Nudity v Violence

[Skwim]

Some months ago the daughter of an acquaintance had to leave work because it was obvious she wasn't wearing a bra and she had nothing to cover herself with. Go figure.

Personally, I envy and delight in the ease with which Europeans regard nudity. I've seen several European films wherein children are exposed to nudity of varying degrees and are never depicted as shocked, but rather with an almost nonchalant acceptance.

Besides our government, our social norms are really screwed up.
.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Wow....you must be watching different shows from mine.
But I admit losing track of which network is aired & which is cable.
Remember when Lucy & Ricky had to sleep in separate beds?
Contrast that with Married With Children & Deadwood.
TV sure has changed.

He may have overstated his position. When he made that claim I thought that the amount of skin on TV has gone down over years. Even the Victoria's Secret Lingerie show isn't what it used to be. Backside views of thongs used to be one of the drawing cards to that show, now not so much. Perhaps with so much porn readily available there is no need for it on regular TV any longer.

For example when Charlie's Angels first came out two of the Angels did not seem to understand the concept of a brassiere. I don't know of any "jiggle" shows today. The limited amount of titillation on TV is nothing compared to what is available on the internet. Or so I am told

 

[Revoltingest]

He may have overstated his position. When he made that claim I thought that the amount of skin on TV has gone down over years. Even the Victoria's Secret Lingerie show isn't what it used to be. Backside views of thongs used to be one of the drawing cards to that show, now not so much. Perhaps with so much porn readily available there is no need for it on regular TV any longer.

For example when Charlie's Angels first came out two of the Angels did not seem to understand the concept of a brassiere. I don't know of any "jiggle" shows today. The limited amount of titillation on TV is nothing compared to what is available on the internet. Or so I am told

I think the change has been that nudity is increasingly OK,
but old fashioned jiggly fun nudity is not.
A show like Married With Children might not be possible anymore.
Nudity must be grisly & businesslike....think Westworld & Deadwood.

 

[natasha levchenko]

I think Americans are taught a type of sexual suppression that is generally dangerous to the individual and society. Then some folks end up acting out the suppression in various forms of sexually aggressive behavior.

What do you mean by saying "....Americans are taught a type of sexual suppression"?

 

[metis]

I just accept that I'm screwed up and try not to let it adversely affect other folks too much.

Ya, I hear ya as I had enough hangups to fill a large walk-in closet.

However, I was a gym-rat, being in gymnastics in high school and college and then playing in racquetball leagues later in life, and I always showered at the gym, so I got use to being nude and seeing others nude. At home, my wife and I didn't go out of our way to much cover up if we came out of the bathroom or were changing clothes, so our kids didn't get much hung up on nudity.

Even when it came to sex education, we decided that when they asked the right questions they'd get the right answers, so our oldest daughter learned at 4 (my wife was pregnant at the time with our son), our youngest daughter learned when she was 5, and our son learned when he was 8. I had the "honors" with our oldest daughter and our son, as we agreed that whomever got the questions had to give the answers. Actually, it was no big deal.

 

[metis]

I've seen several European films wherein children are exposed to nudity of varying degrees and are never depicted as shocked, but rather with an almost nonchalant acceptance.

Ya, and one of my former students who was half Swedish and went to live in Sweden for a summer after graduation, and she was rather shocked at how much they simply don't care there.

 

[Mindmaster]

So, the question I have first is why do we allow so much of that which is violent for public consumption that our children are constantly exposed to but not that which my be about sex or even just nudity that causes basically no harm intrinsically? or does it?

Your thoughts?

People like to watch crazy people on TV it doesn't make them crazy or want to be like them.

Likewise, a through knowledge of sex doesn't mean someone is going to use any of it until they're ready and when they are ready even a lack of that knowledge wouldn't stop them because mother nature is going to take over eventually. Even without being told, you'd figure out sex, because it's already wired into our DNA.

I find it more puzzling that people think that any of it even matters. The notion that nakedness is shameful is just as silly as watching violent content promoting violence.

 

[natasha levchenko]

Yesterday, there was a discussion here at RF on openly breastfeeding in public, and there were some who had reservations on that, which is fine & dandy I guess as far as it goes.

Also yesterday, my wife and I were watching "The View" that she watches regularly, and we were sucking [coffee], and on that program they were discussing teaching children about the birds & the bees, and a couple of the women were almost horrified about teaching their kids about this.

