Forums are a gold mine of modernity.

Rated PG-13 for vulgar language. 

This small segment on imdb discussing actress' Jennifer Lawrence's hacked pictures:

Why would anyone take a nude selfie and save it on an iCloud? Heck, why would anyone take a nude selfie in the first place unless they're vain enough?

 which was followed by

 Many reasons why someone would take a nude selfie...for themselves, because they feel good in that moment; for their partner; to document weight loss; because they freakin want to. But...that is entirely not the issue. A person's private sex life is a person's private sex life, and they are entitled to do what they want without you casting judgment on it; especially in this case since these are photos that she did not intend to be made private.

Anyway, how would this affect her status at all? Did people really not think that a beautiful 20-something did not have a sex life? That she did not have an erotic side to her? These photos are just evidence of something that is as self-evident that she brushes her teeth, eats in the morning, etc. I really don't think these will be an issue... if anything she will be more famous.

The worst she will have to face is to be the butt of a couple of jokes for a couple months... but after Mockingjay 1 comes out and this issue is rehashed a bit nobody will give a crap.

You got to be kidding me. Nope. It's modernity speaking.  Thou Shall Not Judge Others Sex Lives. But modernity judges what car one drives (whether it's eco friendly or not), if one supports certain social issues (homosexual "marriage" or ASL Ice Bucket Challenge) or if one cares about starving kids in Africa. If you express anything less than support you're labeled a "hater."

Anything sexually related?  Off hands. Except for pedophilia and other deviant behaviors, but that's another topic all together. So, modernists want traditionalists - or those that are critical of the act - to cast no judgement and render the critics into a bag of potatoes when discussing personal sexual matters, whether they be sex acts or vanity pics like nude selfies yet they want support for thing like "equal rights" for homosexuals and bisexuals, support "pro-choice" and go "YOU GO GIRL!" when a woman flaunts her sexuality or react in a way that's akin to "This is totally normal. What's the big deal here?" Commenting on what happens in the bedroom is a no no, but traditionalists have to support whatever happens in a bedroom in the name of "equality" and the ideal state of being "non-judgmental." Neutrality is indirect support, since the liberalism feeds off neutrality if support is not directly given.

F_ck that sh*t. I'm gonna judge away. You ain't gonna stop me from being opinionated, as I can't really stop one from taking a nude selfie or engaging in other juvenile acts in disguise of "maturity."

Now it's interesting that the word used to defend such things, nude selfies, is "entitled." Like one deserves such an action to freely do, like they accomplished something and that's their reward - a nude selfie. If the person is going to take a nude seflie I can't stop them unless they're right beside me or texts me saying "Hey, GRA, I'm gonna take naked picture of myself." In fact, whether one is "entitled" to do such an act is besides the point. It's whether one should do it in the first place. Of course, like the second poster explains, there are various reasons take such a picture (all the weight loss pictures I've seen, the ones in google's "image" tab were all showing clothed people, so nude selfies to show weight loss are probably in the minority); but just because you "have a reason" - whatever that may be - doesn't mean one should do it. It's like wanting to punch someone.

If I'm being provoked and my temper gets the best of me, and I physically harm that provoker, would I be in the right of punching him? No. Though one can understand why I punched him, that does not mean the action I took was wise or appropriate. The person assessing the situation would  be right in saying that my action was a poor judgement on my part, that I should've practiced more restraint. Here's the thing: If that's all the person says, without damning my soul to hell, then I, hopefully, would take the criticism maturely and think to myself "You're right. I shouldn't have done such a thing even though the provoker was out of like in his actions as well." Accountability is what's lacking.

Another interesting thing the defender notes: The poster, obviously a fan of the actress, admits to a common tactic that many (extreme) fanboys use. Anything controversial that puts the actor in a negative light is dealt in a very "Don't worry guys, this all will go away with time." He also spins it into a positive light, that once it's all over that she'll more famous for it because it's another "natural" thing a 20 year old would do. So in the end, she wins. And the fans win.

I find this attitude that the defender holds both pathetic and sickening. It perfectly speaks about the mentality of opportunists (the fan in this case) squeezing whatever they can get from an initially controversial topic. In a way it's making lemonade out of lemons, but this sort of lemonade I wouldn't want to drink let alone be proud of.

