In 1992 the dazzlingly beautiful actress and model Cameron Diaz participated in a photoshoot where she appeared topless.  Prior to the release of a movie in which Diaz appeared some years later, the photographer approached her and threatened to sell the pictures to "buyers who were going to use them to damage her reputation and hurt the movie" unless she gave him 3.5 million dollars...

Ms. Diaz rightly told him that was extortion and now he's enjoying his day in court, the prick.  And so what has the news had to say?  We'll I've never heard the word topless so many times in one week, for starters.  But today's coverage got me really steamed.  Here's an example title: "Diaz Not Ashamed Of Topless Pics".

That's the big news item apparently.  Not any real details of the court battle or what a sleaze the photographer is, but how she's not ashamed.

From CBS News article Diaz Not Ashamed Of Topless Pics:

Cameron Diaz testified she wasn't ashamed of topless pictures taken early in her career...

...Confronted with the 1992 photos of her in fishnet stockings, leather boots and, in at least one shot, holding a chain attached to a male model's neck, Diaz said Thursday she wasn't enthusiastic about releasing the pictures, although she did believe her bare breasts looked good in them.

"At least I have that going for me," she recalled thinking...

...Diaz, wearing a brown V-neck top, gray pants and black high heels, laughed about her early modeling career ... photos from the shoot without her breasts exposed appeared in French and Greek magazines, and two shots were displayed for jurors Thursday...

...She said she worried her boyfriend at the time wouldn't like her posing topless but added, "It was a professional shoot. It wasn't like in a back alley, 'Take your shirt off.'"

"I was probably exploring the possibility of my body," she continued. "I wasn't ashamed to be out there like that."...

...Defense attorney Mark Werksman suggested Diaz was trying to unreasonably suppress photos she considered damaging even though she has often posed provocatively when it benefited her career.

Werksman pinned to a display board four Maxim magazine pictures showing the actress in a bikini with her "Charlie's Angels" co-stars.

"It was a sexy movie, right?" the attorney asked.

"Thank you, I guess," Diaz responded...

First of all, I imagine Diaz probably wouldn't have even bothered going to court if she wasn't worried that this guy was going to try to hurt the sales of her movie.  This was not the only photoshoot in which Ms. Diaz appeared topless--there were in fact several.  Given that she has willingly been photographed nude multiple times, why on Earth would anyone be surprised to hear her say she's not ashamed?  Why would that be news?

Secondly, I personally find the idea that someone should be ashamed of their naked body repellant.  I mean if being modest about your body suits you, that's fine, but being ashamed of your body is IMHO extremely unhealthy.  It's your body after all, it's not like you can get away from it.  It is possible to teach modesty without teaching that nudity is "dirty"... but for the most part at least here in the US the outdated "nudity = dirty" belief is widely held.

Thirdly, I note how this article goes to great lengths to talk about Cameron Diaz's appearance, other photoshoots, and so forth.  Heck we're even told what she was wearing on the stand as if otherwise we might wonder if she showed up in court nude.  What was the prosecutor wearing?  Beats me... I guess that's not news.

As far as I'm concerned the person who wrote that article should be ashamed, not Ms. Diaz.