Why Are Americans Afraid of Being Naked?
Neosapienis
http://www.alternet.org/story/50732/
Please read and feel free to comment. :-)
--
Regards,
Dario Western
(61) 0437-428-859
Come and visit my sites at:
http://www.myspace.com/fatpizzaman
http://360.yahoo.com/larrikin70
http://theglamgod.spaces.live.com
Dicky Boy
It's all Crap
septithol
you have asked is actually two questions. People are afraid both of
seeing others naked, AND of being seen naked themselves.
When it comes to the first one, seeing others naked, a naked person is
generally seen as a sexual threat of some kind, depending on the
respective genders of the naked person and the observer, their
nakedness implies (at least to most American's way of thinking) that
the other naked person is either planning on raping them; is planning
on raping their mate, or alternately, is planning on seducing their
mate away from them.
Now, as for the second, being seen naked, many people are frightened
of this for three reasons. First of all (and this does have some basis
in fact) nakedness equals physical vulnerability. If you fall down
while naked, you will probably get hurt worse than if you have clothes
to keep you from scraping yourself. For the same reason, it would be
easier to be hurt while naked, if attacked by someone else. Secondly,
the nakedness is seen as a sexual invitation which others are
supposedly incapable of resisting, so that if you are seen naked,
others are likely to 'suddenly lose control' of themselves, and
attempt to rape you. Lastly, our society is a very sick one in which a
person's status is psychologically tied up, both by themselves and
others, in the clothes they wear, rather than their personal
qualities. People are taught this starting in very early gradeschool,
where a child's rank in the pecking order depends not on what sort of
grades they get, but on whether or not their parents can afford
clothes with the 'right' labels. Basically, social status is either
bought, or granted by political favors, rather than earned. This is
done deliberately by the government, for various unpleasant reasons I
will not get into now. But the point is, if a person happens not to be
wearing their clothes, they lose, both in their own eyes and the eyes
of others, every bit of social status, regardless of what personal
qualities or genius they may or may not have.
tag22
REPLY; It's a interesting article by Dara Colwell , Dario.
thanks for posting it.
Signature: Tag22
Stuffed Tiger
Great post, Silver Sphere. A keeper. You put it in a nutshell. Thanks.
:-)
septithol
> Great post, Silver Sphere. A keeper. You put it in a nutshell. Thanks.
Tiger, regarding a person's status in our society being tied up in
their clothing, and them losing their status (both in their own eyes
and that of other people) if their clothing is removed, regardless of
what personal qualities they might have, there is a rather humorous
scene I might write in the story I am working on about some nudist
wizards from another dimension. One of the wizards, one Hector Proust,
who is about 500 years old, smart enough to make Albert Einstein look
like a wannabe, a very powerful and accomplished teleporter, and
extremely proud man (albeit sometimes an extremely unpleasant one) is
told that the grand poobah of the drooling morons from Planet Earth
(ei, the President of the US.), thinks that Proust is 'ridiculous and
undignified', because he doesn't wear clothes.
To understand Proust's reaction to this, imagine what would occur if
Bill Gates, say, were told by an incontinent lobotomy patient who is
also a serial rapist, that Gates was 'ridiculous and undignified'
because he didn't wear a straight jacket like the one the lobotomy
patient did in whatever back ward of a mental hospital he happened to
be confined to.
In other words, Proust will be less than delighted to hear it.
Anna
wrote:
It isn't a fear but it does have to do with the sexualization of our
society. Nowdays it seems at least in popular society everything has
to do with sex and therefore that would include nudity. In a less
sexualized society the idea of innocent nudity would be easier to
believe.
jackedit
including South America, where it is far more difficult to find a nude
beach in most countries, with the possible exception of Brazil, than
it is in the United States. Ever tried to find the nude beaches near
Buenos Aires? Or Acapulco? or the thousands of other miles of South
and Central American coastline?
although the demographics are changing and nudist resorts are growing
in the USA, I suspect that places like France or the Netherlands will
dramatically change once the Muslim majority starts imposing sharia
law in a few decades, if they don't start earlier like they did with
the brutal shooting and stabbing death of Theo van Gogh on an
Amsterdam street a few years ago. It is just a matter of time as the
traditional European societies commit cultural suicide with a
birthrate far below replacement levels, and the followers of the
Prophet breed like rabbits.
