Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Privacy

Model Dani Mathers Faces Criminal Charge Over Fat-Shaming Snapchat Photo

The 2015 Playboy "Playmate of the Year" was charged with misdemeanor invasion of privacy.

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 11.7.2016 11:15 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Large image on homepages | Mike Danenberg/PressLine/ Splash/Newscom
(Mike Danenberg/PressLine/ Splash/Newscom)
Mike Danenberg/PressLine/ Splash/Newscom

Los Angeles model Dani Mathers, Playboy's "Playmate of the Year" for 2015, has been indicted on criminal charges over a photo of an older, nude woman Mathers took in a gym locker-room and allegedly shared on Snapchat. The Los Angeles city attorney's office announced last Friday that Mathers, 29, was charged with one count of misdemeanor invasion of privacy.

She is accused of secretly snapping a photo of the naked 70-year-old woman in an LA Fitness shower-area in July and posting it to Snapchat with the comment: "If I can't unsee this then you can't either." LA Fitness officials somehow saw the snap, and reported it to Los Angeles police.

Mathers does not deny taking and sharing the photo, but she says it was meant to be sent as a private message and not to be posted publicly. She has since apologized on social media, sharing an apology video on Snapchat and writing on Twitter: "I'm sorry for what I did… I need to take some time to myself now to reflect on why I did this horrible thing. Goodnight."

"Prosecutors often use invasion of privacy charges against peeping Toms and people who conceal cameras to take sexually suggestive photos of women," the Los Angeles Times noted. "But legal experts said this marks a rare time authorities have brought charges against someone over photos making fun of someone's weight. It comes amid growing awareness and outrage about 'body-shaming'—particularly common on social media."

Despite the spin about body-shaming and the use of Snapchat here, however, there doesn't seem to be much that's novel about it. Mathers' motivation may not have been sexual and her intention may not have been to share the photo to a mass audience, but both are likely irrelevant from a legal standpoint. Like any peeping Tom, Dick, or Harry, she still captured an intimate image of someone without their knowledge or consent, in a place where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy, with the intent to share it with one or more individuals. This would seem to fulfill the requirements under California's invasion of privacy statutes, so long as it can be shown that Mathers acted "with the intent to invade the privacy" of the woman of whom she took and shared a nude pic.

Thomas Mesereau, Mathers' attorney, defended her by saying that a) the woman did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the fitness-center shower area and that b) Mathers "never tried to invade anyone's privacy and never tried to violate any laws." But, again: she secretly took a picture of an old lady who was just trying to shower after a workout and then tried to share it with at least someone. I'll buy that Mathers didn't know she was breaking the law, but not that her actions can be construed as anything other than a conscious choice to invade someone's right to privacy.

Unfortunately, Los Angeles law-enforcement is actively stoking the impression that this isn't about old-fashioned privacy rights but some new-fangled effort at eradicating "body shaming." Announcing the charges against Mathers, City Attorney Mike Feuer said it was important that city officials send a message about the "painful, long-term consequences" that can come from making mean comments about people's physical appearances. "Body-shaming is humiliating," said Feuer. "It mocks and stigmatizes its victims, tearing down self-respect and perpetuating the harmful idea that our unique physical appearances should be compared to air-brushed notions of 'perfect.' What really matters is our character and humanity."

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: 2016 Could Edge Out 1998 as Hottest Year in Satellite Temperature Record

Elizabeth Nolan Brown is a senior editor at Reason.

PrivacyCaliforniaNudityCriminal JusticePolice
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (81)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Fist of Etiquette   9 years ago

    She learned it from following @realDonaldTrump, okay?

    1. Suicidy   9 years ago

      I volunteer to handle her house arrest and administer her soankings.........personally.

      1. wareagle   9 years ago

        soankings

        soakings and spankings?

        1. commodious cam't contmpla..   9 years ago

          And then... the oral sex!

          1. DEATFBIRSECIA   9 years ago

            You are in grave danger.

      2. DEATFBIRSECIA   9 years ago

        "Soankings," combination of soakings and spankings?

        Excellent.

      3. JaimeRoberto   9 years ago

        I think he means he will flagellate her with Robbie's hair.

