Support NeoGAF

[ClassyPenguin]

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.

Yup. As a photography hobbyist, candid pictures are a great way of capturing emotion of a certain scene or place or people. Just look at any travel blog or magazine.

But shots like the ones in the op can be considered harassment and the motive is completely different.

I seem to recall a thread on Gaf about some dude who got caught taking these type of pictures and he was arrested or something.

 

[Plywood]

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

Blame yourself or g- just yourself.

 

[CiSTM]

When someone starts creepshots kidz version I wonder if some of the Gaffers will still have the same standings.

 

[ScreenSplitter]

Nothing more satisfying than catching a guy trying to take a creepshot of your girlfriend.

 

[B!TCH]

What the hell is going on in this thread?

The only problem I had was a few people misrepresenting him and suggesting he and others think sexually harassing a woman was okay or deserved. I did say my feelings earlier on, that this was very creepy.

No one was misrepresenting anything he said but I did notice a lot of backpedaling and a general failure to state exactly what you/he meant if it was indeed being so misunderstood by everyone else. Maybe you should stop saying terrible things if you don't have the balls to take responsibility for the shitty things you want to say.

 

[Uno Venova]

What the hell is going on in this thread?

No one was misrepresenting anything he said but I did notice a lot of backpedaling and a general failure to state exactly what you/he meant if it was indeed being so misunderstood by everyone else. Maybe you should stop saying terrible things if you don't have the balls to take responsibility for the shitty things you want to say.

They were, people kept saying he said things when he never did.

 

[B!TCH]

They were, people kept saying he said things when he never did.

Please provide evidence of this.

 

[Uno Venova]

Please provide evidence of this.

You still never showed evidence phos said physical harm was deserved earlier on.

 

[B!TCH]

You still never showed evidence phos said physical harm was deserved earlier on.

Yes, I did.

The burden on proof is on you to prove that people misinterpreted what he said, and furthermore, to clearly state what exactly his position is in your mind.

 

[Uno Venova]

Yes, I did.

The burden on proof is on you to prove that people misinterpreted what he said, and furthermore, to clearly state what exactly his position is in your mind.

No, you linked it, and said it was implied, that's it.

 

[G-Fex]

this still going? lol

 

[B!TCH]

No, you linked it, and said it was implied, that's it.

Hahaha, I knew you would wimp out with some evasive nonsense once again. You know nothing.

 

[Uno Venova]

Hahaha, I knew you would wimp out with some evasive nonsense once again. You know nothing.

You don't know much either it seems. *shrug*

 

[B!TCH]

You don't know much either it seems. *shrug*

Can you at least come up with your own lines? Damn.

 

[ViewtifulJC]

^^^^

 

[Uno Venova]

Can you at least come up with your own lines? Damn.

I dont see the need.

 

[Kite]

When someone starts creepshots kidz version I wonder if some of the Gaffers will still have the same standings.

Not really, it would a pretty shitty place to live people tried to enact legislate to prevent all potential creepy actions: males without children must remain 100 feet away from all public playgrounds, preschools and Toys R Us. Single males are not allowed inside Vectoria's Secrets or the female undergarment section. All males are not allowed to take pictures that contain females that are not immediate family members or don't have some sort of relationship with.

I'm facepalming at people's attempts to try and legislate creepiness. Grow some balls (tee hee) and either confront them directly instead of trying to have the government screw with everone's freedom.

 

[Lost Fragment]

When someone starts creepshots kidz version I wonder if some of the Gaffers will still have the same standings.

You're naive if you don't think this already exists somewhere.

 

[ViewtifulJC]

You're naive if you don't think this already exists somewhere.

Lost Fragment
Obsessed with 4chan
(Today, 11:08 AM)

 

[Newline]

Wear whatever you want, never give into what people expect you to or think you should wear.

But just know that I will be there... behind you... watching, snapping, creepin.

 

[OddSpoon]

I photograph random people all the time, then upload them to twitter or Instagram with funny captions. (The goofy looking people)

Could see why people would be pissed, I mean, after reading Devo's post in here, I don't want people taking photos of my girlfriends hot ass in public. Well if they do, they do (nothing you can do about it)

 

[CiSTM]

You're naive if you don't think this already exists somewhere.