Quite a few years ago, I was reading a British book about what America is like, and at one point it said that America is a very violent society and that a visitor needs to be extra careful when visiting the U.S.

On prime-time television, we can see all sorts of blood and gore, sometimes quite graphic, such as on Scandal or Blacklist, etc., and yet showing a bare breast or, heaven forbid!, a vagina or penis can gain a network a fine.

Here at RF, we have seen numerous active threads dealing with guns, which kill and murder people, and yet my guess is that if we went with what the title of this OP is, it probably would be stopped.

Are we as Americans screwed up or what?

So, the question I have first is why do we allow so much of that which is violent for public consumption that our children are constantly exposed to but not that which my be about sex or even just nudity that causes basically no harm intrinsically? or does it?

Your thoughts?

In many lands, pornography is featured on newsstands, in music, and on television, and on the Internet. I don't think its harmless, as some claim.Those who view pornography may become habitual masturbators and nurture “uncontrolled sexual passion,” which may result in an addiction to sex, perverted desires, serious marital disharmony, and even divorce.

Yesterday, there was a discussion here at RF on openly breastfeeding in public, and there were some who had reservations on that, which is fine & dandy I guess as far as it goes.

Also yesterday, my wife and I were watching "The View" that she watches regularly, and we were sucking [coffee], and on that program they were discussing teaching children about the birds & the bees, and a couple of the women were almost horrified about teaching their kids about this.

Quite a few years ago, I was reading a British book about what America is like, and at one point it said that America is a very violent society and that a visitor needs to be extra careful when visiting the U.S.

On prime-time television, we can see all sorts of blood and gore, sometimes quite graphic, such as on Scandal or Blacklist, etc., and yet showing a bare breast or, heaven forbid!, a vagina or penis can gain a network a fine.

Here at RF, we have seen numerous active threads dealing with guns, which kill and murder people, and yet my guess is that if we went with what the title of this OP is, it probably would be stopped.

Are we as Americans screwed up or what?

So, the question I have first is why do we allow so much of that which is violent for public consumption that our children are constantly exposed to but not that which my be about sex or even just nudity that causes basically no harm intrinsically? or does it?
In many lands, pornography is featured on newsstands, in music, and on television, and on the Internet. I don't think it is harmless, as some claim. Absolutely not! Children can suffer seriously watching pornography

 

[metis]

In many lands, pornography is featured on newsstands, in music, and on television, and on the Internet. I don't think its harmless, as some claim.Those who view pornography may become habitual masturbators and nurture “uncontrolled sexual passion,” which may result in an addiction to sex, perverted desires, serious marital disharmony, and even divorce.

I've been to some of those countries as well, and I hear ya, but do please realize that I was certainly not referring to pornography.

 

[Skwim]

Without bias I place America's intolerance of nudity squarely on the Christian church, principally the Protestants. Pick whatever denominations you like. And it's the same sanctimonious mind set that continues to fight sex education, something now identified as the religious right.

.

 

[Sunstone]

What do you mean by saying "....Americans are taught a type of sexual suppression"?

Hi Natasha!

I'm an American, but I was twice married to non-native women. My first wife was from Bohemia in the Czech Republic, and my second wife was from Tokyo, Japan. Neither woman seemed to have the same sort of sexual inhibitions that I so often found in the American women I knew -- especially my Japanese wife.

Now, having said that, what Americans are taught has been changing tremendously with each generation. Back when I was growing up, one of the most common things to teach kids about sex most likely was this: "Good women don't really like sex, but will do it for a man they love. Crazy women -- nymphomaniacs -- on the other hand like sex, can't get enough of it, and will do it for anyone. Don't marry a woman who likes sex because she will cheat on you. Marry only a "good" woman."

Perhaps you can imagine how that sort of view would cause some problems?

Today, I suspect relatively few people outside the deepest reaches of the American South are still taught that "Good girls don't but bad girls do". Yet, it seems that most Americans, even today are taught

• that sex is something one should be very cautious about,
• that one should put off having it for as long as possible,
• that it can in some circumstances be destructive of society,
• that if it is not carried out within the context of a committed relationship there is something mortally wrong with it,
• that people who've had "too many" sex partners are somehow spoiled,
• that sex should always be treated as something sacred,
• that nudity is necessarily sexual in nature,
• that there is something wrong about sex as a subject of polite conversation,
• that other people's sex lives can be everyone's business,
• and many other such things.

