The Human body: Why are so many afraid of it?

[All Else Failed]

I was observing a plastic surgery show the other night, and I noticed something.

The women was getting breast implants. Now, the camera had her breasts blurred post surgery while they measured and marked the insertion spots, even side views of the breast were pixelated. Yet, the show's producers saw it fully acceptable to show the incision on the breast without pixelation, and the peeling back of the breast flesh to reveal the muscle, fat and other various things you'd find in the human chest without being censored either. They rather forcefully plunged a vaccumm tube through her chest and began to suck some sort of fluid out of her breasts, all the while there was no blurring or censoring going on while the gory process was unraveling. Am I to believe that people producing this show think it's "obscene" to show a perfectly fine human breast, while it is fine to show gory surgical procedures taking place with various bloody tissues being manipulated and fluids sucked out from a torso? Are they saying to society that "Yes, the human breast is too 'pornographic' to be shown, but here's some blood and guts, go wild!"?


I think this shows our society's paranoia about the display of the human body. They won't show a breast because it is too "pornographic" yet slicing into a chest with a bone saw is perfectly fine and will remain uncensored?



Go to your local art gallery, and I can bet you you will find paintings of men and women in the nude, fully exposed. Some of the greatest artworks and statues are of the naked human form, and they are praised, yet its too pornographic to show the real thing while we "oo and awww" representations of it? Seems a bit hypocritical to me.


What is the difference between this:

http://www.wga.hu/art/g/goya/5/501goya.jpg

And this (NSFW contains nudity):

http://www.paulpolitis.com/gallery/attachments/nude_repose.jpg

But the medium it is presented in? The first one is generally accepted as art, yet the second will be shunned and censored in public.


Thoughts?

 

[memento_mori]

you know america is a puritanical society, and yes, the censorship and stigma we have over pornography/nudity is arbitrary. i guess people just need to draw the line somewhere to tempt themselves? kind of like you have the ability to sleep whenever you want, but it's only socially acceptable to sleep at night. maybe swearing would be a better example.

 

[All Else Failed]

you know america is a puritanical society, and yes, the censorship and stigma we have over pornography/nudity is arbitrary. i guess people just need to draw the line somewhere to tempt themselves? kind of like you have the ability to sleep whenever you want, but it's only socially acceptable to sleep at night. maybe swearing would be a better example.

Yeah, America has some crazy standards when it comes to what is socially acceptable, but it only shows the willingness of the masses to follow those standards.

 

[Eridanus]

I have never understood why breast and alike are censored in the US, yet they seem to allow graphic, and violent footage/imagery without blinking an eye.

The furore that the Janet Jackson incident whipped was something of an amusement here (Australia)...nothing could be seen anyway as she was wearing nipple decorations, and it is nothing you can't see when going to the beach (unless the US don't allow topless women on the beach).

 

[UncleBacon]

I think censorship is fucking stupid...

 

[All Else Failed]

I have never understood why breast and alike are censored in the US, yet they seem to allow graphic, and violent footage/imagery without blinking an eye.

The furore that the Janet Jackson incident whipped was something of an amusement here (Australia)...nothing could be seen anyway as she was wearing nipple decorations, and it is nothing you can't see when going to the beach (unless the US don't allow topless women on the beach).

Most of the hub bub was over it being "indecent" for young children. They think that exposure to a naked body part will corrupt their minds or something.

YET they think kids watching grown men take part in a very violent sport is fine...doesn't add up.

 

[dt3]

AEF, you failed to mention that some of the greatest works of art are also of a bonesaw cutting into a chest cavity.






:jk

 

[IntruderLS1]

I don't know, I think preventing kids from seeing certain things is a good thing. It all boils down to the great word "desensitized" that we all picked up in the early 90's.

If kids grow up watching naked people doing the deed on TV, they'll think nothing of it, and have no problem with figuring it out for themselves at a younger age than is healthy.

All morality arguments aside, kids who start having sex too young are bad for society.

 

[icecuban]

the problem in america would not be no easy fix. Too much lust over looks and all the physical parts has built up, to the point where, on the majority, not only the adolecent, but the adult would be aroused by seeing nudity, in any medium. it would take a serious, country wide effort to dull down the vanity in order to change things, because of the curious lust censorship and the fig leaf have bestowed on us gives us no easy answer to the problem. The way we glamorize the body, with and without clothes is a problem, and is shared by many. by doing this, we all know (along with the people in charge) that by getting rid of censorship, at this time, in this country, would just add to our social problem.

