If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reuters)   "On a side note," he said, "she had wonderful breasts." Response to being sued for a million dollars for topless picture taken on top of Empire State Building   (in.reuters.com) divider line 27
    More: Amusing, Empire State Building, boobs  
•       •       •

20481 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Jan 2014 at 7:05 AM (37 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

d23 [TotalFark]
2014-01-14 07:11:08 AM
6 votes:
Found it.

http://gothamist.com/2013/08/11/nsfw_photos_topless_woman_atop_empi. ph p#photo-1

yeah, NSFW, but the final line in the story is right.
2014-01-14 07:07:18 AM
6 votes:
TTIWWP
Skr
2014-01-14 07:10:00 AM
4 votes:
"observation deck was full of tourists, including children" I don't think the kids would have any problems with the boobs. Really just the adults impressing morals unto them.
2014-01-14 07:31:44 AM
3 votes:
OH NO!!! You mean CHILDREN may have seen BREASTS?!?!?! Heavens!

I'll never understand that shiat for as long as I live. I grew up with parents who were / are artists. I saw paintings, drawings and pictures similar in nature to the ones in the article from when I was pretty much, well, alive. Only it was the early late 60s early 70s, so more sagging and lots more bush.

ANYway, I don't get this "There were CHILDREN there who say the breasts" shiat that comes up all over the US. Who farking cares? No wonder so many kids are farked up about their bodies and sexuality! From day 1 they're told they should be ashamed of them and that tits are bad.

No. Tits are awesome. They should be free, let them flap in the breeze! Ditto wangs. Just let that shiat be.

Care chases, graphic murders, fights, that's all kosher, but tits? That's just out of the question.

/no, I'm not a nudist
//would never dream of subjecting an unsuspecting public to my pale, pimply ass
///but really, get the fark over it already
2014-01-14 07:09:13 AM
3 votes:
If you want to find America's biggest boobs, they are none other than the Empire State Building's management team.
2014-01-14 11:40:01 AM
2 votes:
Wonderful breasts?

i216.photobucket.com
2014-01-14 07:19:36 AM
2 votes:
Yeah, that's really worth a million dollars. Some tits... things that roughly half the human race has. Perish the thought that some people might have seen a pair of them.

WTF is wrong with Americans?
2014-01-14 07:23:32 PM
1 votes:
Having read TFA... it seems that the point is not the boobs, but the building. You're apparently not supposed to be doing a commercial photoshoot on top of the Empire State Building. They wouldn't have noticed, or cared, except that the boobs meant that everybody + dog saw the picture.

He's claiming that he was just snapping a pic on his cell phone camera, so even though he's a professional photographer, this picture wasn't taken in a professional capacity.

No idea what the law is, but "one meeelyun dollars" can't possibly be what they're legally allowed to fine him for breaking their "no commercial photoshoot" EULA when he got into the elevator.
2014-01-14 05:00:38 PM
1 votes:
img.fark.net

img.fark.net

Just because.
2014-01-14 03:48:59 PM
1 votes:
Anyone mention BIE?

/EIP
2014-01-14 01:01:13 PM
1 votes:
i216.photobucket.com
2014-01-14 11:42:53 AM
1 votes:
i216.photobucket.com
2014-01-14 11:42:01 AM
1 votes:
i216.photobucket.com
2014-01-14 11:40:51 AM
1 votes:
i216.photobucket.com
2014-01-14 11:37:28 AM
1 votes:

MycroftHolmes: So, are you saying that children should be subject to sexuality at an early age? Not sure I agree with that.

I do agree that non-sexualized nudity (think National Geographic) is no big deal, but that was clearly not the case. In this case, the photographer chose a very shapely model, put her in a somewhat provocative pose, specifically for the social experiment of eliciting a response. This behavior is, by definition, offensive. Is the Empire State building stretching a point to try and punish him? Yes. But his actions should not considered normal, socially acceptable behavior.

Nudity per se is not offensive. But there is more to this incident than simple nudity.


Define 'sexualized nudity'?

A lot of people pick up National Geographic and fap like there's no tomorrow (and have done for ages). Hell, I'm sure there's people who have seen the Venus de Milo and rubbed off a few.

