Regarding Cameron Diaz’s giggly testimony on the stand yesterday, let me see if I have this straight: Diaz said she’s not ashamed that she posed for topless photos for photographer John Rutter in 1992. ”The photos themselves were not offensive to me. I thought my boobs looked good … at least I had that going for me,” the New York Daily News quotes her as saying.
Rather, what she said she objected to was Rutter’s alleged threat to sell the photos in 2003 to an overseas client who planned to use them in a ”bad angel” photo spread. (Rutter has denied the charge that he tried to blackmail Diaz.) So, is she saying she didn’t mind being seen naked, just being seen as naughty?
Also, a Zen koan comes to mind, of the if-a-tree-falls-in-the-forest variety: If a photographer takes nude pictures of Cameron Diaz but is barred from ever showing them, do they still exist?
Comments (1-2) of 2 Add your comment
It’s that she’s said in the past that she’d never do nudity and now she looks like a hypocrite and everybody knows it.
hella funny. What happened to Cameron though? You never really see her these days.