Support NeoGAF

[clearacell]

"hey I saw a hot stranger in a public place and stalker-photo'd them but never had the guts to approach them, you jelly?"

Actually it reminds me of the dudes that brag about the hot girls on their facebook friends list (hell, even I do this too sometimes)...but I don't it's bragging as much as it is "whoa this girl is hot other guys would like to see her as well"

 

[Madrin]

Just the other day a girl on my Facebook feed posted a link to some tumblr where girls take secret pictures of hot guys at their university, and it got a bunch of "lol this is awesome!" comments from other girls. Kind of funny the difference in reactions when the situation is reversed.

 

[nckillthegrimace]

This "sudden interest" is typically more urban paranoia that runs in concert with urban isolationism. The only winners are lawyers.

No lawyer in their right mind would bring a case as flimsy as "that guy took a picture of me...in public!" to a court. So no one wins. Except the creeps, I guess.

We might as well all become creepers.

 

[Plywood]

 

[iamblades]

A store or a bakery is not a public place. A sidewalk is.

They are all considered public places under the law.

The law generally considers 'public place' to mean 'place open to the public', not public property, ie. owned by the government.

As for the issue at hand, yes it is creepy as fuck, but no, there is really nothing that can or should be done about it.

Ultimately people are going to have to learn to get comfortable with the idea of being filmed 100% of the time while in public, because that will soon be the case, if it isn't already in some places.

 

[DrBo42]

I agree that creeping on women with a camera in public is creepy as fuck. GIFs like this or the photos in the OP make it continue though. We'll publicly damn these acts when women are around but damn do we enjoy the product of the creepiness. We're weak. I'm sorry ladies.

 

[shanshan310]

Again, why can't you just go look at porn? There is an entire industry devoted to letting you perv on images of women - who have consented to having their faces/asses posted all over the internet.

Just the other day a girl on my Facebook feed posted a link to some tumblr where girls take secret pictures of hot guys at their university, and it got a bunch of "lol this is awesome!" comments from other girls. Kind of funny the difference in reactions when the situation is reversed.

Being an asshole is not limited to one gender. Creepshots are creepy. Good work on the generalizing though.

 

[Jea Song]

More likely it was another chick filming her.

 

[Htown]

Fucking winner winner chicken dinner

If you don't want people staring, ditch the yoga pants/leggings/tight jeans. Women are such hippo crits. They wear very revealing body conforming clothing to attract attention, then complain when they get it. I'm considering turning gay, that's how aggravating they are

You have serious issues.

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

More likely it was another chick filming her.

No. It was a boy. And I'm pretty sure that girl is like 15 or something.

 

[Htown]

Listen, ladies. It's real simple. If you don't want people to take pictures of your butt and spread them all over the internet, just stop going to grocery stores. Or banks. Or gas stations. And stop walking on sidewalks.

I mean what do you expect? You're outside of your house so you deserve what you get.

Such hypocrites. You want to wear clothes that are comfortable, and then get mad when a random guy takes a secret picture of you and puts it on reddit?

 

[Medalion]

No. It was a boy. And I'm pretty sure that girl is like 15 or something.

Those girls were with those other highschool kids in the background

But yeah, keep quoting that pic away

 

[SteveWinwood]

Again, why can't you just go look at porn? There is an entire industry devoted to letting you perv on images of women - who have consented to having their faces/asses posted all over the internet.

Just saying that for some people that the lack of consent can be what turns them on. Most would agree that these people might need help, but few would argue that it's worse that they view these and vent whatever they have pent up than a wide range of other actions that involve the opposite sex and a lack of consent.

 

[Kinyou]

More likely it was another chick filming her.

It's in an apple store. There's no one sitting behind the camera

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhDAyUatCz8

 

[Dr.Guru of Peru]

I really don't see how this would bother anyone. What possible harm is there to this?

 

[shanshan310]

I really don't see how this would bother anyone. What possible harm is there to this?

People consenting to having their pictures plastered all over the internet in a sexual manner? What is there not to get?

 

[BadAss2961]

Again, why can't you just go look at porn? There is an entire industry devoted to letting you perv on images of women - who have consented to having their faces/asses posted all over the internet.

Just saying that for some people that the lack of consent can be what turns them on. Most would agree that these people might need help, but few would argue that it's worse that they view these and vent whatever they have pent up than a wide range of other actions that involve the opposite sex and a lack of consent.

This, but also that everything is more interesting with women you know personally, or maybe have even just briefly come in contact with. Who hasn't crept on Facebook before?

 

[Finaika]

Again, why can't you just go look at porn? There is an entire industry devoted to letting you perv on images of women - who have consented to having their faces/asses posted all over the internet.

Porn isn't real.

