The ethics and morality of nudity

[Cactus Jack]

Is it the human body itself that offends you?
Does it arouse feelings or thoughts that bother you?
Do you see this as a precursor to something else?

What do you feel is immoral or unethical about nudity, when sex is not involved?

 

[Hank]

I differentiate between nudity and sexuality.

Why would something that attracts me be offensive?
People get aroused by fully clothed people, (or maybe I am the only one). It's not what they wear or don't but what signals they issue. Since I should be in control over my thoughts, others do not bother me, irrespective on how they are dressed.

Those that have issues controlling their desires, well, don't blame others, look in the mirror first.

 

[MiniEmu]

The human body does not offend me, it is a wonderful work of Creation in all its forms.
Never has a human body caused me the sort of thoughts or feelings where I have been bothered, certainly not the point where the mere prospect of nudity brings me out in cold sweats.
A naked body is a naked body, it takes on different meanings in different settings and (speaking entirely for myself) a naked body in a sexual situation is completely different to a naked body in a non-sexual situation.

Nudity can exist without being immoral/unethical, just as immoral and unethical states of being can exist without nudity. Where it becomes immoral or unethical is where the individuals involved are motivated by, well immoral and/or unethical things. I do not view it as a black and white issue, and while there are certainly examples in the Bible where nudity is shown as a very clear symbol of shameful, sinful or otherwise immoral behaviours/situations the way I've always understood these elements of scripture (and I may be entirely wrong) is that the nudity was a consequence of the state of being, not necessarily that the nudity itself was shameful. It became shameful only when other factors were present.

 

[Darkhorse]

Is it the human body itself that offends you? ?

No, the human body doesn't offend me. People's stupid attitudes about it offend me; they see nudity and think "sex!".

Does it arouse feelings or thoughts that bother you?

Yes. These attitudes arouse feelings of hopelessness about the intelligence of the human race. We are all born nude, but too many modern moralists wrap the newborn in clothes and negative feelings of shame when there's nothing to be ashamed of. Our ancestors did better than this hundreds of years ago.

Do you see this as a precursor to something else?

I see this as a precursor to a new Victorianism of repression and unhealthy attitudes about bodies and their functions. We were going in the right direction, but...inappropriate contentification happened!

What do you feel is immoral or unethical about nudity, when sex is not involved?

Nothing!

 

[Open Heart]

In our culture, sex is always involved if it's public, because of our culture's modesty standards.

Modesty is culturally defined. In every culture there are signs that a person is advertising for sex. In one culture it may be as little as a woman showing her face. In another culture of nudity, it may be having particular body art. In our culture, it is having a woman's breasts showing (among other things). In another culture where women's breasts are routinely bare, it is having her back showing.

What is important is whatever the signs of your culture, make sure you stay within the lines. Fully. Don't even skirt the fringes, as you don't want to give mixed messages.

Now if the nudity is just you, your mirror, and the walls, why the hell not.

 

[warrior of Christ 94]

No, the human body doesn't offend me. People's stupid attitudes about it offend me; they see nudity and think "sex!".




Yes. These attitudes arouse feelings of hopelessness about the intelligence of the human race. We are all born nude, but too many modern moralists wrap the newborn in clothes and negative feelings of shame when there's nothing to be ashamed of. Our ancestors did better than this hundreds of years ago.




I see this as a precursor to a new Victorianism of repression and unhealthy attitudes about bodies and their functions. We were going in the right direction, but...inappropriate contentification happened!




Nothing!

Of course inappropriate content and all the evils that go with it happened. Humans will always push an idea to its most extreme. We have seen this over and over throughout history. Be it the power mad Kings who had divine right to rule, to the bloody rampage communism went one, to the sexual revolution and all of the depravity and death that brought. Better to have too much order than none at all.

 

[ken777]

I know my wife would not like me to appear nude in front of others - nor I her - unless it was a medical situation.
God made clothes for Adam & Eve becuase of the original sin ... which wasn't eating an apple!

 

[Darkhorse]

I know my wife would not like me to appear nude in front of others - nor I her - unless it was a medical situation.
God made clothes for Adam & Eve becuase of the original sin ... which wasn't eating an apple!

Actually, according to the Bible, original sin was eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.
This, of course, was a direct disobedience of God.

God made them good strong leather clothes to replace the shoddy fig-leaf clothes they improvised in their attempt to hide from Him.

He knew they would need tough clothes to deal with abrasion and cold outside of Eden. He never commanded them to wear those clothes, or any clothes; they came up with that idea all by themselves, or maybe with help from the serpent.

 

[warrior of Christ 94]

I know my wife would not like me to appear nude in front of others - nor I her - unless it was a medical situation.
God made clothes for Adam & Eve becuase of the original sin ... which wasn't eating an apple!

Are you referring to some of the Jewish traditions that say the fruit was grapes?

 

[ken777]

Are you referring to some of the Jewish traditions that say the fruit was grapes?

No, I was referring to the fact that they made aprons to cover their genitals.

Are you suggesting the only reason God gave A&E clothing was for protection from the environment?

 

[warrior of Christ 94]

No, I was referring to the fact that they made aprons to cover their genitals.

Are you suggesting the only reason God gave A&E clothing was for protection from the environment?

I tend to look at that story as Adam and Eve being spiritual beings falling to a base material level and the clothing being flesh over the soul.

 

[ken777]

I tend to look at that story as Adam and Eve being spiritual beings falling to a base material level and the clothing being flesh over the soul.

I see them as flesh & blood human beings before the fall because they were eating food.

 

[warrior of Christ 94]

I see them as flesh & blood human beings before the fall because they were eating food.

As is your right. If that is how the Holy Spirit interprets the scriptures for you, well and good.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

Is it the human body itself that offends you?

The human body is beautiful. Specifically women's bodies. Of course I'm a male but I find the curves and grace of a female form to be ever so pleasing, especially when nude. The male form is no slouch either, hardened edges and a build exterior just exudes manliness and is something to admire.

Does it arouse feelings or thoughts that bother you?

The female form certainly arouses. If ya get my drift.

Do you see this as a precursor to something else?

Hmm. What does this mean?

What do you feel is immoral or unethical about nudity, when sex is not involved?

Nothing. I just don't think one should expose themselves to the natural elements. And quite frankly when you're not in the mood for it, viewing private parts isn't exactly a favorite past time.

 

[Cactus Jack]

Wow. From reading the other threads on nudity I was expecting a lot of hell fire and damnation from the pits of purgatory!
I myself am nudist. I have found how weird people get whenever it comes up. It's automatically a hush subject or it's deemed sexual.
Sadly, as much as I enjoy it, when I have gotten into nudist groups, I mean these guys really get weird. Long story on that and I'm too tired to tell it right now.

But I actually feel a lot better now that I see I'm not the only one that appreciates it!
Thanks guys!

 

[Eudaimonist]

What is important is whatever the signs of your culture, make sure you stay within the lines. Fully.

Why? How do you think that cultural change happens? The "lines" never keep stationary.

(No advertising intended.)


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Eudaimonist]

What do you feel is immoral or unethical about nudity, when sex is not involved?

I don't think that there is anything intrinsically wrong with nudity. I suppose that one should give consideration to context -- it's probably not a good idea to attend a wedding in the nude unless it is a nude wedding. There is always judgment involved, but I don't think that people should be slavish to the expectations of others. You are never going to make everyone else happy, nor should you have to.

I see nudity as beautiful. Yes, there are many individual exceptions. I am talking about nudity at its best. I often take a "humanistic" pleasure in seeing nudity, especially in art, because it evokes a sense of timeless truths about humanity. When I see artistic nudity, I feel a profound love for humanity.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Dave-W]

THis is such a loaded subject. There is no consensus on what the bible means by "modest dress." That has given rise to both extremes - on the one hand you have the neo-victorianists (often found in the ranks of fundamentalist and holiness christianity) and on the other there seems to be a group of vehement pro-nudity christians. I cam across one of their websites recently (no link posted) that showed pics of nudes in both non-sexual and some VERY sexual contexts. (mid-[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] for instance) The latter I see as not that much different from inappropriate content.

I am really not sure where I stand on this. I understand that there is a HUGE cultural influence on how we understand this. And that western culture was heavily influenced by the early church fathers who intentionally cut themselvs off from the cultural understandings of their Jewish predecessors; and were vehemently anti-sex in any form. That led to a lot of legalistic "holiness" rules that thankfully are finally coming down. But that again brings us to the eternal question: how far is too far?

Not sure I can answer that.

 

[Darkhorse]

Are you suggesting the only reason God gave A&E clothing was for protection from the environment?

No, I believe the leather clothes were also a tangible reminder of the "blood sacrifice" God made to cover their sin (which was disobedience, nut nudity) when He killed the animal(s) to make them. God wanted to show them that only a blood sacrifice would atone for sin. This is the reason that Abel's animal sacrifices were acceptable to God, but Cain's "vegetable" sacrifices were not.

I do not believe that God required His humans to be covered simply to be covered; I think that is still the case.

 

[Dave-W]

Darkhorse - why do you think God killed animals when the text says no such thing?
Was He not in the business of just creating things with a word?