There are probably many sites like that, tho they aren't public like creepshots since they would probably be taken down by the feds.

 

[Stahsky]

I'm not even sure how you people started fighting over this. It's creepy. What else is there to talk about? GAF is weird

 

[jediyoshi]

What else is there to talk about?

Is there some chatroom version of GAF I'm missing that doesn't archive thread comments?

 

[Stahsky]

Is there some chatroom version of GAF I'm missing that doesn't archive thread comments?

Probably next to the threads that don't somehow start petty bickering

 

[noah111]

I'm still surprised at how mixed the 'general consensus' has actually been in here.

Some posters will say 'no no, i think this is wrong and creepy' but then go on to say 'b-b-but it's to be expected when women wear x y z'.

for fuck's sake, stop arguing about yoga pants.

Most of those pics in the subreddit from the OP feature normal clothes or short shorts

NOPE! If only they didn't wear yoga pants mayne, they would be more protected!

It's basically an ongoing tell-tale joke; people always cling on to specific clothes when trying to (sorry, but ultimately) victim blame.

The cut on those pants reminds me of 80s cartoons every time I see it, I don't know why.

ot; they remind me of spider-man.

In Québec, people have legal control of their own image, maybe this sort of law should be more widely adopted?

That's interesting, how does it work with celebrities, though?

Yup. As a photography hobbyist, candid pictures are a great way of capturing emotion of a certain scene or place or people. Just look at any travel blog or magazine.

But shots like the ones in the op can be considered harassment and the motive is completely different.

Exactly, that's been my point. You can't just say 'oh but they're in a public space! when 90% of the photo consists of their ass. The way a photo is framed is more important than the setting it's in, legally anyway imo.

 

[Izick]

Bragging rights.

Bragging rights? Bragging rights that you saw an ass? (not you, the royal you)

 

[Buzzati]

Can we take pictures of the pathetic dorks that do this and post them on the internet, too?

 

[IceCold]

Can we take pictures of the pathetic dorks that do this and post them on the internet, too?

Are they hot? Because otherwise no one will care.

 

[Blasty]

Can we take pictures of the pathetic dorks that do this and post them on the internet, too?

As long as they can't be identified nobody, including them, will care.

 

[Sapphire Dreams]

Creepshot? what is that ?

*looks at the pictures*

Okay...

 

[fizzelopeguss]

*glances over at Post a Picture of Your SO Thread*

That thread is dodgy as hell.

 

[Angry Fork]

It's unethical but as long as they don't show the face online it shouldn't be illegal imo. I'm not gay so if for example a gay guy took a picture of me from behind, posted it online and I found out I'd be a bit creeped out but nothing dramatic. I wouldn't even ask them to take it down like I just have a who cares stance as long as my face isn't there.

It's still a bit too weird to justify doing it like some secret agent though. There have been times where I've seen someone so beautiful I wished I could take a picture just because I didn't want to forget what they looked like but it just feels wrong without their permission.

edit - Actually I'm not even sure taking pictures randomly of people's faces should be illegal. I wouldn't like it if it was done to me but I don't like big brother laws when it comes to stuff like that it's way too intrusive. At some point people will just be photographing some statue, there happens to be a person there and now that picture becomes illegal just because some person is there? It's too broad of an idea.

 

[Chuckie]

That thread is dodgy as hell.

Why is it dodgy? You think people are posting pics of not girlfriends?

 

[fizzelopeguss]

Why is it dodgy? You think people are posting pics of not girlfriends?

Partly, there's also something that feels off and a little masturbatory about it all, almost fishing for "phwoar! eh, look at this!" gif replies.

Maybe it's because of that yixian scumbag from years back.

 

[SquiddyCracker]

In Québec, people have legal control of their own image, maybe this sort of law should be more widely adopted?

Why does Canada (Quebec) have to be so great, CD?

Quick, bring up some negatives!