 

[noah111]

God damn, seven pages to catch up on. This'll be fun. -_-

 

[Dr.Guru of Peru]

People consenting to having their pictures plastered all over the internet in a sexual manner? What is there not to get?

Umm, you can't recognize these people, so who gives a shit?

Even if you could, why does anyone give a shit?

 

[CorvoSol]

Porn isn't real.

How could you?

 

[shanshan310]

Porn isn't real.

So I guess the next question is whether being able to perv on sneaky photos of 'regular people' is worth women giving up their privacy and being able to consent to their images being online.

Umm, you can't recognize these people, so who gives a shit?

Even if you could, why does anyone give a shit?

They probably give a shit. Just because you see women as wank material doesn't mean no one else has a problem.

 

[Madrin]

Being an asshole is not limited to one gender. Creepshots are creepy. Good work on the generalizing though.

I agree creepshots are creepy, but people usually react more negatively when guys are the ones doing these sorts things. I'm not complaining that it's unfair. I honestly think guys tend to be creepier than women in general.

 

[noah111]

You calling my fiancee a slut? 'Cause she wears yoga pants when we go out.

I'm being dead serious, you think she's a fucking whore? Or that she has no class?

What about my sisters? How about my mom?

 

[shanshan310]

I agree creepshots are creepy, but people usually react more negatively when guys are the ones doing these sorts things. I'm not complaining that it's unfair. I honestly think guys tend to be creepier than women in general.

I can only guess that its more socially okay for women to perv because they have historically been more sexually oppressed, and its an empowerment thing. I don't think its okay to take photos of strangers to perv on regardless, but the difference is interesting.

 

[nckillthegrimace]

So I guess the next question is whether being able to perv on sneaky photos of 'regular people' is worth women giving up their privacy and being able to consent to their images being online.

They gave up their privacy when they went out in public, as does everyone. If you don't want your picture taken, then don't go outside. As I type this, I realize it sounds perilously close to blaming the victim, but it's the legal and practical reality of things. Cameras are virtually ubiquitous now; you can't simply opt out of being photographed unless you opt out of society itself. That said, there's also nothing stopping anyone from confronting and shaming someone doing creepshots. Just as they have a right to take photographs in public, you have a right to point it out and get angry. So do it. Make it the worst day of their pathetic life. It's a far better alternative than pushing for legislation that abridges everyone's rights. As a bit of a countermeasure, that legislation about forcing phone cameras to make noise sounds kind of dumb on its face, but it seems like a way to get around the whole rights issue while still making people who take creepshots more obvious to anyone paying attention.

 

[Jim E. Rossler]

All you gotta do is put your phone on silent and the camera is silent
Thanks shutter sound law!

 

[Pecan1]

Hey GAF did you guys solve this prob yet????

Does this all just boil down to a 2nd grade argument?

boys are icky
girls are smelly


And whats the difference between looking at women outside around and on the internet? Arent they both public places?

 

[soultron]

Hey GAF did you guys solve this prob yet????

Does this all just boil down to a 2nd grade argument?

boys are icky
girls are smelly


And whats the difference between looking at women outside around and on the internet? Arent they both public places?

It's fucked up since these women are not consenting to photography that is expressly objectifying them.

Just for fun, let's hypothesize that behaviour like taking covert ass shots is a pre-cursor to more serious things like upskirts and flat-out sexual harassment/assault.

Not cool.

 

[Lost Fragment]

Hey GAF did you guys solve this prob yet????

Does this all just boil down to a 2nd grade argument?

Welcome to 99% of all internet arguments.

 

[PigSpeakers]

Any ya'll love yoga pants? I love yoga pants. Not enough to take a picture of them in public. But I love some yps.

 

[evil solrac v3.0]

ah, this shit ain't cool man. not at all. not in a bakery not in a sidewalk, nowhere at all should anyone be taking pictures of anyone without consent.

 

[The_Hitcher89]

Is there a certain hypocritical nature to condemning creepshots, and watching celebrity home-porn videos?

 

[jaxword]

Is there a certain hypocritical nature to condemning creepshots, and watching celebrity home-porn videos?

Yes, yes there is...if those weren't deliberate.

You know that most if not all of those celeb "leaks" are done by the celebs/their agents, because it invariably makes them MORE popular and helps their status.

Not totally comparable.

 

[Locke_211]

Is making the effort to clearly remember what someone looks like so you can masturbate about them when you get home better or worse than taking a photo without them knowing? Serious question, sort of.

 

[Broder Salsa]

You know that most if not all of those celeb "leaks" are done by the celebs/their agents, because it invariably makes them MORE popular and helps their status.

The good old unproven myth.

