WebProNews

Tag: Nudity

  • Instagram Not Into ‘Hosting Porn’, But Floated Idea of More Nudity-Friendly Version

    Instagram’s anti-nudity policy and the backlash toward it have been well-documented. But now it appears that maybe, just maybe, the company has thought about rethinking that?

    Probably not – for plenty of reasons that mostly deal with advertising and its parent company Facebook. But according to CEO Kevin Systrom, Instagram has actuall floated the idea of an “R-Rated” version.

    Via Mashable:

    “There have been discussions,” he said, noting that it becomes a slippery slope about “who decides what’s R-rated.”

    “We’re not in the business of hosting porn,” he added. “We focus on people being able to express themselves in beautiful ways.”

    Systrom also said that nudity isn’t banned on Instagram – “just to be clear”.

    Of course, that’s misleading at best.

    Here’s Instagram’s word-for-word nudity policy:

    “We know that there are times when people might want to share nude images that are artistic or creative in nature, but for a variety of reasons, we don’t allow nudity on Instagram. This includes photos, videos, and some digitally-created content that show sexual intercourse, genitals, and close-ups of fully-nude buttocks. It also includes some photos of female nipples, but photos of post-mastectomy scarring and women actively breastfeeding are allowed. Nudity in photos of paintings and sculptures is OK, too.”

    Instagram bans every single type of nudity, save a few very specific cases where it’s ok. Real nudity is only ok if it’s nipples, not genitals or butts, and only if those nipples are male or female and attached to a baby. Oh, and you can post pictures of statues. How generous.

    So really, nudity is banned on Instagram. The company has every right to do so, but to say it’s not is disingenuous.

    Another disingenuous thing that Instagram has said about nudity recently? That its policy is Apple’s fault.

  • Instagram Blames Apple for Its Dumb Nudity Policy

    Instagram Blames Apple for Its Dumb Nudity Policy

    We’ve documented Instagram’s (and its parent company Facebook’s) hatred of the female form for years. The company basically bans photos of female nipples, unless they are attached to a baby or on a sculpture.

    Instagram’s actual, word-for-word policy on nudity says…

    “We know that there are times when people might want to share nude images that are artistic or creative in nature, but for a variety of reasons, we don’t allow nudity on Instagram. This includes photos, videos, and some digitally-created content that show sexual intercourse, genitals, and close-ups of fully-nude buttocks. It also includes some photos of female nipples, but photos of post-mastectomy scarring and women actively breastfeeding are allowed. Nudity in photos of paintings and sculptures is OK, too.”

    Of course, people challenge this all the time and Instagram is always fighting to remove offending conduct. Plenty of celebrities are unhappy with Instagram’s ban on boobs, and even more everyday users are testing its boundaries with #freethenipple posts.

    Why is Instagram so anti-nudity?

    For the first time, its CEO kind of gave an answer to that. And by answer I mean he passed the buck.

    Speaking recently at an event, Kevin Systrom said that it’s basically Apple’s fault that Instagram is so puritanical.

    From Business Insider:

    Systrom said at the event hosted by Dazed Media on Wednesday in Shoreditch, London, that Apple’s App Store has strict guidelines on the types of content allowed within apps, explicitly banning nudity unless the app is rated 17+. He went on to say that Instagram wants to appeal to as many users as possible, and gaining a higher age rating would prohibit younger users who want to view PG-13 content.

    Despite the censorship, Instagram remains “committed to artistic freedom,” according to Systrom. He went on to say that “in order to scale effectively there are [some] tough calls.” For Instagram, banning some photos of female nipples is one of these tough calls.

    Instagram is in a tough position when it comes to #FreeTheNipple. As Systrom pointed out, the internet hardly lacks pictures of female nipples, and viewing them on Instagram is not essential to the service.

    While Systrom is 100% correct in painting Apple as the equivalent of Carrie’s mom ranting about dirty pillows, this answer is kind of a cop out.

    Twitter is an app that is in no danger of being banned by Apple, yet it features nipple after nipple after nipple. Hardcore porn, too. Twitter’s a porn free-for-all.

    It’s rated 4+.

    Look, Systrom’s right – if you want to find nipples on the internet, you don’t need Instagram. But don’t blame it on Apple. Apple has dumb guidelines for app submissions, absolutely. But Instagram just surpassed 400 million users. It’s not going anywhere, no matter what kind of rating you slap on it. And it’s not like Apple’s going to rate Instagram mature for a relaxation of its nipple policy. Despite Apple’s laughable policies, there are still plenty of apps in the App Store that act as gateways to boobies.

  • Chrissy Teigen Is the Latest to Test Instagram’s Nudity Policy

    So, how long will this post stay up on Instagram?

    Model Chrissy Teigen is the latest in a line of high-profile celebrities who’ve chosen to defy Instagram’s lame rules concerning nudity. On Monday afternoon, Teigen posted this photo, from a shoot for W Magazine:

    Back in April, Instagram took a harder line on nudity. The site has always banned nudity and has been quick to remove posts that violate its policy – but now the lines are more clear. Instagram, unsurprisingly, takes the same stance on nudity as its parent company Facebook. Boobs are ok if a baby is attached, and that’s it.

    “We know that there are times when people might want to share nude images that are artistic or creative in nature, but for a variety of reasons, we don’t allow nudity on Instagram. This includes photos, videos, and some digitally-created content that show sexual intercourse, genitals, and close-ups of fully-nude buttocks. It also includes some photos of female nipples, but photos of post-mastectomy scarring and women actively breastfeeding are allowed. Nudity in photos of paintings and sculptures is OK, too,” says Instagram’s terms of service.