  2. Hugh Akston   9 years ago

    Unfortunately, Los Angeles law-enforcement is actively stoking the impression that this isn't about old-fashioned privacy rights but some new-fangled effort at eradicating "body shaming.

    I was fine right up to this.

    1. Elizabeth Nolan Brown   9 years ago

      Yep. I was about to mock the LA Times for framing it this way until I realized they were just parroting the prosecutors here...

      1. Bobarian (Would Chip Her)   9 years ago

        Do you or anyone else have the picture that got her in trouble?

        Asking for Crusty.

  3. Domestic Dissident   9 years ago

    She's the Playmate of the Year? For real?

    1. jester   9 years ago

      She sure has a yuge mouth.

      1. Lord Humungus   9 years ago

        +1 hotdog eating contest

      2. geo1113   9 years ago

        Kick her out of bed!!!

      3. Suicidy   9 years ago

        That's for when two producers have a sword fight in her mouth.

        1. Mint Berry Crunch   9 years ago

          Eeeewwwwww!

          / Winona Ryder

    2. Jerryskids   9 years ago

      I believe that pic is Steven Tyler in his Halloween costume. That is not a handsome woman.

      1. Domestic Dissident   9 years ago

        Seriously. Did Playboy get bought out by MAD Magazine or something and I missed the news?

        1. Bobarian (Would Chip Her)   9 years ago

          Having went googled her name, the image that ENB chose was probably the worst one available.

          *Big mouth shaming*

          Careful with this because lots of NSFW images can be found.

      2. toolkien   9 years ago

        Was thinking she was the love child of Steven Tyler and Mary Tyler Moore...or at least the painting of MTM in the Draw Me A Pear episode...

    3. mad.casual   9 years ago

      She's the Playmate of the Year? For real?

      I can't read the story and look at her fact without thinking about young kids pulling the tips of their noses up and making pig noises to make fun of someone.

      Seriously, with that look, she looks she should be picking fights in a Cantina on Tatooine

      1. Radioactive   9 years ago

        why Playboy no longer has nudes...they've run out of pretty women in Chicago.

      2. Cynical Asshole   9 years ago

        she should be picking fights in a Cantina on Tatooine

        +1 death sentence on 12 systems.

    4. Mint Berry Crunch   9 years ago

      Are you suggesting that she didn't actually win, and that the vote was rigged?

    5. Cynical Asshole   9 years ago

      Apparently playmates aren't what they used to be. Is Hugh Hefner going blind or something?

      1. Nunya   9 years ago

        Careful. You might be ugly shaming. Hence, it is illegal.

  4. Hamster of Doom   9 years ago

    What really matters is our character and humanity.

    A city attorney said this?

    1. juris imprudent   9 years ago

      He's only doing the law gig until he gets his big break.

      1. Bobarian (Would Chip Her)   9 years ago

        Became a lawyer because he was too dumb to be a waiter?

        1. juris imprudent   9 years ago

          Waiters have to give good service to make money.

          1. Groovus Maximus   9 years ago

            Phasing out TIPS in lieu of a flat, "Living Wage!one!!!1!!," a la Euro-landia, is becoming the rage in the USA.

  5. Fist of Etiquette   9 years ago

    Announcing the charges against Mathers, City Attorney Mike Feuer said it was important that city officials send a message about the "painful, long-term consequences" that can come from making mean comments about people's physical appearances.

    Since when is prosecution about intent or even the law on the books. It's about winning, and Max Headroom there is going to win, even if he has to appeal to the zeitgeist and not the statutes. Which he doesn't.

    1. $park? is totally a Swifty   9 years ago

      Nobody g-g-g-gives a shit about p-p-p-p-privacy anymore. Framing it as a b-b-b-b-body shaming issue is t-t-t-the only w-w-w-way to guarantee a w-w-w-win.

    2. wareagle   9 years ago

      Ethics of the photo aside, we actually have agents of the state wanting criminal penalties for "making mean comments"?

      Then again, the Thought Police at Harvard are already in place even though the targets of the comments took them far better than the admins did.

