Right, which goes to make her point, that nudity is not sexuality but there are laws against it
Egyptian girl strips to protest; western media censors her photos
- Thread starter S.A.M.
- Start date
Right, which goes to make her point, that nudity is not sexuality but there are laws against it
Hell...Sam...you should know where I stand on nudity.
I'm just proposing an idea of why they chose to censor the pictures.
Hell...Sam...you should know where I stand on nudity.
They chose to censor the pictures for the same reasons that the Egyptians have laws against public nudity. To protect the sensibilities of the public. Its why they have laws against streaking and why Santa Claus cannot sit nekked in the mall if he wants kiddies on his lap - because people equate nudity with sexuality
Bells
Staff member
Would you let your child sit on a naked stranger in the mall for photos?
I understand your point about nudity and how the State deems it apparently appropriate to protect our supposed delicate sensibilities from boobs or even kissing in movies (as with many Indian movies), but naked Santa? I wouldn't view it as being the same, would you?
Are you in favor of newspapers publishing naked pictures of underage kids?
Bells
Staff member
Or to take that one step further, how would she feel if her child was running around on a beach naked, as children often do, and a stranger was off to the side taking photos of her child without her consent?
It happens all the time in India, we don't really go around censoring people from taking pictures. But you see the point. You would not be comfortable with putting your kid in the lap of a nekkid Santa and possibly neither would any of the so-called supporters of nudity here. But nudists don't care about that stuff
What is meaning of underage kids? At what age are kids old enough to be nude without being distracting? And whose responsibility is it? The ones who are "distracted" like the men who want women to cover their eyes in Saudi Arabia? Or the women and kids who prefer to be nude?
I see nothing wrong with children being nude, we ran around in our underwear [and without] quite a bit when young. So what does it say about a society where children have to be protected from nudity?
Children on some beach in India:
Is there something wrong or obscene about that picture?
Last edited:
Underage (in the US) is below 18. I'm not sure what it is the UK. Again, I have nothing against nudity...I was pointing out that the girl in the photo does not look 20, IMHO, she looks closer to 15, and sets of the "jailbait alert system". Without a copy of her ID, the newspaper is not going to print photos of her nude. If it turned out the girl wasn't 20, and was actually 15...they could face serious charges. I don't make the laws...that's just what they are.
Right.
What about these? Do they fall under "strangers taking pictures of naked underage children"?
Would the news media blur the genitals where visible?
Why do we have laws that sexualise the nudity of children?
Moderator note: The following images show people suffering. Click at your own risk.
http://jspivey.wikispaces.com/file/view/vietnam-war-photo.jpg/34487989/vietnam-war-photo.jpg
http://nml.ru.ac.za/files/carterimage.jpg
Last edited by a moderator:
In.....Egypt
The daily mail maybe is a bit prudish is the worst you honestly can say since we know there is no actual restriction against nudity in the UK, what other papers have published this and pixelated nipples?? All press outlets have a target market and image they choose themselves whether they have a policy against full nudity or not, maybe the Mail caters to the elderly or kids or conservatives?
Her message is the main point and in a place like the UK where it is legal to publish nipples her message is more important than her photo and the Mail did a decent job of getting her message across.
Your whole premise would have worked much better if you didn't, once again, try to use it as an opportunity to paint over the entire western hemisphere with your hate brush.
SAM here you have a woman with a concrete gripe against censorship in Egyptian society as a whole and the best you can do is pervert her message by saying the Daily mail is prudish?? Shame on you
This focus completely misses the point.
Because:
Apparently what these naked female protesters want is to bring about societal change.
Yet they go about it like clueless and selfish rebels.
These protesters want other people to respect them and to change for their sake,
while the protesters themselves extend no respect to those they desire to change.
These protesters (and their defenders) are manifesting immature and ineffective approaches to bringing about societal change.
When you are as filled with hate as SAM is, every message comes out that way.
Which is why here hate filled messages have little impact, except the typical corrections and/or derision.
In this case SAM can't see the obvious difference between western media choosing not to publish nudity and the fact that other western media outlets exist based on publishing nudity.
We strike a balance between people's right not to be confronted with nudity in public with the right of people to be nude or buy such if they do so knowingly.
Hence we have plenty of nudity in Playboy as wall as in movies and nudist camps and nude beaches etc etc.
So, as usual, the truth is quite a bit different than the slanted version of the West that SAM tries unsuccessfully to portray.
Arthur
False argument. Do you think there is no porn in Egypt? Do you think that Aliaa is talking about pornography?
She is addressing exactly this issue:" people's right not to be confronted with nudity " which is defined in Egypt as no nude pictures in the public sphere.
Hence her declaration to first destroy the works of arts and the statuary of antiquity, then burn your own bodies to get rid of your sexual hangups before telling her that her nudity is pornographic or obscene.
And by censoring her nudity, the Daily Mail defined it as pornography
Oh, the irony!
I disagree, did you note the fact that her nudity is in her own space? She took her own pictures and published them in her own blog diary. You have to consent to the Blogger rules to view those pictures. But they are freely available to anyone who wants to view them. This is her point. Its her choice to define her own identity and if other people don't like it, they can suck it. Its an incredible act of bravery and will define her life for a long time.
The reaction seems to be quite a bit more aggressive in Egypt, actually.
Good luck to the reformers - they'll need it. But is the objective here the damnation of Western society (which it seemed at the start) or Western media?
Or eyes, even. :shrug: Sometimes, women just ask for too much, you know?
Since we're talking comparisons here, one wonders what one does with immoral
eyes, let alone nipples or letting women drive or vote or get raped. Actually, I'm curious as to how official response to that latter abhorrence differs from, say Saudi Arabia or Egypt or Pakistan or Malaysia or Indonesia or, well, heck, any of several other more enlightened places that Sam shills for, or whether you might get much of an argument about that assertion and whether or not it happens to be true of a sample of those populations in large part. I suppose it's one of those things that we'll never know - not because it isn't the 800 pound gorilla sitting in the room, but because the conversation will probably take a sharp right turn to talking about Iraq from here.
Well, the thread seems pretty unsurprising so far, unless you count general astonishment at another poster's gall.
Her desire is to change others. She has made this clear enough.
Yet she does not care about the people she desires to change.
She is at fault.
The Saudis don't publish the Daily Mail. I'm interested in the responses of those who think nudity is pornographic in the public sphere, even when children are represented.
I wonder, do people still draw baby Jesus with a weewee or is it sacrilege to think of baby Jesus with a penis?
She does not desire to change others, she is not going around stripping the veil off of other women [thats in France] she is only desirous of being allowed freedom to express herself
I wonder, do people still draw baby Jesus with a weewee or is it sacrilege to think of baby Jesus with a penis?
She does not desire to change others, she is not going around stripping the veil off of other women [thats in France] she is only desirous of being allowed freedom to express herself