    Both Rihanna and Chelsea Handler have been vocal in their displeasure at Instagram’s nudity policy. Teigen didn’t mention Instagram in her post or specifically state that she’s testing Instagram’s resolve or anything. But if Instagram chooses to yank her photo or even worse – ban her account – I’m sure we’ll hear about it.

    Image via Chrissy Teigen, Instagram

  • Miley Cyrus Doesn’t Care If You Approve of Her Nudity [Pic]

    Miley Cyrus turned heads with her Paper magazine cover last week, but in a very different way than Kim Kardashian did when she shot the cover for the same magazine.

    While Kim Kardashian was nude and oiled up, Miley Cyrus decided to go for a more, shall we say, unique look. Her nudity, body paint and dyed pubic hair stood in stark contrast to Kardashian’s throwback approach to elegance combined with shock.

    When Kardashian posed nude for Paper, Piers Morgan came out to defend her as an icon of progress. Miley Cyrus posed with a pig.

    But it was Miley’s admission of being bisexual — or pansexual, as some would term it — that turned heads.

    “I am literally open to every single thing that is consenting and doesn’t involve an animal and everyone is of age,” Miley Cyrus said in the interview that accompanies the shoot. “Everything that’s legal, I’m down with. Yo, I’m down with any adult — anyone over the age of 18 who is down to love me,” she says. “I don’t relate to being boy or girl, and I don’t have to have my partner relate to boy or girl.”

    When pressed for more elaboration on that point by Time Magazine, Miley said that it is just an attitude she carries.

    “I’m just equal. I’m just even,” Miley explained. “It has nothing to do with any parts of me or how I dress or how I look. It’s literally just how I feel,”

    She says that she was open to bi-curious girls she knew growing up.

    “They all wanted to experiment. I was always the one,” Cyrus says.

    Her identification as not pinning an identification may flummox some, but Miley Cyrus is not swayed.

    “People try to make everyone something,” Cyrus says. “You can just be whatever you want to be.”

    As for how the public might respond to it, Miley gave up worrying about that when she left Hannah Montana behind.

    “Someone said the other day to me, ‘Should you ask your advisor?’” she says. “I’m like, ‘If I have an advisor, they should have been fired two years ago.’”

  • Maggie Gyllenhaal Talks Sex, Nudity at ‘Hollywood Reporter’ Roundtable

    Maggie Gyllenhaal dished about both sex and nudity with regard to the film world at a recent Hollywood Reporter roundtable. The conversation also included Taraji P. Henson, Viola Davis, Jessica Lange, Ruth Wilson, and Lizzy Caplan.

    As sex and nudity so often do, the points Maggie Gyllenhaal made on the subjects added definite intrigue to the roundtable discussion.

    The Honourable Woman star spoke of how she was told on more than once occasion that she didn’t quite live up to Hollywood’s standards for beauty or sexuality.

    “When I was really young, I auditioned for this really bad movie with vampires,” Maggie Gyllenhaal shared. “I wore a dress to the audition that I thought was really hot. Then I was told I wasn’t hot enough. My manager at the time said, ‘Would you go back and sex it up a little bit?’ So I put on leather pants, a pink leopard skinny camisole and did the audition again and still didn’t get the part. (Laughter.) After that, I was like, ‘OK, f— this!’”

    Sex scenes in films hold a great deal of intrigue for the actress.

    “I think sex in film is so interesting,” Maggie Gyllenhall says. “It’s uncomfortable to take your clothes off in front of people you don’t know, but it can be an opportunity for really interesting acting. I’m 37, and I’ve had two babies, and I’m really interested in nudity now.”

    Fake doesn’t translate into sexy for Maggie Gyllenhaal. In a world–especially in her Hollywood world–where so many people have undergone cosmetic procedures to capture their eternal youth, there’s something very refreshing about her attitude.

    “Isn’t it so much hotter to see a woman on TV who looks like an actual woman, someone whose arms aren’t perfect?” she asks. “I am much more turned on when I see people’s bodies that look like bodies I recognize.”

    Maggie Gyllenhaal has grown into an actress that many now revere as not just amazingly talented, but incredibly sexy as well.

    Do you suppose her competition from that long-ago vampire movie is still in the acting business? And if so, is she as naturally beautiful as Maggie Gyllenhaal?

  • Maggie Gyllenhaal Wants Film Sex: ‘I’m Really Interested In Nudity Now’

    Maggie Gyllenhaal has arrived. If her own body of work and fantastic reputation weren’t enough to indicate that, then her inclusion in a roundtable conversation with a pantheon of fantastic actresses should.

    Maggie Gyllenhaal sat down with Jessica Lange, Lizzy Caplan, Viola Davis, Ruth Wilson, and Taraji P. Henson for a Hollywood Reporter roundtable that covered all the hot touch points about actresses in the business today. Race, sexism, and aging were dissected and chewed over among these A-list talents.

    Maggie Gyllenhaal revealed that she used to be told that she was not “sexy enough” or “pretty enough” for parts she auditioned for. Gyllenhaal told one story that illustrated her point.

    “When I was really young, I auditioned for this really bad movie with vampires,” Gyllenhaal recounted. “I wore a dress to the audition that I thought was really hot. Then I was told I wasn’t hot enough. My manager at the time said, ‘Would you go back and sex it up a little bit?’ So I put on leather pants, a pink leopard skinny camisole and did the audition again and still didn’t get the part. (Laughter.) After that, I was like, ‘OK, f— this!’”

