From: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Arnett)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Nudist TV segment
Date: 6 Jan 1993 10:01:40 GMT
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
NNTP-Posting-Host: unixg.ubc.ca

In article <1993Jan5.134111.21465@icd.teradyne.com> yaffe@icd.teradyne.com writes:
>In article LGA@apollo.hp.com, nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes, in reference
>>  The flaw in her reasoning (and yours) is simple:  The prohibition is
>>  against showing *genitals* onscreen.   When you see female "full frontal
>>  nudity" on HBO, say, all you're seeing is pubic hair.  Nature has 

Please do share the source of your information.   I know of no "prohibition"
against showing a penis in an R-rated movie, but it doesn't occur very
often!  Here in Canada, a penis *can* be shown during *prime-time* on 
regular commercial TV.  In particular, Room with a View has been shown
prime-time more than once.  I've heard it has also been shown uncut on
either PBS or A&E (I forget which).  This seems to contradict your
"prohibition" belief.  (And in turn contradicts the "flaw".)

>>  arranged for the female external genitalia to be modestly hidden by
>>  her pubic hair.  Thus "full frontal nudity" on most women is about as
>>  revealing as a beard (also a kind of "pubic hair") on a man.  But males
>>  enjoy no such modesty when it comes to genitals.  

Excuse me?????  "Pubic hair" on my face????  I think not!  "Pubic" means
of or relating to the pubis (the bone structure in the vicinity of the 
genetals) *not* of or relating to puberty.  Check out your dictionary.

As such, pubic hair is clearly related to the sexual organs.

>Peter, IMHO, I think you're falling into the Leif Heilberg trap here.  Leif
>is a Naturist/Nudist photographer who always seems to want women to spread
>their legs (and not just "a little"), justifying it with an argument similar
>to yours.

Do you have some evidence to support this?  I have seen many of Heilberg's
photos but have never seen any emphasizing a woman's genitals.  The Naturist
Society frequently publishes pictures by him---usually in issues where they
are not criticizing him for selling photos to H&E.  There are a bunch of
photos by him in the World Guide (eg., pages 142-143).  Several other nudist
magazines also publish his photos, maybe more.

>Naturism/Nudism is not about genitals.  It is about going without clothes.
>This thread began with an article about a Nudist TV segment, so we're not
>talking about an anatomy lesson here - we're talking about nudism.  I resent
>that we're getting down to whose genitals are showing.
>
>Please don't misunderstand - I admire good looking bodies as much as anybody
>else, and I show a marked preference for good looking female bodies.  But
>genitals are about sex, and Nudism/Naturism is not.

I disagree with all of this.  Nudism is about accepting the body---the
*entire* body---as it is.  Excluding the genitals is *not* what nudism
is about.  Let's get this straight: *every* part of the body can be
associated with sex.  Actions and intent indicate sex, not anotomical
parts.

Cheers.  Bill.
-- 
Bill Arnett                            Internet: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca
Newsgroups: rec.nude