 

[Byakuya769]

Hey GAF did you guys solve this prob yet????

Does this all just boil down to a 2nd grade argument?

boys are icky
girls are smelly


And whats the difference between looking at women outside around and on the internet? Arent they both public places?

Come in with a snarky attack on the thread... leave with a stupid ass question.

 

[UnblessedSoul]

I think taking photos without their consent is wrong and creepy, it reinforces the fact you will never get that type of woman

 

[Rentahamster]

I can't imagine how a law would be written to handle the issue.

Any thoughts on that? (taking pictures of asses and whatnot)

Seems like all laws dead end at the very difficult to prove intent.. otherwise who is to say that any given photo wasn't taken for sexual gratification?

You can't have authoritarian rules restricting picture taking without having potential negative repercussions and abuse that effects freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

The ones we have now are fine-ish.


1. If you are in an area with no reasonable expectation of privacy, you automatically consent to having your picture taken (or being talked to, or waved at, or any other non-violent human interaction that isn't illegal). However, your image or likeness cannot be used to generate a profit or promote a product or company without written consent.

2. If you are in an area with a reasonable expectation of privacy, you do not automatically consent to having your picture taken. You do not have consent to take a picture of someone in a bathroom, changing room, or in the privacy of a house to which you are not invited.

3. Intent should have little to no say towards the severity of the punishment or severity of the crime. Policing thoughts is bad.

That should be enough. The matters regarding perversion and morality are best left to our society's social structures to handle, not the law. It is not illegal to be a pervert, but it is illegal to commit a perverted action that harms others as a result.

Matters regarding stalking, harassment, patterns of behavior, and threats to the well being of others can be dealt with by any law enforcement or judges handling the case.

 

[sk3]

It's the price of freedom. When are people going to realize you have to take the good with the bad? You cannot solve for every "problem". For an example of this backfiring terribly, see the worthless TSA.

If you don't like it, perhaps North Korea or Saudi Arabia are more to your liking.

 

[legacyzero]

LOL

Sentry: still one of my favorite GAF posters.

 

[The Anti-Monitor]

Don't like creepshots? Well, sounds like we got ourselves a commie. Why don't you go to North Korea and Saudi Arabia, so that you don't have to deal with out FREEDOM?

This fucking forum.

 

[Plywood]

Again, why can't you just go look at porn? There is an entire industry devoted to letting you perv on images of women - who have consented to having their faces/asses posted all over the internet.

The appeal is inherent in the voyeuristic nature of the photos, the fact that the person who was photographed is unaware that the picture was taken in the first place.

 

[Blasty]

Does anyone here seriously believe a legislation on photos would ever happen?

 

[ChosenPredator]

lol so perfect

 

[legacyzero]

Don't like creepshots? Well, sounds like we got ourselves a commie. Why don't you go to North Korea and Saudi Arabia, so that you don't have to deal with out FREEDOM?

This fucking forum.

DAMN lol

Does anyone here seriously believe a legislation on photos would ever happen?

Hmmm... Isn't there legislation on recording somebody without consent? I work for a call center and they tell us that it's illegal to have a customer recording us without letting us know first. Which is why you hear "this call may be recorded for quality and training purposes" I suppose.

Wouldn't photos and videos fall under the same type of thing?

 

[Blasty]

DAMN lol


Hmmm... Isn't there legislation on recording somebody without consent? I work for a call center and they tell us that it's illegal to have a customer recording us without letting us know first. Which is why you hear "this call may be recorded for quality and training purposes" I suppose.

Wouldn't photos and videos fall under the same type of thing?

Everyone's talking about blocking photos in a public setting. That would mean if you happen to appear in the background of a photo taken out in the street, that photo is breaking the law.

 

[Uchip]

pretty sure this has existed many years prior to reddit

 

[legacyzero]

Everyone's talking about blocking photos in a public setting. That would mean if you happen to appear in the background of a photo taken out in the street, that photo is breaking the law.

Oh shit. I'd be rich. RICH I tell you!

 

[SquiddyCracker]

It just seems like the kind of law legislatures would fumble over.

But maybe something simple with a clear "intent has to be provable" would not be too far-reaching.. posting a picture on "JerkOffToTheseCandidAssPhotos.com" is rather obvious, but I do think we have to be careful not to enact legislation that ends up having unreasonable consequences.

And yeah.. would at least scare off a lot of people.

And require some extra web site moderation. This thread for instance.

I still think that extending sexual harassment laws (or throw in a good dose of morality legislation!) is the best solution for all involved parts.
The major honeypots are banned, perverts still masturbate to the creepshots they take, and people won't have to worry about pictures of their primary/secondary sexual characteristics are uploaded and spread online.

Can't see a single downside to this.