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:
More Information:
I view it as art myself
ReplyDeleteI see it the same way. I hate when some people take something lovely and debase it.
ReplyDelete