Feature
- Do You Hate Your Partner, Too?
- California Teen Avoids Heavy Sentencing by Passing the Buck
- Wanna Buy Your Teenager a Padded Push-Up Bra?
- Vampires in Texas!
- These Guys Are As Bad As Westboro Baptist Church
- Funny Letters Sent to Women's Magazines
- Women's Ski Jumping: Still Not a 'Real' Sport
- Will the World Be Pro-Choice Soon?
- Are We Getting Too Lazy to Even Divorce?
- Forever 21's Maternity Line: Glamorizing Teen Pregnancy?
We live in a society where, generally, nudity is frowned upon. In public, especially. However, this week a woman posed nude in the gallery window of a Greenwich Village art center and barely anyone bat an eye. Initially.
Initially, law enforcement turned a blind eye but after second day of hanging out nekkid in the storefront display case, model Megan Hanford was advised to put some clothes on and climb out of the showcase.
This has left many people to speak their minds regarding the often-taboo topic of public nudity. Although many artists claim that there is nothing wrong with exposing the nude body for the world to see (which I agree with, as long as it’s done tastefully, naturally), there are just as many dissenters stating that while yes, there is generally nothing backward about displaying a naked human being as a part of an art exhibition, there is something fundamentally wrong about forcing anyone and everyone to see said body — whether they like it or not.
This I can agree with. While I, personally, wouldn’t have any adversities to seeing nude models posing for the sake of art (I mean really … we all have the same parts), I can understand that not all people appreciate nudity as art and misconstrue art for other aspects of exhibitionist nudity. Daniel S. Connolly, a lawyer in New York City, states the following:
“If you’re walking down a street in New York City and someone is naked in the window — and so children and whoever can see it — you’re depriving people of their choice … That’s where you butt up against other people’s rights.”
Understandable and respectably-noted as far as I’m concerned.
What do you guys think? Would you be comfortable walking down the street, minding your own business and coming across an explicitly-nude male or female hanging out in a storefront display? Do you think the perception of public nudity has gone so far that it’ll never be accepted in the art world as it maybe should be?
You Might Also Like ...
-
-
12
I am not a fan of phsyical censorship. A body is a body and we all know what’s going on underneath the clothes. Do I think that everyone should walk around naked? No, because it’s not practical. But I think a boob here and there on network TV shouldn’t be as appalling as people make it out to be. The FCC needs to chill the hell out.
only slightly related, but this reminded me, in New York city it is actually legal for women to go topless and it not be considered public indecency(unless they’ve changed the law in the last couple of years).
I have to say I agree 100% with Connolly’s statement.
I don’t think it would bother me, but I can see why it would bother others; actually, it strikes me as a bit odd that one would want a nude model in a window looking onto a street, but maybe that’s just me.
While I don’t agree with censorship and I sure as hell don’t believe seeing someone naked is going to horribly scar our children, what was the purpose in this? was she part of an art piece? trying to sell something? (obviously not clothes) or was she just standing around trying to get some shock value and free press? If it had no purpose I don’t have a problem with them stopping it because well it had no point and art should probably be in an art window.
Wonder what people would say if it wasnt a naked model.. what if it was an overweight person standing there nude? is that still considered art to them?
I think that if (tasteful) public nudity were more common, our society would loosen up and nobody would have a problem with it. We’d stop cordoning it off behind ropes and glass walls in musty, sterile museums.
For some reason, Americans have never differentiated between different kinds of nudity – all nudity is sexual (in mainstream society anyway). This is why there is such a contentious debate about public breastfeeding. I mean really, breastfeeding?!
We need to realize that nakedness is healthy, normal, and natural. It is not automatically bad, or shameful, or pornographic, but that is what we’re taught. And it’s very sad, because there’s nothing like sitting around in your living room butt naked, reading a book and enjoying a cup of tea.
As far as warning people about nudity in an area – isn’t that just continuing to make an issue of it?
“That’s where you BUTT up against other people’s rights” hehe
[...] Public nudity crosses the fine “artistic” line in New York [Zelda Lily] [...]
In NY it is perfectly legal to be fully nude in public if you’re part of a show, performance, play or entertainment — See Penal Law section 245. If someone is offended by nudity, they simply have to avert their eyes and dirty minds.
Yeah! What about breastfeeding? We are told that breastmilk is still best for babies. And I can’t openly feed my bundle of joy because it would be improper to expose a part of my body. I don’t mind that i use Ameda Purely Yours Breast Pump Carry All so I can store my milk and feed it to my baby later. I just think that it will be a lot easier and healthier for her to get it straight from me when she needs it.
I think people have a lot to complain about..
it’s the same as people saying it made them sick to see memorials of the dead nearby the road because they were in the shape of a cross..
the cross would be a symbol for an abundancy of things, but it’s really a jerk thing to say that it’s infringing on your rights when you’re driving walking by, no one is shoving it into your kitchen or living room, ads are on everything & everywhere & I personally would prefer a real person clothed or otherwise than the drab endless commercialism.
nudity should be more accepted, as you said we’re all more or less the same, & a number of centuries ago they would have mistook the prudence for a deformity.
personally, I don’t like frontal male nudity, it’s not sleek, & lacks a bit of grace, and hair on people can also detract from the form of the figure, while the only people who should be able to complain about female nudity (in general, obesity or something of that sort is a seperate issue) are perverts, who distort nature and reality.. which I’m not saying is uncommon in our current culture/age
as for the display of breasts, they’re essentially the same, they made the same for males & female save females generally swell (in humans) beginning around adolescence, and males’ generally don’t.. (for both there are exceptions)
some people find covering the nipples with a non-existant bikini to be more satisfactory, but if you debate it.. it more or less seems silly that you would try and wear something like that instead of not..
exposure has been moving up since it moved towards complete coverage a few centuries ago, and due to things such as bras, that naturally keep them covered compared to the revealing of ankles , the shoulder bellies, etc etc, they’re further behind, & it’s rediculous not to be able to act naturally to feed one’s kid, it’s a rather backwards thought.
I’m pretty sure I just broke into rambling.. early on, but yeah, I hope that’s a help?
it doesn’t intrude anymore than any other ad. and the only reason it can be found to be frowned upon is by the perversion of nature..
there’s no real difference between coverage with veils in the arabic world compared to breasts etc here, & girls don’t have anything external to cover up down below..