Male Nudity And Equality

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
MrsSpringsteen said:
Personally I think what is left to the imagination is always the sexiest. After shows like that HBO show (I am going by the description, I am HBOless unfortunately), what is left? I prefer love scenes that are more discreet and nudity that is the same.



what's interesting about the show, though, is that's intentionally clinical about sex -- it's not sexy at all, and it's not intended to be. i haven't made up my mind about it yet, but i'm intrigued by it.
 
Irvine511 said:

what's interesting about the show, though, is that's intentionally clinical about sex -- it's not sexy at all, and it's not intended to be. i haven't made up my mind about it yet, but i'm intrigued by it.

I have read some about it and from what I understood the relationship aspects of it are really the most graphic and "disturbing" elements.

I think the equality aspect of this is great, and it is about time. But personally I'm still interested in looking at Viggo's eyes. The rest is not something I need to know about :wink: But I don't need know about the women either. There is sexy nudity and there is nudity that is just so unsexy.

I just don't see the full frontal male nudity ever becoming a norm, not the way female nudity is.
 
Irvine511 said:
i thought we were talking about penises?
I thought we were talking about "full-frontal male nudity," not "penis closeups." I haven't seen the series nor the scene in question; maybe it's one and the same in that case. But I think the way that article put it...
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen
Just as the cinematic baring of female breasts led many women to compare themselves and despair, putting the male organ out their for public consumption may strike many men as disempowering, deflating and just plain icky.
...exaggerates the role of one particular body part in what's "deflating" about constantly seeing highly idealized versions of the total package of your sex's body type on screen. Yeah, breasts and penises are respectively the most "noteworthy" things you spot when you see a naked woman or man onscreen, but the whole package and how its proportions flow together is also being evaluated, and being "well-endowed" in those particular areas isn't going to outweigh an unflattering impression of everything else. I'm not saying that's necessarily something to cheer about--on the contrary, in some ways it would at least mean fewer people depressed about their bodies if being "lucky" in that one department trumped everything else. But in real (sex) life it doesn't. If there was ever a time when "the cinematic baring of female breasts" alone "led many women to compare themselves and despair," then it's long since broadened into a much more extensive list of assets for women to mope about their own "inadequacies" in, several of them things you "either have or you don't." Maybe an increasing use of full-frontal male nudity wouldn't have that same effect, maybe everything would always come down to penis size, but I kind of doubt it. I don't know that it really matters much that penises are genitalia and breasts aren't--either way it tends to be perceived as a comment on your "potency," or maybe better in women's case, desirability--whatever, the point is it adds up to a verdict on your worth as a sexual being. The "performance" difference is a good point, though that's only a factor if the scene calls for it.
 
MrsSpringsteen said:
I just want to know how many men who think the full frontal male nudity is "icky" would also say that the full female nudity is icky. Is the icky strictly looking at another guy's penis? I guess the disempowering would involve losing that control, women have had to lose it for years.

I don't think either are "icky". They just are -- it's what nature gave us.

If there's increasing demand for male nudity in films, I don't have a problem with that. Women deserve eye candy too. <wink> But I think equality in that regard is a long ways out, given our society's sexism.

I'm not going to seek out a film because it has male nudity, but I'm not going to turn down a film just because it has it.
 
yolland said:

I thought we were talking about "full-frontal male nudity," not "penis closeups." I haven't seen the series nor the scene in question; maybe it's one and the same in that case. But I think the way that article put it...



and i took the two as interchangeable, because i've always taken "full-frontal male nudity" as basically seeing the penis. we see most everything else of men, and we're getting more male backsides, especially on cable sex shoes like SATC and the new "Californication," and that seems fair to me, since there's no female pubic hair (but plenty of butts and breasts).

i also don't think it's fair to directly compare breasts to penises. across europe, you'll find plenty of topless women sunbathing, but unless you are at a nudist beach, you really won't find any naked men sun bathing their penises.

but if male full-frontal nudity becomes more normalized, i agree, in addition to fretting about penis size, we'll have more men starving themselves in order to get the discussed-in-here Michael Phelps "Man-V":

040815_phelps_nogold_vlrg_2p.widec.jpg
 
I remember my brother had seen some movie in one of his German classes, and he said it was a really amazing, thought-provoking film, but he wasn't going to buy it because there was one scene where a man gets up from bed to open the blinds or something, and he's naked, so when he stands up you get a glimpse of his junk. The scene to him was just "unnecessary." And in his case I don't think it was the whole comparing size thing making him feel inadequate, but just the innapropriateness of nudity. But even so, I don't think that his reaction would be the same if it were a woman, just because that seems to be more common in films.

I don't really have a lot to add to the discussion, but I just want to say that I am SO excited for Viggo's movie. I was before I found out about the nude fight scene in the sauna, but now I'm just so curious! I mean, looking at a girl, you know what her assets are, generally, even when she's wearing clothes; it's pretty obvious if someone has nice breasts, but with men you have no idea.
 