  6. LynchPin1477   9 years ago

    The body-shaming aspect of this seems totally unrelated to any criminality. It's entirely about invasion of privacy.

    Also, she is 70 years old and at least at the gym. Pretty awful thing to do, regardless of whether it was actually meant to be public or not.

  7. LurkinInaBuildin   9 years ago

    No kidding. She looks like a photo negative of Guy Penrod.

  8. SugarFree   9 years ago

    Samwell Tarly hit hardest.

    1. Fist of Etiquette   9 years ago

      NO SPOILERS

    2. Intraveneous Woodchipper   9 years ago

      Hodor!

  9. widget   9 years ago

    Dani should not have any children with Mick Jagger.

    /body shaming

    1. Cynical Asshole   9 years ago

      Or Steven Tyler. If she did it would just be a giant mouth.

  10. lafe.long   9 years ago

    LA Fitness officials

    I don't like the sound of that.

  11. SugarFree   9 years ago

    She's got the dyed-blonde hair and fake boobs that Hugh loves.

    Click me, bro.

    1. geo1113   9 years ago

      Wouldn't...rolls eyes!

    2. Hugh Akston   9 years ago

      Look dude, if we wanted people to have the bodies that God intended, we wouldn't have killed Him.

  12. OldMexican Blankety Blank   9 years ago

    If being an asshole was a crime, then everybody... hmm...

    ... uh, except, it seems that being an asshole is NOW a crime in these U.S.S.A.

  13. The Fusionist   9 years ago

    "so long as it can be shown that Mathers acted "with the intent to invade the privacy" of the woman"

    "Not Guilty" /Comey

  14. GILMORE?   9 years ago

    I need to take some time to myself now to reflect on why I did this horrible thing.

    (fast-forward to making a melodramatic, self-flagellating viral-apology-video and initiation hashtag campaign; the cure to all social-media scandals? Moar social-media pimping)

    1. juris imprudent   9 years ago

      Rote confession; show trial; then Warty's dungeon one would imagine.

      1. Intraveneous Woodchipper   9 years ago

        *shifts nervously in seat

  15. The Fusionist   9 years ago

    If this Playboy woman did what they claim, she's a creeper just as much a criminal as someone who photographs an attractive girl in the shower and posts it on HotCoeds.com.

    The prosecutors should do their jobs without being headline whores about it or pretending they're on a noble crusade to defend unattractive people. (although I can see the personal incentive for most prosecutors to wage such a crusade - by which I mean prosecutors are ugly and have saggy tits, and that's just the male prosecutors)

  16. GILMORE?   9 years ago

    Also = that is always what i imagined Stephen Tyler's daughter *would* look like, rather than the actual (and quite smoking) one.

  17. Radioactive   9 years ago

    gives new meaning to the term "knob gobbler", don't it?

    1. Groovus Maximus   9 years ago

      No, the definition is still the same, just a new foto entry.

  18. You ARE a Prog (MJG)   9 years ago

    So would the victim get anything out of this, or just the state?

    1. Hugh Akston   9 years ago

      You heard the City Attorney, what really matters is our character and humanity, not filthy lucre.

  19. Playa Manhattan.   9 years ago

    ENB chose that picture on purpose.

    *checks earpiece*

    I'm being told that this was the best available photo.

    1. AlmightyJB   9 years ago

      Will the Clown terror never cease?

  20. Jerryskids   9 years ago

    City Attorney Mike Feuer said it was important that city officials send a message

    I think "sending a message" via prosecution is a violation of the equal protection clause.

  21. Mickey Rat   9 years ago

    So people do have reasonable expectations of privacy in a locker room? Shackford must be clutching his pearls at the thought.

    1. Zeb   9 years ago

      Shackford has come out in favor of people being allowed to take photos in locker rooms without the subjects' permission? I must have missed that.

      Or is this more tranny-panic?

      1. Mickey Rat   9 years ago

        I just think he would be shocked at the idea that people have a legal expectation of provacy in such places.

        Oh, how cute, you have adopted his penchant for ad hominems.

        1. You ARE a Prog (MJG)   9 years ago

          So explain why you think he believes don't have some expectation of privacy in these places.

