Public Nudity

I am amazed at the beauty of nudity. It fulfils some of my entrenched urges notwithstanding my conceited arguments against it, speaking very honestly. I am thankful to all here who so intrepidly have written wonderful posts and they are full of life, vigor and something vital that can heal this sick world. There is no shred of promiscuity and most come up with great aesthetic truths that remained sealed for want of the audacious intellectuals who choose not to withdraw their say nor lower their tone fearing criticism. I always want to write like them but it demands the capacity for convincing people.
Nudity is divinity and thru nudes we see divine forms. That is why in India many temples have nude idols of gods entangled in raptures. It is not eroticism; it is humanism in their great manifestations

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by osho

I am amazed at the beauty of nudity. It fulfils some of my entrenched urges notwithstanding my conceited arguments against it, speaking very honestly. I am thankful to all here who so intrepidly have written wonderful posts and they are full of life, vigor and something vital that can heal this sick world. There is no shred of promiscuity and most come up with great aesthetic truths that remained sealed for want of the audacious intellectuals who choose not to withdraw their say nor lower their tone fearing criticism. I always want to write like them but it demands the capacity for convincing people.

---

I agree that human body is the most beautiful creation of all. However, it was taken to the levels that are very degrading. Sad, indeed.

Quote:

---

Nudity is divinity and thru nudes we see divine forms. That is why in India many temples have nude idols of gods entangled in raptures. It is not eroticism; it is humanism in their great manifestations.

---

LOL! I wish I could post an image of Hindu goddess Kali. Trust me, it has nothing to do with humanism. :biggrin5: But I may post an image of goddess Kali that I will not run into trouble.


http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_EKP11mOJRW.../s400/kali.jpe



http://www.exoticindiaart.com/artimages/ba11.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ftil

I agree that human body is the most beautiful creation of all. However, it was taken to the levels that are very degrading. Sad, indeed.





LOL! I wish I could post an image of Hindu goddess Kali. Trust me, it has nothing to do with humanism. :biggrin5: But I may post an image of goddess Kali that I will not run into trouble.


http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_EKP11mOJRW.../s400/kali.jpe



http://www.exoticindiaart.com/artimages/ba11.jpg

---

The posters of Kali are a different issue my friend; it has a different allusion. I am talking about nude, erotic idols in some Indian temples. Our religious pundits have since time immemorial been suppressing human instincts. We are clothed to cover up our organs. These bodily parts do not harm us if we have a clear conscience and do not fuse with our conceptions, prejudices. When you see a naked baby you do not disgrace yourself. The same baby grows and her physical parts mature you keep from them. This is your sheer conditionality bred from social and ethical interpretations of values. Why I call nudity humanity is thru nudity we are exposing ourselves fully untarnished. Look at a nude portrayal of man or woman or animal it is all beauty. The most interesting revelation when I visit Indian temples is erotic idols in which males and females wrapped up in their physical entanglements, in their true and natural manifestations far from all of our understanding smeared by religious or social bigotries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by osho

The posters of Kali are a different issue my friend; it has a different allusion. I am talking about nude, erotic idols in some Indian temples. Our religious pundits have since time immemorial been suppressing human instincts. We are clothed to cover up our organs. These bodily parts do not harm us if we have a clear conscience and do not fuse with our conceptions, prejudices. When you see a naked baby you do not disgrace yourself. The same baby grows and her physical parts mature you keep from them. This is your sheer conditionality bred from social and ethical interpretations of values. Why I call nudity humanity is thru nudity we are exposing ourselves fully untarnished. Look at a nude portrayal of man or woman or animal it is all beauty. The most interesting revelation when I visit Indian temples is erotic idols in which males and females wrapped up in their physical entanglements, in their true and natural manifestations far from all of our understanding smeared by religious or social bigotries.

