Go ahead. Take your top off

[Scott C.]

That's not what body shaming is. Body shaming is basically ridiculing someone for being too fat, or too skinny, too pale, etc, etc. The notion that people need to fit some sort of physical ideal.

Ok, but whenever there's a discussion on the importance of modesty in dress, someone claims that this is body shaming, which to me means they think we want to hide the body out of shame. I could be wrong.

 

[Scott C.]

I've read in the past that such attraction is instinctual, because it means a potential mate will be apt for adequately feeding offspring, or something like that.

That makes sense and would imply that there is something inherently sexually attractive about breasts.

 

[Scott C.]

How is this exploitation? It's a scene in a film.
They are sexual to you for the same reason ankles were sexual to your grandfather. When you hide something; when you make it forbidden, you make it titillating. Had you been raised in a more liberal society the sight of a breast might be no more sexual than the sight of an ankle.

That could be true, but I doubt it. You could argue the same for any body part. Yet, we know we are instinctively sexually attracted and aroused by the sexual parts of others. Are the sexually attractive parts entirely defined by what we are used to seeing? I don't think so.

 

[Father Heathen]

Ok, but whenever there's a discussion on the importance of modesty in dress, someone claims that this is body shaming, which to me means they think we want to hide the body out of shame. I could be wrong.

I've only heard the phrase used in the context of ridiculing people for being overweight.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I got that impression from reading the article, but wasn't previously familiar with them since I don't pay much attention to the personal lives of celebrities.

I'm not aware of her career much, but I noticed in the article it said she was a regular at TV commercial auditions by the age of 4, which made me think the parents were very much invested in her career, and this may not necessarily have been a situation of a teenager approaching her parents for permission to do a great role for the sake of artistic expression. It paid off with money and increased fame, apparently.

I see the article states the parents "encouraged" her, so that makes me wonder if she originally was hesitant and/or if they decided it was it good move for her for "launching" her career. Otherwise, I would have thought they might have "consented, rather than "encouraged."

I guess we'll find out if she ends up writing memoirs whether or not down the road she continues to think this was a great decision she made and is happy for the support of her parents, or if she felt pressure from her parents and ends up being resentful. I get the impression sometimes with child actors they may be used as "workhorses" for their parents.

Either way, like getting a tattoo, showing one's boobs on the movie screen is something one can't take back. It might be a decision a person is glad they made. It could be something a person regrets.

I don't think there is an ethical/moral problem with taking one's shirt off, but I would expect it to change the kinds of interactions she would have with people who had seen her boobs. I'd rather protect my child from a decision she might later regret while she still young enough to require my permission, and let her make the decision on adult things when she is an adult.

A bit about her father and his creepy controlling ways: http://www.wetpaint.com/what-happened-thora-birch-creepy-598751/

 

[Valjean]

That could be true, but I doubt it. You could argue the same for any body part. Yet, we know we are instinctively sexually attracted and aroused by the sexual parts of others. Are the sexually attractive parts entirely defined by what we are used to seeing? I don't think so.

Not entirely, but mostly. In tropical societies where women didn't wear tops no-one saw any problem, no-one was driven to sexual excess. In our own society no-one covers their nose, even though noses are as much a secondary sexual feature as breasts.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It's seems the traditions and cultures are very differents .

Very true. There have been and still are many cultures were breasts are nothing more than organs for feeding infants. Women bare them freely, and there are absolutely no sexual connotations associated with them.

breastfeeding is could be very attractive to man,and cause problem(you know ) , I don't know if the same for women when they saw chest man.

If a man gets turned on and aroused watching a woman breastfeeding her child, he should probably be directed to the nearest psychiatric ward before he ends up hurting someone.

I'm surprised that the movie industry is allowed to exploit a minor this way.

If you'd take the time to watch the move, you'd know it wasn't exploitation, and it wasn't even sexual, but rather a glimpse into a complicated relationship (one of several featured in the movie) that involves a very complicated character (Rick - Jane, the girl is the scene, is also a complicated character. Actually, pretty much all of them are anything but normal).

 

[Scott C.]

Not entirely, but mostly. In tropical societies where women didn't wear tops no-one saw any problem, no-one was driven to sexual excess. In our own society no-one covers their nose, even though noses are as much a secondary sexual feature as breasts.

It's hard for me to know the psychology of this for certain. You may be right.

 

[Scott C.]

Very true. There have been and still are many cultures were breasts are nothing more than organs for feeding infants. Women bare them freely, and there are absolutely no sexual connotations associated with them.

If a man gets turned on and aroused watching a woman breastfeeding her child, he should probably be directed to the nearest psychiatric ward before he ends up hurting someone.

If you'd take the time to watch the move, you'd know it wasn't exploitation, and it wasn't even sexual, but rather a glimpse into a complicated relationship (one of several featured in the movie) that involves a very complicated character (Rick - Jane, the girl is the scene, is also a complicated character. Actually, pretty much all of them are anything but normal).

