The recent hacking of nude celebrity selfies got me thinking. What, if any, is the social damage to the celebrities involved, in American culture?
I mean, the pictures are clearly private, taken by the women themselves or by a lover. So it’s not like they “sold” themselves. Traditionally, a woman who sold her own nude image was thought of as, in some way, a prostitute, right? But that is not the case here.
If the pictures showed that the celebs were in reality less attractive and had bamboozled everyone into thinking they were beautiful, well, that could get some sniggering. (I think that is mostly the appeal of picutres of celebs without make-up, for women) But the pictures, if anything, show us that these girls really are really beautiful.
Is it because in US culture, decent girls don’t take nude selfies to send to lovers? So anyone who does take a selfie, is a slut who deserves scorn? Do people really feel that way, when every ladies magazine tells its readers to be sexpositive if they want their marriage to work?
What am I missing? Why is such a leaked selfie damaging to the celeb, instead of for the hackers, or the people who have looked them up, like I admit here to doing?
I’m not talking about why a celebrity would object to such a hack. For that, the reasons are obvious.
My question is about the social and reputational damage. In the past, an actress who had ever posed nude commercially would have a hard time being accepted as a serious actress, or she and the movies she played in would be boycotted as indecent and immoral by a large part of the public.
Is such a sentiment still shared? And does it apply to this kind of leaked pictures?
Less than it used to be. Not only is nudity increasingly common in mainstream media, and porn openly a part of everyone’s sex lives, but there have been recent scandals (e.g. Paris Hilton) that suggest standing up and admitting the reality of it actually puts them in a more admirable position. These days we don’t really care all that much.
The issue with this situation isn’t reputation but their decision to keep parts of their lives private being taken from them.
I don`t think actresess’s careers were ever hurt by nude photos (unless they were from an actual porn shoot). Back when it might have matters, Hollywood bosses were sexist males, so they had no objection. Marilyn Monroe’s nude photos (which showed up in Playboy didn’t hurt her. Vanessa Williams may have been stripped of her Miss America title, but it didn’t hurt her in the long run.
The real issue is the embarassment and the fact the public is seeing things that were meant to be kept private and is none of their business.
Its not so much about being boycotted as reputational damage. It also depends on what the celebrity is getting up to in the leak and her public persona. If the public persona does not tally with the private persona then problems can arise. Celebrity is as much about what you wish to feed to the public. A video of Kim Kardashian recieving a facial will not have the same career damage as one that shows Katie Couric doing the very same sex act.
Nobody expects beautiful young Hollywood actresses to act like nuns these days. In Ms. Lawrence’s case, her career will not be harmed at all, and might very well be helped. Directors are more likely now to think of her as suitable for more “adult” (in the good sense) roles. (I haven’t been following this story closely enough to know who else’s pictures, if any, might have been leaked, but most probably, if they are likewise actresses known for their beauty and sex appeal, much the same probably applies.)
I am not saying that whoever hacked and released these pictures are not assholes, or that those affected might be feeling very embarrassed and angry about it at teh moment. But in terms of professional reputation they are not likely to lose anything.