        2. Zeb   9 years ago

          What ad hominem? I asked a question to clarify what you were talking about. Since you took it personally, I'll take it as a "yes".

  22. darius404   9 years ago

    I usually feel disturbed by people's acceptance of state coercion. But compared to all the people who accept it on other topics, the casual acceptance of criminal punishment for MAKING FUN OF SOMEONE in the comment section of that LA Times piece is by far one of the most disturbing examples I've ever seen. Pretty much every single one of them practically thinks that woman should be sentenced to years of imprisonment. Their only complaint about the whole thing is that she might not be imprisoned long enough.

    And make no mistake, they're only upset about her taking a picture because she did it to be mean to someone they feel protective of. If someone they found socially undesirable had their picture secretly taken and mocked they wouldn't bat an eye.

    1. DesigNate   9 years ago

      Principals, not principles.

      I mean it was definitely an invasion of privacy to take her picture without consent, but you're absolutely right that the outrage is because it's someone they find socially desirable.

    2. Domina Elle   9 years ago

      You shouldn't be able to post a photo of a semi nude or nude person anywhere without the persons permission. A reasonable consequence is in order.

  23. The Late P Brooks   9 years ago

    With a face like that you got nuthin to laugh about.

    1. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   9 years ago

      No wonder Playboy is eliminating nudity from their magazine.

    2. Groovus Maximus   9 years ago

      Only with a shovel.

  24. The Late P Brooks   9 years ago

    that is always what i imagined Stephen Tyler's daughter *would* look like, rather than the actual (and quite smoking) one.

    Seriously. Mendel got it wrong. By a lot.

    1. Mickey Rat   9 years ago

      I am presuming Liv's mother was such an ethereal beauty that his genes could not overcome hers.

      1. Groovus Maximus   9 years ago

        Or the other (obvious, yet unspoken) possibility: STEVEN TYLER IS NOT THE BABY'S FATHER!

        /Maury

  25. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   9 years ago

    Was the woman who was in charge of Anthony Weiner's twitter account?

  26. AlmightyJB   9 years ago

    It's a misdemeanor as it should be. Nothing to see really.

  27. Laurennn   9 years ago

    Didn't Erin Andrews just get awarded 55 million dollars for something very similar? Hmmmm.

    1. Intraveneous Woodchipper   9 years ago

      Yeah but she hot doe...

  28. Empress Trudy   9 years ago

    Maybe we should burn her face with acid like the Taliban do. Can you even think of anything more PC than that?

  29. Bags   9 years ago

    Not a very good photo of the "Playmate of the Year"

  30. Tionico   9 years ago

    when body shaming" is made a crime in California, then she can be prosecuted for that "offense" under those laws. This DA will have to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that this woman's provace WAS invaded.... (I think it was from this account..... had she taken a photo of some naked "hottie" and posted that with a comment something like "wish more women looked this good....." it would be....)

    I think the staff at LA Fit were correct in taking action. THEY have an obligation to protect the privacy of their clients/customers. Interesting that it were THEY who notified LE, not the woman whose privacy was invaded.

  31. Domina Elle   9 years ago

    That's what struck me as well. This is an invasion of privacy situation. But gosh! Popular narratives are just so tempting to tap into! Virtue signaling at its worst.

    How gross can you be though- ageism and profoundly shallow. Let's see how good she looks at 70. She's going to be hating every wrinkle, every sign of aging her body experiences that in and of itself is a self imposed sentence.

    Vanity sucks.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Brickbat: Road Hard

Charles Oliver | 6.4.2025 4:00 AM

Trump's Haste Begets Lawlessness

Jacob Sullum | 6.4.2025 12:01 AM

D.C. Pauses Plans To Hike Minimum Wage for Tipped Workers

Billy Binion | 6.3.2025 6:00 PM

It's Rand Paul and Elon Musk vs. Donald Trump Over the 'Big Beautiful Bill'

Eric Boehm | 6.3.2025 4:35 PM

Female Nude Spa in Washington Can't Bar Transgender Clients With Male Genitalia, Federal Court Rules

Billy Binion | 6.3.2025 4:20 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!