The article isn't questioning why there's a frenzy, rather it concludes that, "Like the rest of us privacy-respecting citizens, [Lawrence's] biggest problem is that she is forced to share the planet with the likes of this excuse for a human being, who used all that talent and creativity for bad, in a world that so desperately needs it for good."
My main issue with the article is that it could've made that exact same point without doing a surface-level google search for other goings-on in the news right now including women, throwing it into the same basket and saying "because sexists." I think the obsession with getting the naked pics is creepy, but if there was a Taylor Lautner sex tape I'm not going to lie to you and say I wouldn't be tempted. Being motivated by sex is not inherently misogynist or misandrist.
The more specific you narrow something, the more results can be affected by mere coincidence.
But do they get less attention purely because they're women? And are there less purely because they're women, or because male celebrities don't tape themselves having sex as much?
I know you like to point out the Paris Hilton sex tape, but let's not forget that it was from 2003; Paris Hilton was smack-dab in the middle of her 15 Minutes. She was a reality TV star and all over the news. She didn't suddenly come into the fore because of her sex tape. She was already a big news item of the day, and when the sex tape broke it got a lot of attention because it was A) 2003, these things were more novel over a decade ago, and B) She was
already famous.
Eraserhead is a straight guy. Of course he would think they're more important.
I don't disagree with you personally, but I also completely understand why some people are interested. Jennifer Lawrence is a huge star right now, particularly well known with internet users because of her proliferation in gif-form, and is very attractive. So naturally, there's going to be curiosity. I don't have to like it but I am at least capable of understanding it.