If the woman in those photos and been stroking her nipples or rubbing her breasts together in a "come hither" sort of fashion, sure I would agree she was sexualizing her nudity. She wasn't though, she was just standing in the rain and sure, striking a few poses. What one person considers "sexual" another may consider, well, a sheep (possibly NSFW). But simply because a woman is topless doesn't mean it's sexual. We've been taught it is, sure. But walk down any beach in much of Europe and South America. People / women go topless and hardly anyone gives a toss. Oh, sure, when they get HOME I bet more than a few guys do (snerk), but you can sexualize anything or any one.
2014-01-14 10:54:08 AM
1 votes:
I think public nudity laws should be based on aesthetic value.

We convene a panel of people from various backgrounds, of various religions, sexual orientations, and political ideals.

Whenever there's a case of public nudity, this panel would decide whether it was a misdemeanor, a felony, or no crime at all based on the panel's consensus regarding the beauty of the person who exposed themselves. Also considered would be comedic value, taste/tact, and other factors that might alter the perception of each individual case of public nudity.

If the perpetrator looks like this:

2.media.collegehumor.cvcdn.com

image.shutterstock.com

Then it's probably a felony.

If the person looks like this...

www.adweek.com
www.dr-youngforever.com

Then it's a minor misdemeanor.


And if they look like this:

walkoffwin55.files.wordpress.com
i3.photobucket.com

Then no crime was committed, and we publicly thank them.


/Mostly kidding
2014-01-14 10:28:33 AM
1 votes:
If I'm not mistaken, it's legal for women to go topless in New York City, isn't it?

So what's the problem?
2014-01-14 10:19:02 AM
1 votes:
There shall be no sexual images atop one of the world's largest phallic symbols.
2014-01-14 09:21:37 AM
1 votes:

Marcus Aurelius: I thought tits were legal in NYC.


They are.  The Coed Topless Pulp Fiction Appreciation Society (NSFW) taught me that.
2014-01-14 08:51:01 AM
1 votes:

d23: Found it.

http://gothamist.com/2013/08/11/nsfw_photos_topless_woman_atop_empi. ph p#photo-1

yeah, NSFW, but the final line in the story is right.


Fantastic!
The lawsuit is being instigated because they think he made a profit off the photos and isn't sharing.
2014-01-14 08:19:29 AM
1 votes:

hillary: So if I visit the Empire State Building and my fly is accidentally open and some idiot posts a photo, I could get sued. Good to know. Think I'll avoid the Empire State Building on my planned upcoming visit to NYC. Suggest all other Farkers do likewise.


No. The person who took and distributed the photo would get sued. You'd get arrested and tossed on the sex offender registry... because penises are scary.
x23
2014-01-14 08:10:13 AM
1 votes:
"as 30-year-old photographer Allen Henson captured the image on his cell phone."

does not compute.

and after seeing the pics i am certainly no more convinced the label should be 'photographer'.
2014-01-14 07:38:28 AM
1 votes:

unchellmatt: OH NO!!! You mean CHILDREN may have seen BREASTS?!?!?! Heavens!

I'll never understand that shiat for as long as I live. I grew up with parents who were / are artists. I saw paintings, drawings and pictures similar in nature to the ones in the article from when I was pretty much, well, alive. Only it was the early late 60s early 70s, so more sagging and lots more bush.

ANYway, I don't get this "There were CHILDREN there who say the breasts" shiat that comes up all over the US. Who farking cares? No wonder so many kids are farked up about their bodies and sexuality! From day 1 they're told they should be ashamed of them and that tits are bad.

No. Tits are awesome. They should be free, let them flap in the breeze! Ditto wangs. Just let that shiat be.

Care chases, graphic murders, fights, that's all kosher, but tits? That's just out of the question.

/no, I'm not a nudist
//would never dream of subjecting an unsuspecting public to my pale, pimply ass
///but really, get the fark over it already



Technically, breasts are for children.
2014-01-14 07:31:02 AM
1 votes:

kertus: Would be legal in Canada


being topless is legal in New York
2014-01-14 07:19:10 AM
1 votes:
Those are some shiatty pictures
d23 [TotalFark]
2014-01-14 07:09:20 AM
1 votes:
OMG! Kids saw boobies!  They are SCARRED FOR LIFE!
2014-01-14 07:08:05 AM
1 votes:
I'd have to see these 'wonderful' breasts before I can render judgment.
 
Displayed 27 of 27 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report