Welcome to Gaia! ::

Note: If your not going to read the first post, don't reply at all!

Greetings all.

This is somthing that I have always wonderd about. Time and time again, when people think about nudity they almost always go "OMG! COVER UP UR INDECENT!1!11!". And my question is; why? Why does sociaty feel the need to always keep ourselves coverd in cloths all the time? I will tackle in this post some common misconseptions about nudity;

It's dirty and in-decent!

How? If it's not desplayed sexualy then what exactly is the problem with the human body on it's own? Picture this; 2 people are standing infront of you. They are both the same gender, the same aproximate hight and weight. They are both totaly nude. One starts thrusting their hips as you and tries to use "dirty talk", while the other just talks normaly. Why are they both in the wrong? From my point of view at least, the one who is being dirty and in-decent is the one thrusting.

But what if little kids see this?

Um, so what if they do? Kids know what body parts are there. When you were a very small child, did you ever take a bath with your sister (if you have one obviously)? Then you see the genitals and nippels. Both of which the media scensor out (I'll say more on that later). Kids will learn what body parts they have sooner or later so why bother shielding it from them? Sure, little kids don't see breasts uncoverd all the time. But they will get them eventualy and they do learn about it. You only have to look at your own body and see what is coverd up.

If it's not wrong why does the media scensor so much?

That's because people are to paranoid about the human body and so the media would getmassive complaints if they did. But the thing is, it's realy stupid how the scensor things and what they do. The media scensors out only the nippel of a breast and badly pixelate genital areas. WTH? Did people forget what they look like? Honestly if there is a good reson for nudity why still scensor it out? I can't possible fathom why on earth, all these shower gel adverts are allowed to have the actresses whine and moan like they are having sex, and yet they still will not show their breasts or vagaina, constently avoiding them. I've even seen one advert which has them ware tops or bras while showering! Who on earth wares a top while they are in the shower?

Now, I'm sure all of us at some point in our lives have seen Mr.Bean. I personaly loved Mr.Bean as a kid and still do. So does my younger brother who recently turned 13. Now recently they have started showing these episodes on Nickolodeon. 1 episode has Mr.Bean loseing his swimming trunks in the pool, then atempts to get to the changeing rooms without being seen (and fails XD). Now Nickolodeon cut that whole part out simply because it showed Mr.Beans bottom. WTH? Even little kids know what a bottom is! What on earth is the problem with showing a bottom breifly on T.V? Bottoms and breasts are not sexual objects and are not used in reproduction. Yet we are still paranoid about it!

I can remember 2 incadents where there has been a huge uprore about breif flashes of nudity. The first was in a big superbowl, being shown to possibly millions of viewers. Janet Jackson who was performing on stage had a wordrope balfunction and breifly flashed her breast. Now you most likley wouldn't have seen the nippel and the breast it's self was probobly only shown for 3 seconds if that. Yet there were a ton of complaintst and the T.V company lost hundreds if not thousends of dollars because of 1 small breast flash.

Also, a well known baby magazine about baby's health and such aimed a mothers, once showed a baby being breast fed. It didn't show the nippel, but could be correctly identifyed as a breast. Complaints came flooding in, in one case a mother turned over the magazine to prevent her 13-year-old son seeing it. 1/4 of all comments about the cover were against the nudeity flash.

Now to me, this is totaly stupid! Why? Because in neither of these incadents were the human body parts desplayed for sexual intentions.

Now keep in mind; I am neither a nudist nor a pervert myself. I myself like wareing cloths at times. I like the feel and styal of the cloths. There are times like when we need to protect outselves from the elements or possible skin damage that we need to ware cloths. Also, I am not interested in sex until I find the one person who is right for me. I won't do it until at least engagement.

But even so, I am not desgusted by the site of other human bodys. I don't care who goes around naked infront of me, I don't care. Aslong as they arn't being desplayed sexualy there isn't a problem.

I personaly only ware cloths when;

1: I need to protect myself from the elements (E.G too cold)
2: There are other people around and so I avoid being shouted at.
3: I feel like it.

If none of those aply, I will go around naked. Simpel as that.

Now think about this; Roman and Greek art. Do we consider them to be dirty or desgusting or indecent? NO! Nor do we complain about other artwork being nude.

In ainchent greece and rome, it was rare to see a healthy human body. And so people saw the human body as a beutifull thing; which it is. Peopel even shared public baths!

Also, social standards used to say that if a woman showed her ankels, it was sexualy provoking. No longer, right?

So this is my question to you all;

If we don't need to ware cloths, why should we be forced to? What is wrong with being naked? Descus.

Note 2: This is a descussion about why it is wrong to be nude from a moral point of view, excluding the obvious practical advantagees that can somtimes aply.

This once again wrongly links nudity to sex. When the link is broken, the problem should disapear shouldn't it?

Well people should also notice those who get naked for reasons OTHER than sex. I am sure there are many people who don't only get naked when they are either having sex or washing (excluding getting changed).