---

I don’t think that it is a different issue. I am afraid I have a different idea what eroticism means and I definitely wouldn’t want eroticism of blood thirsty Kali. LOL! ........... But if you like pornography and orgy……than you would like the images I have mentioned earlier. :biggrin5:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ftil

I don’t think that it is a different issue. I am afraid I have a different idea what eroticism means and I definitely wouldn’t want eroticism of blood thirsty Kali. LOL! ........... But if you like pornography and orgy……than you would like the images I have mentioned earlier. :biggrin5:

---

It is not pornography and orgy that moves me or goading to write the comments I have been putting forth here. I do not loathe pornography and orgy and am not against them at all or never like to campaign against them socially and individually as long as they do not damage human situation. I have no intense interest in these facets of life, though they have enough substance to stimulate me. My aspect is pure aesthetic, the way we watch copulating animals, our dogs, cats etc. There is no vulgarity. Vulgarity is in our eyes, in our ways of dealing with it and making analogy. Or else I see beauty manifest in nudity. Humanity married with nudity with an unsullied sense of aesthetics impresses me, not the nudity of a brute sabotaging the innocent. If I from this standpoint look at a nude picture or a nude woman or man it only electrifies my sense of beauty not my inner brutal urges that lead to gratify the suppressed wantonness in human beings

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by osho

It is not pornography and orgy that moves me or goading to write the comments I have been putting forth here. I do not loathe pornography and orgy and am not against them at all or never like to campaign against them socially and individually as long as they do not damage human situation. I have no intense interest in these facets of life, though they have enough substance to stimulate me. My aspect is pure aesthetic, the way we watch copulating animals, our dogs, cats etc. There is no vulgarity. Vulgarity is in our eyes, in our ways of dealing with it and making analogy. Or else I see beauty manifest in nudity. Humanity married with nudity with an unsullied sense of aesthetics impresses me, not the nudity of a brute sabotaging the innocent. If I from this standpoint look at a nude picture or a nude woman or man it only electrifies my sense of beauty not my inner brutal urges that lead to gratify the suppressed wantonness in human beings

---

Hm…..but you wrote with enthusiasm about eroticism in Hindu temples. I was also talking about the images from the temples. Therefore, I said that we have a different idea about eroticism. We agree about the beauty of a human body but disagree about manifestation of our humanness. You are not saying that it would be good to have public sex…like animals. :biggrin5:

Secondly, whether we want or not paintings and images evoke feelings. If women are depicted with the emphasis on their sexuality, those paintings evoke feelings. As my male friend said, we are bombarded 24/7 with images that evoke sexual feelings. The beauty of eroticism and human body is gone as there is not that much space left for mystery and deep feelings but second charka emotionalty. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ftil

Hm…..but you wrote with enthusiasm about eroticism in Hindu temples. I was also talking about the images from the temples. Therefore, I said that we have a different idea about eroticism. We agree about the beauty of a human body but disagree about manifestation of our humanness. You are not saying that it would be good to have public sex…like animals. :biggrin5:

Secondly, whether we want or not paintings and images evoke feelings. If women are depicted with the emphasis on their sexuality, those paintings evoke feelings. As my male friend said, we are bombarded 24/7 with images that evoke sexual feelings. The beauty of eroticism and human body is gone as there is not that much space left for mystery and deep feelings but second charka emotionalty. :p

---

All I want to say is I love honesty above all else. I recall once in my childhood I saw a naked woman. She was young and full of vigor. She was taking a bath from a fountain. In fact the lady came from a tribal community. I had not seen a stripped woman and very honestly speaking I always wanted to see the thing women and men were hiding. I had seen nude children but never nude adults. This curiosity grew and grew and there was no scrap of vulgarity. I wanted to see that the way I wanted to see a rose. When I saw the tribal woman completely exposed something, some quiver passed inside me. I sneakily watched the scene. I was not matured enough to observe it thru an erotic lens or it did not breed sexual feelings inside me. I still distinctly carry the thing she had exposed.

Now I look at it from different lenses and I mingle the feeling with aesthetics. I still have the urge to see an unclothed lady. I do not want to rationalize the feelings that can arouse in me. This is beyond philosophical thought. This is purity and humanity, not something obscene, something as sweet and elegant as a rose.