Enjoy it while you can. Your grandchildren won't be able to (if you
have any)
On Apr 19, 10:31 pm, "Neosapienis"
septithol
> It isn't a fear but it does have to do with the sexualization of our
> society. Nowdays it seems at least in popular society everything has
> to do with sex and therefore that would include nudity. In a less
> sexualized society the idea of innocent nudity would be easier to
> believe.- Hide quoted text -
Anna, I would say that the problem is actually the precise OPPOSITE of
what you claim, namely that our society is overly-sexualized. Our
society is, in fact, UNDER-sexualized.
To use the analogy of food, if a country has plenty of food, people
generally do not worry about being snatched off the streets by roving
bands of cannibals. If there is famine in the country, then people
might start to worry about it, and if there is not only famine, but a
bombardment of advertisements which take advantage of the famine
situation by, say, showing images such as trays of steaks next to a
motorcycle, or a large chocolate cake on top of a sports car, this
will probably make things far worse, as it will make everyone
simultaneously mentally obsessed with food, while being unable to
actually obtain any real food.
If the famine is artificial in nature, and caused by government laws
forbidding the growing or selling of food unless certain difficult to
meet and completely un-necessary pre-conditions are met (which is how
sex is treated in the US), this will only serve to worsen the general
frustration level of the people in such a country.
Anna
> On Apr 23, 12:12 pm, Anna <annalidd...@lycos.com> wrote:
>
> > It isn't a fear but it does have to do with the sexualization of our
> > society. Nowdays it seems at least in popular society everything has
> > to do with sex and therefore that would include nudity. In a less
> > sexualized society the idea of innocent nudity would be easier to
> > believe.- Hide quoted text -
>
> Anna, I would say that the problem is actually the precise OPPOSITE of
> what you claim, namely that our society is overly-sexualized. Our
> society is, in fact, UNDER-sexualized.
If we weren't so oversexed then we could believe that nudity can be
non-sexual.
Anna
wrote:
I find portrayals of a nude Jesus unnecessary. Sure he was probably
crucified nude as was the practice but showing that doesn't add to the
message at all so why show it. Many people don't like looking at
penises so portraying him this way would just detract from the message.
Neosapienis
I do wish that some people would stop showing so much hate and disgust for
them. Those who do don't deserve to live.
--
Regards,
Dario Western
(61) 0437-428-859
Come and visit my sites at:
http://www.myspace.com/fatpizzaman
http://360.yahoo.com/larrikin70
http://theglamgod.spaces.live.com
"Anna" <annal...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:1177434279.4...@c18g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
septithol
> I find portrayals of a nude Jesus unnecessary. Sure he was probably
> crucified nude as was the practice but showing that doesn't add to the
> message at all so why show it. Many people don't like looking at
> penises so portraying him this way would just detract from the message.-
The fact that you find some sort of art, such as a nude portrayal of
Jesus, to be 'unnecessary' is irrelevent, Anna, and the wrong question
to be asking. Strictly speaking, ALL are is unnecessary. It does not
feed you, clothe you, or keep you warm in the winter time.
The same applies to a lot of things, such as cars, television, and
video games. There is a man who has covered his car with 149,000
buttons.
This is probably unnecessary and does nothing to enhance the
performance of his car, but it is his own business and nobody elses.
If you don't like cars covered with buttons, you don't have to cover
your car with buttons or go to his button museum to look at it.
It would only become your business if the government decided to tax
you to pay for his hobby of attaching buttons to everything. Likewise,
an artist creating a nude Jesus is only your business if the
Government taxed you to pay for HIS artistic endeavors. And, btw, the
government taxing people to pay for someone creating a chocolate nude
Jesus is no more or less or differently wrong than the government
taxing people to pay for a chocolate CLOTHED jesus, or a chocolate
sculpture of Harry Potter or Barney the Dinosaur.