You're right I haven't seen it. I could change my attitude.

 

[Smart_Guy]

الديوث ههههههههه

Oh, that is one cultural difference. In our culture it is a big deal but in other cultures it could be normal.

Full nudity, but nothing really graphic, and usually done in good taste.

You mean while still in Play Boy and similar presentations? They of course had to move to other producers, if not a producer actually saw them and came to them with offers, and the lists include many who moved to porn from there and undoubtedly the experience they had in just nudity gave them ideas and incentive to go porn.

Do you think being told "no" at 16 would stop someone from doing something as an adult? And it's not like girls don't have a mind of their own. We're talking 16 years old. Practically an adult anyway. 16 year old girls can drive, work at a job, give sexual consent, hell, they even have babies. Showing breasts at that age isn't some huge deal that will likely scar them for the rest of their lives.

No, but it is a potential effect to their future. I could be confusing cultural differences, but in mine parenting considers the children not just while still under custody, but also to build their future after they move on. It may not be a huge deal, but big things start with little things. Showing breasts at 16 is a potential link to go a little further. I'm not really judging, by the way. I'm just expecting further development I see inappropriate, but if the concerned see it's okay to risk it and have those developments realized, then I respect that. It's a cultural difference and I apologize if I sounded judgmental.

 

[Wu Wei]

Take my top off!?

Do you have any idea how hard it was for me to get this top on

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

I'm impressed that you managed to keep it clean when you removed it from the hiker!

 

[Wu Wei]

I'm impressed that you managed to keep it clean when you removed it from the hiker!

It was in the pack he dropped.... when he climbed the tree.

 

[Godobeyer]

Oh, that is one cultural difference. In our culture it is a big deal but in other cultures it could be normal.

Maybe I will make a thread about to check out

 

[Smart_Guy]

Maybe I will make a thread about to check out

Cool!

Remember, try to not give judgmental comforting impressions. What could be extremely bad in ours, could be perfectly fine in other cultures/communities.

 

[Godobeyer]

Cool!

Remember, try to not give judgmental comforting impressions. What could be extremely bad in ours, could be perfectly fine in other cultures/communities.

Thanks for this advice .

I will try to find out the different views between us and other cultures in this issue , I made long poll options

I creat it , this is it
http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/cuckold.186671/

 

[dawny0826]

So why do you find the sight of "underage" girls bare breasts to be distasteful? I assume you find the sight of the bare breasts of a girl of age to be tasteful:

Bare breasts of an 17 year - 11 month - 3 week - 6 day old girl:

Bare breasts of an 18 year - 1 day old girl

.

I'm discussing "tasteful" within the context of a movie scene that has a sexual undertone. In this type of situation, I would find a request for a minor to bare her breasts to be distasteful. I don't believe that minors should be exploited sexually for the sake of art.

 

[4consideration]

Also, even as older than 16, they are still our daughters. The thread is about permission and approval which is verbal, not allowing which involves letting or making them not. One may not permit or approve but still leaves the person do what they want. I think it is all about family ethics. People with good family bonds tend to respect what their parents' wishes unconditionally. Then again, I think even that is a cultural thing.

I think there is probably a cultural difference regarding the extent of adhering to the wishes of one's parents in one's own life after reaching adulthood.

Personally, in a situation like we're discussing, my decision to not do, or not give consent would be entirely my own doing -- although it would also (I assume) be in line with what I think would be the thoughts of my parents and family-at-large. I would care what my family thought. It would not be the sole/deciding factor, though.

While many people in close families may be strongly influenced by their parents' wishes, it is not accurate to say it as a general rule that we respect (as in defer to) our parents' wishes unconditionally. In our culture it is generally accepted that a person is an adult and can make their own decisions at the age of 18. Of course, there's always the possibility a person might defer to their parents' wishes for various reasons.

 

[metis]

Does anyone remember Franco Zefferrelli's version of "Romeo and Juliet"? The main actress was very briefly topless when getting out of bed, and she was only 15 at the time if my memory is correct. If I was her father, I would not have had a problem with her doing that scene.

 

[Skwim]

I'm discussing "tasteful" within the context of a movie scene that has a sexual undertone. In this type of situation, I would find a request for a minor to bare her breasts to be distasteful. I don't believe that minors should be exploited sexually for the sake of art.

Taking your use of "exploited" to mean

" transitive verb:
to make use of meanly or unfairly for one's own advantage <exploiting migrant farm workers>"
Source: Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
​

I fail to see how it qualifies. In the case of Thora Birch in American Beauty, after considering the significance of the scene to the movie, both she and her parents willing gave their approval; no meanness or unfairness involved at all. As for "sexually," I know for a fact that many people can look at a bare female breast without thinking of them as sexual. And, in the movie it's quite evident that the scene was not made to sexually titillate or arouse the audience, but to better define Jane's character and her relationship with Rickey. So, "exploited sexually"? Certainly not in this case.


.