 

[cutmeamango]

Legal control of their own image would do nothing, blurred faces still have nice bums.

 

[Rentahamster]

The farther we progress technologically so that we eventually record and digitize everything we sense, the more conflicts we are going to run into in the future if we change our present laws to outlaw the thought crime of "creeping".

 

[Wool]

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.

This is pretty accurate. While I think a forum dedicated to creepshots is creepy, men have always ogled women. With the addition of the internet and cameras built into phones this is just the natural next step. If the women who's picture was taken doesn't know, and other people enjoy the picture, I don't really see the harm.

Anyway, it isn't going to suddenly stop happening, and a ban on public photography is not going to happen, so what is there to discuss?

 

[Blasty]

This is pretty accurate. While I think a forum dedicated to creepshots is creepy, men have always ogled women. With the addition of the internet and cameras built into phones this is just the natural next step. If the women who's picture was taken doesn't know, and other people enjoy the picture, I don't really see the harm.

Anyway, it isn't going to suddenly stop happening, and a ban on public photography is not going to happen, so what is there to discuss?

As long as you can't be identified, there is no harm. Being constantly ogled presents more risk than a picture.

 

[Raonak]

I don't know, for some reason i never really thought of someone creeping over me to be something worth worrying about. guy mentality and all. would probably be more of an ego boost than anything

could definetly see people being upset with it though, aslong as they can't be identified i don't see how it could be illegal.

Spoiler

goes bookmarks creepshots subreddit..... jk

 

[Devolution]

As long as you can't be identified, there is no harm. Being constantly ogled presents more risk than a picture.

No harm? I don't really think that's true. Respecting boundaries and not encouraging the idea that others are merely objects for sexual gratification is pretty important.

 

[cutmeamango]

No harm? I don't really think that's true. Respecting boundaries and not encouraging the idea that others are merely objects for sexual gratification is pretty important.

Sure, still, no harm.

 

[Blasty]

No harm? I don't really think that's true. Respecting boundaries and not encouraging the idea that others are merely objects for sexual gratification is pretty important.

It doesn't make it right or moral, but there isn't really any more harm in it than there is watching porn. I also don't believe most (normal) people consider the opposite sex as merely objects of lust, but you're right, it is important.

 

[Trey]

That thread is dodgy as hell.

There's a certain amount of hypocrisy present that allows that thread to exist when claims of objectification come fast in strong in all threads like these.

Though, perhaps, the posters in each camp do not overlap.

 

[Verelios]

No harm? I don't really think that's true. Respecting boundaries and not encouraging the idea that others are merely objects for sexual gratification is pretty important.

I'm not sure, but I think that in reality the above is quite often the case for random people on the street. Not to the extent of "I'll rape you in my mind", but if you see an attractive woman, you're not going to go 'do not want'.

It's similar to what's going on in your mind, in that what they don't know can't hurt them. Unless they know, which is probably not that good. But it's a public setting and as long as it's a public setting and there are no laws directly banning that activity, I honestly don't see the problem. It's creepy as hell, I'll give it that, and I would savagely beat the person taking shots of my gf/friend/relative, but other than that: Whatcha gonna do?

 

[The Anti-Monitor]

As long as you can't be identified, there is no harm. Being constantly ogled presents more risk than a picture.

And supporting and hi5ing the guys who take a picture is definitely going to help.

 

[Blasty]

And supporting and hi5ing the guys who take a picture is definitely going to help.

I haven't done either of those things though nor have I supported it, so why bother quoting me?

 

[FyreWulff]

It doesn't make it right or moral, but there isn't really any more harm in it than there is watching porn. I also don't believe most (normal) people consider the opposite sex as merely objects of lust, but you're right, it is important.

People in porn knew the filming would be rebroadcast to other people. It's not the same thing.

 

[Devolution]

It doesn't make it right or moral, but there isn't really any more harm in it than there is watching porn. I also don't believe most (normal) people consider the opposite sex as merely objects of lust, but you're right, it is important.

On properly (and legally) produced and distributed porn the actors sign off on their rights for their images to be distributed.