    That doesn’t mean that Gyllenhaal is not interested in doing sex scenes on film.

    “I think sex in film is so interesting,” Gyllenhall says now. “It’s uncomfortable to take your clothes off in front of people you don’t know, but it can be an opportunity for really interesting acting. I’m 37, and I’ve had two babies, and I’m really interested in nudity now.”

    The interesting thing is that, by rejecting the demands of others regarding how “sexy” she was supposed to look, Maggie Gyllenhaal has achieved sex symbol status. This allows Gyllenhaal to begin to explore that part of film without the sordid difficulties it may hold for actresses who were aiming to “be sexy” in a role.

    “I was interested in it [when I was younger], too. But I was never the actress asked to be the hot girl who took her clothes off on her first day of work. I was never objectified that way.”

    But Maggie Gyllenhaal is not interested in fake, plastic representations of femininity and looks.

    “Isn’t it so much hotter to see a woman on TV who looks like an actual woman, someone whose arms aren’t perfect?” Gyllenhaal asks. “I am much more turned on when I see people’s bodies that look like bodies I recognize.”

  • Chelsea Handler Bares Ass in Defiance of New Instagram Butt Rules [Pics]

    Chelsea Handler will not sit down and shut up. What is more, Chelsea Handler will not stop showing her butt on Instagram.

    As if this were the great civil rights issue of our time, Chelsea Handler has taken it on as her personal mission to wear Instagram down one blow at a time.

    Chelsea Handler and Instagram came to a battle of words when the company removed a photo that Handler had posted because it violated their Terms of Service. She showed too much skin. In the months that followed, Chelsea Handler came very close to the TOS line, almost daring Instagram to do something. Occasionally she crossed it and her pic would be deleted, such as the one of her skiing topless.

    Recently, Instagram issued stricter guidelines about the display of nipples, buttocks, and other bits of skin on its site.

    “We know that there are times when people might want to share nude images that are artistic or creative in nature, but for a variety of reasons, we don’t allow nudity on Instagram. This includes photos, videos, and some digitally-created content that show sexual intercourse, genitals, and close-ups of fully-nude buttocks. It also includes some photos of female nipples, but photos of post-mastectomy scarring and women actively breastfeeding are allowed. Nudity in photos of paintings and sculptures is OK, too.”

    Well, leave it to Chelsea handler to test that rule out.

    Kicking off Chunk's work week.

    A photo posted by Chelsea Handler (@chelseahandler) on

    When the pic went up, fans held their collective breath to see if Chelsea Handler would be finally banned from the site. Maybe Instagram feels that some plumber crack from Handler is within its limits of tolerance and not “fully-nude buttocks.” The pic has been up for a few days now. It joins these:

    Can you believe more than 2 ass can fit on the same screen? Guess which one's real. Your move, instagram.

    A photo posted by Chelsea Handler (@chelseahandler) on

  • Instagram Takes Harder Line on Nudity, Abuse

    Instagram has always asked users to be nice and respectful of each other, but now the social network is taking a harder line on a handful of issues.

    And it’s updated its community guidelines to reflect this.

    “In the old guidelines, we would say ‘don’t be mean’,” Nicky Jackson Colaco, director of public policy for Instagram, told the Wall Street Journal. “Now we’re actively saying you can’t harass people. The language is just stronger.”

    Here’s Instagram’s new, more forceful rebuke of harassment:

    We want to foster a positive, diverse community. We remove content that contains credible threats or hate speech, content that targets private individuals to degrade or shame them, personal information meant to blackmail or harass someone, and repeated unwanted messages. We do generally allow stronger conversation around people who are featured in the news or have a large public audience due to their profession or chosen activities.

    It’s never OK to encourage violence or attack anyone based on their race, ethnicity, national origin, sex, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, religious affiliation, disabilities, or diseases. When hate speech is being shared to challenge it or to raise awareness, we may allow it. In those instances, we ask that you express your intent clearly.

    Serious threats of harm to public and personal safety aren’t allowed. This includes specific threats of physical harm as well as threats of theft, vandalism, and other financial harm. We carefully review reports of threats and consider many things when determining whether a threat is credible.

    Nudity has received some focus as well.

    Instagram has always banned nudity and has been quick to remove posts that violate its policy – but now the lines are more clear. Instagram, unsurprisingly, takes the same stance on nudity as its parent company Facebook. Boobs are ok if a baby is attached, and that’s it.

    “We know that there are times when people might want to share nude images that are artistic or creative in nature, but for a variety of reasons, we don’t allow nudity on Instagram. This includes photos, videos, and some digitally-created content that show sexual intercourse, genitals, and close-ups of fully-nude buttocks. It also includes some photos of female nipples, but photos of post-mastectomy scarring and women actively breastfeeding are allowed. Nudity in photos of paintings and sculptures is OK, too,” says Instagram’s new terms.

    Sorry, Chelsea Handler. Sorry Rihanna. You’ll have to take your boobs to Twitter.

    Image via Instagram

  • Focusing on Buttocks: What You Need to Know About Facebook’s Newest Attempt to Clarify Its Content Rules

    What can you post on Facebook and will Facebook remove it? What’s ok and what crosses the line? Where the hell is the line?

    Facebook has pulled the curtain back – at least a sliver – on its much-maligned content removal process, giving us a more detailed breakdown on each type of controversial content. For example, something like the promotion of self-injury has always been banned on Facebook – but what does the company actually mean when they say self harm? What qualifies?

