ET Warrior Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle Why do I even post when people say this way better than I do:D? Because you like the sound of your own e-voice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IG-64 Posted April 4, 2005 Author Share Posted April 4, 2005 I hate it how everyone puts things they dissagree with in "quoatations". How I look at it, from a "religious morality" standpoint, which none of you seem to get; you can watch violence, but it is bad to act it out. Nudity however, is bad to watch. Why? Because nudity leads to lust. And it leads to adulty (and addiction, and corruption) much easier than watching violence. Acting out lustful things is a normal desire for a human being (and simply wrong from a religious standpoint, I don't know how to explain it any further than just that), while blowing someone's head off is maniacal. Don't get me wrong though, I don't enjoy indulging myself unto gorey, explicit violence, it just makes me feel bad. I hope that made enough sense for you people not to butcher it and put it all in "quotations" and use selective wording indended to ridicule. If not, then I give up, because this debate is pretty pointless one way or another. And I only try to defend my beliefs which seem to be growing more and more neglected by the LF community every day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 I wouldnt' say your beliefs are neglected so much as simply not shared by the majority. The problem is that nudity doesn't lead straightaway to lust. Seeing a naked woman does not make me instantly want to have sex with her, I simply will admire her beauty. It's like saying art is bad because it's nice to look at. Just because a lot of people who are lustful enjoy nudity doesn't mean nudity causes lust. Correlation != Causation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverhoodian Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 There are many reasons why nudity is a controversial subject. For one thing, people don't usually walk around nude in everyday life. Though there are social influences that play a factor, clothing does serve very important practical purposes. I certainly wouldn't want to brave a raging blizzard naked, or for that matter getting hit in the family jewels (or anywhere else) hard with nothing to soften the blow. It's curious how the definition of indecency changes over time according to culture. Back in the 1800's, it was considered indecent for women to show their ankles. They'd probably have a conniption fit if they saw how short skirts are nowadays. Basically, indecency is whatever society deems it to be. I kid you not, if showing off elbows ever became indecent, Playboy playmates would be flashing bare elbows instead of breasts. One has to keep in mind that the standards of indecency are not the same in other parts of the world. I'm not going to be judgemental towards tribal women in Africa just because they might go around topless. They've been raised in a different social setting than mine, with different customs, standards and traditions that I could never fully understand. I suppose it all boils down to personal taste. If you watch a movie that contains material you may find indecent, you have every right not to look, just as those who don't have every right to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IG-64 Posted April 4, 2005 Author Share Posted April 4, 2005 Originally posted by ET Warrior Just because a lot of people who are lustful enjoy nudity doesn't mean nudity causes lust. And I agree with that, I enjoy art, but usually in movies nudity is intended to sexually excite. We were discussing nudity in movies, weren't we? >_> Originally posted by Neverhoodian It's curious how the definition of indecency changes over time according to culture. Back in the 1800's, it was considered indecent for women to show their ankles. They'd probably have a conniption fit if they saw how short skirts are nowadays. Basically, indecency is whatever society deems it to be. I kid you not, if showing off elbows ever became indecent, Playboy playmates would be flashing bare elbows instead of breasts. Yeah, and that's called Lust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Originally posted by IG-64 Yeah, and that's called Lust. Not so, lust is defined as "Intense or unrestrained sexual craving." Enjoying the sight of a womans body does not necessarily correlate to sexual craving. It may be that you simply appreciate the female body which is, in fact, a beautiful thing. (Better in person, but that is neither here nor there) Nudity in movies is NOT necessarily there to be arousing or lust inducing. It's a manner of expression or art. Nudity in PORN is intended for that purpose, but we're not discussing porn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrion Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Originally posted by IG-64 "How I look at it, from a "religious morality" standpoint, which none of you seem to get; you can watch violence, but it is bad to act it out. Nudity however, is bad to watch. Why? Because nudity leads to lust. And it leads to adulty (and addiction, and corruption) much easier than watching violence. Acting out lustful things is a normal desire for a human being (and simply wrong from a religious standpoint, I don't know how to explain it any further than just that), while blowing someone's head off is maniacal. Don't get me wrong though, I don't enjoy indulging myself unto gorey, explicit violence, it just makes me feel bad." But you see, being lustful by itself isn't that bad. But like with violence, acting out in lust(namely adultering or rape) is what's harmful. If the woman goes bare by her own free will in front of a camera, then she shouldn't feel embarrased knowing that men are going to masturbate at her image. (wait, we're not talking about porn? Oh, uh, then ditto what Et said...) And to further describe what Never is saying, back in the 1800's exposed breasts actually were common, and it was the shown ankles and elbows that were taboo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IG-64 Posted April 4, 2005 Author Share Posted April 4, 2005 Originally posted by ET Warrior Nudity in PORN is intended for that purpose, but we're not discussing porn. Sorry, I was replying to this: Originally posted by Neverhoodian Playboy playmates would be flashing bare elbows instead of breasts. I should probably have made it more clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vikinor Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Nudity in porn is where I draw my line. That goes against my religion. Just seeing a naked person doesn't really have an effect on me. But seeing naked people in front of a camera in certain poses. Well that just gets different. In Sweden the people don't seem to have a BIG problem with nudity like America does. Say for example. I am going to a beach. I have my swimming shorts, but they aren't on. So I get to the beach and I decide to change right there around other people. There isn't that much of a effect. Try doing that in Ocean City. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IG-64 Posted April 4, 2005 Author Share Posted April 4, 2005 Originally posted by VikingLarz Nudity in porn is where I draw my line. That goes against my religion. Just seeing a naked person doesn't really have an effect on me. But seeing naked people in front of a camera in certain poses. Well that just gets different. In Sweden the people don't seem to have a BIG problem with nudity like America does. Say for example. I am going to a beach. I have my swimming shorts, but they aren't on. So I get to the beach and I decide to change right there around other people. There isn't that much of a effect. Try doing that in Ocean City. Yeah, you'd probably get arrested for indecent exposure here in America. Personally I like to go to beach knowing i'm not gonna have to see someone's bits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeKatarn Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Me too. I agree with you IG. And yes, we all know cold isn't an excuse. Say it was the hotest day of the year, why do we still wear clothes? Why do we swim with swimming clothes? Etc.. Adam and Eve were nude, are you sure? I belive that, but I am just agenst nudity unless it is someone I am related with in the now. Everyone is related in some way, but you don't consider them all your family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 So you're saying to see both your parents naked but it's not fine if it's your friend? Or some girl on TV or in a movie? I'd rather never see my parents naked. Ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOutrider Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Im religious and I have no problem with nudity as long as it isn't perverted nudity. I mean if its part of a movie then fine with me. And who invented that stupid sterotype thingy that "Nudity is wrong". Its like saying body function (burps and farts) are wrong. I got in trouble for farting in class the other day then talked back with "Its a natural body function". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOutrider Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Originally posted by IG-64 Yeah, you'd probably get arrested for indecent exposure here in America. Personally I like to go to beach knowing i'm not gonna have to see someone's bits. Theres this beach where I live where people get nude whenever they feel like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinWalker Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 It seems pretty clear that those that are worried and concerned about seeing a movie that has nude scenes in it are really saying more about themselves than the movies. I pity the person who watches a Rated R movie and worries about the 15 second nude scene in a well done cinematic production. While they may have lasted more than 15 seconds, the nude scenes in movies like Moulin Rouge with Nicole Kidman and Sea of Love with Al Pacino and Ellen Barkin were both extremely well done and the scenes added to the overall cinematic effect. Did it create feelings of lust, eroticism, love, romance, desire, etc.? Sure. But one doesn't need a nude scene in a movie to get those feelings. It's how you deal with those feelings that makes or breaks you as a Christian. If you leave the movie and have only the scene of Al Pacino and Ellen Barkin in your head, or spend the night in your bathroom thinking about Nicole Kidman's red hair and pale, creamy skin against your own.... then you missed the point of the movie and wasted your $7.50. Nudity is a natural state of humanity. Sex is a natural act of humanity. We're the only animal on the planet that appears to engage in it purely for recreational purposes. If there is a god, then sex must be his gift to humanity. But to worry that you will be corrupted by the very act of viewing nudity -not even actual sex, or even sex itself in a cinematic production says more about the individual that is viewing than society as a whole. The Abrahamic aversion to nudity and sexuality stems from its patriarchal bias and the oppression of the woman in general. This is true for Christianity, Islam, Judaism, the Othodox Churches, etc. Religions prior to the Judeo-Christian sects used to embrace sex and use it in ritual ceremonies that celebrated the sacred union of man and woman into a new state of being in which both became one and that one was spiritually whole. God's "left hand" was once a female. The Canaanite tradition (the region in which the Jewish people who wrote the Torah originated) held that Yahweh had a wife, Asherah (one of her names); the Gnostic Gospels include that Jesus had female Apostles -indeed one is seen in Da Vinci's The Last Supper. Priests were once required to engage in sexual union with their counterparts in order to commune with God but, following the Cannonization of the current Christian dogma, the female was effectively restricted and oppressed in the Church. Even in contemporary Protestant faiths, female ministers and reverends are rare. The left is considered evil and right is identified with righteousness. "Mother Earth" has been long forgotten in the recent religion of Christianity and in its place is "Our Father," along with the patriarchal bias against the femanine gender and sexuality. Among Abrahamic religions, it is the female that is oppressed with clothing. Rarely is it the male that is restricted in his nudity to the degree of the female - a man working in the yard without a shirt is acceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CapNColostomy Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Here's the thing about nudity. There's absolutely nothing wrong with it. And if you argue that point, the one pair of underwear you've been wearing since you were five or so, must smell like prison ass and be all ten kinds of full of holes, because like, you hate nudity! So where do you get off trying to get nude for the sake of bathing, showering, or just cleaning