Conference moira::naturism

    I couldn't find a "Naturism on prime-time TV" basenote (gee, I wonder
    why?) so I'm choosing this as a reasonable facsimile.
    
    I heard that an upcoming episode of "L.A. Law" has the married couple
    attending a "nudist" resort. Supposedly it includes several "firsts"
    for prime-time. Anybody heard any more that that? It should be worth
    seeing to see how they treat it. As a generalization, this show
    seems to handle "tough" subjects reasonably well. While they are
    of course interested in ratings so they can sell more product and
    stay in business, they seem to restrain themselves from pure
    titillation and exploitation. The couple in question is currently
    trying to "start a baby", and they're quite candid about their
    difficulties, and the unfortunately very "clinical" stuff they have
    to deal with. They did a scene in which they made love on the floor
    of her office (after hours) because "the time was right" - didn't
    show any of "the act", but did show her lying on the floor afterwards
    (covered) with her knees up, and she said something about having to
    stay like that for so many more minutes, etc. My point is, they
    do portray real-life issues/subjects which many people consider
    "taboo" or "dirty", in a matter-of-fact way, with a touch of
    (non-salacious) humor. So let's see what they do with the "nudist
    resort". It could be real positive!
    
    
    
    

    This weeks episode of LA Law has one of the lawyers defending a
    "nudist colony" (their words, I think).  My expectations are quite
    low, as the ad seemed terribly exploitative, but you may wish to
    form your own opinions.
    
    LA Law is on Thursdays at 10pm (EST).
    
       Gary

    I am interested in the noters' reactions to last night's (i.e.
    12-JAN-89) LA Law program.  One of the attorneys was defending a
    "nudist colony" [sic] against a complaint that Miss Nude Universe
    [which I believe *IS* a legimate title] was enticing neighborhood
    teenaged non-nudist boys to cavort with her in the camp.
    
    The nudists were referred to as "perverts" by one of the characters,
    and one of the senior attorneys said that He wouldn't want to have
    a "nudist colony" near where he lives.  It turned out that Miss
    Nude Universe *was* enticing the boys, as an effort to cause enough
    local outrage to close the camp, so that a group of investors could
    purchase it.
    
    Some views of the members of the camp were depicted, but with
    strategically placed objects obscuring the sight of parts of the
    human anatomy [God Forbid!!]
    
    The camp ended up selling out, but for more money than was originally
    offered.  The moral of the story???
    
    This will, I'm sure, be discussed in the REC_NUDE conference, but
    as we have read-only access to it, I am interested in hearing the
    views of the Naturism noters.
    
    Thanks,
    
    Jack

    I thought the show represented the naturist scene very well. It
    showed not only the naturist viewpoints but also represented the
    misconceptions that many people have about it. In addition i think
    that to some extent it depicted, to some extent, how naturist groups
    are under constant attack.
    
    I was very pleased with the ending where the owner of the camp had
    the chance to express some of the naturist philosophy to the lawyer
    and his wife who decided to attend the final party. They (the lawyers)
    were clothed, but the rest of the room was nude. In a very non-invasive
    way the owner explained naturism and left it at that. The wife thought
    about it for a few minutes then did the "When in Rome" thing much
    to the amazement of her husband.
    
    I was also very impressed with the camera technique. They showed
    an entire room full of nude people enjoying themselves at a party,
    on national TV, *without* showing any parts of the anatomy that would
    offend the non-naturist viewers. You've got to admit it must have
    taken some careful planning. Also I was pleased to see that the
    people at the party were a reasonable cross section of body types,
    (ie: young, old, thin, fat, etc...) as opposed to the more typical
    TV images of perfect to near perfect physical condition/attractiveness.
                   
    			FWIW my reaction,
    			Mark
    

	I have to agree with .4 - I thought the episode was done very
	well, and showed the subject of nudity/naturism in a postive
	way and with good taste. I especially enjoyed the final scene
	at the party. The owner of the "nudist colony" (G-d, for some
	reason that term rubs me funny......I tend to think of people 
	living like ants...) had alot of important, positive things 
	to say to Michael and Gracie (Michael defended the case for 
	the owner and subsequently was able to raise the sale price
	on the property an additional $500,000.00).

	There was one quote he used (I think he said his daughter originally 
	had said it) that basically summed up (in a positive way) the 
	naturist philosophy...however, I can't think of it at this time 
	(if anyone saw the episode and cares to refresh my memory...)


	Now...If only *other* television programs would pick up on the way 
	that naturism was expressed in this episode, perhaps it might shed 
	more positive images on this lifestyle!

	My $0.02....

	Marc

    see also Note 21.1
    

	I know this is kind of quick notice, but tonight on "Dear John"
	(I think it's an NBC show), there's a new member in the support
	group - a nudist. 

	Didn't have a chance to see the whole preview, but it looks like
	a good episode.

	It's on at 9:30pm.

	Marc

The Dear John episode didn't have anything to do with naturism but it was 
amazing how much nudity they got away with.  And some of the remarks were
typical remarks from non-nudists about being naked.

The guy that gets naked is hot-to-trot to have an affair and has lied to
to people about his wife that is presumed dead which is a lie, to get sympathy. 
One woman asks him to her apartment for coffee.  When they get to the apartment,
some conversation is had, then he goes into the bathroom and comes back out 
nude except for his socks!  Of course, a plate is held in front of the genitals.
The woman orders him out and she opens the door.  He sits down.  More 
conversation is had.  Then, another person (John) walks into the apartment 
through the open door and starts accusing them of having sex.  The woman states
`But I'm dressed, how can we be having sex?'.  John says, `I didn't say it
was good sex'.  

It is funny how alot of people still think nudity = sex.  Just goes to 
show, it doesn't, the majority of the time.  

Judy

> The Dear John episode didn't have anything to do with naturism but it was 
> amazing how much nudity they got away with.  And some of the remarks were
> typical remarks from non-nudists about being naked.


	Sorry....I should pay closer attention to the TV ads...

	Marc

	(who's_inserting_foot_in_mouth_before_engaging_brain)

Marc,

I hop I didn't mean to turn you or anybody off reporting nudity on TV.  I think 
it is great idea letting everyone know, so we can all watch how `Hollywood' 
depicts nudity and what they can `get away with'.  

Judy

	Judy - 

	No problem! I just wished I had paid more attention to the preview
	before posting it - while it was still a most interesting episode
	as you stated in your previous reply, I was still somewhat disappointed
	that the subject matter was not what I had led myself to believe.

	Perhaps it's time to renew that TV Guide subscription....  8-)


	Marc

    
    
    A local independent station in Boston (ch56) ran a movie on Sunday 
    that had some nude scenes in it. I forget the name of the movie but 
    it was one of those murder/mystery/suspense/metaphysical things where
    people changed back and forth from leopards to human ala the
    "Were-wolf".
    
    In the one scene that I watched before shutting the TV off one of
    the "victims" had been jogging and on returning to the gym of the
    college was going into the swimming pool. In the uncut movie (seen
    on cable some years ago) it showed her disrobing and then gong to
    the pool. She kept her under pants on because of prowler type noise
    in the background but they did show a full front with bare breasts.
    
    On the TV version they showed her start to disrobe the cut to where
    she looked frightened and heard noises, face and shoulders only,
    but they did show her diving into the pool and in the water.
    They made no effort to black out the bottom of the screen or cut
    those scenes where she was clearly visible as being topless.
    
    Apparently it was okay for her to be topless in the water but not 
    in the locker room. At least they seem to be aware of the fact that
    people do get wet without being clothed. If this and "Dear John"
    is what we get then at least it is a start towards the realization
    that every time people take clothes off does not lead to sex or
    a shower.
    
    Steve
    

    Well... from what I've seen on television in Canada, all the stuff
    that the rest of you are reporting on seems to be quite tame !
    
    Occassionally, one of the English channels runs movies (granted,
    they usually are later at night) that show complete nudity.  The
    french stations frequently carry movies that have complete nudity
    however, the naked people are usually involved in some sort of
    sexual activity.  The french stations are much more liberal in their
    broadcasting.  I suppose the English channels are probably more
    conservative since most of the English channels we receive come
    from the United States, and most of the shows on our own Canadian
    channels, come from the US.
    
    The Canadian government does not spend a lot of money on "the arts",
    instead, it spends it on education, so we even end up with some
    channels that are completely dedicated to bringing local news
    (videotext form), and lectures on various curriculum from the local
    Universities.  When Canadians want to be entertained by TV, they
    tune into the US shows, Canadian talent (and production) is VERY
    bad, and I assume it is this way, because its' cheaper to bring
    in the US shows, than it is to invest in our own arts.
    
    The french stations, all from Quebec, produce more movies and shows
    than any other province in Canada, and they generally get away with
    putting in whatever they want (almost all the movies out of Quebec
    have "some" nudity in them).  The only thing they stay away from
    broadcasting is pornography.
    
    						Darrell
    

    re: .13
    
    	   At the risk of diverting this conversation down a rathole...
    
>    Canadian talent (and production) is VERY
>    bad, and I assume it is this way, because its' cheaper to bring
>    in the US shows, than it is to invest in our own arts.
    
    	   I know some Canadians who would strongly disagree with
    	you on this point.  One in particular, drives a tour bus to
    	and from Niagara Falls.  
    
    	   In all honesty, the only Canadian television I have been
    	exposed to was SCTV.  I loved it.  However, I understand that
    	the production was moved to the US before it began broadcasting 
    	here, so I really don't know if it is indicative of Canadian 
    	television at all.
    
    	   To tie back to the base subject, I cannot recall any nudity on
    	SCTV (the American version).
    
    	- Greg
    

    Sorry, I've never heard of "SCTV".
    
    Believe me, the french stations in particular can get very
    riskay.(sp?), for instance, on Saturday night they had a full
    uncut movie of one of the Emanuelle series !  That's French 
    Canadian broadcasting.  I'm sure one of the English channels would
    not ever carry this movie, or any like it.
    
    The French people though, are much more liberal than the English.
    It seems to evident in every part of their culture.
    
    Darrell
    

    New Hampshire Cross Roads had a segment on a Nudist Park in New Hampshire.  
I missed the beginning so I did not here the name or location.  If you did 
not see it the show repeats Sunday night at 5:30(13 Aug) and Monday night 
at 8:30(14 Aug) on New Hampshire Public Television(Channel 11 plus others).

    If you are unfamiliar with New Hamshire Crossroads, it is a news magazine
that travels to different locations around New Hampshire.  The host Fritz 
Weatherbee is an old New England story teller.  We have tapes of the shows sent 
to my parents in AZ because they like the host.  

Unlike some of the network shows which over sensationalized their coverage of 
nudist, New Hampshire Cross Roads treated naturists as normal people(at least 
as normal as most people they cover).  


Brian

I saw the New Hampshire Crossroads program last night. I thought it
was very well done, emphasising (but not overly so) the fact that naturists
are for the most part just plain folks. It was a good opportunity to see
the park and its facilities.


Jim

At the dinner table tonight, Bob told me the Sally Jessy Raphael program 
planned for Tuesday 5-Dec, is supposed to be about parents who take photos
of their nude children and the affects this may have and the affects of
parents who go nude in their homes.

We are going to tape it so I can see it later.  I'll report on the show
after I view it.  Sorry this is such late notification.  Our TV Guide doesn't
mention what is scheduled....

Judy

The first guy on was taking semi-nude/nude photos of his step-daughter to
supposedly help her in her modeling career.  She was 14.  They showed one of 
the photos, which was a bathing suit, which I didn't she why everyone was
upset.  It was a popular style with the leg cut way up the sides of the hip 
and cleavage showing down to her navel.  He went to prison for the pictures.
The audience in general felt this was pornographic.

The next person was a woman who took photos of her nude children to use in
her art.  The kids were babies (18 months and 5 years I think...I placed a
magazine article in here somewhere about this incident) and the poses were
not `sexual'.  Most of the audience felt this was not pornographic.

Then there was a guy on who felt nudity was wrong because it left nothing 
to the imagination and a `blush' wasn't going to be available to a woman if
she got naked for no reason.  This is very hard to explain.  It almost sounded 
like he's never been naked in front of anyone besides his wife but he didn't 
say anything about a wife so maybe he's never been naked.  It would be 
interesting to know how he takes a shower or has sex.  Fully clothed, I 
suppose.

Then there was a father and daughter that were nudists.  They sat right next 
to the guy that was definitely a non-nudist.  They talked about how natural
it was to be nude and how there wasn't anything sexual about it for them.  
They spoke about there family and their nude experiences.  There was also
a mother/daughter that spoke up from the audience that were nudist.

There was a psychologist who spoke in poetry lyrics and wasn't making much
sense but I took it he was against nudity.  All of this is so hard to relay
to you that I have ordered the transcript of the show and hope to type the
whole thing in when I get it.

General consensus of the audience was non-nudist but Sally pointed out, this
is a free country and what we do in our homes should be our own business.  To
bad that's not true!

Judy

The _New Hampshire Crossroads_ segment discussed in .16 and .17 was about
Cedar Waters Village nudist park in Lee, NH.  It's about 10 minutes long.
I have it available on videotape (both VHS and Beta), and will be happy 
to loan it to anyone who wants to come by my cubicle in ZKO to pick it up.  
Just send mail in advance so I can bring it in.

	-Neil

  CNN recently did a special on tourism in Greece, and how it has been
  affected by the change in oil prices, and the tensions in the middle
  east.
 
  During the special they mostly showed videos of the beaches.  The
  beaches were not only beautiful, but clothing optional.  This was
  quite evident from the video, in which a number of naked or partially
  naked people were caught on camera, (including close ups).

  The cameraman was probably male, and probably not a naturist.
  (judging from many close-ups and shots of naked women)

  
  Anyways, CNN didn't seem to mind showing the clothing optional beach,
  however, I only saw the feature only once (usually they run features
  every hour for a day or two).  Maybe a number of people complained.
  (I wouldn't be surprised)

  Paul  

    
    Recently I saw an advertisement for the lholiday season from
    mumble-mumble corp. which contained a number of nude babies. Although
    no genitals were shown, how is it that private citizens can be hassled
    about nude photos of their children and this ad can be put on TV?
    
    BTW I enjoyed the ad, it was retty clever.
    
    ed

RE: .23

We saw the same ad last night!  We were wondering the same thing.  We thought 
the ad was cute too and surprised they got away with it.  Maybe not enough of
the censor people have seen it yet!

Judy

>	how is it that private citizens can be hassled
>	about nude photos of their children and this ad can be put on TV?
 
    One explanation presented in Joseph Heller's "Catch-22" for what
    "Catch-22" means is "They can do anything to us we can't stop them from
    doing".
    
    
    

    In Canada, I have recently seen a TV commercial, advertising all the
    different kinds of clubs that people belong to across Canada.  I think
    they started airing the commercial a couple of weeks ago, but I have
    seen it frequently during the evenings.
    
    The commercial shows some of the different clubs and their members,
    such as the Winnipeg Knitting Club, and stuff like that, and then they
    get to a "Naturist" club from Price Edward Island.  All the members
    are hiding behind a big sheet they're holding up, but at least I felt
    that it was one of Canada's first steps in bringing forth a positive
    attitude towards naturism.  What's my point?  I think naturism/nudism
    is gaining in popularity, or at least the general population is
    learning to accept our differences more openly, even if they do not
    particpate themselves.
    
    Anyway, it was refreshing to the naturist club depicted in the 
    TV commercial.  Just thought I'd share this with all of you today.
    
    Regards,
    Darrell
    

    
       Last night I saw a commercial on CBS for their late night program
    (can't remember the name) in which they show segments of the actual
    episode. Anyway, there was some dialog along the lines of "she's a
    naturalist...","oh, I sometimes sleep in the nude myself".
    
       Did anybody see the entire show? I fell asleep during the news (real
    exciting stuff) and when I woke up the show was already over. Again, it
    aired last night (Thursday, 17-June) on CBS at 11:30 Eastern time. I'm
    wondering where the dialog out-takes actually fit in to the whole episode.
    
    
    Frank
    

    I caught part of the Today show this morning.  The Today crew is taping
    all week from Hawaii.  Today they were in Maui.  One segment of the
    show discussed the beaches of Hawaii (all the islands) which are
    considered among the most beautiful in the world.  (I can vouch for
    some of them!)  At one point, the presenter (a local resident) said
    that many isolated beaches receive a fair amount of nude use.  They
    then showed a brief scene from (I believe) Kaihalulu Beach, where a
    small group of people were, in fact, nude.  It was a positive message,
    not a snickering, or puritanical, one.  It was basically saying "Nudity
    happens in Hawaii, and it's Okay!"
    
    Anyone else happen to catch it?
    
    Jack

Hi all,

Since we're not really in the naturist season yet, this should provoke some
interesting conversation.  

This weekend's episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation ("The Cost of Living")
showed naked people in a mud bath, with a nude (non-erotic) dancer.  The dancer
(female) was covered in some form of paint (or mud), which did not hide very
much.  In fact, it probably revealed more than the strategically placed 
furniture which covered up the people in the nudist camp on L.A. Law a few 
years back.

What are peoples opionions of this episode?  Did anyone see it?  I'm
particularly interested in children's reactions.  In the Star Trek conference
(NOTED::STAR_TREK, note #540) people are discussing this episode.  The points
which stick out in my memory are those of parents, answering children's 
questions.  One such question was "(Daddy,) How did they get in the mud bath
without seeing each other naked"...Some debate over whether they got in and
then took their clothes off or just got in naked.

In the interest of fairness, I won't re-post any replies from the Star Trek
notesfile, but take a 5 minute digression to this file.  It should prove
interesting.

Tim

    Oh great,...the only episode I didn't tape...:-P

>This weekend's episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation ("The Cost of Living")
>showed naked people in a mud bath, with a nude (non-erotic) dancer.  The dancer

I'd contest a little the idea that the dancer was "non-erotic".  I don't
think it was an accident at all that she had a conventionally attractive
female form (ie. for those who didn't see it, she was very thin, had no
noticable fat, firm, medium sized breasts).  Honestly, my own opinion
was that she was very attractive physically.

And that's what I didn't like.  Why is it that this would be considered
"entertainment" to a mixed sex/mixed species/mixed age group?  It seemed
to me geered almost exclusively towards heterosexual males.  The "dance"
that the woman was doing was little more than flowing about.  In other
words, what was "entertaining" was watching a semi-nude figure moving
about.

I don't think Alexander (a Kligon boy) would find this entertaining, nor
do I understand why Diana's mother would.  I can imagine that a good por-
portion of male heterosexual viewers of the show enjoyed it.  I don't 
imagine that was true for a large number of female heterosexual viewers.

I don't think this display was inspired by a naturist point of view at
all.  I think it was inspired by a desire on the part of the people who
make the show to exploit the fact that many men will tune into a show
which shows sexy, semi-nude women whenever possible.  Star Trek wants
more viewers.  If they showed a true naturist event, they wouldn't get
that for long.  

I think their choice to show mostly young, extremely fit, females in
a semi-nude state both comes from and contributes to our culture's
distorted sense of what is "normal" and attractive.

Gotta get back to work,

Kerry

    in regards to .31 
    
      If it were any other show than Star Trek I would probably agree with
you, however I think one of the concepts that Star Trek has always tried to
get across is to challenge people to think in terms of other ways of life.
So what may seem, objectionable in our "Earthly" opinion may certainly not
be to individuals a goo goo gazillion light years away.   Who knows what   
the attraction to the dancer was for those in that scene.   If I remember
correctly, the other idividuals that were created for that scene by the
holodeck, were just out and about socializing, while the people that had
their concentration on the dancer were those from the Enterprise.  I think
anyone who has experienced a few different c/o environments has come across
passives, actives, and gawkers. 



                           Set coordinates for Moonstone Scotty,


                                                        Energize....


          
                                       

Re: .32, Exactly what I meant. Star Trek has a reputation (I should say
Gene Rodenberry (RIP) has/had a reputation) for making the viewers think.  I
don't suspect it was so much naturist-inspired as much as comfortable with
nudity in a casual setting inspired.  I can see where heterosexual male viewers
could think it was erotic, however, since I am one, I maintain that at least
one such viewer did not.  I can also see the point about the "perfect female
form" that was made in .31.  However, there are no "non-perfect" human
forms on Star Trek (a failing? Or is everyone health concious in the 24th
century?).

Tim

Perhaps the computer beamed their clothes off! :)

    Don't forget the end of the show when Lwuxana showed up for her 
    wedding nude, much to the horror of her bridegroom.  Seems a nude
    wedding is the custom of the bride's planet.
    
    Linda
    

>    Don't forget the end of the show when Lwuxana showed up for her 
>    wedding nude, much to the horror of her bridegroom.  Seems a nude
>    wedding is the custom of the bride's planet.
 

... and Lwuxana's ISN'T the "perfect TV body", even if it is great for her
age.  The punchline of the show was (to me) "accept me (and my culture) 
naked or don't accept me at all".  I thought the nudity was handled pretty
well.  

By the way, Lwuxana is played by Gene Roddenberry's widow.  She also 
supplies the voice of the ships computer.


Roseanne 

Lwuxana Troi is played by Majel Barret Roddenberry.  She played Nurse Christine
Chapel in the original series.  I too enjoyed the wedding (not the first nude
wedding scence in ST:TNG, either, she did it once before, or they talked about
it...my mind is kind of fuzzy).

I didn't include the wedding scene in my original note because the discussion
in the star trek notesfile did not.  (less shown, I guess)

Tim

Re: .32

>       If it were any other show than Star Trek I would probably agree with
>you, however I think one of the concepts that Star Trek has always tried to
>get across is to challenge people to think in terms of other ways of life.

I think that's what the producers would like you to think, and perhaps
this conversation is some proof that they're effective.  I did like the
idea that a nude mud bath was a relaxing event.  What I saw as cowardly
was the inclusion of the dancer.  Do any of you really believe that when
the actress was chosen to play that part, it was just an accident that
she had a body like that?

>If I remember
>correctly, the other individuals that were created for that scene by the
>holodeck, were just out and about socializing, while the people that had
>their concentration on the dancer were those from the Enterprise.  

Actually, I don't think you remember correctly.  The two from the 
Enterprise were Lwuxana and Alexander; Lwuxana was interested, Alex-
ander had childlike curiousity.  The rest of the characters were from
the holodeck.  The older gentleman who was concerned about rules seemed
most interested than anyone to me.  The others also seemed as interested
as Lwuxana and Alexander.

>I think
>anyone who has experienced a few different c/o environments has come across
>passives, actives, and gawkers.

Have you ever been to a c/o environment that had a dancer like that?
I haven't.  If the intent of the show was to get people to consider
a nude lifestyle, this segment grossly misrepresented my experiences
and impressions of c/o.  If anything, I think it encouraged male
heterosexuals to join up (and reinforced their misconceptions) while
it discouraged female heterosexuals who already feel that their body
is flawed and has to fit some sort of mold to be acceptable and/or
attractive.

Re: .33

>I can also see the point about the "perfect female
>form" that was made in .31.  However, there are not "non-perfect" human
>forms on Star Trek (a failing? Or is everyone health concious in the 24th
>century?).

I think the reason there are not "non-perfect" human forms (using your
words... for me, part of the naturist philosophy makes the concept of a
"perfect form" meaningless), is that more people will watch the show if
they can look at pretty people while they're at it.  I don't think Star
Trek is any different from other TV shows in that respect.

Re: .34 & .35

>    Don't forget the end of the show when Lwuxana showed up for her 
>    wedding nude, much to the horror of her bridegroom.  Seems a nude
>    wedding is the custom of the bride's planet.
 
>... and Lwuxana's ISN'T the "perfect TV body", even if it is great for her
>age.  The punchline of the show was (to me) "accept me (and my culture) 
>naked or don't accept me at all".  

Unfortunately, I got a phone call and had to mute my TV for the last
ten minutes, but I was able to watch.  Now I'm not sure if my memory
serves correctly, but if I remember right, the idea that Lwuxana
was nude was clear (even when the TV muted), but what was actually
shown was her head and shoulders (not the shampoo :^>).  

Comparatively, they showed the _whole body_ of the young, firm, model
type just a little earlier!  Why not show Lwuxana from the back, head
to toe?  I'll tell you what I think, they didn't because it wouldn't
be pleasing for people to look at.  Which, to me, proves the point I'm
making about the dancer.

The show did not handle nudity in a "naturist" fashion.  It handled it
in a hollywood, sexy, heterosexual male oriented fashion.  BTW, I'm
sure that there are many men who watched the show with no erotic thoughts,
but do any of you really believe that the producers were entirely
innocent to the eroticism going on?  Didn't it look so calculated to
you?  It did to me.  

From where I sit, Star Trek looks little different from Baywatch and 
90210.  _All_ the people shown have classically attractive features that 
_very few_ people in reality have.  Hey, I think the rest of us are
attractive too, "imperfections" and all.  That's why I like naturism.
Naturism really does say "accept me as I am", I think that Star Trek 
show just pretended to.

Thanks to all who replied, however, although I disagree with you, I
find it very interesting to hear your thoughts.

Kerry

    .32 may have a point.  This show is about the future, although I dont
    watch it and have never found it that intrestin I do think in the
    future people will start taking better care of themselves.  Low fat,
    low colestorol, less smokers/drinkers etc, etc, etc.  I dont think
    this will be done for looks, right now in america there's a fitness
    craze (Still) I think it will turn into a Health craze, with insurance
    premiums going way up for people who smoke and are out of shape and
    non smokers who stay in relativly good shape will pay less.
    
    One question, Is there anything wrong with looking at that dancer in
    an erotic way ???? (again I didnt see the show Im just asking).
    
    								Mike

>> Why not show Lwuxana from the back, head
>> to toe?  

They did show Lwuxana from the back.  She was not shown head to toe, but it
was about from her shoulder to the top half of her buttocks.  The shot was
made just as she entered the room.


Roseanne

 
      The female figure that was dancing was not nude.  She had on a body
  suit.  I suspect it was to imply that she was nude, and she simply had
  a different, more interesting skin. 

      The body suit most likely was to make sure there would be no censorship
  of the scene.  The same was done for Lwuaxana, she wasn't shown most likely
  in order to fulfill the censorship requirements.

      Overall, I think the dancing girl fit into the context of the situation.
  They were supposed to be on a planet made for enjoyment.  If we take 
  into consideration that nobody in the scene has any problem with nudity
  in any form (we can only wish people will be so mature in the 24th century)
  than the woman is simply a dancing woman, .. who was nice to look at.
  I suspect that the writers intent was to show beauty, and not eroticism.
  
      I do not think it was to induce more viewers to watch.  This scene
  was not shown in any preview clips to gain audience.  Star Trek honestly
  does not need any new viewers in order to continue a long and successful
  run, ... and so on..

      One final point, ... what difference does it make that the woman had
  a firm, non fat, nice body.   There's nothing wrong with that.  There's
  nothing wrong with apreciating a nice body.   Again, the scene was not
  set to be a statement on a naturist event, .. it was set in the context
  of a planet made for enjoyement and entertainment. I see nothing that says
  any of the characters couldn't take enjoyment in watching the woman dance.

  paul

    
    	I can't totally agree that normal is other than fit and attractive
    While in Brasil I was part of nude groups with dancing and everyone
    was fairly attractive. This is an understatement by the way.
    	I was asked why americans are as they are by quite a few. They
    explained that the diet,lifestyle,and the climate make for slim,low
    body fat physiology. Seems to be working.
    	The women seem to enjoy each other as they dance.
    
    	Roger

    
    
    I was clicking thru the channels a couple of weeks ago and landed on
    one of the public channels. There were 3/4 men, I would guess in their
    mid twenties, skinny dipping. They were surprised by two women and a
    man in Victorian dress. The skinny dippers left the water, two/three
    hid in the bushes and one ran down the road, confronting the women.
    
    This was total frontal male nudity and was the first time I had seen this
    on TV. I expected to see some protests/news reports in the newspapers
    or on TV but I guess no one seemed to have a problem with it.
    
    Bob
    

Hi Bob,

Sounds like what you were watching was PBS's broadcast of the feature 
movie _A Room with a View_.  I've seen this scene before and I'm 
impressed that it was even in a movie, let alone that a TV station 
would air it without cutting that scene!  

Since some may wonder after my comments about the Star Trek episode,
I thought this scene was an excellent portrayal of nudity.  The two
young men were classically attractive (in my view), but that fit the
story line (one was a brother of one of the women who happened upon
the three men, one was a man she was interested in).  The third man
was a priest (! :^>), who had what I consider an average healthy physic 
for a man his age (ie. a bit of a pot belly).

Kerry

    PBS had had a number of shows with nudity...they're not
    a commercial station so they're not out to get audiences by
    trying to go beyond current standards.

    
    
    	ABC's MEN,SEX, and RAPE contained some scenes shot inside of a
    strip-joint. I thought the footage would be of the normal shoulders-up
    variety, but it wasn't. Some of the scenes showed the the dancers
    completely. 
    
    Does this mean that other shows can now do the same, or is this just
    limited to news shows. I missed the beginning of the show, did they 
    announce a 'warning' about the nudity?
    
    ed

ABC's MEN,SEX, and RAPE was shown late here in Colorado (9-10 pm) and they
did give the warning at the beginning about graphic language, scenes, etc. 
that would be seen and heard and may not be proper for children.

What I found hard to stomach was the behavior of the guys at the `bachelor',
party having the scantily clad woman lay across the laps of many men and 
the one guy placing the beer can on the pubic area of the woman and the
`laying' of hands on her.  What animals.  :-(

Judy

    
    
    re. 47
    
    	I must of missed that part of the show. All of the nudity that I
    saw was of the strip-joint scenes. Not the best view of nudity, but I
    was just suprised to see this on network TV. It aired at 10-11 pm here
    in Mass. 
    
    All the times you see a news item on TV that involves nudity, there is 
    'discrete' camera work or visual distortion. Maybe this will open the
    door for some 'normal' nudity to be shown on TV.
    
    ed

I watched that show on tape last night (a friend taped it for
me and she & I watched it together).  I agree with you Judy,
the scene with the guys at the bachelor party was pretty hard
to stomach.  

I thought the show brought up a lot of good issues, but it seems
a lot clearer to me that the reason men rape has a lot to do with
the disrespect our culture generally gives to people who have less
power to protect themselves (women, *children*, minorities, and
so on).  

I never really see anyone pointing out that *all men*, no matter how 
powerful they are as adults, went through a long and very influential 
portion of their lives as people with little power to protect them-
selves (ie. as children).  I think the boys who had their lack of power
as children exploited but never learned that that exploitation they 
suffered was _wrong_, are the ones who will exploit the lack of power
in women and others.

I could go on about that, but since it's not a naturist topic, I'll
stop.

I'd like to reply to Mike and Paul in notes .39 and .41 after
having watched this show.

.39>    One question, Is there anything wrong with looking at that dancer in
.39>    an erotic way ???? (again I didnt see the show Im just asking).

.41>      One final point, ... what difference does it make that the woman had
.41>  a firm, non fat, nice body.   There's nothing wrong with that.  There's

Hi guys,

I wanted to think a little before responding to this because I
agree that it's possible to enjoy eroticism without doing anything 
wrong or hurting anyone.  Our sexuality is one of the things that
can bring us great pleasure in life and I think that's wonderful.

I guess it's just when I see women, especially very attractive women 
displayed in a sexual manner on TV or on the cover of magazines in
the supermarket, I feel like it encourages me to look at women as 
sexual objects.  I feel that way because the images are so effective
in arosing me sexually.

When I go to a naturist event and see lots of men and women in the
nude just sitting around and talking or playing walleyball, I feel
like it's a lot easier to see people as people, and not as objects
for my gratification.  Sometimes even at a naturist event, I'll
think, "Boy, she's really pretty" or "Wow, women must think that
guy is very attractive."  But I don't have the feeling that the
person is presenting themselves in order to convey that thought.

When I saw the Star Trek episode, I got the feeling that the dancer
was presented to convey sexuality in an erotic fashion.  I admit
that it was my filters which saw this as erotic, and I may be the
only person in the entire viewing audience that consciously viewed 
it as such, but so much of it stuck me as necessarily calculated
(the fact that the producers had to find an actress to fill the
role, the fact that they chose someone with a body that "society"
has deemed attractive, the fact that her body suit was made to
appear non-existant, and so on).

Perhaps this fit in the context of the story (ie. this is a planet
of pleasure, this is the future, etc), but the story was written
by people from today and they brought to the story today's prejudices.
It felt to me that one of the prejudices they brought to the skit
was that of women as objects of sexual gratification.  

It's not that I would have been happier with an unattractive dancer,
it's that I didn't feel comfortable with a dancer at all.  I agree
with those who would argue that just because I feel uncomfortable
it doesn't mean that something is wrong or that everyone will view
the thing as I do or as I fear many people do.  But the purpose of
my note was to express _my_ feelings.

The guys I imagined enjoying this dancer for her eroticism were 
very much like the guys shown in _Men, Sex, and Rape_ at the bachelor
party with the scantily clad woman.  Guys that aren't evil, but who
just seem have no problem sexually objectifying a woman and apparently
ignoring the rest of her personhood.  

Given that men in general are more physically powerful than woman in 
general, and men in general have more political power than woman in 
general, that ability to ignore a woman's personhood frightens me.  It 
leads me to believe that men could abuse that personhood as a side effect 
of seeking their own gratification.

Today's topic on Phil Donohue is a compilation of his programs on nudity.  
Just an FYI for those that can call someone to have it recorded or get
home in time to watch it.  Channels and times vary across the country.

Judy

    
    Did anyone catch the program?  Can you summarize here for those of us
    (like me) who didn't see it?
    