    It’s questions like these that Facebook has decided to tackle with a new Community Guidelines page that offers more specifics than the company has ever given us on the topic.

    “We have a set of Community Standards that are designed to help people understand what is acceptable to share on Facebook. These standards are designed to create an environment where people feel motivated and empowered to treat each other with empathy and respect,” says Head of Global Policy Management Monika Bickert.

    “Today we are providing more detail and clarity on what is and is not allowed. For example, what exactly do we mean by nudity, or what do we mean by hate speech? While our policies and standards themselves are not changing, we have heard from people that it would be helpful to provide more clarity and examples, so we are doing so with today’s update.”

    The new Standards explainer is here. You should go check it out, as it’s interesting to see how Facebook’s mind works (breastfeeding nipples ok, buttocks not ok). But I know you’re busy. I’ve been over it, and here are some of the more interesting distinctions in the new document.

    – Facebook bans direct threats – those made toward other users as well as those made toward public figures. But did you know that Facebook takes the location of the threat-maker into account when attempting to determine the threat’s credibility? According to Facebook, it’ll automatically assign more credibility to threats originating and targeting people in “violent or unstable regions.”

    “We may consider things like a person’s physical location or public visibility in determining whether a threat is credible. We may assume credibility of any threats to people living in violent and unstable regions,” says Facebook.

    – Body modification does not qualify as self-mutilation or self-harm. Facebook does not remove those posts. People can talk about suicide on the site, but only if they don’t promote or advocate it.

    “We also remove any content that identifies victims or survivors of self-injury or suicide and targets them for attack, either seriously or humorously. People can, however, share information about self-injury and suicide that does not promote these things.”

    – You can discuss ISIS all you want, but you cannot voice support for it or its actions.

    “We remove content that expresses support for [terrorist activity or organized criminal activity]. Supporting or praising leaders of those same organizations, or condoning their violent activities, is not allowed.”

    – You could get in trouble for sending too many friend requests to the same person. If they don’t want to be friends, they don’t want to be friends. In explaining its ban on bullying and harassment, Facebook says that “repeatedly targeting other people with unwanted friend requests or messages” is a no-no.

    – You can discuss illegal activities on Facebook, as long as it’s not celebrating your own handiwork. And you should know this by now, but if Facebook thinks you pose a direct threat to an individual or the public at large, it’s going to tell the police.

    “We prohibit the use of Facebook to facilitate or organize criminal activity that causes physical harm to people, businesses or animals, or financial damage to people or businesses. We work with law enforcement when we believe there is a genuine risk of physical harm or direct threats to public safety. We also prohibit you from celebrating any crimes you’ve committed. We do, however, allow people to debate or advocate for the legality of criminal activities, as well as address them in a humorous or satirical way.”

    – For the first time, Facebook is specifically banning revenge porn.

    “To protect victims and survivors, we also remove photographs or videos depicting incidents of sexual violence and images shared in revenge or without permissions from the people in the images.”

    Both reddit and Twitter have also written new language into their ToS specifically targeting revenge porn.

    – Facebook’s long and confusing history with nudity has been documented ad nauseam. Porn has always been banned on the site, and any sexual nudity has also been a deal breaker. But Facebook’s long been open to nudity when it’s art, and when it’s used in the depiction of a natural act like breastfeeding.

    But of course, there are fine lines. And Facebook knows it often screws up policing said content.

    “As a result, our policies can sometimes be more blunt than we would like and restrict content shared for legitimate purposes. We are always working to get better at evaluating this content and enforcing our standards,” says the company.

    Here’s Facebook’s thought process on nudity:

    “We remove photographs of people displaying genitals or focusing in on fully exposed buttocks. We also restrict some images of female breasts if they include the nipple, but we always allow photos of women actively engaged in breastfeeding or showing breasts with post-mastectomy scarring. We also allow photographs of paintings, sculptures, and other art that depicts nude figures. Restrictions on the display of both nudity and sexual activity also apply to digitally created content unless the content is posted for educational, humorous, or satirical purposes. Explicit images of sexual intercourse are prohibited. Descriptions of sexual acts that go into vivid detail may also be removed.”

    Don’t focus in on those buttcheeks.

    Did you catch that last part? Facebook may yank your status update if you talk about sex in a graphic manner. Not a photo or anything, just a simple text description.

    – You can sell guns (as long as the proper checks have been done), but not pot (even where it’s legal).

    – You can discuss others’ hate speech, but if you post anything attacking people on the basis of Race, Ethnicity, National origin, Religious affiliation, Sexual orientation, Sex, gender, or gender identity, or Serious disabilities or diseases – Facebook will remove it if reported.

    – If you’re going to share violent content, it can’t be to glorify it. Also, Facebook requests that you give everyone a warning that the video you’re posting is graphic.

    Ok, everything’s cleared up now, right?

    Probably not. And there’s still a lot of room for mistakes on Facebook’s part. Remember, Facebook isn’t scanning everything to find posts that go against its community standards. Facebook still relies on user reports. Once Facebook’s content moderation team (which is partly outsourced) is made aware of a potentially improper piece of content, it’s a judgement call from there on.

    But this does give us a clearer picture. Just make sure that picture isn’t focusing on butts.

  • No Full Frontal: We Won’t Get To See Jamie Dornan’s Todger

    Fans who will be flocking to see the film adaptation of Fifty Shades Of Grey in hopes of seeing Jamie Dornan go completely nude will be in for a disappointment. The 32-year-old actor has confirmed in an interview with The Guardian that he won’t be going nude for the film. “There were contracts in place that said that viewers wouldn’t be seeing my, um… yeah, my todger”, Dornan told the paper. He follows, “You want to appeal to as wide an audience as possible without grossing them out. You don’t want to make something gratuitous, and ugly, and graphic.”

