elebrities turn up nude in photos all the time.  It's so common that you might think that's what the Internet was made for, at times. There are several million "Nude Celebrity" sites, all of which have more scanned Maxim photos, Playboy photos, swimsuit calendar pictures, DVD vid caps, and grainy stalkerazzi pics than you can believe. I don't ordinarily take any notice of that sort of thing, but occasionally something along those lines hits the mainstream media, or is just too juicy to resist mentioning on this site.

Check the first (lowest) update on the Anna Kournikova page for the amusing topless Penthouse photos that were great, aside from not actually being pictures of Anna.  That update would be on this page, if Anna didn't have her own special page.

September 28, 2002

Another reason to hate rich guys.

The hot chicks they get, while the rest of us have to settle for some scab we picked up at a Bennigan's over a plate of buffalo wings, and know we'll just end up fighting with over money and how we're always working late with that cute redhead from personnel, before she inevitably smashes up our apartment in a jealous rage and cleans out the checking account before flying back to Kansas City to live with mother.

• Exhibit one is this picture of Tiger's girlfriend, on hand to watch him lose Ryder Cup matches. That's a pretty good girlfriend, really.  The only thing more boring than playing golf for eight hours is watching it, and she's out there walking around in the gallery without a perpetual yawn on her face.
• Exhibit two is Justin Timberlake admitting to performing some gamahuche on Britney Spears.  I'd imagine it looked a lot like this.

That nude pic of her reminds me of this site, which I saw some weeks ago.  It's a weird site by a guy who is crusading against the shocking (to him) and horrible (to him) practice of selling fake nude celebrity photos on eBay.  Ironically, he includes numerous uncensored fake celeb nudes in his ranting.  I would almost wonder if he's trying to get a job as a publicist or is maybe a plant; I mean who really cares if celebs have some fake nudes of them flying around?  They worked their whole lives to be famous, they earn a colossal living doing TV or movies or music, they can take a few fake nudes.

Now if some guy were creating those of a woman he knew at work, or his ex-girlfriend, and causing her serious defamation and unwanted attention by publicizing them, I could see that being a serious issue.  With celebrities I see it almost as a fair use thing, or satire. 

No one believes that there is an explicit photo of Mira Sorvino performing fellatio, so celebrities are easier targets for this sort of thing, but also somewhat immune to it being taken seriously.  Which isn't to say that if I were the celebrity involved I wouldn't be really pissed off.  I also think this should be illegal to sell, but the fact that it's being sold isn't exactly enough to outrage me.

July 6, 2002

Jennifer Aniston, one of the actresses on Friends, a show I have never (and will never) seen, has settled a lawsuit against some celebrity nude magazines.  She was suing them to stop publication of the photos, and for financial damage.  Obviously the money is nothing to her, she just wants to get back at them for spying on her, and to hurt the magazines, and her main motivation is to keep the photos from being published again.

Aniston, 33, claimed a photographer — described in her lawsuit as a "stalkerazzi" — scaled a neighbor's wall and, using a telephoto lens, snapped photos of her "reclining topless in her back yard, wearing only her panties." The pictures were then sold to the magazines.

Nice view for the neighbors, eh?  It's sort of odd that she'd sue over this, I mean is she planning on holding up some movie company for an extra $5m her first topless scene?  It's not as if she's holding much back, being as she's done a nude Rolling Stone cover, and many other shots with her tits all but revealed.

I've never found her all that attractive myself; Courteney Cox is the one on that show I think is hot, at least in magazine photos and such, and mostly for her face, which is painfully striking.  Once in a while I'll happen upon Friends on a rare channel surfing escapade, and if she's on I'll just mute it and stare at her.  The guys on that show all look singularly idiotic and goofy to me, so I've been known to hold my hands up to the screen, covering their idiot smirks, while watching just the spot Courteney's face occupies.  After 30 seconds I'm okay and can go back to my life. IMHO, Aniston and the other one are pretty for TV stars, but well below model-quality, if I can be cold and harsh in my appraisal (and if you've seen the Hot or Not page, my abilities in that arena are not in doubt).

Anyway, you're probably wondering why I waste time on this?  Well, I have what is purported to be the photo of Aniston that the lawsuit was about.  Copied it from a newsgroup posting some months ago when I heard about these lawsuits for the first time.  It's not a very good picture; bad angle, and there's no way you could determine who's actually in the shot, with no visible face, so I wonder why Aniston didn't just deny it was her and let the whole thing die a publicity-free death?

Click the thumbnail to see the full size pic, and let's hope that, 1) it doesn't get google-linked as "Jennifer Aniston Nude" and devour my entire monthly bandwidth in about 10 minutes, and 2) get me nasty letters from her lawyers.

I find it mostly interesting for her weird boobies.  The left one looks like it was damaged with a razor blade, making a dent right across it.  I wonder if that's a birth defect or she somehow cut it?  Hard to imagine an accident that would do such a narrow slice across one though.  Piercing that was torn free? *ouch* Or maybe it's just a little ridge she has, and the shadow from the sun is making it look like a slice/divot?

Aside from that weird bit, she's got oddly-shaped breasts as well.  They look natural, and are a nice size (size doesn't really matter to me on breasts, as long as they aren't too big), but the shape is strange, with the way they abruptly narrow at the areola. It looks almost like the ends were heated too much and shrank, or like someone squeezed and twisted them, like the end of a balloon.  Obviously that's not the case, it's just the shape she was born with/grew into, but it's an unusual one you don't see very often in nude photos.

Imagine the old days, pre-internet, when you couldn't see several thousand naked breasts a day with virtually no effort?  Next time your dad and/or granddad starts going on about how kids today have it so easy, you'll know where he's coming from, and be able to commiserate.  "Yep, granny's got a rack like a Denny's breakfast special; pity you couldn't do some online comparison shopping before they clamped on the ball and chain, gramps."  This will draw you two closer than every before.

All site content copyright "Flux" (Eric Bruce), 2002-2007.