Full Frontal Nudity Fragrance Ad

Yes. It's how I learned of this site originally.

full frontal nudity
I was sitting in my gyn's office recently and posted on the wall were 2 explicit posters of male and female genetalia - inside and out - and my thought was thank God for raging hormones or this would be a no go.

But thank you Blatham, he is gorgeous from the waist up.

Maybe it's a personal thing, but pictures of human plumbing just don't do a thing for me. I find pictures with a "come hither" look, or the face of a really sensitive, intelligent man, is much more of a turn on.

Gotta be lack of hormones. Oh, well!

Seaglass and Phoenix

My suggestion was definitely not that nudity or genitalia ought to turn us on, and if it doesn't, there is something wrong with us. I wouldn't even try to make the case that any individual ought not to be offended. Those are matters of individual taste and preference and I have no business there.

But I will argue that our culture is beset by a whole package of very negative notions related to the body and to sexuality which are a consequence of completely arbitrary historical events and persons (though I'll quickly note, before our resident Freudian with the long legs jumps in here that matters of the psyche may well be a component). The evidence for this view is ample but one merely needs to note the variation culture to culture regarding these matters.

And I used the derogation 'beset' above because I do not believe this cultural inheritance has been a good thing and has caused far more harm to individual happiness than anything positive it has achieved. I'll point to the refusal to fund sex education, but there's rather a lot else I could also point to.

Blatham,

Your resident Freudian reporting. Did you call? It seems to me, as the culture moves from primitive to neurotic, sexual inhibition, guilt, shame and defenses against them increases. It's true, I agree that certain cultures may be more of less inhibited based in part on some chance historical circumstances, but still, I wouldn't agree that this is the main influencial factor.

Dear Anna

Perhaps we ought not to think in terms of 'main/subsidiary', unless by 'main' you are meaning to suggest certain facts of the psyche are ubiquitous, whereas facts of societal attitudes and behaviors are varied (thus perhaps a word like 'fundamental' might work better) It seems clear that some psychic elements are at play across cultures, though I'd love to see some study on this.

But even if we were to find this so, the degree of variation culture to culture is really accomodatingly broad, even for a rascal such as myself.

I suppose one might imagine an experiment where two test groups of individuals were drawn from two populations - the first, a relatively unrepressed society such as the original Polynesian culture, and the second, from a community of Scottish Calvinists whose outhouses have teenie little holes in the seat. Then we'd run this second group through, say, ten years of rigorous analysis. Finally, an arbitrarily chosen adjudicator (I have some spare time)would sleep with as many test subjects as possible from both groups, thus gaining valuable insight on which factor, psychic or cultural, seemed to be the more influential.

I think Blatham's brought up some really good points. First, the sexualization/ objectification of minors -- oy. I went shopping for my 4-year-old niece recently, and the clothes in her size were jaw-droppingly inappropriate. (Marshall's, variety of brands.) Low-rider hiphugger jeans, midriff-baring tight t-shirts, the whole mini-hoochie-mama gamut. This is for FOUR YEAR OLDS (and younger -- the section I was looking in started at 2T.)

Second, about very negative notions, I think it is interesting from a nature/ nurture/ psychological component to note what fashion is doing with men these days. Women have been long used to being held to a largely unattainable ideal, but I found this passage in the ad you found very interesting:



"Male beauty standards", "as required", "new shift" -- all of this is, to my knowledge, new for men, (and oooold for women). I recently saw something that compared G.I. Joe figures over the years, and he's gone from a normal-lookin' guy to a giant, "ripped", steroid-crazed monster.

Turnabout is fair play, but I kinda wish it went the other direction, rather than both teenage girls and teenage boys despairing when they examine themselves in the mirror.

Dear Mr. English Professor,

You are correct, fundamental, essential, basic, underlying, or elemental, would be words better suited to the message I was trying to convey in the middle of the night, when I should have had better sense than to post a note in response to you. And as we've agreed before, it may not be necessary to distinguish between ubiquitous and varied factors except for the purpose of a search for a remedy. But then again these problems must be approached from all sides...........so I apologize for my argumentative tone.

As for your suggested Polynesian/Scottish Calvinist scientific study, surely you aren't suggesting that the only subjects would be female. I think I might have a few moments of free time myself.

And I agree with Sozobe, the narcissitic pursuit for magazine-photo-quality beauty is futile and frustrating for many of us, especially young people.......although I know a few who actually attain it. But the beauty in this Ralph Lauren photo is breathtaking to me and very nice to see.

Dear Anna

Likely, I remind you of your father, therefore your argumentative (your word, I would have used another, perhaps lippy) post is entirely forgiveable. On the other hand, you remind me of my mother and therefore we ought to sleep together very soon. As the Top Adjudicator, your appointment to the position of Bottom Adjuicator would be, clearly, a matter for my discretion (though I have little).

Why, Mr. Professor...........your proposal shocks and pleases me. I'll trust your descretion, especially since you say you have so little. Are we still on the subject of full frontal? But perhaps we should take ourselves to some more private location. What do you think?

I have been arguing, since my initial post on the thread, for an increase in openness and honesty in matters related to libido (in Freudian nomenclature) or humping (the comparable Anthropological term) so would prove my arguments inconsistent if t'were now to change.

<sneaking out and leaving the room to the forthright Freudians...>

Sorry Sozobe..........thank you.

And change would, I agree, be too much to ask or expect of one so fully aware of his convictions. Admirable, I must say. Astonishing really.

As Sozobe sneaks out, we quickly scan for missing jewelry, and our fears, however slight, are allayed.

The Freudian analyst lays down on the black leather couch, as the Antropologist (an exotic foreigner and bon vivant who plays the spoons) pulls out his notepad.

Analyst: I...had this strange dream last night...my father was shucking corn and...I could clearly see his hairy legs coming out of the gingham dress....the thing was...

Anthropologist: (interrupting) There are three Micronesian cultures where...

Analyst: (interrupting) I noticed you used the term 'micro'...is there anything you want to tell me?

You win, Mr. anthropologist........I don't think I'll up the ante from here. I concede, however reluctantly.

Dear Anna

It has been, I confess, an on-line encounter of...hell, let's go all out here...of biblical proportions.

And so now, which of us will have the last word? I suppose now you'll "let" me win......."because I have to win at something."

Blossom Dearie

You win at all the important things already. For just one example, you are far prettier than me - I'm blue and unmanly, you are leggy and womanly in a ripe sort of way and you're pulling your skirt up. You are unmatchable.

So if you have lost above, and clearly you have, I know you'll not be bothered but a wince at the demeaning.

ok, this is satisfactory for now.