At least many of those notions seem to cause people to have various fears and inhibitions about sex.

 

[idav]

What do you mean by saying "....Americans are taught a type of sexual suppression"?

Generally with US Christian culture people are taught that their basic nature goes against what people are supposed to be. It’s more harmful to suppress nature or you end up with churches trying to hide their pedophiles. I’m not saying to throw out morality but to shame people to try and get them to never having sex or to somehow suppress harmless types of sexual desires only causes problems for the individuals in the long run. Encouraging people to have healthy relationships with consenting adults is really the best policy.

 

[Sunstone]

Without bias I place America's intolerance of nudity squarely on the Christian church, principally the Protestants. Pick whatever denominations you like. And it's the same sanctimonious mind set that continues to fight sex education, something now identified as the religious right.

.

As I understand it, the Christian church was most likely not the single greatest cause of American prudishness. At least some decades ago when I took an university course in the History of Human Sexuality, we were taught that American prudishness derived mainly from the morals of a specific socio-economic class of Victorians, and that the morals and prudishness had largely an economic cause. Religion comes into the picture merely as a means of rationalizing the economic motivations for the morality, and of encouraging people to be prudes, but it is not the cause of the morality.

Don't blame religion: Blame the Victorian era economics that made it catastrophically risky for the daughters of skilled and semi-skilled masons, carpenters, plumbers, etc to get happily laid out of wedlock!

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Yesterday, there was a discussion here at RF on openly breastfeeding in public, and there were some who had reservations on that, which is fine & dandy I guess as far as it goes.

Also yesterday, my wife and I were watching "The View" that she watches regularly, and we were sucking [coffee], and on that program they were discussing teaching children about the birds & the bees, and a couple of the women were almost horrified about teaching their kids about this.

Quite a few years ago, I was reading a British book about what America is like, and at one point it said that America is a very violent society and that a visitor needs to be extra careful when visiting the U.S.

On prime-time television, we can see all sorts of blood and gore, sometimes quite graphic, such as on Scandal or Blacklist, etc., and yet showing a bare breast or, heaven forbid!, a vagina or penis can gain a network a fine.

Here at RF, we have seen numerous active threads dealing with guns, which kill and murder people, and yet my guess is that if we went with what the title of this OP is, it probably would be stopped.

Are we as Americans screwed up or what?

So, the question I have first is why do we allow so much of that which is violent for public consumption that our children are constantly exposed to but not that which my be about sex or even just nudity that causes basically no harm intrinsically? or does it?

Your thoughts?

We're a bunch of delightful whack jobs.

 

[Skwim]

In many lands, pornography is featured on newsstands, in music, and on television, and on the Internet. I don't think its harmless, as some claim.Those who view pornography may become habitual masturbators and nurture “uncontrolled sexual passion,” which may result in an addiction to sex, perverted desires, serious marital disharmony, and even divorce.

Boy, talk about invoking the domino effect. You, one funny lady. Viewing porno may lead to divorce. Well, did you know that those who go church may become habitual Bible readers and nurture "“uncontrolled illusions of god-like powers," which may result in a sense of personal superiority, a perverted morality, a need to force it on others, the purchase of firearms to do so, and even killing innocent people? So, my suggestion is that no one ever set foot in a church. It's a breeding ground for serial killers.

.

 

[Skwim]

As I understand it, the Christian church was most likely not the single greatest cause of American prudishness. At least some decades ago when I took an university course in the History of Human Sexuality, we were taught that American prudishness derived mainly from the morals of a specific socio-economic class of Victorians, and that the morals and prudishness had largely an economic cause. Religion comes into the picture merely as a means of rationalizing the economic motivations for the morality, and of encouraging people to be prudes, but it is not the cause of the morality.

Don't blame religion: Blame the Victorian era economics that made it catastrophically risky for the daughters of skilled and semi-skilled masons, carpenters, plumbers, etc to get happily laid out of wedlock!