    In 2010, the male nudity clause was added to ratings systems after parents complained about the nudity in the film Borat. Countless films have been flagged for nudity, but there are three recent examples of films being flagged for male nudity in particular: Eat Pray Love, Jackass 3D, and Grown Ups.

    — WESH 2 News (@WESH) November 3, 2014

    The upcoming Fifty Shades of Grey film is based on the best-selling book by EL James about the relationship between billionaire Christian Grey and student Anastacia Steele. The novel’s themes focus heavily on subjects like bondage, dominance and submission, and sadism/masochism.

    This recent development regarding the lack of nudity in the Fifty Shades of Grey movie confirms the speculation that the film will be toned down compared to the raunchy source material.

    — FiftyShadesFan.Org (@FiftyShadesEN) November 3, 2014

    Sam Taylor-Johnson, who directed Nowhere Boy, helmed the film adaptation which stars Jamie Dornan as Christian Grey and Dakota Johnson as Anastacia Steele. Dornan managed to nab the highly sought-after role after Charlie Hunnam, of Sons of Anarchy and Pacific Rim fame, dropped out of the project.

    The actor, who describes himself as a feminist, defended the novel against claims that it perpetuates violence against women by saying in the interview that “I think it’s very hard to argue that when it is all consensual. Half the book is about making contracts. Permission and agreement that this be done. There’s no rape, no forced sexual situations.”

    Fifty Shades of Grey will be shown in theaters in February 2015.

  • Chelsea Handler: “Bodies Are So Silly”

    Chelsea Handler: “Bodies Are So Silly”

    Chelsea Handler recently stopped by Ellen DeGeneres’ talk show, The Ellen DeGeneres Show, to discuss their famous shower scene on Handler’s late night show Chelsea Lately.

    During the finale of Chelsea Lately, one of the highlights of the show was when Ellen walked into the shower with Handler, who was totally nude. They proceeded to have a very comedic conversation while Handler took a shower.

    This isn’t the only time that Handler has been seen in the buff, and Ellen wanted to know why she enjoys being naked so much. Handler isn’t like all of the other women in show business.

    “I think it’s very empowering for me. I like to be naked because I don’t take my body seriously,” Handler told DeGeneres. “I know people do and that’s nice for them, but I think bodies are so silly.”

    Handler said she doesn’t care if she has the perfect body, and isn’t afraid to show it off … especially her breasts, which she describes as her best feature.

    “I like to take them out whenever I can, and be like, ‘Hey look! Pretend this is my whole face!’” Handler said jokingly.

    Recently, several A-list celebrities were targeted in an online hacking scandal. Nude pictures of celebrities such as Jennifer Lawrence and Kate Upton were floating around social media. Handler admitted that she had no fear of being hacked.

    “Nobody is even going to make money from a naked picture of me because I’ll sell it to you for free,” she said.

  • Miley Cyrus Really Loves Being Topless [PHOTOS]

    Miley Cyrus just keeps on entertaining her fans. On Saturday, Cyrus posted two racy photos on Instagram, with one photo of her topless while sporting the hairstyle that may have been inspired by Little Rascals’ Alfalfa. The photo was captioned “#preshoweralfalfaselfielife.” However, many are saying that her hair looks more like Cameron Diaz’s in There’s Something About Mary. She added a little octopus emoticon to cover up her exposed nipple.

    The second picture the former Disney star posted was her lying in bed wearing only a string bikini and captioned it “postshowerinstagramwhoreselfielfie.” Could it be that Cyrus is showing her ex-beau, Liam Hemsworth, what he’s missing?

    Hemsworth and Cyrus called off their engagement in September of last year.

    Other topless Miley moments

    Cyrus is one of the stars opposed to Instagram’s nudity policy. Along with her are other stars including Scout Willis, Lena Dunham, and Suki Waterhouse. Rihanna, who is also known for posting nude pics on Instagram, was forced to take down some of her photographs from her photoshoot with Lui and Vogue, since they violated Instagram’s nudity rules.

    The 21-year-old Cyrus is obviously comfortable showing off her body. Last year, she released a video for the single Wrecking Ball where she rides an actual wrecking ball wearing nothing more than a pair of Dr. Martens boots.

    Cyrus is currently on her Bangerz World Tour and will be performing at the MEO Arena in Lisboa, Portugal, on Sunday, and at Palacio de Deportes in Madrid, Spain, on Tuesday. She will then make her way to Belgium and Netherlands. The tour will take a month-long break before it resumes in the U.S. in August.

    Bangerz is the fourth studio album from Cyrus. It was released in 2013. Cyrus described the album as “dirty south hip-hop,” and the content is a lot raunchier than her previous albums. Bangerz features guest vocals from well known artists, such as Nelly, Ludacris, Future, French Montana, Big Sean, and Britney Spears.

    The Bangerz World Tour has received favorable reviews from critics who are saying that her performances are “weird and wonderful.”

    Image via YouTube

  • Eva Green: Sin City Poster Has Too Much Boob, Says MPAA

    Eva Green is no stranger to on-screen nudity. The actress has bared skin in a handful of movies and TV shows throughout the past decade, most recently in this year’s 300: Rise of an Empire. It’s no surprise then, that Green’s shapely figure was chosen for a new teaser poster for Frank Miller and Robert Rodriguez’s upcoming movie Sin City: A Dame to Kill For. The only problem is that the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) believes the poster is just too sexy to be released.

