I do have reservations about depicting objectification as evil in a lot of ways, but I’ll lead that for smart people to write about in acadamia someday.”
It does not take an academic to realize that seeing and treating people as objects is the root of evil.
Did squickqik really just try to argue that once a photo is taken, it’s completely reasonable to send it to whoever you like without the consent of the person/people in it? That consent to be photographed is equivalent to consenting to dissemination of that photograph? Because that idea seems problematic.
The whole reason people have to sign releases when they’re photographed for business purposes is because your likeness is inextricably associated with you as a person, and there’s an acknowledgement in law that you should be able to have control over how that association is used.
(again with an awful property crime example, but it’s the best I can come up with on the spot)
The other problematic aspect is conflating a highly restricted dissemination with dissemination for public consumption.
It’s like saying if I tell my partner my PIN code, it’s automatically implied that I’m okay with her posting it to Reddit. No. Just, no.
Consider this scenario:
i, A site is set up highlighting these nudes, search optimised to be readily available to those who wanna fap. It’s left up for a couple of weeks.
ii, And then those who browsed it find out that their addresses have been logged, their browsing patterns have been analysed, details were matched to cookies or other data to determine their identities, and the full package will be mailed to everyone who knows them. If you spent twenty minutes perusing a particularly juicy picture of J.L. bending over, every contact you have on Facebook will find out…
So – do you think those caught in the honey trap will be screaming about invasion of privacy and unfairness?
And break stuff and shit on zir floor. Because it’s just beyond stupid to trust a neighbor, so zie got what zie deserved. And plus, it doesn’t make me a bad person, because zie consented.
(Help. I really need to learn how to fully and properly decline zie. I’ve got the nominative and possessive now. What is the objective? Is that also zir?)
Phoenician for New Evil Overlord!
I work with old photographs, and it’s not just a problematic idea it’s an idea that is completely untrue. We do a very complicated risk analysis when deciding whether or not to make photographs available online and, because we’re a responsible, ethical institution, that availability is subject to review if we get any information that indicates that we shouldn’t have released the photos.
Of course, our photographs aren’t really anyone’s fapping material (I hope), so clearly all moral/ethical considerations only apply to non-fapworthy pix.
Oh hell yes. They didn’t give permission for their private interests to be available to total strangers to tell whomever said stranger pleases, after all!
BwahahahahahaNO. Not even hardly. Tampons do a good job of exactly that. So do menstrual cups, if you can find one that fits and is easy to use. Even pads are better than nothing.
Why do I get the feeling that this dude’s sole experience with the Red Lady-Tide was that elevator-door scene from The Shining?
Right, Jenny – the answer to that question is obvious.
@bhalistic
I have the same reaction to Matt Forney. He’s horrible, but he’s also so completely stupid, irrational, and illogical that he often falls into unconscious self-parody. Usually, I start off pissed off, but then I read something like, “As a friend of mine put it, all girls crave spankings; it’s their way of making up for Eve’s sin,” and I just start laughing.
Also, this: “Additionally, don’t make her cum every time you have sex. Think like a dealer: you give the customer the pure stuff when you want to get them hooked, and when they’re addicted, you sell them shit that’s been cut with rat poison to increase your bottom line. Like with point four, rationing out her orgasms at random will keep her on her toes trying to satisfy you.”
On the one hand, this is creepy and controlling. On the other hand, it reveals that Matt Forney is somehow still oblivious to the fact that women can have orgasms without anyone else’s help and that a woman is also doing work to get herself to orgasm during sex.
Right, Jenny – the answer to that question is obvious.
Which is to say, they knew precisely why what they’re doing is a problem, so don’t accept any bullshit arguments that they don’t see it. Throw the situation back at them and force them to acknowledge what they’re doing.
O RLY? I’ll make this super easy and simple for you, then, since your brain doesn’t seem to want to wrap around such convoluted concepts:
Objectification involves turning people into objects. Dehumanizing them, in effect. Once you do that, you have no moral scruples left about anything awful that can and will be done to them.
Or, to make this even simpler, since you don’t strike me as the brightest light in the string:
Would YOU like to be an object? Treated as disposable and potentially infinitely abusable?
If not, then it’s obvious that there is nothing here for “smart people in academia” to discuss.
For some reason, the only thing I could think to do in response to this:
Was go listen to this again to comfort myself:
Snort. This assumes that he has the power to make her orgasm at will. Something almost NO man has. And the few who do, ironically, aren’t PUAs or MRAs. They’re guys who actually put their partner’s needs before their own. And that’s a no-no in asshole country.
The more relevant threads are kind of old, so I’m just going to post this here even though it’s off topic for this thread: Female Journalist Gets Rape Threats Over Comic Book Criticism
But she’s probably just making it up.
I’ve heard so many people talk about how, if you don’ want your nudes stolen and shared with the world, you shouldn’t store them on your computer… So… where should one store their nudes ? On their camera? As printed copies ? Because no way that could ever end up bad…
OH, they shouldn’t have any nudes of them taken, ever, for any reason. Especially if you’re a celebrity. Got it.
I mean, several of my bikes have been stolen. They were kept in storage for the night and were locked, but I’ve still had three bikes stolen. I guess its my fault that someone got in, broke the lock and took my bike. After all, if I don’t want my bicycle stolen, I shouldn’t risk owning one.
Woooo, that slam poem was good shit. Wish I’d seen that sooner!
If you think it sounds like these guys don’t know what a clitoris is, then you’d be right. They never learned that men can’t hand out orgasms as rewards. We can have them on our own whenever we want. Reason #5,389 for never having sex with an MRA type. They also believe that vaginas become loose because of sex, that their sperm has transformative properties that alter a woman forever and that all porn is an actual documentary on how sex usually goes between men and women.
**shake head** Clueless fucks.
Thanks, qikqik. You filled our quota of denialism, bloviation and mansplaining for this thread.