Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Darvi]

Aaaand of course two our neighbors have restrictions on them. Hypocrites /:-l

[Kay12]

There's no culture that doesn't mandate something from its members. Some cultures are permissive in certain aspects and restrictive in others. For a clothing example, the typical European/North American culture has restrictions on toplessness but less so on bare bottoms - exactly reversed in many African cultures where toplessness is norm but bare buttocks are considered too "naughty" or "filthy".

[KaelGotDwarves]

The funny thing is that everyone is so quick to point at and judge the outsiders and other people rather than looking at ourselves and problems with our own culture.

One of the things I learned from an Iranian friend is how they scoffed at American women for being brainwashed into feeling the need to wear bikinis and skimpy clothing in order to attract males and how sex is so prevalent in our media while at the same time being so taboo. On the American side, we scoff at certain Muslim cultures by saying that their women are being brainwashed, treated like property, and forced to wear a hijab. Generalisations are bad, mmk?

If you want to get anywhere with dialogue, we must explore the actual reasons behind the beliefs, educate ourselves, and then allow free choice.

And our government should stop being in bed with Saudi Arabia. What a disgusting state of affairs for cheap oil.

[Kay12]

Another example: Finnish culture concerning nudity is quite permissive. Full-frontal nudity in non-sexual context is situationally acceptable (typically not in public though!) That's why I find it odd that in the US, sexuality is such a taboo.

Consider GTA: San Andreas, the game that got some publicity from the 'Hot Coffee' mod which unlocked a mode "hidden" (or rather, disabled) by the developers: a minigame where CJ (the male protagonist) has sex with a girl he has been dating. Consensual, adult-on-adult, sex after dating for long, so it's not even a one-night stand or prostitution! And this is a game where one gets to kill people without discretion, blow up cars, boats and planes and even bury a portable toilet with a man inside in cement. And the thing that makes this game particularly detrimental for kids is... consensual sex with CJ's girlfriend.

However, I know many Americans find this taboo as odd and unhealthy as I do, so I don't consider this to apply universally to all Americans.

[Truean]

The funny thing is that everyone is so quick to point at and judge the outsiders and other people rather than looking at ourselves and problems with our own culture.

One of the things I learned from an Iranian friend is how they scoffed at American women for being brainwashed into feeling the need to wear bikinis and skimpy clothing in order to attract males and how sex is so prevalent in our media while at the same time being so taboo. On the American side, we scoff at certain Muslim cultures by saying that their women are being brainwashed, treated like property, and forced to wear a hijab. Generalisations are bad, mmk?

If you want to get anywhere with dialogue, we must explore the actual reasons behind the beliefs, educate ourselves, and then allow free choice.

And our government should stop being in bed with Saudi Arabia. What a disgusting state of affairs for cheap oil.

Absolutely, but Americans point this out too.

"Halloween is just an excuse for girls to dress slutty." <--- Absolutely true nowadays and numerous of my girlfriends have said it....

No, we're all screwed up, and if you think I lay into the Muslims about how they treat women, then be thankful I haven't published the book of how our culture screws over females. This is especially true in the appearances department.

(Warning, the following shows renaissance art like Michelangelo's detail of the Sybil from the Sistine Chapel Ceiling, and Rembrandt's "Bathsheba." This includes some nudity.)
http://cinnabarswan.com/oldsite/essayfb2.htm

Those women are beautiful.... They are what I want to be, especially Bathsheba, and what society should strive for and hold out as the ideal of beauty instead of the physically impossible crap we do today. Sybil and Bathsheba actually eat something now and then. There's a girl who knows what something besides celery tastes like. They actually are real women portrayed beautifully in image and art.... No, really the crap we have today is physically impossible and made by photo shop, bad photo shop.

And then of course there is where they botch photoshop to leave out part of the model's body:
http://omg.yahoo.com/blogs/a-line/demi-moores-w-cover-worst-photoshop-ever/306

Where is her right hip? Do you see how it's missing? Take a look at the right hip part of that little... outfit... she's wearing. You see how that wrap thing is kind of floating away from her "body." You see that little space? That space is where her hip is and the bastards at the magazine photoshopped or airbrushed it out. Why? Why you bastards? Was she not skinny enough?