    According to a New York Post Page Six report, the poster has been rejected by the MPAA for sporting “nudity.” More specifically, the MPAA stated that the “curve of under breast and dark nipple/areola circle visible through sheer gown” were what made the poster too risque. The MPAA serves as the movie ratings board for the U.S. and is well-known for its harsh stance toward sex and nudity in cinema.

    The poster was released in its original form on the Sin City Facebook page. Though it’s not entirely clear that Green’s nipples can truly be seen, her silhouette is clearly defined by the image’s stylistic lighting.

    Of course, the controversy over the poster is likely to get it seen by many more people on the internet than it would have been in a few thousand movie theaters across the U.S. Though the Post report states that the MPAA and movie executives are ironing out a compromise to allow the poster’s release, this type of controversy is exactly the kind of free advertising that marketing executives dream of. The poster in its original form is now destined to become a collector’s item and people across the internet have now been reminded in a very provocative way that Sin City: A Dame to Kill For will hit theaters this August.

    Image via Facebook

  • Rihanna, Instagram Spar Over Nude Photos

    Facebook hates nipples. So does the Facebook-owned Instagram. To be fair, Instagram hated nipples before it was acquired by Facebook, but I’m guessing that Instagram hates nipples even more now because of Facebook’s extreme nipple hatred.

    So it’s not that shocking that Instagram scolded Rihanna over her nipples. Rihanna’s response, however, is hilarious.

    Earlier this week, Rihanna’s new cover shoot for the Paris-based Lui magazine hit the internet, and well, she’s kind of naked in many of the photos.

    And as Rihanna is wont to do, the pop star posted said photos on her Instagram account. Apparently, this drew a warning from the brass at Instagram.

    TMZ‘s sources say that Rihanna received an email from the company that “basically warned her–keep your clothes on or risk having your account permanently shut down.”

    Cue Rihanna’s public response:

    Instagram’s official terms of service prohibit the posting of “violent, nude, partially nude, discriminatory, unlawful, infringing, hateful, pornographic or sexually suggestive photos or other content via the service.” But if you follow enough people, you’ll find that the enforcement of this policy is spotty, at best. Rihanna herself has been posting some pretty suggestive photos for a long time now, but I guess the latest display was simply too much for Instagram to abide, especially when you consider that Rihanna has almost 13 million followers on the network.

    Oh well, you can still find all the images over on Twitter, where Rihanna has posted them as well. Twitter, as you may know, is much less nipple-phobic. Actually, they’re pretty much ok with whatever. Twitter doesn’t have a policy against nudity.

    Image via Rihanna, Instagram

  • Girls TV Show Nude-ispute: Reporter Relays His Side

    Whenever an argument gains momentum, trends, and turns into gossip fodder – on the internet or otherwise – it’s always best to hear both sides before making an assessment.

    Today, the tiff in question is a debate between Lena Dunham her Girls TV show associates versus a reporter at the Television Critics Association press tour panel. During their winter press tour, reporter Tim Molloy inquired about the level of nudity on the show – comparing it to Game of Thrones, before deducing that the latter had purpose while the former did not. Tim had commented during his question:

    “They’re doing it to be salacious. To titillate people. And your character is often naked at random times for no reason.”

    Affronted, Dunham retorted, “It’s because it’s a realistic expression of what it’s like to be alive, I think, and I totally get it. If you are not into me, that’s your problem.” Lena’s colleagues then chimed in, chastising Molloy for his unfavorable phrasing.

    But what about the reporter’s side of the story?

    Well, in his online recollection of the story, Tim Molloy addresses Lena’s comment, saying: “Huh? But I didn’t say that,” recalling that subsequently the “conversation continued its personal turn as Apatow asked if I had a girlfriend.” During the panel, Apatow had followed up Molloy’s affirmative reply with, “Let’s see how she likes you when you quote that with your question.”

    Molloy’s online response went on to say that his girlfriend “wondered about it too” and was “cool with it”.

    Ultimately the problem wasn’t so much about the question of nudity so much as how Molloy asked it. By saying it was “for no reason”, the implication was that it had no artistic merit. By highlighting the disparity of thread-shedding in Thrones versus Girls with the adjectives he did, the inference could be made that Dunham’s natural nudity is merely pointless and “random”, while saline tits are “titillating”. That adjective, however, he omitted as recalled the exchange and stood his ground online:

    The happy ending to this story is that all press it good press for professionals whose livelihood depends on it – especially when it’s so well timed. Oh, gee. Did I leave that out? Yes – since the first episode of Girls premieres Jan. 12, 2014, it’s such a happy accident that this amplified coverage of perceived body-shaming will ignite a buzz-trend on Twitter to remind viewers to watch it on Sunday.

    Meanwhile on Twitter, Mr. Molloy seems to be enjoying his 15 minutes of infamy from Lena’s legions of followers as his article gets heaps of hits from haters.

    But I’m, like, totally sure this little dispute wasn’t blown out of proportion or planned for publicity… whatsoever.

    I mean, what would either party possibly have to gain?

    Image via Youtube

  • The Wolf on Wall Street: Doing Well Despite Raunch

    Among the eight movies that opened on Christmas Day, Variety tells us that Martin Scorsese’s The Wolf of Wall Street is coming out near the top, which is no small feat with The Hobbit being its main competitor.