up?! There's a time and a place for everything, sure. Nudity falls under this rule. Sometimes, it's just not a good idea to be nude. But if one makes a movie, and tries to capture gritty realism, and that requires nudity, so be it, I say. The director must have felt that it was the time and place for nudity. If that bothers you, more the fool you. I'm curious how much internet pr0n is downloaded daily by all of these anti nudity nut jobs. It's a good thing your mothers weren't so close/clothes minded. Or else you might have a permanent panties necklace you'd have to sport for all of your days. One of the greatest works of art (and tiniest penis's) of all time waves hello to you prudes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Rythe Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Originally posted by GothiX To the people whining about nudity in movies: Get a grip. It's called "cinematography", adding some form of realism to movies. It's not like they're having sex with horses or anything. If nudity bothers you that much, I feel sorry for any girlfriend you might get. Emphasis on "might". I agree with that 100% What, do you guys take showers fully clothed, do you get freaked out about going to the beach? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 This thread could really do with an introduction, as it kind of comes ut of nowhere for those people who wern't involved in the original Sin City thread... Sometimes on the web its really hard to figure out if people are serious, or just taking an awkward position in order to stir up controversy. I know that the US is supposed to be prudish as far as nudity goes, but this is silly. If i remeber my Adam & Eve correctly god WANTED then to be naked, it was only once they were "corrupted" that they became ashamed of their nudity and covered themselves... So surely all christians should be trying to be as nude and pure as they can be? I obviously went to the wrong churches, as i don't remember EVER being told that nudity was against religion. Sex maybe. Lust maybe. But not nudity. Oddly, it is clear that the MORE REPRESSED a person and/or country is about nudity the MORE nudity becomes corrupting and lustful. You can hang around on beaches in europe (heck, even england) and be surrounded by naked and semi-naked people. But because it is usual it isn't seen in a lustful way. However in a country where it ISN'T usually seen, the smallest flash of a breast causes uncontrolled lust or a national scandal (as seen by the janet jackson fiasco that the rest of the world just looked at dumbfounded about what all the fuss was about). That is also why the flash of an ankle would have filled an 18th century guy with lust, but today it has no effect at all. Which is the more christian? What about all the christian religious paintings in churches around the world that depict naked cherubs, naked women etc? ---- As for clothes, they serve multiple functions, modesty being only one. They can keep you warm, or cool. They can protect you from the sun, rain, wind, snow and other elements. They can contain your "bits" so they don't bounce around painfully or get caught on barbed wire. They protect you from general nicks, grazes and scratches. They identify your social grouping. Useful things, but not moral shields. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeKatarn Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 People, shut up! I am talking about the nudity of others. If it is one you have a personal relationship ((Son, wife, soughter, etc.)) then it's fine. Just because I don't want to see people I'm not related to naked, doesn't mean I don't care if I'm naked in private, as long as noone sees me. I take showers, noone sees. Babys, well they ARE babies, it's not like their grown. I also don't really care about seeing my own gender naked. I mean it's just like me. But seeing a female naked, no, unless I'm related. So buzz off of IG and me, there is no reason to mock our parents and us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acdcfanbill Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Originally posted by LukeKatarn ...But seeing a female naked, no, unless I'm related... no offense, but this seems a bit weird, in my book anyway. I would think the very opposite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeKatarn Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Because your a pervert? And to everything who was mockeing IG and me, how do you like to have an 11 year old telling you to buzz off? MUHAHAHAHAHAHA! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrion Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Originally posted by LukeKatarn Because your a pervert? And to everything who was mockeing IG and me, how do you like to have an 11 year old telling you to buzz off? MUHAHAHAHAHAHA! Ah, to be 11 again and have that youthful feeling of inner power. Don't worry, you have a few more years left until you realise it's just your hormones trying to get you killed. Mine almost got me, those bastards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Originally posted by LukeKatarn Because your a pervert? I don't know, I think wanting only to see those you're related to, naked, is more perverted. Then again, I have dabbled in the world of perversion from time to time. But personally nudity does nothing for me, it has to be actual acts to get my lusting going. I'm not all "zOMG titty" I'm "wow, those are some nice sheets, looks like silk..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinWalker Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Originally posted by LukeKatarn People, shut up! I am talking about the nudity of others. And at 11 years old, I should hope you do avoid the movies with nude scenes. Most 11 year olds simply aren't mature enough to handle it. But with time and maturity, I hope you come to see nudity as not something to be ashamed of, but rather something about humanity that can be appreciated -appreciated in spite of lust and all those emotions that religious people ascribe to be "sinful." However, your personal nudity should be guarded, since (as noted by others) there are those among humanity who regard it in ways that go far beyond appreciation of the human body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZBomber Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 When you get the "Talk", you'll realize that sex and nudity isn't a dirty thing.... unless your parents make it sound like it is.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.