The deteriorating perception of nudity

[Guest man]

 

To Tsukino, alpha, and JD -

 

Just for perspective, what are your opinions on Janet Jackson's so-called "wardrobe malfunction" at the Superbowl some years ago and about Miley Cyrus's latest performance?

 

I view both as provocative and immodest, though the latter much more so than the former.

 

Though I do have friends from Australia that could not see the big deal about Janet Jackson at all, to them there was nothing to be upset about.  And it is very likely had I been born and raised with them I would feel the same way.

 

 

 

I have friends in the United States that also saw nothing to be upset about. I was born and raised with them and yet their views are not my views. Strange. 

[TsukinoRei]

To Tsukino, alpha, and JD -

 

Just for perspective, what are your opinions on Janet Jackson's so-called "wardrobe malfunction" at the Superbowl some years ago and about Miley Cyrus's latest performance?

 

I felt that Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction received far far too much media attention.  I would describe the look on their faces when it happened as 'mortified'.  I don't feel it would be charitable to presume otherwise.  As a rule, I try to avoid tabloid stories.  Celebrity gossip magazines hold no interest for me.  As an aside, I thought it was just awful when Princess Kate had a long range photograph of her taken nude, in the middle of nowhere on a private get-a-way for her honeymoon.  >.< It's harder to avoid these stories when they're mentioned on the BBC for weeks and everyone is talking about them.

 

I didn't even know who Miley Cyrus was until the media storm erupted about her latest performance.  Now I've you-tubed the performance, and I would say that the intention of her performance was immodesty.  I'd also say that she isn't a very good dancer, or at least she wasn't during that performance.  She doesn't appear to be a professing Christian either though, so I'm not sure why we'd expect her to conform to Christian values of modesty.  In fact the song she was singing appeared to affirm that her values are, 'it's her body, she will wear what she wants and do what she wants.'  So of course her performance reflects the values that she holds.  If she had a choreographer she needs a better one.

[TsukinoRei]

 

To Tsukino, alpha, and JD -

 

Just for perspective, what are your opinions on Janet Jackson's so-called "wardrobe malfunction" at the Superbowl some years ago and about Miley Cyrus's latest performance?

 

I view both as provocative and immodest, though the latter much more so than the former.

 

Though I do have friends from Australia that could not see the big deal about Janet Jackson at all, to them there was nothing to be upset about.  And it is very likely had I been born and raised with them I would feel the same way.

 

 

Exposed breasts are less of a big deal in Europe as well.  Particularly in places like Sweden where people of all ages hop in and out of public, open air hot springs in the dead of winter without a stitch on!  We went skating on a lake beside one such hot spring and my husband got a full eye full of an elderly man in all his glory!  I was at just the right height to be saved from the full view by a wooden bar.  To this day he has a pin in our map of Sweden labelled 'Ugly Naked Guy'.  All the other people were up to their necks in the water so we just put eyes forward and moved on to the skating area with the rest of the kids!

[missmuffet]

We will have to agree to disagree on this.I am not going to reply any longer.

[alphaparticle]

 

'dressing provocatively' suggests bad intent and foreknowledge she's doing that.... ....

Yes and no. I know many girls who "dress for attention" - which is in the form of short short shorts, short short skirts, tight pants, tight top, very low cut top, exposed midriff, and the like.

They may not think they are trying to "provoke" guys, but they know/believe such attire will draw attention from guys, and so they dress this way.

But there are also those who dress this way because "everyone" dresses this way, and anyone who doesn't is a nerd.

 

Tsukino, Those are good points. I don't know why it's always about women's clothing.

OK, let's talk about the boys and young men who wear their pants as if they are falling of and exposing their drawers!

 

It bothers me that the interest isn't primarily in ourselves and our own hearts, and rather about obsessing about how horrid those ladies are and how much it offends us.

My concern actually is not about being "better than you", but rather about a culture that teaches women their value is in their looks, their sexuality, outdoing the next girl in "attractiveness", and so forth.

 

Alright, some women do it purposefully, but we don't know who just by seeing her do we? That's my point.I don't think it's cool to assume the worst about someone just because we don't approve of their clothing. I don't care about Miley Cyrus (as an issue), she's a product and she's doing what will get attention.

[nebula]

 

 

My concern actually is not about being "better than you", but rather about a culture that teaches women their value is in their looks, their sexuality, outdoing the next girl in "attractiveness", and so forth.

 

are we not a culture that does this with everything?  not just looks but possession, jobs, education, etc.

 

Does that make it any less vile to train girls to regard themselves as pieces of meat?

[nebula]

 

 

To Tsukino, alpha, and JD -

 

Just for perspective, what are your opinions on Janet Jackson's so-called "wardrobe malfunction" at the Superbowl some years ago and about Miley Cyrus's latest performance?

 

I view both as provocative and immodest, though the latter much more so than the former.

 

Though I do have friends from Australia that could not see the big deal about Janet Jackson at all, to them there was nothing to be upset about.  And it is very likely had I been born and raised with them I would feel the same way.

 

 

Exposed breasts are less of a big deal in Europe as well.  Particularly in places like Sweden where people of all ages hop in and out of public, open air hot springs in the dead of winter without a stitch on!  We went skating on a lake beside one such hot spring and my husband got a full eye full of an elderly man in all his glory!  I was at just the right height to be saved from the full view by a wooden bar.  To this day he has a pin in our map of Sweden labelled 'Ugly Naked Guy'.  All the other people were up to their necks in the water so we just put eyes forward and moved on to the skating area with the rest of the kids!

 

 

OK, so am I to understand that while you advocate nudity in art, you are not too keen on being exposed to it in your daily life?

[nebula]

 

 

'dressing provocatively' suggests bad intent and foreknowledge she's doing that.... ....

Yes and no. I know many girls who "dress for attention" - which is in the form of short short shorts, short short skirts, tight pants, tight top, very low cut top, exposed midriff, and the like.

They may not think they are trying to "provoke" guys, but they know/believe such attire will draw attention from guys, and so they dress this way.

But there are also those who dress this way because "everyone" dresses this way, and anyone who doesn't is a nerd.

 

Tsukino, Those are good points. I don't know why it's always about women's clothing.

OK, let's talk about the boys and young men who wear their pants as if they are falling of and exposing their drawers!

 

It bothers me that the interest isn't primarily in ourselves and our own hearts, and rather about obsessing about how horrid those ladies are and how much it offends us.

My concern actually is not about being "better than you", but rather about a culture that teaches women their value is in their looks, their sexuality, outdoing the next girl in "attractiveness", and so forth.

 

Alright, some women do it purposefully, but we don't know who just by seeing her do we? That's my point.I don't think it's cool to assume the worst about someone just because we don't approve of their clothing. I don't care about Miley Cyrus (as an issue), she's a product and she's doing what will get attention.

 

 

All right, I can appreciate the not judging part.

 

But my heart still feels angry and grieved at the brainwashing of our society to make products out of women. (The choice of words you gave to Miley is fitting.)

[TsukinoRei]

 

 

 

To Tsukino, alpha, and JD -

 

Just for perspective, what are your opinions on Janet Jackson's so-called "wardrobe malfunction" at the Superbowl some years ago and about Miley Cyrus's latest performance?

 

I view both as provocative and immodest, though the latter much more so than the former.

 

Though I do have friends from Australia that could not see the big deal about Janet Jackson at all, to them there was nothing to be upset about.  And it is very likely had I been born and raised with them I would feel the same way.

 

 

Exposed breasts are less of a big deal in Europe as well.  Particularly in places like Sweden where people of all ages hop in and out of public, open air hot springs in the dead of winter without a stitch on!  We went skating on a lake beside one such hot spring and my husband got a full eye full of an elderly man in all his glory!  I was at just the right height to be saved from the full view by a wooden bar.  To this day he has a pin in our map of Sweden labelled 'Ugly Naked Guy'.  All the other people were up to their necks in the water so we just put eyes forward and moved on to the skating area with the rest of the kids!

 

 

OK, so am I to understand that while you advocate nudity in art, you are not too keen on being exposed to it in your daily life?

 

 

I was surprised by it because I'm not accustomed to it.  Public nudity isn't something I grew up with.  But I wouldn't campaign to impose my standards on all the old guys in sweden!

[Guest shiloh357]

 

Isaiah 20:2 At the same time spake the LORD by Isaiah the son of Amoz, saying, Go and loose the sackcloth from off thy loins, and put off thy shoe from thy foot. And he did so, walking naked and barefoot.

 

 

Can you imagine if the Lord commanded someone to do this today?  Also, this is a post-Eden time period wherin a prophet is commanded to minister naked.  Not even a loin cloth.  Therefore, nakedness in itself is not always a sin and is not always immodest.

 

Saul got his kit off too.

 

 

 

He stripped off his robes and also prophesied in Samuel's presence. He lay that way all that day and night. This is why people say, "Is Saul also among the prophets?" (1 Samuel 19:24)

 

And David,

 

 

 

2 Samuel 6:14: "And David danced before the LORD with all his might; and David was girded with a linen ephod." 

 

An ephod, by the way, is pretty much a loin cloth.  

 

And here we have another naked prophet.

 

 

 

Micah 1:8: "Because of this I will weep and wail; I will go about barefoot and naked"

 

 

The Bible does not seem to imply that all these were sinning in their immodesty.  Perhaps the deterioration in the perception of nudity is in that we perceive the nudity itself to be sinful rather than our reaction to it?

Actually, the Hebrew word for "naked" as it is used here, does not refer to "nudity."   Nakedness in the Bible often carries a different connotation than it does in our modern western culture that views naked and nude as interchangable terms.  The Bible often refers to people as "naked" who were at least partially clothed, it refers to "nakedness" of the poor and so on.

 

The difference is that these prophets were not exhibitionists and most likely were still wearing the tunics that men wore under their garments, as would have been the case with David, Saul and Isaiah and Micah.