    The Wolf of Wall Street is based on the true story of a New York stock broker, the mob and the corporate banking world in the 80s. We witness Jordan Belfort’s, played by Leonardo DiCaprio, entire rise and fall caused from sex, drugs and bank withdrawals within a three-hour length of time.

    Funny thing– while the public looks to love it,

    when it was played at an Academy screening, RealBollywood.com tells us that senior Oscar voters were vocally disgusted, and confronted Scorsese about the whole idea of it all.

    Scorsese, the man behind Goodfellas and Gangs of New York, admits that the film is a bit more raunchy than what his old friends may be used to seeing from him(according to mtv.com, actress Margot Robbie almost declined the legendary director because of the gratuitous nudity in the script), but the reviews show that the public either gets it… or just loves seeing a good raunchfest.

    Either way, The Wolf of Wall Street is doing great this Christmas week. Who has already viewed it? Curious about your opinion.

    Image via Youtube

  • Amy Adams Bares it all in American Hustle

    Amy Adams Bares it all in American Hustle

    Here’s what most of us already know about David O. Russell’s new upcoming film American Hustle. Yes, Bradley Cooper not only has really curly hair, but he sets in rollers like my grandmother does before church every Sunday. Christan Bale sports a sweet comb over and has such a big beer gut that’s it hard to believe that this is the same guy that got down to 120 pounds in The Machinist and then bulked up to Superhero weight to play Batman.

    We can also see that the film takes place in the 1970s and has a very stylized, almost Scorsesesque look to it. The general gist of the plot seems to be about con men and women, a dirty FBI agent and the mob. And finally, maybe you’ve heard? Amy Adams and Jennifer Lawrence do a little lip-locking.

    Have your attention now?

    Amy Adams spoke with E! News about kissing her sexy female co-star and also about being asked at the last minute to strip down naked.

    The 39 year old actress spoke candidly about the details of her romantic scene with Lawrence. “It’s funny because after the first take of that, I ended up with lipstick out to here [gestures all around her mouth]—she has very full lips—and also playing somebody who’s not puckering for a kiss, its really interesting how a kiss hits you when you’re not participating in it.” She went on to add. “Jennifer pulls it off wonderfully because you believe it again as part of the character. It doesn’t feel like this salacious, sexual kiss between two women. Its part of her struggle for control.”

    (image)

    As for getting nude, Adams says that was never part of the original plan. Perhaps because she’s worked with David O. Russell before (she received an Academy Award nomination for her performance in The Fighter), she felt comfortable enough with him at the helm to bare it all on the big screen. “David threw that at me last minute, too. He didn’t give me time to think about it at all. It was the night before, so I got a text or I might have woken up in the morning, saying, ‘I think your character might have been a stripper. I think we wanna shoot it.’ And its the first day of filming and its the end of the day, so I said, ‘Well, as long as you let me look at the scene, I’ll do it.’ And he did.”

    American Hustle will hit theaters nationally on December 20th. It is already receiving tons of Oscar buzz. It currently has a 97% approval rating on rottentomatoes.com.

    Image Via Facebook, Facebook

  • Facebook Won’t Pull Shockingly Graphic Indian Prostitution Page [UPDATED]

    UPDATE: It looks like Facebook has removed the page, as I thought they would. But it was still active for a long time, and Facebook did delay in yanking it even after various content reports. Still shows how messed-up Facebook’s content-removal system can be.

    ORIGINAL ARTICLE: This post is NSFW

    Facebook – you’re sending some seriously mixed messages here.

    After yanking such highly-offensive content as artwork of Bea Arthur’s breasts, a New Yorker cartoon featuring the most rudimentary depiction of breasts that could ever exist, elbows that appear to resemble breasts, and various photos of women engaged in breastfeeding, Facebook has decided that a page for one of India’s most notorious red-light districts is a-ok.

    The page, Sonagachi (very NSFW), features graphic photos of breasts, vaginas, penises, oral sex, and even a series of photos apparently depicting a girl losing her virginity.

    It makes no point to hide what it is, listing this in the “about” section:

    Sonagachi is the largest red-light district in Kolkata, India and one of the largest in Asia. It is an area with several hundred multi-story brothels and estimated 11,000 sex workers

    The page hasn’t posted in months, but it is still filled with postings from others – some soliciting prostitutes. Plus, all of those photos…

    Blogger Liz Boltz Ranfield first spotted the page and called on Facebook to do something about it. She, along with a writer from Jezebel (and others), all reported the content to Facebook for removal.

    To their shock, Facebook replied with a “thanks but we can’t find any reason to remove it” email:

    Hi,

    Thanks for your recent report of a potential violation on Facebook. After reviewing your report, we were not able to confirm that the specific page you reported violates Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities.

    Learn more about what we do and don’t allow by reviewing the Facebook Community Standards: https://www.facebook.com/communitystandards.

    Thanks,
    Viki

    Interesting. Considering that the page features graphic nudity, sexual acts, and possibly sexual depictions of minors, this seems like an odd choice.

    Facebook’s terms of service clearly state that…

    “You will not post content that: is hate speech, threatening, or pornographic; incites violence; or contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence,” and that “You will not use Facebook to do anything unlawful, misleading, malicious, or discriminatory.”

    Seems like there’s plenty here to prompt the shuttering of the page.

    Just so we can understand this – this is ok:

    As is this:

    But this deserved to be yanked:

    (It was later reinstated with Facebook’s apology – but still, the content moderators felt they had reason to pull this at some point)

    In the past, many of these content-removal controversies could be attributed to two simple facts about Facebook: First, their content moderation is mostly outsourced, and second, there are billions of photos going up on Facebook every week. That means that it’s almost impossible to police all the content without some screw-ups.

