|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 4:35 pm
The world as we know it, is heavily focused on skin(or rather, how much is shown). Products pushed by scantily clad girls(or men) almost instantly attract customers, and keep people coming, yet when we deal with something like a nudist colony, people automatically shun them, and label them as 'weird' Likewise with those on the other end of the nudity spectrum. Most people say they would like to be naked with a girl in a room, yet a lot of us can't handle the opposite sex changing in the same room as us.
What I want to know, is what do you think of the power that skin has in our society today? Should we be further shedding our clothing, or should some of it be coming back on? Is there(or should there be) an age limit, to who should be exposing skin, and how much would you feel comfy exposing in public?
Me, personally, I think skin is probably one of the cornerstones of advertising, and is a good way to bring attention to your cause. Yes, some clothing should probably return to our bodies, but as long as people are dressed in that way because they feel comfy in it, and not to gain confidence from people gawking at them, I'm all for it. And I believe kids shouldn't have the ability to wear so little and expose so much, for the sake of fitting in. Also, if I could, I'd just walk around buck naked, and go about my business.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 3:18 am
Allow me to handle this point by point.
The difference between near-nudity and nudity is small but significant. The sexual organs (or tips of them in a particular two's case) are the head of the sexual repression that is, for better or worse, part of what makes society work. Their being so casually shown off, as a nudist colony attains, is shocking to this moderately innate sensibility, regardless of it's practical or societal advantages.
Honestly, I'm a clothing fetishist - careful balances of clothing tell plenty, and I like information - so I tend to think that freedom of dress, regardless of age (well, below 13 is where I'd probably draw the line, along with a few specific things like not wearing Nazi symbology (*cough*WALMART*cough*)) should be the rule, with the only limits being those of existing indecent exposure laws (mostly because while there are plenty who would be perfectly fine with nakedness, there's also plenty who would use it for shock value and other detrimental reasons). If you wish to dress sluttily, then let that turn off others. A certain sense of taste is far more interesting to most anyhow. Let natural selection of the relationship world ensue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 4:33 pm
I can't help but feel contradictive about this subject. I must say, near-nudity is very imbedded in our culture, crackwhore's and dragqueens, young boys and preteens. Not to mention pop-culture. 8 year old girls should not be dressing in mini skirts and halter tops, and Britney Spears et al, aren't helping. However, I am only 17, and sadly, addicted to fashion, glamour, and intoxication. I am constantly stripping my clothes, and wearing designer products that are strategically translucent. I am confident and comfortable in my skin, and with showing it off. But, where do we draw the line? Is it alright to use sex and nudity as a marketing tool? And what about self-solicitation? And how do we sensor the young minds of society? Moreover, what's wrong with nudist colonies? If anything, they have the right idea. Nudity shouldn't be a tool or weapon. It should just be natural.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