If you're fan of any actor and if they get caught in some questionable acts, don't worry. As long as they become more famous because of it you're A-OKAY. I wonder if O.J. Simpson admires followed the same attitude? Okay, that was an extreme comparison. But I wonder ..

Upon thinking about what the poster stated, the towards the end of the first paragraph, it also shows that today it is natural to assume that any attractive 20 year old is sexually active. An attractive virgin? That's messed up. An attractive chaste 20-something year old? Unheard of. Honey, you need to get your hips pumping & slappin' skin by midnight tonight. Author John C. Wright touched upon this.

In modern times, it is being cultivated to not assume that a stranger is straight. If I found a member of the opposite sex attractive, muster up the courage to talk them and maybe ask then out for lunch or coffee, I'd most likely be held as inconsiderate & ignorant if I thought that person was straight. The person maybe bi or a homosexual. What's totally okay to assume is if that person we are attracted to is sexually active.

So take note: Okay - assume that an attractive person is sexually active. Not Okay - assume a given person is straight.

(OT: Film actors are pretty much the most protected class of people in America right now, besides homosexuals and illegal immigrants. A 12 year old child growing up in a middle class home has more accountability than film actors.)

 It gets even more pathetic. Mary Anne Franks, from the NY Daily News, states:

The suggestion that the female celebrities whose private nude photos were hacked are somehow at fault is false; they have been deprived of dignity and equality. The law must be reformed to make invasions of sexual privacy punishable.

Is this another war on women? I'm surprised I didn't come across someone saying this.

An interesting use of words: Dignity and equality. Setting up the narrative of "girl power in the face of social injustice" I see. Too bad I'm not buying it.

And another reformed law in order to cater to such incidents? This is coming very close to reforming traditional marriage in order to accommodate same-sex pairings. 

Libertines are fiercely protective of their sex lives when it comes from outside judgement, but they are fiercely comfortable in showing their sexuality and saying "Take me as I am!"

This all looks like "blaming the victim." I won't disagree with that. I am putting responsibility on Lawrence's shoulders, but not all. I do believe that cloud systems, in which the pictures were hacked from, should be more solid in their user's privacy. I do think the hacker should be jailed & fined. I do think it's unfortunate that all these young women were exposed this way (100+ celebrities). But, like the hacker, actions have consequences, whether it's good or bad or a mixture. My sympathy is hard to get and to distribute to the parties involved.

What I can't help but laugh if this happened to 100+ politicians. They would be crucified by the media - not protected like the celebrities in painting them as complete innocents and getting the freakin' FBI involved.  It won't be just talked about in political magazines or political circles - it would be discussed in the morning news, in the evening news and comedians would be all over any Republicans (not that I'd defend them). It be like a Sarah Palin Media Frenzy.

What I like about this issue is that it branches into several topics: privacy in general. actions & consequences, perverts and fanboys. It is a topic that reflects modernity and its mentality.  

Now, do I think Miss Lawrence is a bad person? No. Do I think she's a slut? I don't know since I don't know if she sleeps around with other people. Do I think she's a good role model? She never entered such a category, in my mind, even before this incident, though I do like how she doesn't take PETA seriously (yet).

UPDATE: Some responses having the 'This wouldn't be a big deal ... " mentality suggest that if nudity wasn't seen as socially immoral then this incident - nude selfies being hacked - wouldn't garner the current media attention. Again, this reminds me of people saying "If people saw gays like 'everyone else' (as in "married", raising kids etc.) they would be in favor of marriage "equality."' It's all about stripping away the social stigmas & taboos when it comes to anything sexually related, really.

The late Lawrence Auster commented on modernity's romance with body art. I find this entry (alongside the comments talking about plastic surgery) very appropriate with the 'art' of selfies. At first, selfies were seen as vain actions. It started with the 'duck face' and now has evolved into nude selfies, with maybe the 'duck face' smacked on the face of the photographer. Now, they're seen as normal actions done by anyone under 25. The next step is releasing nudity from any stigmas so nude selfies would be met with no negative reaction and, as the imdb poster notes above, be seen in a healthy light. (But what if the girl isn't as attractive as Lawrence?)