Pervert videotapes a girl's butt in Time Square

[0roo0roo]

the guy is kinda a dork, but the idiot girl was posing in public like an attention whore and clearly liking the attention knowing shes hot sh*t in times square..tourist video taping/picture area. wtf does she expect.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

I want to know WTF they're doing even taking her pic or whatever in times square anyway.. The entire thing looks completely and totally unprofessional.

 

[masterxfob]

girl/group is stupid for not expecting that to happen in public.
cyclist is a douche who needs to mind his own f'ing business.
camera guy is creepy.

 

[Fayd]

she wasn't acting like a slut at all. she was having a photoshoot. they could have been her senior pictures. she did nothing wrong.

:thumbsup: to "goober"... he did what any real man should have done, which was get in that dude's camera lens so he couldn't take shots of her crotch to potentially post all over the internet.

why do people care? it's not like her cooter is visible...

 

[preslove]

wtf? Seriously, wtf are you guys talking about? What a non-issue. I watched during the first minute, waiting to see someone in the background videotaping her. At about the one minute point, there's a guy on the sidewalk doing just that (else taking a picture, but he holds the camera steady for a bit.) The majority of the time, it seemed he had her entire body framed, or almost her entire body. Interestingly, the angle he was shooting at toward the end was the *same* angle the photographer was shooting at in the beginning - actually, the photographer was even closer, and shooting from toward the ground upward.

Granted, at one point, he did start zooming in for about 10 seconds or so, but - how the hell was someone supposed to know he was zoomed in on her butt vs. knowing whether or not the photographer did the same thing for a couple of frames?

*shrug*


(Edit: before the "seems like a perv" - the guy is a professional asshole, and apparently, out of the closet gay - i.e. not interested in her. But, it took multiple people being asses before it was apparent that he's an ass too. )

Pretty much this. Hell, I would have video taped it all myself, if I were there, just for the novelty of it. Some girl is posing in Times Square. That's kind of the type of random thing you go to a place like NYC to see. Is it pervy to video tape the naked cowboy?

 

[Regs]

8/10. Needs a little more height and maybe a bigger bust for a 10. Seems like a typical day in NYC.

 

[slightlyhuman]

no, you shouldn't be surprised.

i actually appreciated the biker, but then, i'm all about knights in shining armor saving a damsel in distress.

'you just wish you could work as hard as i do'.

you prefer... that?
:biggrin:

the guy is a creep.
the girl is a dumb bitch for thinking she would not get a reaction like that when doing that in a public place.
the biker goober, well he's a fuck tard.

 

[mizzou]

wow, something about strippers who feel ashamed about their stripping in front of you just makes it that much hotter

 

[Koing]

lol the hilarity of this thread and the video.

Koing

 

[Capt Caveman]

she wasn't acting like a slut at all. she was having a photoshoot. they could have been her senior pictures. she did nothing wrong.

:thumbsup: to "goober"... he did what any real man should have done, which was get in that dude's camera lens so he couldn't take shots of her crotch to potentially post all over the internet.

Correct. I don't believe anybody would have harassed him if he hadn't of moved over to start filming her ass. The photographer is on the ground and obviously taking pics of her in a pose. Some folks can't seem to figure out the difference.

People think it would be fine to walk around with a camera to film women's asses b/c they're in a public place.

 

[Regs]

People think it would be fine to walk around with a camera to film women's asses b/c they're in a public place.

The guy likely looked like a creep as well.

 

[HybridSquirrel]

tagged for when i get home

 

[Regs]

tagged for when i get home

Does not disappoint.

 

[zinfamous]

Well, on one hand, he does have the right, but on the other, man he was a creep

creep, and he sounds like a complete imbecile. Just because the film crew got permission, license, whatever to shoot in that public space, doesn't give anyone else the license to show up and film or shoot their own content.

They have every right to tell him to gtfo, and deny his assumed "right" to encroach on their material. what a dickweed. I don't think I've ever encountered someone with such an antagonistic, douchebaggy, and outright flawed understanding of public space and rights than this guy behind the camera.

what a fuck.

 

[zinfamous]

she was airing out her vadg in public? Do all womenz do this in america?

Yes.

This is why America > *

:sneaky:

 

[mizzou]

When a real celebrity is doing the same thing, signs go up everywhere around the perimeter, security surrounds the site, and they TAKE your camera out of your hands, even if its a cell phone

I saw this done when Jessica Alba was in my area

(no it wasn't my cell phone camera)

 

[zinfamous]

Should I be surprised that people here are defending this cretin and critiquing someone for telling him to stop?

maybe not. Though I'm completely surprised how one-sided it is. Sounds like the guy is a set-up (sounded a bit..."fake" to me, but I accepted him as real), so it's hard to take him and his argument seriously after htat.

However, his "I'm in public, I'll film whatever I want," is completely NA in this situation. Only goobers would defend him for filming her ass during a licensed shoot. (assuming that's what was going on with their set-up)

 

[zinfamous]

She doesn't want pervs, or guys who hook up with Howard Stern to get a buck for playing jackass in public, filming her. It looked like a ballet pose, you noticed the ballet slippers? Who are you to say what she was doing exactly. It could've been for a dance portfolio with the busy city in the background.

exactly.

Though the reaction here somewhat confirms that the ave. ATOTer is a hairy-shouldered, hunched, perv, doesn't it?

 

[cyclohexane]

this is the shit.

 

[Engineer]

Do stuff in public and expect to pay the consequences.

Guy was weird but he didn't do anything illegal (that I know of).

*shrugs*

 

[zinfamous]

I don't see how he's a creep, perv, or whatever for video taping her ass - she has a nice ASS and she's showing it off in PUBLIC for the entire world to see and video tape or take pictures.

What if it was a woman holding the camera? Would she be a creep? Probably not.
What if it was an man doing the same thing as the woman in the video? Would the person holding the camera still be labeled a creep? Probably not.

I bet 99% of men [and some women] would take at least 1 pictures of her ass or include her ass in a picture if they had a camera.

FFS - if you don't want your body to be video taped in this type of situation - then frikken do it in a private studio..

.....yeah, so I'm guessing most people IRL consider you a creep, if this is an accurate representation of how you rationalize such things.

 

[Fritzo]

Was the guy holding the camera Rocky Balboa's son?

 

[zinfamous]

Yes, the age old philosophical debate on morality is settled because you said so.

actually, it looks to me like you settled this argument in your previous post by dismissing the entire concept as "a farce."

see:

The reason his actions need defense is because of people like you. The concept of morality is a farce.

way to make up shit for the sake of...well, nothing. I think your confusing the concept of morals with the expected origin of morals. Or, the typical ATOT debate of religion vs need for morality. rejecting that argument (morals as a result of religion) does not make morality = farce.

What I'm saying, is that it seems like the only way to accept your statement: "morality is a farce," is with the qualifier "morality only through religion is a farce."

There is nothing farcical about the concept of morality. There is an objective definition of morality that a majority of rational humans can accept. To argue that morality is subjective, in the sense that "Well, Hitler thought killing the jews was moral, so who are we to accept as the authority? It's all perspective!" ...is a non-argument.

One would have to accept that different values placed in regards to certain groups of people are rational for those that choose to place such values--that is not a rational perspective when considering morality.

 

[coolVariable]

It was NOT a licensed shoot and if the police had gotten involved, they would have probably needed to pay a fine.

 

[Deeko]

The most thing illegal in that video was the cyclist - both for touching the guy's camera and running over his foot. Could be construed as assault quite easily. While the camera man was very odd, he was within his rights, and frankly, a girl doing something like that in Times Square should expect something like that to happen.