Nudity = Obscene? Really?

A couple of recent incidents have brought the issue of nudity and the American mindset to my thoughts lately. Of course, there is the controversy and apparent upset about the nudity in ESPN's Body Issue that came out October 9, 2009. According to various sources, some Christian groups are disappointed with ESPN (which is owned by Disney) because they perceive this issue as using sex to sale. However, I see one glaring flaw in this theory. There is no "sex" in the ESPN special issue.

Frankly, I would venture to say that most men that stroll to the bathroom with Playboy and Sports Illustrated's Swimsuit Issue would not pick up Body Issue from the magazine rack for their extra curricular purposes. The photo spread includes athletes such as Sara Reinertsen, a female amputee that completed the Ironman competition, Byambajav Ulambayar, a 341 lb. sumo wrestler and Michelle Carter, a quite muscular Olympic shot putter. Needless to say, these are not the figures gracing skin magazines. But beyond that, it is obvious that ESPN is highlighting sport physique not sex.

The tragedy is how some people take the beauty of nudity and instantly associate it with sexuality. What exactly is base, lewd or profane about the human body? Why exactly is it ok for children to watch a violent sport like football or hockey but a travesty for them to see a woman's nipple? The answers to these questions aren't black and white. But, I do think it represents a strange sickness in American culture fueled by the fundamentalist religious crowd.

Perhaps, these people should ask themselves why they feel this magazine is obscene. After all, God molded the beautiful and amazing forms that grace the covers of these pages.

Photo Credit:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidisbester/ / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

More Information:

ESPN's Body Issue Photo Gallery

ESPN's Body Issue With Serena Williams

Serena Williams and the Birthday Suit Issue

Ever since ESPN released their first ever Body Issue magazine on October 9th, the Net has been abuzz with criticism of Serena Williams going the full monty on the cover. I admit that after first hearing about this I was pretty shocked. Since she is my second favorite tennis player(Venus Williams is my favorite), I've always had a tremendous amount of respect for her and her accomplishments. I'd never imagine her stooping low like many celebrity females and trading their bodies for stacks of cash and fame.

So, of course, I searched for these supposed outrageous pictures in fear of having my ideals of a strong woman dashed into the pavement. Low and behold, when I actually viewed the photographs, I found very tasteful and beautiful images of a fit athlete. There was nothing at all sordid, trashy or disgraceful about them. Consequently, this lead me to my next meandering thought.

Why is it that Williams was singled out when there are several other female athletes in the same magazine nude? Is it because the visage of such a proud, fierce and voluptuous black woman is too much heat for the American public to handle? Is it more racist backlash from those who despise her for residing at the top of women's tennis? Is it the haters from her own race that can't breath if another sister succeeds? I really don't have the answer, but it surely seems fishy to me.

All I can say to Serena is ...

Go on with ya bad self sista!

Tomorrow's Related Rant: Nudity = Obscene? Really?

More Information:
ESPN’s Body Issue With Serena Williams
Should Serena Williams be naked on ESPN's 'Body Issue' cover?
Serena May Get Stripped

Side Note: egyptsaidso.com reported that Williams could possible be banned from tennis and receive a fine for participating in this nude magazine issue. However, I could find no other report to substantiate the claim. So, I won't comment on the insanity of that prospect and treat it as a rumor until I see otherwise.