Well, me neither, but then it's not costing me a lot to miss them.
I don't think visuals affect women quite the same way. I can't get too interested in pictures of naked men, particularly ones I don't know. From the almost complete lack of interest among women in discussing such a thing, I would guess I'm not unusual. When you go into a women's locker room, you're not likely to see nudie pix on the wall. That's not to say that we don't admire the way men look, but it's not the same. Maybe the image needs more context.
I'm not sure about that as a matter of law, but I'd like to think a lady (or a friend of any kind) could entrust me with a hard drive filled with secrets -- whatever they might be -- and expect that I would keep them without pouring through them.
Of course, as a matter of law, that could probably get me in trouble too. But it's the honorable thing to do.
I'm reminded of a miniseries I saw...it was set in Hawaii, the hero was a missionary (played by Peter O'Toole I think), and one of the villains was a lecherous old ship captain played by Richard Harris.
Harris caught a couple of his men trying to force one of the local girls (who were, overall, decidedly free with their favors)...put a stop to it and admonished them:
"Rape's poor enough sport anywhere, but on this island it's a downright waste of energy! Now go on and find yourselves some willing ones."
I remember when a teenage boy might have some minimal trouble in finding nude pictures to look at...it was back in the twentieth century sometime. I don't see how nude photos of celebrities would even excite the "thrill of the forbidden" in our time and place. (And no, I haven't seen these. I don't even know who those celebrities are, and I don't want to know.)
Sure--I mean, would you open other people's mail? If you knew your friend's PIN, would you withdraw money from his bank account? My neighbors and I share house keys, but we don't burgle each other.
External controls are for the pitiful folks whose internal controls are sick.
I, for one, have no interest in seeing pictures of naked women. Ain't my style. Having said that, I can't help but feel for these women who feel the need to fully expose themselves to feel beautiful. Jennifer Lawrence is an exremely beautiful woman with clothes on, why she felt the need to remove them and take pictures is beyond my comprehension.
Given the vast, truly vast amounts of porn of every possible taste that is available for free on the internet, the only possible allure in seeing these pictures is that they were hidden by famous people in the first place.
Hidden perhaps is the wrong word here, but all of them make their living off of the sex appeal of their looks--and while Ricky Gervais got yelled at for saying it, he was right. If you don't want naked pictures stolen from your icloud account, don't take naked pictures and store them on icloud.
And nobody is going to remember this in a year's time.
Matt Walsh: "intentionally looking at the stolen images of women is exactly equal to hiding in the bushes and staring at your neighbor while she undresses."
(Of course it isn't: the latter has a physical threat aspect to it that the former lacks. Still, close...)
I was reflecting on YAG's approach, which doesn't translate to us female types. In a man, it's called being a "flasher," rather than a woman waiting patiently until a man signals he's ready to be viewed.
Since I chose to argue with the post below, allow me to say that for years I have waited in vain to see a man say what you said here in this post.
I don't know why it is so hard to do, but it must be because I can't believe most men approve of this sort of thing. I think I really would lose faith if I ever came to believe that.
From my perspective, the author of the linked post concedes too much -- "We're all" indicates a kind of normativity, i.e., that a behavior is normal just because a behavior is common.
I got to thinking about it because Allahpundit said he was going to look them up, and framed it in terms of his duty as a journalist to know what people were talking about. Nonsense, I thought: you can't have a duty to do something immoral.
...Allahpundit said he was going to look them up, and framed it in terms of his duty as a journalist to know what people were talking about.
Wow. That's got to be one of the more puerile things I've read in my lifetime. It's right up there with, "I have a right to watch you die in agony so I can truly understand the cost of war".
Humans are retarded. But that shouldn't be a surprise. They can never achieve the ideals they pursue. The ones that do achieve them, the 3-10%, get executed, punished, or exiled in the bucket of crabs.
16 comments:
Well, me neither, but then it's not costing me a lot to miss them.
I don't think visuals affect women quite the same way. I can't get too interested in pictures of naked men, particularly ones I don't know. From the almost complete lack of interest among women in discussing such a thing, I would guess I'm not unusual. When you go into a women's locker room, you're not likely to see nudie pix on the wall. That's not to say that we don't admire the way men look, but it's not the same. Maybe the image needs more context.
