The hackers and those peddling the stolen ‘property’ absolutely should be punished. I had an ethical dilemma about even viewing these photos, but curiosity kills the cat, they say. Is this a crime? Certainly, yes. Is it morally and ethically wrong to hack and/or distribute photos that were presumed to be private? Yes. Should we (celebrities included) know better by this point? Yes, and I believe this is the main point of argument among people.
There is a certain prudence that most are taught to avoid putting themselves in a vulnerable position, be it burglary, theft, assault, sex crimes, etc. It’s odd to me that this prudence is challenged (and called victim-blaming) only when women are the likely victim. No reasonable person ever argues that someone deserves to be the victim of a crime due for any reason, least of all a lack of prudence. But why do people (feminists, mostly), put so much energy into challenging behaviors/actions that make people SAFER? It’s misguided and delusional and hinges on one aspect:
“We should teach those committing the crimes that they shouldn’t do these things because they are bad. We should not teach people how to NOT be victims.”
This, of course, is a valid argument, but it is decidedly not SOUND. Why? Because we DO teach people that it’s not okay to steal. We DO teach men (over and over and over again, I might add) that it’s not okay to sexually assault women, and that consent is very important. We DO teach people that it’s not okay to murder. Why then, does it still happen? Because some people suck (enter here: my argument about the perception of normalized violence, rape-culture, and sensationalism and their effect on lawmaking. A topic for another day). It’s therefore prudent to take measures to avoid being a victim of someone who sucks. Nobody flinches at the idea of teaching people to lock their doors, hide their valuables, shut your garage doors, avoid bad neighborhoods at night, take extra precautions to avoid drunk drivers, etc. In fact, most people who DON’T engage in these activities are called fools. Why must we flinch when we teach women to avoid walking home alone at night, not to get into cars with strangers, etc.? It’s not blaming the victim, it’s just being prudent. The only difference being that, because sex crimes mainly affect women, women bear the comparatively unfair duty of prudence (enter here: argument about how well trained women with mace/firearms/etc. level the playing field and my confusion with why feminists are generally anti-gun).
So where does this argument fit in with having pictures stolen of your phone (a device connected to the internet)? Well, to me, there’s nothing more ironic than complaining about your privacy on a public twitter account.
What happened to Jennifer Lawrence is very unfortunate, but people who take nudie pics on devices connected to the internet certainly know the risk. Thanks for missing the point of both this article and my comment, though.
1) Place dryer sheets under your ass when you sit in your desk chair. Yes it’s weird and dumb-looking, but totally worth it to fart in (relative… don’t trust mexican food farts) peace at your cubicle.
Because weekday sleepovers suck. Can’t scratch my sweaty balls all night, can’t fart, can’t roll around as much. End up getting 5 hours of sleep and then work sucks the next day.
I can’t tell if you’re trying to be ironic with the patronizing label you give him, or what. Pots and kettles banging really hard together over here, honey.
Also, just because you majored in what is the 21st century equivalent of alchemy doesn’t necessarily validate your point either.
Starting at “However…” Absolutely 100% correct. And the grand irony is the stock argument from feminists that women are “told by society that they aren’t good at math and science.” Or that “society grooms women to be subordinate.” When the feminist movement itself is disenfranchising women. Instead of empowerment, you’re told to feel that society did this to you. That you’re a victim. That you’re hopeless because of your gender. It’s sad because the root causes for your problems/unhappiness really are right in front of you. It’s not your gender that lost you the respect of your coworkers, in this case it was your a lack of professionalism.
I would argue there is an equal percentage of male desk jockeys who are considered assholes, douches, arrogant, etc. as there are women who are considered selfish, pushy, bossy, etc. (a great deal of them, in both cases). I honestly believe the woman’s stereotype (or anything to do with women’s issues. Sorry.) gets more exposure because the typical response to criticism from women is way different than that of men. Whereas a typical response from women would be a post on their blogs about misogyny, patriarchy, and general helplessness/need for societal change or at the least a serious talk with their friends, a male’s typical response would be more on the lines of, “cool story. Now go fuck yourself. Oh yeah, did the Giants win last night? Saw it went into OT.” Or at the most complaining to their friends that their boss is a dickhead.
Advertise
The hackers and those peddling the stolen ‘property’ absolutely should be punished. I had an ethical dilemma about even viewing these photos, but curiosity kills the cat, they say. Is this a crime? Certainly, yes. Is it morally and ethically wrong to hack and/or distribute photos that were presumed to be private? Yes. Should we (celebrities included) know better by this point? Yes, and I believe this is the main point of argument among people.