There's no doubt that the prudishness in Great Britain grew out of Victorian mores, which was then emulated in the USA, as was the case with many styles and attitudes in vogue in Europe at the time. But because of the dislike many Europeans then had for the English and their ways---Britain was a world power and "ruled the waves"---it never took hold on the continent. However, this prudish attitude was immediately taken up by the churches in America as another brick to throw at Satan from the pulpit---nudity was a close kin to sexuality, both being partners in the sex act---and from then on it was prohibited behavior, particularly between those of the opposite sex---men could still be naked around each other, but among a collection of women it would be more of a blushing and eye-averting affair. So, as the years wore on America and Great Britain remained covered up while the Continent quickly embraced more revealing fashions: In the 1920s Josephine Baker was an entertainment hit in her banana skirt and bare breasts. Then there was the bikini, topless beaches, and sheer, see-through clothing---of course not everyone partakes, but when they do it isn't given much, if any, thought. Many Europeans also retained a long standing vacation option; the family nudist outing. Today, America is just beginning to shed ts prudery. We now have naked bicycle riding events in several cities, and some places, such as New York City, permit female toplessness in public.

.

 

[Milton Platt]

Yesterday, there was a discussion here at RF on openly breastfeeding in public, and there were some who had reservations on that, which is fine & dandy I guess as far as it goes.

Also yesterday, my wife and I were watching "The View" that she watches regularly, and we were sucking [coffee], and on that program they were discussing teaching children about the birds & the bees, and a couple of the women were almost horrified about teaching their kids about this.

Quite a few years ago, I was reading a British book about what America is like, and at one point it said that America is a very violent society and that a visitor needs to be extra careful when visiting the U.S.

On prime-time television, we can see all sorts of blood and gore, sometimes quite graphic, such as on Scandal or Blacklist, etc., and yet showing a bare breast or, heaven forbid!, a vagina or penis can gain a network a fine.

Here at RF, we have seen numerous active threads dealing with guns, which kill and murder people, and yet my guess is that if we went with what the title of this OP is, it probably would be stopped.

Are we as Americans screwed up or what?

So, the question I have first is why do we allow so much of that which is violent for public consumption that our children are constantly exposed to but not that which my be about sex or even just nudity that causes basically no harm intrinsically? or does it?

Your thoughts?

I'll pass on discussing the violence, as this discussion was going on before I was born and I'm 67. As to the breast-feeding, I see no problem with it, but I understand that some folks get their sorts twisted up about it. As far as sex education, I cannot for the life of me understand why someone would want their kids to learn about sex by reading the bathroom walls.

 

[Frater Sisyphus]

 

[Valjean]

I think the change has been that nudity is increasingly OK,
but old fashioned jiggly fun nudity is not.
A show like Married With Children might not be possible anymore.
Nudity must be grisly & businesslike....think Westworld & Deadwood.

Nope. in the '50s there was nudity on TV, not to mention good old National Geo. (which apparently no longer depicts scantily dressed tribals).
I remember watching anthropology shows with topless Africans, Australians or Polynesians. Movies set in Africa regularly depicted topless women. Naked children were not uncommon.
Topless Caucasian women, though, were only on the UHF channel.

In the '70s and '80s lots of women didn't wear bras, and nips were all over prime time TV.
There were also specials like Roots and Shaka Zulu showing lots of topless women.

In the early 2000's I used to watch EGG, the Arts Show on PBS. It was replete with nude sculpture, painting, even live models and tableaux -- full frontal.

Today the naked babies are gone or pixillated. Tropical peoples are fully clothed. Nippley '70s shows are pixilated, A couple months ago I even saw a TV show with topless five or six year old girl at the beach -- with a pixilated chest. Yet freely available on the web today is debauchery that would have made Caligula blanch.

 

[Revoltingest]

Nope. in the '50s there was nudity on TV, not to mention good old National Geo. (which apparently no longer depicts scantily dressed tribals).
I remember watching anthropology shows with topless Africans, Australians or Polynesians. Movies set in Africa regularly depicted topless women. Naked children were not uncommon.
Topless Caucasian women, though, were only on the UHF channel.

In the '70s and '80s lots of women didn't wear bras, and nips were all over prime time TV.
There were also specials like Roots and Shaka Zulu showing lots of topless women.

In the early 2000's I used to watch EGG, the Arts Show on PBS. It was replete with nude sculpture, painting, even live models and tableaux -- full frontal.

Today the naked babies are gone or pixillated. Tropical peoples are fully clothed. Nippley '70s shows are pixilated, A couple months ago I even saw a TV show with topless five or six year old girl at the beach -- with a pixilated chest. Yet freely available on the web today is debauchery that would have made Caligula blanch.

I never saw your UHF nudity, so it had to have been rare.
Roots & Shaka Zulu gots nuthin on the full monty modern examples I gave.