Advertisement
Dublin: 5 °C Saturday 23 November, 2024
©Steven Bergman/AFF-USA.com

Thinking of looking at those J-Law nude pics? Here's why you shouldn't

For her eyes only.

YESTERDAY, IMAGES OF a nude or almost nude Jennifer Lawrence began circulating online.

The photos had been stolen from her – likely as a result of hack or problem with Apple’s iCloud service, or a phishing scam resulting in password theft. A representative for Lawrence has confirmed that the images are authentic.

Meanwhile other stars like Ariana Grande and Victoria Justice have said that the images purported to be of them are fakes.

More than 100 well-known names appear on a master list posted by the leaker on the 4chan sharing site, where the photos also first originated.

The pictures aren’t that hard to track down, if you really want to see them. But do you need to?..

They are simply not for your eyes

Imagine someone could go into your phone and post whatever they found there across your social media accounts or send it to your parents. Imagine they could tweet that information or those images, and people could comment on your appearance or your actions or your words.

It’s a violation of privacy. It’s potentially your most intimate and personal moments laid bare for all the world to see. You’d probably rather if people didn’t look, and your parents didn’t have to know about it.

Jennifer Lawrence is not the only one whose images have been published online. Mary Elizabeth Winstead has also been violated. Here’s what she had to say:

“If you don’t want nude photos leaked then don’t take them”

If we’re sticking to that logic then if you don’t want your private emails leaked don’t write them. If you don’t want your text messages on the internet don’t send them. Don’t ever do anything that you’d rather other people didn’t know about.

There is nothing shameful about them, but that still doesn’t mean you should look

There is an important distinction to be made between not being ashamed of the images, and not wanting other people to see them.

Lena Dunham explains:

The women involved are being shamed, trolled and insulted

Let’s not perpetuate that. They have nothing to be ashamed of.

It’s not porn… not even close

The images of Lawrence were shared non-consensually. Those commenting that ‘you’d find better on Pornhub’ or ‘they’re so tame’ appear not to understand that the images are not porn. They are a person’s private images for their own private use. Not for strangers to pore over and critique.

The person who leaked the images yesterday also claims to have video of Jennifer Lawrence performing a sex act, and is accepting PayPal donations in exchange for releasing it.  But it’s still not porn. Except if you want to define it as ‘Jennifer Lawrence’s own private porn collection’. Private. 

However, it is a form of revenge porn

Revenge porn is any kind of sexual material posted online without the subject’s consent. It’s called ‘revenge porn’ because it’s usually association with an ex-partner sharing the material in order to shame the subject.

It’s one thing to hope and expect that an ex partner won’t post any images of you online. There’s an element of trust there.

It’s another to hope and expect that a stranger won’t go on an extensive search for material to post online, combing through your most personal bits and pieces. Shudder.

Jennifer-Lawrence-blond-hair-GIF-well-now-that-you-said-it-yeah Crushable Crushable

The law is involved

A statement from Jennifer Lawrence representative reads:

This is a flagrant violation of privacy. The authorities have been contacted and will prosecute anyone who posts the stolen photos.

Twitter has begun shutting down accounts which are sharing and posting the images.

Kate Upton – whose photos were also leaked – has her attorney involved.

We intend to pursue anyone disseminating or duplicating these illegally obtained images to the fullest extent possible.

Read: Those stolen nude pics of Jennifer Lawrence are real>

Close
111 Comments
    Submit a report
    Please help us understand how this comment violates our community guidelines.
    Thank you for the feedback
    Your feedback has been sent to our team for review.