There is a certain prudence that most are taught to avoid putting themselves in a vulnerable position, be it burglary, theft, assault, sex crimes, etc. It’s odd to me that this prudence is challenged (and called victim-blaming) only when women are the likely victim. No reasonable person ever argues that someone deserves to be the victim of a crime due for any reason, least of all a lack of prudence. But why do people (feminists, mostly), put so much energy into challenging behaviors/actions that make people SAFER? It’s misguided and delusional and hinges on one aspect:
“We should teach those committing the crimes that they shouldn’t do these things because they are bad. We should not teach people how to NOT be victims.”
This, of course, is a valid argument, but it is decidedly not SOUND. Why? Because we DO teach people that it’s not okay to steal. We DO teach men (over and over and over again, I might add) that it’s not okay to sexually assault women, and that consent is very important. We DO teach people that it’s not okay to murder. Why then, does it still happen? Because some people suck (enter here: my argument about the perception of normalized violence, rape-culture, and sensationalism and their effect on lawmaking. A topic for another day). It’s therefore prudent to take measures to avoid being a victim of someone who sucks. Nobody flinches at the idea of teaching people to lock their doors, hide their valuables, shut your garage doors, avoid bad neighborhoods at night, take extra precautions to avoid drunk drivers, etc. In fact, most people who DON’T engage in these activities are called fools. Why must we flinch when we teach women to avoid walking home alone at night, not to get into cars with strangers, etc.? It’s not blaming the victim, it’s just being prudent. The only difference being that, because sex crimes mainly affect women, women bear the comparatively unfair duty of prudence (enter here: argument about how well trained women with mace/firearms/etc. level the playing field and my confusion with why feminists are generally anti-gun).
So where does this argument fit in with having pictures stolen of your phone (a device connected to the internet)? Well, to me, there’s nothing more ironic than complaining about your privacy on a public twitter account.
What happened to Jennifer Lawrence is very unfortunate, but people who take nudie pics on devices connected to the internet certainly know the risk. Thanks for missing the point of both this article and my comment, though.
I agree with your sentiments, but what is this… HuffPost? Emotionally driven rhetoric is bad on both sides of the aisle.
I understand satire and thought it was funny. Don’t let the haters get you down, yeahokaywhat.
I just don’t understand how someone smart enough to get into Harvard would be dumb enough to go into politics
1) Place dryer sheets under your ass when you sit in your desk chair. Yes it’s weird and dumb-looking, but totally worth it to fart in (relative… don’t trust mexican food farts) peace at your cubicle.
How awful that the promoter wouldn’t give her free stuff for being with a group of girls! Horrendous.
Why can’t women like something useful, like, say, a 10,000 dollar engagement 80 inch television?
Because weekday sleepovers suck. Can’t scratch my sweaty balls all night, can’t fart, can’t roll around as much. End up getting 5 hours of sleep and then work sucks the next day.
It’s okay, I forgive you. Please do make sure to write me when you are all able to, how do I say, turn your metaphorical lead into gold.
I can’t tell if you’re trying to be ironic with the patronizing label you give him, or what. Pots and kettles banging really hard together over here, honey.
Also, just because you majored in what is the 21st century equivalent of alchemy doesn’t necessarily validate your point either.
Starting at “However…” Absolutely 100% correct. And the grand irony is the stock argument from feminists that women are “told by society that they aren’t good at math and science.” Or that “society grooms women to be subordinate.” When the feminist movement itself is disenfranchising women. Instead of empowerment, you’re told to feel that society did this to you. That you’re a victim. That you’re hopeless because of your gender. It’s sad because the root causes for your problems/unhappiness really are right in front of you. It’s not your gender that lost you the respect of your coworkers, in this case it was your a lack of professionalism.
I would argue there is an equal percentage of male desk jockeys who are considered assholes, douches, arrogant, etc. as there are women who are considered selfish, pushy, bossy, etc. (a great deal of them, in both cases). I honestly believe the woman’s stereotype (or anything to do with women’s issues. Sorry.) gets more exposure because the typical response to criticism from women is way different than that of men. Whereas a typical response from women would be a post on their blogs about misogyny, patriarchy, and general helplessness/need for societal change or at the least a serious talk with their friends, a male’s typical response would be more on the lines of, “cool story. Now go fuck yourself. Oh yeah, did the Giants win last night? Saw it went into OT.” Or at the most complaining to their friends that their boss is a dickhead.
^ One hundred million times, THIS.
Rob, you evil, evil man. Though, I will be sitting my happy ass in the engineer’s seat on the gravy train.
Buy a ton of expensive alcohol at the bar, women flock to you, still don’t know how to interact with them.
I’m all about that nazi-sexy-costume
Getting DFA’d and sent down to the minors. Though, doesn’t seem so bad in this context.
Level 197 has ended my hope in humanity.
We don’t like to think of it as a ‘write up’