Holy shit really? It's not bad enough that I have a society where women have to look like models in order to feel pretty but now even the models aren't good enough? Now we have to use computers to make the photos complete and utter bullshit...? Designers, could  you at least give me an incredibly hard thing to strive towards being instead of a completely impossible one?

Why do we worship skinny little strumpets or really in some cases sluts? Now, while I'm not overweight, I'm also not skinny. I'm healthy and I eat things now and then. Most men consider this sexy: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Asian_model_with_pole.jpg I see this and wanna hand that poor thing a cheeseburger and ask with concern, "Honey are they feeding you?"

[Virex]

So porn is OK if it's made by a famous, dead painter? Or is it OK if the person in question adheres to a more sane ideal?

[Truean]

[Sigh]

It wasn't about porn. I don't like women that way anyhow....

The reason I posted it was to show the difference between what is "beautiful" now and what was "beautiful" then. It fit perfectly with the discussion because a full body cover is one extreme and the idea that women have to be almost completely exposed (in our culture) is the other extreme. It's about how women are portrayed and question of why. It is also about showing that while the traditional Islamic garb is screwing over women by demanding they cover themselves, we do the exact same thing in the opposite way by demanding they show too much and be rail thin besides....

It really messes with your head when you're a girl and you see nothing but impossible models everywhere. Sane ideals... please.

Nudity is porn instead of art when the intent is to sexually stimulate. Sybil was painted in a church, the Sistine Chapel Ceiling, do you really think that was the intent of putting it there? If it wasn't completely impractical, I'd say we should teach stuff like this in school, except of course it is completely impractical for fairly obvious reasons. Doing so would probably cut down on the rate of anorexia in girls and I can unfortunately only dream that it could make boys have more realistic expectations of what their wives should be..... Again, I realize that this will never happen and that unfortunately it shouldn't. There's a big difference between the real and the ideal, between what "is" and what "ought" to be.

The real reason nudity is so taboo in America is that we're all obsessed with sex.... This is sad.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

It is also about showing that while the traditional Islamic garb is screwing over women by demanding they cover themselves, we do the exact same thing in the opposite way by demanding they show too much and be rail thin besides....

I think there is an important distinction to be made here. While there is certainly an issue in western society of demanding unrealistic portrayals of women and expecting real women to meet that goal, a woman can choose to go against it with significantly more ease than a woman in an Islamic country can forgo head/body coverings, mostly because of this.

[Virex]

Nudity is porn instead of art when the intent is to sexually stimulate. Sybil was painted in a church, the Sistine Chapel Ceiling, do you really think that was the intent of putting it there?

Much of what we consider art today was made with less... artistic ideals in mind (especially since "l'art pour l'art" is something that started in the 20th century). It's not without reason that nude paintings were very much sought after in the Victorian era
Considering the record of the church on similar matters, I wouldn't be surprised if they were.... overjoyed with Michelangelo's scene...

[Truean]

It is also about showing that while the traditional Islamic garb is screwing over women by demanding they cover themselves, we do the exact same thing in the opposite way by demanding they show too much and be rail thin besides....

I think there is an important distinction to be made here. While there is certainly an issue in western society of demanding unrealistic portrayals of women and expecting real women to meet that goal, a woman can choose to go against it with significantly more ease than a woman in an Islamic country can forgo head/body coverings, mostly because of this.

Absolutely

Nudity is porn instead of art when the intent is to sexually stimulate. Sybil was painted in a church, the Sistine Chapel Ceiling, do you really think that was the intent of putting it there?

Much of what we consider art today was made with less... artistic ideals in mind (especially since "l'art pour l'art" is something that started in the 20th century). It's not without reason that nude paintings were very much sought after in the Victorian era
Considering the record of the church on similar matters, I wouldn't be surprised if they were.... overjoyed with Michelangelo's scene...