When I see deities in temples I think the ancient carvers or artists had those aesthetic images in their minds while sculpting such erotically aesthetic idols. Kali has that horrific image too as you have mentioned, but Kali or Shakti and Shiva when entangled in cosmic postures, though it seems to us erotic will fall into a fit of raptures become unified creators.

SLG Quoted-Does she? And would you have us believe that women are so easily swayed and weak-minded that the media has had such a profound effect upon them... and yet not equally upon men? It would seem to me that men and women are equally influenced by the images put forth in the media... while at the same time, the media is quite often a mirror of society... and the roles assumed by men and women.

Well, how do you explain the growing number of young girls and women who suffer from anorexia nervosa or bulimia? How do you explain the results of a pull done by one of the magazines where women were asked if they had a choice to be slim or to have a successful career, if I remember correctly, it was 93% of women who chose being slim than having a successful career. They had also another choice: to be slim, to have fulfilling relationships, or successful career. If my memory is correct, it was 51% of women who chose being slim than having successful career, or fulfilling relationships. I was shocked reading the results. Media knows how to manipulate us. Men are not manipulated through media to the same extent as women.

Being honest, I can't say I'm overly sympathetic toward anyone stupid enough to allow the media to so sway them. There is an off switch on the TV, the radio, and the computer. Personally, I almost never watch TV or listen to the radio. I agree that the media has long been a rather malevolent force... although again I'm not overly concerned about weak-thinking adults who allow the media to do their thinking for them when it comes to establishing ideals of how they should look. I am more concerned about the media impact upon children who lack the ability to critically think about what message is trying to be sold as well as upon political discourse in the nation as morons like Rush fuel the fires of extremism. Of course, all our freedoms... including freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and freedom of the press come at a cost, and one aspect of this cost is that these freedoms demand a certain vigilance... and an employment of critical thought, which seems to be beyond the abilities of many.

Blaming the media for your self-image or lack of self esteem... or simply lack of self respect is far too easy. What solution do you propose? An enforced Puritanism in order to safeguard the weak-minded and the weak-willed? Perhaps a form of Islamic iconoclasm eliminating all representations of the human being... after all, it is next to impossible to establish any clearly agreed upon divide between ART and Pornography and Eroticism. Do we eliminate all representations of women (or men for that matter) who might be construed in any way as being sexually attractive for fear of the unattainable ideal such establishes in the minds of some?

While we are on this topic, a question comes to mind. How is it that it is men who are seemingly so influenced... even aroused by appearances... to the extent that the vast wealth of images of sexually attractive men... as well as women... have been historically both the creation of males artists directed at a male audience... and yet it is women, if we are to accept your argument, who are the most influenced by such imagery... to the point of allowing it to overwhelm or circumvent their ability to think critically? It seems telling that women's magazines are laden with images of women, while men's magazines are laden with images of... women. Hmmm? Men... at least heterosexual men... are looking admiringly at the opposite sex (Should we expect otherwise? Do we imagine that this can or should be changed?), while women are looking at other women with an eye to comparison and establishing an ideal self-image. Of course, once again, the individuals have the power not to buy the magazines if they feel that they are offering something they dislike. I'm assuming most heterosexual men would immediately cancel their subscriptions to Sports Illustrated if the "swimsuit" issue was suddenly filled with images of buff men in Speedos.

But I'm also left to wonder whether the media has not simply capitalized upon the behaviors of the sexes. How many men (beyond our resident dandy Alexander) arrive at a party and begin to compare clothes with other men or make comments about how other men are dressed or their appearances in general... one way or the other. "Oh Jim... what a lovely tie! You must tell me where you got it!" "Bob, Bob... you simply must tell me who does your hair!" "My God! can you believe the trousers Dan is wearing? I mean really! They don't do a thing for him. What was he thinking." I can't believe Brian actually wore that here... I mean he's such a slut!"

BTW, you love art as much as I do…but I love different kind of art. I don’t care about the price of the painting.

The price of art has nothing to do with its aesthetic merits either for or against. It does, however, hint at what is in demand... and hence valued. I mentioned the price of Klimt's Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer and the popularity of his The Kiss as one form of proof that traditional ideals of "beauty" are not completely undervalued in the Modern era. Personally, I think the Pollock and the DeKooning are mediocre examples of their work and certainly grossly overpriced. But then the best paintings by both artists are already in museums. The Picasso and the Klimt are real gems... but surely any painting at such a price is overvalued... until you compare the price with the salaries of certain pop stars and athletes and CEOs of failed banks.

ftil- I agree that human body is the most beautiful creation of all. However, it was taken to the levels that are very degrading.

Where? Who decides what is "degrading"?

osho- The posters of Kali are a different issue my friend... Look at a nude portrayal of man or woman or animal it is all beauty. The most interesting revelation when I visit Indian temples is erotic idols in which males and females wrapped up in their physical entanglements, in their true and natural manifestations far from all of our understanding smeared by religious or social bigotries.

I don’t think that it is a different issue. I am afraid I have a different idea what eroticism means and I definitely wouldn’t want eroticism of blood thirsty Kali. LOL! ........... But if you like pornography and orgy……than you would like the images I have mentioned earlier.

It seems to me that you misread... intentionally?... any comments that challenge your own thoughts. I suspect that member osho is referring to the sculptural imagery of the temples such as those on the famous Kandariyâ Mahâdeva Temple:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kandariya_Mahadeva_Temple

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&r...w=1280&bih=856

The erotic sculpture on this temple is surely unsettling by Western standards in that it presents a celebration of physical love in the most open... even epic of manners. Such art has nothing to do with Kali, violence, sadomasochism, etc... Terming them "pornographic" says more about you than it does about the art.

...whether we want or not paintings and images evoke feelings. If women are depicted with the emphasis on their sexuality, those paintings evoke feelings.

Do you suppose that artists have not also explored the physical and sexual attraction of the male body... that a physical ideal of the male appearance is somehow missing from the arts and media?

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6183/...dca86015_b.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6080/...f9e23402_z.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6076/...d09634dcc7.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6067/...70068278_z.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6063/...9850bc1b_z.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6186/...945172c7_z.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6074/...535400ae_b.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6064/...0e12ce74_b.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6066/...ebc4bf08_z.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6188/...4515f2d5_b.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6188/...57e7ab00_z.jpg

continued...

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6183/...1cd02e3e_b.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6205/...4944edee_b.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6069/...d0754bd0_b.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6075/...ce9b9a14_b.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6079/...00fca639_b.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6061/...164c2a2d_z.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6184/...4bddd587_z.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6210/...aec1e9741c.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6071/...c63861e5c4.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6206/...622be8c7_b.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6080/...66329567_z.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6067/...6a150e9e_z.jpg

**********

Reminds me of Alison Bechdel's slightly tongue in cheek break down of female representation in comics.

http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z...py/Bechdel.png

Applying the famous Bechdel Test to movies is kind of revealing too.

:p

Quote:

---

stlukesguild wrote:

It seems to me that you misread... intentionally?... any comments that challenge your own thoughts. I suspect that member osho is referring to the sculptural imagery of the temples such as those on the famous Kandariyâ Mahâdeva Temple:

---

I didn’t but you have missed or misread my discussion with Osho. :biggrin5: I was talking about images from Hindu temples that I decided not to post on this forum.

You are very quick to make judgments without knowing a person. I am not afraid of challenging my beliefs. On the contrary, I examine my beliefs that I hold as the truth. I am delighted when people who thoroughly research a subject can show me what I didn’t know. I am afraid that you are caught up in your projections. :brow:

Quote:

---

Where? Who decides what is "degrading"?

---

I wouldn’t want to go there any more. I have written about it but you didn’t address it and I am not going to repeat myself. :p As I said earlier, if you have seen see Jean Kilbourne’s video, our discussion would be different

Quote:

---

The erotic sculpture on this temple is surely unsettling by Western standards in that it presents a celebration of physical love in the most open... even epic of manners. Such art has nothing to do with Kali, violence, sadomasochism, etc... Terming them "pornographic" says more about you than it does about the art.