    But this is different. This is Facebook’s content moderation being notified (multiple times) about content that is the epitome of what Facebook should be banning (per their terms of service), and the company is choosing to leave it up. It’s especially odd considering Facebook’s recent move to get tougher on harmful content after being pressured by various women’s groups

    I fully expect Facebook to eventually see the error in this judgement and yank the page. It’s inevitable with this much backlash. But, once again, we have an example of Facebook’s bad content moderation system at work. Something’s gotta change.

  • Pinterest Will Soon Allow Nudity, As Long As It’s Artistic

    Pinterest Will Soon Allow Nudity, As Long As It’s Artistic

    Pinterest, like many other social sites, has had to deal with an unavoidable amount of nudity, porn, and the battle between the two. Is a bare breast considered pornographic? I don’t know, ask Facebook. How much porn is too much porn, and how hard should you make it for the average user to stumble upon it? I don’t know, ask Vine. If porn is what the users want, should the company get it the way? I don’t know – Yahoo seems to think they shouldn’t.

    Pinterest has explicitly banned sexual content, nudity, and even partial nudity. It’s right there in the Acceptable Use Policy. “You agree not to post User Content that is sexually explicit or contains nudity, partial nudity or pornography.” If you search a term like “sex” or “nude” on Pinterest, you’re greeted with this message:

    Reminder: Pinterest does not allow nudity. Pinning or repinning photographs displaying breasts, buttocks or genitalia may result in the termination of your Pinterest account.

    Though that sounds pretty straightforward, well, it’s not. Sure, Pinterest says that they do not allow nudity or pornography. Yet there’s plenty of porn and more “tasteful” nudity on Pinterest. See? See? (NSFW, obviously).

    Now, it looks like Pinterest is taking a proactive step (at the behest of users) to make sure that the nudity that exists on the site is an acceptable type of nudity – artistic nudity.

    “Pinterest is about expressing your passions and people are passionate about art and that may include nudes,” Pinterest told the Financial Times. “So we’re going to try to accommodate that.”

    Gizmodo received another quote from Pinterest spokesman Barry Schnitt.

    “Pinners have asked us for a policy on nudity that makes a distinction between works of art and things like pornography. A change like that poses a lot of questions. We’re working our way through those questions but we don’t have any additional details to offer just yet.”

    It sounds like Pinterest wants to avoid the mess that Facebook’s gotten in as of late. Mainly, the banning of not only art featuring exposed breasts, breastfeeding photos, and cartoon boobs, but even photos that resemble breasts but turn out to be completely innocuous.

    Pinterest has to face it: Their UI is great for art and photos. And if the people want tasteful nudes, well, the people should get tasteful nudes. Lest they run off to a place where it won’t be persecuted. Not that Pinterest has done a great job of enforcing their policy up until this point anyway. Moving forward, Pinterest is probably going to have a problem making that distinction between artistic nudity and porny nudity. It’ll be interesting to see how that plays out.

  • Teacher Fired Over Bikini Photo to Attend Graduation

    Teachers across the U.S. have been fired for a variety of reasons, but modeling is not usually one of them.

    This week, 26-year-old Olivia Sprauer told the Huffington Post that she was fired for her modeling bikini pics. She stated that she was called into the principal’s office on April 29, was shown one of her modeling photos, and was asked for her resignation.

    Sprauer isn’t broken up about the firing, however, as she had planned to stop teaching at the end of the year and attend graduate school. She also stated that she will attend the high school’s graduation ceremony to see her students off.

    Sprauer hasn’t performed in porn, though a few of her modeling photos are a bit more risque than just bikini pics. Her modeling page on the Model Mayhem website states that she loves being in front of the camera and loves being photographed. It also states that she is ok with a bit of nudity:

    I am more than comfortable shooting TASTEFUL nudes for the right projects and look forward to hearing from photographers interested in capturing the perfect photograph!

    Sprauer also has a Facebook page for her modeling persona filled with photos no one would expect from a high school teacher. She seems to be taking the job loss in stride, though, using her Twitter feed to have a laugh at all the attention she is now getting:

    (Image courtesy Victoria Valentine James Facebook page)

  • Topless Scene Regretted by ‘Downton Abbey’ Star

    As Seth MacFarlane so tactfully pointed out at this year’s Oscars, Hollywood has a bit of a fascination with seeing actresses’ boobs. It’s not a particularly radical concept for mature adults (or Europeans), but sometimes the push for a breast tissue can pressure young actresses into baring their chest when they would rather not.

    Take Jessica Brown Findlay, for instance. The actress gained fame playing the rather modest role of Lady Sybil Crawley on the hit show Downton Abbey. More recently, she has taken the role of Alais Pelletier Du Mas in a TV adaptation of the Kate Mosse novel Labyrinth. In the upcoming show, Findlay bares quite a bit of her body, but it’s the skin she showed in the past that she told the Radio Times she regrets.

    According to the interview, Findlay stated that a scene in the movie Albatross in which she flashes a store clerk was “naivety” on her part and that she didn’t know she could say “no.” Going forward, Findlay advises actresses to be “honest and natural” with their nude scenes, but that she would have prepared her body more in hindsight.

    “I was drinking pints and eating burgers.” said Findlay. “But actually, it’s not something I would do again.”

    The video below is the scene from Albatross, and is, naturally, NSFW: