watever give the gurl a break!!!! i mean its fun to take photos like that!!!!

She didn't pose in a raunchy way, she was just topless. The human body is nothing to be ashamed of. There is nothing wrong with a beautiful young woman to pose for tasteful pictures if she is comfortable with the idea. She is handling the situation perfectly, and she is not lying. She never expected the public to see these photos, although she is not ashamed of them. Shame on anyone that wants her to feel bad about making a very minor publicity mistake. She is a perfect role model.

For those who are saying, "who cares?": Don't lie to yourself. People do these kinds of things such as taking nude photos because they want PEOPLE to care. THey want the attention, to be talked about, complimented, etc. or let's just say they're in dire need of attention. And of course, someone like Audrina would because she's not known for her acting or singing skills so she thought she'd make it by posing nude. Yeah, I definitely agree that its VERY hypocritical: why say it's not intended for the public when you know damn well that if playboy agreed, it would would have been everywhere.

The only problem here is there are still those people who deny that things like this don't matter. Well you know what, it does because what kind of example are we setting up for children who look up to people such as Audrina? That its ok to pose nude when you're in high school..ITs MORALS people, get some!

I seen the nude pics,and I can understand why
Hugh Hefner turned her down.

Her nipples looked deformed.And although she is attractive,she is far from being Playboy material.

And sorry,there is no way these pics were taken when she was just out of high school,I don't buy it.

These pics look quite recent,like they were taken in the last 2 yrs.....

Another thing,Audrina looks coked up in all the pics.
She needs to lay off the booger sugar.

Oh I wish they would cut the crap with the no talent BIMBOS on the hills. I mean come on that show is truely stupid as HELL

Not only were her photos rejected by "PLAYBOY" but according to inside sources when the photos went across Hugh Hefner's desk(right after lunch) he glanced at them and then heaved up his lunch all over his Girls Next Door. Mr. Hefner then went on to say, " What the hell was that! We don't publish pictures of trannies! Throw that crao away now and get me a crabcake sandwich!" Supposedly Mr. Hefner then took a two hour nap while his Girls Next Door were being hosed off.

Yeah she can argue anything she wants (I was innocent... bla bla bla)... and I'm sure that whoever sold the photos is just some jerk trying to make a buck... but there is just nothing artistic about those photos...

They are not bad or ugly or anything... but there is nothing artistic about that little girl outfit... it's actually kind of vulgar.

are you kidding me? Artistic and not provacative? What an idiot! If anyone asked me to put on a catholic school girl skirt that would be a red flag! Obvoiusly she has no parental guidance and no common sense!

Didn't US Mag publish this exact same article YESTERDAY??? They just rearange the words, add a new pic and think this is NEW news? I'm getting really sick of this magazine.

Patridge says the shots, which were allegedly submitted to (and rejected by) Playboy, were supposed to be "artistic and not in any way provocative" and "not meant to be seen by the public."

She is such and Idiot!! What does she mean by saying it was not ment to be seen by the public?? If Playboy choses the pic then IT IS GOING TO BE SEEN BY THE PUBLIC!! Duh!!

Even a brainless, no-talent idiot like Audrina can't be stupid enough to believe that she actually has 'fans'.

What is it with people who think to get into modeling you have to do nude photos? Has anyone else ever noticed that Audrina doesn't look at the camera...ever!? She is always looking up or over, never at the camera. Wierd!

She actually doesn't look provocative in these photos -- almost looks like she would rather be anywhere else but there. I don't see any art in these photos.

Suuuuuuuure Audrina. Artistic........???? I've seen 'em, and there's nothing artistic about them. Dressed up in your little school girl outfit and showing off your tata's while you sitting on a step and trying to be sexy is NOT artistic. What's the word I'm looking for.....how about, SLEAZY. If taking photos to get into Playboy is all you had going for you, because you wanted to be a model at the time, well, you're dumb. Be a model somewhere else, a place where you don't have to get naked to show off your tata's, beaver and butt. Come on girls, don't you have more standards than that? All I have to say is, take nude pics, make a reality show, get some 15 min. of fame, those pics are bound to show up somewhere. Case in point girls, how about not taking naked pics of yourself. All you girls out there that do Playboy, GGW, or any other filthy things that displays naked woman, get a clue would you, get some morals and stop acting like dirty sluts. The only thing that happens when something like this occurs is when you get called garbarge names, and men look at you like you're a piece of meat.

this really isnt a big deal. whats funny is that these pictures were not supposed to be viewed by the public, byt instead submitted to playboy???

hypocritcal....