---

Well, I didn’t based my opinion purely on images. Last year, I have done an intense research about Hindu religion and its impact on emotional and mental well being.
Again you are quick to make judgment. I expressed earlier why I didn’t want to have anything with Kali eroticism. Perhaps, I should elaborate more but it is not a topic of this tread. I may do it on mythology and religion tread, though.

Quote:

---

Do you suppose that artists have not also explored the physical and sexual attraction of the male body... that a physical ideal of the male appearance is somehow missing from the arts and media?

---

Hm….where did I say that. LOL!

Quote:

---

The price of art has nothing to do with its aesthetic merits either for or against. It does, however, hint at what is in demand... and hence valued.

---

Well, I said that I didn’t care about price as you emphasized the price of the Lucian Freud’s paintings. I personally don’t like his art, not matter how much does it cost. :biggrin5:

De gustibus non est disputandum. :wink5:

The images are really beautiful <3

Quote:

---

Posted by Luke:
Being honest, I can't say I'm overly sympathetic toward anyone stupid enough to allow the media to so sway them. There is an off switch on the TV, the radio, and the computer. Personally, I almost never watch TV or listen to the radio. I agree that the media has long been a rather malevolent force... although again I'm not overly concerned about weak-thinking adults who allow the media to do their thinking for them when it comes to establishing ideals of how they should look. I am more concerned about the media impact upon children who lack the ability to critically think about what message is trying to be sold as well as upon political discourse in the nation as morons like Rush fuel the fires of extremism. Of course, all our freedoms... including freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and freedom of the press come at a cost, and one aspect of this cost is that these freedoms demand a certain vigilance... and an employment of critical thought, which seems to be beyond the abilities of many.

---

I agree. The concern is for children. Marketers know to target them. The mind learns to accept all sorts of mixed messages, such as that a person can drink Coke and have great teeth. Then people can be sold religious and political ideas that are full of complete contradictions. [My personal belief is that the Rush people who profess to oppose messages that corrupt women and families are the ones behind the scenes promoting it. The so-called "family values" people are the "porn" people. If they can weaken people to where they can't think and want to spend their lives drinking soda and watching trash TV and porn, they will also buy into churches that feature rock and roll bands and the politicians that go with them. These two factions being separate is an illusion. It creates confusion and results in individuals (such as you, Luke, and I) seeming, at times, to be on opposite sides when we both abhor Rush.]

I didn't grow up watching television and I can tell that in certain areas my thinking is divergent from the women around me. I view my weight from a health standpoint. This concept is foreign to most women. (I was once diagnosed with anorexia, a mild case, but the diagnosis was lifted because my problem has been lifelong and is caused from nervousness affecting my appetite, and had nothing to do with trying to be thin.) I feel okay about myself. I have no desire to look like some kind of fakey pin-up.

If a person has not been molded by advertising from childhood, she can't be sold anything - not soda, not teeth whiteners, not breast implants. And I adore my Sonicare and my computer for the right reasons.

I don't think it's just children that are affected by advertising - but all of us are. we all change our buying - not immediately because these things aren't immediate - but gradually. Do you buy the same things you bought 2 or three years ago? Probably not, and probably not just because your habits were directed by yourself.

What the advertisers are trying to do is to impinge just a bit upon your consciousness for that fraction of a second when your mind is distracted or on auto pilot or what you usually buy is not there, or what you want is more expensive. They're not interested in debate and rationale. They are going for the time when the only product on the shelf you recognise is what they want to sell you. It might take a bit of a push - an offer - two for one - a cheaper price - but the recognition that comes from repetition, or an advertising campaign, or distate for the presenter, or annoyance with the tune.

It's fascinating how t works. here are two examples where you think - how do they sell anything?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8CTscW3dpI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0-2n8JHc1M&NR=1

I feel like punching the window bloke - and the newer ones are worse.

I agree that the guy is extremely irritating but not all adverts are as bad.

http://youtu.be/rVhto-jt438

Or are they?

I have always said that all advertising is evil, truly evil.:mad5:

Ultimate manipulation.

Avoid it at all costs (though good luck with that...).