As I've said before, the only women I want to see naked are those that want to be seen naked.
Consent matters. Stealing, releasing, and viewing these pictures are nothing less than sexual assault.
I'm not sure about that as a matter of law, but I'd like to think a lady (or a friend of any kind) could entrust me with a hard drive filled with secrets -- whatever they might be -- and expect that I would keep them without pouring through them.
Of course, as a matter of law, that could probably get me in trouble too. But it's the honorable thing to do.
I'm reminded of a miniseries I saw...it was set in Hawaii, the hero was a missionary (played by Peter O'Toole I think), and one of the villains was a lecherous old ship captain played by Richard Harris.
Harris caught a couple of his men trying to force one of the local girls (who were, overall, decidedly free with their favors)...put a stop to it and admonished them:
"Rape's poor enough sport anywhere, but on this island it's a downright waste of energy! Now go on and find yourselves some willing ones."
I remember when a teenage boy might have some minimal trouble in finding nude pictures to look at...it was back in the twentieth century sometime. I don't see how nude photos of celebrities would even excite the "thrill of the forbidden" in our time and place. (And no, I haven't seen these. I don't even know who those celebrities are, and I don't want to know.)
Sure--I mean, would you open other people's mail? If you knew your friend's PIN, would you withdraw money from his bank account? My neighbors and I share house keys, but we don't burgle each other.
External controls are for the pitiful folks whose internal controls are sick.
I, for one, have no interest in seeing pictures of naked women.
Ain't my style.
Having said that, I can't help but feel for these women who feel the need to fully expose themselves to feel beautiful. Jennifer Lawrence is an exremely beautiful woman with clothes on, why she felt the need to remove them and take pictures is beyond my comprehension.
"I'm not sure about that as a matter of law,..."
I don't know about as a matter of law. But I'm absolutely certain of it as a matter or morality.
Given the vast, truly vast amounts of porn of every possible taste that is available for free on the internet, the only possible allure in seeing these pictures is that they were hidden by famous people in the first place.
Hidden perhaps is the wrong word here, but all of them make their living off of the sex appeal of their looks--and while Ricky Gervais got yelled at for saying it, he was right. If you don't want naked pictures stolen from your icloud account, don't take naked pictures and store them on icloud.
And nobody is going to remember this in a year's time.
Compared to what actually goes on in the porn industrial complex, this is rather like a prank.
Matt Walsh: "intentionally looking at the stolen images of women is exactly equal to hiding in the bushes and staring at your neighbor while she undresses."
(Of course it isn't: the latter has a physical threat aspect to it that the former lacks. Still, close...)
I was reflecting on YAG's approach, which doesn't translate to us female types. In a man, it's called being a "flasher," rather than a woman waiting patiently until a man signals he's ready to be viewed.
I never said that I want to see naked, *every* woman that wants to be seen naked. :-)
Since I chose to argue with the post below, allow me to say that for years I have waited in vain to see a man say what you said here in this post.
I don't know why it is so hard to do, but it must be because I can't believe most men approve of this sort of thing. I think I really would lose faith if I ever came to believe that.
From my perspective, the author of the linked post concedes too much -- "We're all" indicates a kind of normativity, i.e., that a behavior is normal just because a behavior is common.
I got to thinking about it because Allahpundit said he was going to look them up, and framed it in terms of his duty as a journalist to know what people were talking about. Nonsense, I thought: you can't have a duty to do something immoral.
...Allahpundit said he was going to look them up, and framed it in terms of his duty as a journalist to know what people were talking about.
Wow. That's got to be one of the more puerile things I've read in my lifetime. It's right up there with, "I have a right to watch you die in agony so I can truly understand the cost of war".
People are depressing.
People are depressing.
Humans are retarded. But that shouldn't be a surprise. They can never achieve the ideals they pursue. The ones that do achieve them, the 3-10%, get executed, punished, or exiled in the bucket of crabs.
Post a Comment