Gee, what's the big deal? This is nothing that hasn't been seen in European mainstream cinema for years!

You yanks need to get over your hang ups! :wink:
 
Eh. . . I tend to agree with BonoSaint. It's about time men get put under the unforgiving searchlight for a change. Whatever new psychological angst might result will probably be small potatoes compared to what women have had endure over the millenia.

Personally, I'd rather not see full frontal male nudity (while at the same time being more inclined to see female nudity) but then that makes sense. . .I'm a heterosexual man. And frankly personal preferences are neither here nor there in terms of what "should" or "shouldn't be" shown.

The show itself sounds fascinating though.
 
Mrs. S has a point though. I was all for loosening of language restrictions. Nothing quite packs the same punch as "fuck". However, in a lot of ways, that loosening became a crutch and led to lazy writing and often tedious writing. I suspect a loosening of taboo on male frontal nudity will have the same effect, although I think it is time. We'll soon be having the obligatory cock shot, the same way we have the obligatory female nude scene to the point of tedium. I'll miss the creativity that had to be used to try to get around the rules.
 
maycocksean said:
And frankly personal preferences are neither here nor there in terms of what "should" or "shouldn't be" shown.


:yes: It's time the audience grew up. It's not that big a deal.
Now to walk the fine line between taboo and gratuitousness.
 
I can do without the full frontal shots from either sex.
It often shows a lack of creativity, just throw a T&A shot in to please the folks at home.
It kinda wrecks the continuity for me, I end up giggling and thinkig,"ooh, I just saw .....'s wang, tee hee hee."



maybe that's just me though:reject:
 
i think penis size is alllllll in a man's head. I also think if every time you're looking at a man and goes 'wow he's small!' get a life! Its not like you're going to be using it for your own enjoyment anyway.

Why do we care about the size? Its total bullshit from a womans perspective. Of course if its a button mushroom there is going to be problems, but everyone knows that men have different sizes, and really, i highly doubt they're going to go in for a 5 minute close up so we can scrutinise every single thing.

also - i don't think size is a problem - i think its the slight of a flaccid penis :sick: :lmao:
sorry, but ewww ewww ewww
 
I always do a bit of a double-take when I see male FFM, just because it's so unusual. I mean, I'm watching Any Given Sunday and there they are in the locker room, and what do you know, camera pans down and there they are, a regular penis buffet. I do think it isn't shown because there's an assumption that showing a penis will alienate a large part of your male audience (O NOZ I SAW A DICK I'M GAY!!!!111!1). Not sure how many men would actually avoid a film because there was a penis shot but I do think the studios consider that.

And yes I think there are probably male actors who prefer not to show it...either they don't want to just because, or they're small, or their flaccid penis is snall. And I agree breasts/penis isn't a fair comparison...I'd say penis/vagina is more comparable, and you never see the pink in mainstream film.
 
i think it's time we took a moment to appreciate all penises in all their various forms -- cut or uncut, hard or soft, big or small, thick or thin, and sometimes all of the above.

:pray:
 
Irvine511 said:
i think it's time we took a moment to appreciate all penises in all their various forms -- cut or uncut, hard or soft, big or small, thick or thin, and sometimes all of the above.

:pray:

Don't forget curvy...
 
BonosSaint said:
Absolutely. Although not genitalia, it's certainly an anxiety women have had to live with forever, in many ways almost our sole definition and worth. Kind of brings it down to our level a tad. So my sympathy is tempered.

Besides I'm curious.

Agreed. When I read the first few posts, "size" never came into my mind. It seems to me that guys are the ones always bringing that up, so......

see also Sean's statement:
It's about time men get put under the unforgiving searchlight for a change. Whatever new psychological angst might result will probably be small potatoes compared to what women have had endure over the millenia.

yup.
 
Well, for any guy that's watched straight porn, seeing an erect penis shouldn't be a big deal at all.
Hell, in that movie SuperBad, there's a whole scene about a straight boy's obsession with erect penises. Very funny scene, btw.
 
I can think of a (justly) much more famous icon of the beautiful male form who isn't nearly as "sizeable":

davidlm5.jpg
 
and done by perhaps the most famous homosexual in history ... and begun on MY BIRTHDAY ... :hmm:

on an honest note, it has always struck me as odd how is penis looks prepubescent, but what's so noticeable about that statue, at least when i saw it, is that exquisite tilt in the hips.

:sigh:

i want to go back to Italy.
 
yolland said:
I can think of a (justly) much more famous icon of the beautiful male form who isn't nearly as "sizeable":

davidlm5.jpg

david_r1.jpg


I noticed size. I also thought what a magnificent man.
 
Back
Top Bottom