Granted, unfortunately. [sigh]. Yet, at the same time, the notion of a massive porn industry is also a modern concept they didn't have. So your argument both strengthens and weakens itself. I don't know which weighs more heavily: the fact that people are always like that to some degree, or that it wasn't as prevalent as it is now. *shrugs*

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Considering the record of the church on similar matters, I wouldn't be surprised if they were.... overjoyed with Michelangelo's scene...

It also has an Angel flipping off the Pope. Michelangelo was an interesting person for his time, to say the least. (He also fired all of the assistants that were hired for him the first day he started painting the Sistine Chapel and did all the work, by himself.)

[Virex]

Granted, unfortunately. [sigh]. Yet, at the same time, the notion of a massive porn industry is also a modern concept they didn't have. So your argument both strengthens and weakens itself. I don't know which weighs more heavily: the fact that people are always like that to some degree, or that it wasn't as prevalent as it is now. *shrugs*

Well, prostitution was way more common back then, so to some extend the current situation is better...

[Truean]

Granted, unfortunately. [sigh]. Yet, at the same time, the notion of a massive porn industry is also a modern concept they didn't have. So your argument both strengthens and weakens itself. I don't know which weighs more heavily: the fact that people are always like that to some degree, or that it wasn't as prevalent as it is now. *shrugs*

Well, prostitution was way more common back then, so to some extend the current situation is better...

No it isn't. We just don't see it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_trafficking

[Phmcw]

I don't see the problem with sexually exiting art.
Or why something sexually exiting wouldn't be art.
And moreover a lot of "this is art for art" stuff is actually designed to be sexually appealing.

Hell, when a man or a woman dress sexy, it's to be sexy, when you watch a nude painting, wanting it or not, you'll find it appealing.

The main problem with today's porn is that the taboo of our society forbid it to be anything else than stupid mating.

[Hiiri]

I don't really get the point of school uniforms. Is there actually a reason the hypothetical girl here shouldn't be allowed to wear whatever she damn well pleases?

I don't live in America, but I've heard stories of people getting kicked out of schools for any religious symbols. Including rings with hardly noticeable symbols.

For the sake of the rules, not for the sake of good.

Yeah, I've heard rumours of that. I'm not sure if I actually believe them. It sounds fairly silly. Here in Finland, trying to stop students from sporting religious symbols would probably clash with the whole freedom-of-religion thing. Honestly, I thought America had something like that going on as well. Isn't there something in the constitution about not banning religions?

Religious freedom is bound to clash with the laws. It's not like you can go and murder your neighbor and get away with it because some musty old tome or the voices in your head says so. Religion CANNOT give you exceptions or special treatment. Everyone has to be treated equal.

And someone asked why there are school uniforms; I think it's because of bullying. Which is okay reason for me, because kids are likely to judge each other by their clothes. Which is stupid. Whether school uniforms are good or bad is another topic.

Just a couple of questions: If a Muslim girl goes to a school, and wants to wear the bhurka, she should be able to wear one but only in the colours of the school. That sound right? And if that girl can wear a bhurka, shouldn't another girl be allowed to wear her cross?

In my opinion, in a free country, a person should be able to express him/herself with clothing freely (as long as said clothing covers the "naughty areas" of the culture in question). On the other hand, clothing that covers the face has a problem in functionality, as ID checks, for example, require one's face to be visible.

In any case, while I'm not a religious type myself, I never understood why forcing people to not wear religious symbols promotes religious harmony. By that logic, painting everyone blue promotes racial harmony.

Why are suddenly "naughty areas" supposed to be covered? Aren't you just saying that people should be able to wear whatever they want, as long as they wear what you say? Isn't that a bit hypocritical?

Freedom is such a curse word these days; it should be banned from any political discussions, because everyone can back their case up with it. "I should have the freedom to own slaves!"

Edit: As for the analogy; races are reality we have to live with and accept. Religious beliefs are not.