 

[Tim]

I don't know, I think preventing kids from seeing certain things is a good thing. It all boils down to the great word "desensitized" that we all picked up in the early 90's.

If kids grow up watching naked people doing the deed on TV, they'll think nothing of it, and have no problem with figuring it out for themselves at a younger age than is healthy.

All morality arguments aside, kids who start having sex too young are bad for society.

I agree with censoring sex acts, but how is a topless women considered a sex act? This even goes to breast feeding in public, are we asking the women to cover their breasts for the sake of the adults or so the feeding child won't catch a glimpse of a naked breast?

So how bout it Lacey, is everyone having sex on the beach there because the women can go topless? Since women do go topless there, are womens breasts looked at differently then we look at them here? What about children seeing topless women, does it corrupt them like we are lead to believe?

 

[Puf]

I honestly believe that the reason censorship is around is because of religion. To some it's just the human body to others (christians and other religions) it's adultery, which is against the bible. Seriously think about it, how many of our decisions that we make are based off of our morals? All of them, and we get a majority of our morals from our religion. The exposure of the human body is a moral issue and some can deal with with, whilst others can not. Making a religion big part of this debate.

 

[All Else Failed]

I do think it has to do with religion. Religion teaches you that your body is a lustful tool of evil, and should be covered, no sex until marriage etc etc. But Lets not get into another religious debate......


But, lets take Europe for example. The showing of the human body and sexual art and the like in Europe is far more rampant than the US, along with lax sex ages and so on, yet their teen pregnancy rates and abortions are far lower than the US.

http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/PUBLICATIONS/factsheet/fsest.htm
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3324401.html


So right off the bat, I personally do not think its an issue of children seeing nude images or pornography, but the entire culture's attitude and mentality towards that kind of imagery and subject matter.

 

[memento_mori]

it seems like our entire society is built on whores and perverts. kids are having sex younger and younger, and stds are getting more and more of a problem. we never should have put friends on the air, their sexual in-your-endo jokes started this whole mess.

 

[SilentEyz]

I do think it has to do with religion. Religion teaches you that your body is a lustful tool of evil, and should be covered, no sex until marriage etc etc. But Lets not get into another religious debate......

Thank You

it seems like our entire society is built on whores and perverts. kids are having sex younger and younger, and stds are getting more and more of a problem. we never should have put friends on the air, their sexual in-your-endo jokes started this whole mess.

Then how would you Explain the 60's?

 

[memento_mori]

were little girls giving blow jobs on the playground in the 60s? i thought that just started happening recently, with all the sex we have on tv and explicit hip hop lyrics.

 

[SilentEyz]

It has become More Explicit in its Freedom, But Being an Extreme Sexual generation is not something New, The Acceptance of Society has become more open, The knowledge available has become more.

In the 60's Little Girls didnt Know What a Bj was, Today you would be hard to find one under 8 who doesnt know.

The theory is the same, its the knowledge and acceptance in society that has changed the extent of sexual freedom

 

[memento_mori]

so let's not encourage it by showing nudity on television. hell, maybe we should have more censorship on television, so that it's not depicting sexually implicit material.

 

[SilentEyz]

Well Technically I am not against That,

Not because it truely serves a purpose, but the more we continue to find acceptance in what once was frowned upon, The more damage is done.

Censorship may not serve an extreme purpose, But We are a society that is trained by what we learn young,

If we had never had censorship then It would not be an issue that creates a growing problem, But, we have always had it, so the less we now have of it, the larger the problem becomes.

Its not uncensored because its normal and should not have been made an issue to staart with, But the less we have, the more we feel as though we are getting away with something sneaky, The more its looked at in a sexual manner rather then a natural manner.

 

[quarterican]

Not because it truely serves a purpose, but the more we continue to find acceptance in what once was frowned upon, The more damage is done.

I am going to have to disagree with that statement, but I guess that's a completely different debate.

I can understand the censorship of sexual content, but naked doesn't automatically mean sexual content. America needs to desensitize itself to the body, because it's definitely much more than a sexual thing.

 

[SilentEyz]

Im not Disagreing with that it is a seperate thing, but Honestly unless they are watching the Discovery Channel It is mostly exhibited in a sexual nature, and since it is not now nor never has been introduced as a natural thing, its only natural that it will be seen and taken as it is displayed?

How much censurship do you see because its Natural rather then sexual based? Yes there is some, but most things these days are very sexually based.

Disensitizing people from nudity would require it to be displayed in strictly a non-sexual way, Hence you would still be censoring them