    
    Frank
    

An anonymous reader informs me that there will be a segment on Cedar Waters
(see note 12.16) on the _Chronicle_ program, tonight (Monday, 8/24) at 7:30
on Channel 5 (presumably Boston).

	-Neil

    Could someone record that, please? :-)
    
    B.

From my original correspondent:

=============================================================================

Neil,

I feel embarrassed abouit the Chronicle show; it wasn't on last night...Rites of
Passage was. Evidently, the "next" Chronicle is what was meant, and that won't
be until tonight. Sorry...didn't mean to mislead anyone.

               Station may be forced to televise nude film

    by Bill Murphy
    Eagle-Tribune writer

    SALEM, N.H. - The local cable TV channel may be forced to broadcast a
    videotape featuring nudity, even over the objections of town officials.

    Public access Channel 38 may have to air "Nature's Summer," a videotape
    about nudist camps in America, because of federal regulations that
    support local residents who seek to televise a program.

    Lawrence Weil of North Salem and Arthur Ketchen of Nashua submitted the
    videotape, which was filmed at nudist camps in Texas, Florida and
    Vermont and shows frontal nudity.

    Mr. Weil and Mr. Ketchum represent First Amendment Legal Defense Fund /
    Citizens Against Censorship, which criticized the town's attempts last
    year to write zoning laws to ban adult bookstores.

    Town Manager Barry Brenner said he has asked a lawyer to determine
    whether the town can legally refuse to air "Nature's Summer."

    He will advise the selectmen of the lawyer's opinion.

    Mr. Weil, who attends nudist camps, said First Amendment Legal Defense
    Fund submitted the film to provide "an introduction to family naturism.
    It intends to show people we're normal people that just recreate
    differently."

    The defense fund, he said, also wants to find out whether Channel 38
    will provide pro-nudists the same access gained by anti-pornography
    groups.

    Channel 38 has aired anti-pornography films and messages submitted by
    churches.

    For a fair portion of "Nature's Summer," nudist colonists are seen
    playing tennis, swimming, sunbathing and boating, said Douglas Micklon,
    Channel 38 program director.

    No sexual encounters are shown in the documentary-like program.

    There's "quite a lot of frontal nudity," Mr. Micklon said.

    But Cable Committee member James Dunaway Jr. said "Nature's Summer" is
    not obscene, based on Mr. Micklon's description of it.

    		Lawrence Eagle-Tribune, August 29, 1992

	'Civil Wars' will carry a "Viewer discretion warning" for tonites
episode which will feature star Mariel Hemmingway posing nude for a photographer.
I wonder how this will be handled?


ed 

    .56
    
    I saw it.  It was done in good taste, I thought.
    
    Richard
    

  Isn't civil wars on a major network, .. I thought they couldn't do
  nude shots on the networks.  (or is that because of the advertisers)

  Anyway, ... did they show Mariel nude, (bare breasts, full frontal? ...)
  Just curious, .. if it goes over without complaint, I'd say we will probably
  see more nudity on the networks in the comming months ... (or years .. )

  paul

    .58
    
    There was no doubt in my mind that MH was actually nude.  However,
    to answer your question directly - no.  Her arms and legs were always
    in a position to shield her breasts and genitals from view.
    
    Richard
    

                    Nudist film will not be televised

                    by Bill Murphy
                    Eagle-Tribune staff writer

    Salem, N.H. - A documentary on nudist camps willnot be shown on the
    town's cable television channel because the man who asked that it be
    aired has withdrawn his request.

    The withdrawal came a day after the Cable Committee had approved the
    showing of the documentary 4-2.

    Lawrence Weil said he no longer wants the documentary to be shown
    because opponents to the idea are using the issue to grandstand on
    pornography and other issues unrelated to nudist camps.

    "Everything has lost whatever serious value it had because (the debate)
    has turned into a three-ring circus," Mr. Weil said.

    Mr. Weil, of North Salem, and Arthur Ketchen, of Nashua, submitted the
    film.  The represent First Amendment Legal Defense Fund/Citizens
    Against Censorship, which fought the town's attempts last year to pass
    zoning laws banning adult book stores.

    The hour-long documentary, "Natural Summer," generated immediate
    controversy after it was submitted last last month because it includes
    frontal nudity.

    Robert Ciandella, a lawyer representing the town, has said the town
    could not legally refuse to show the film because it is not obscene.


    ------

    Lawrence Eagle-Tribune
    Saturday, September 19

    Last Saturday (26/6) at 6:30 PM we were watching A TV program title
    "Top Spots around Sydney", which was showing numerous places within two
    hours drive from Sydney suitable for Holidays. 
    
    A segment started which showed a dirt track leading down a steep hill,
    and there was a chorus from our kids "were've been there", it was River
    Island Nature Retreat, the CO camping area where we spent a very
    enjoyable long week end last summer (The New Years weekend actually).
    
    The segment concentrated on the nature side of RINR, showing more of
    the animals then the people, but there were a couple of quick shots of
    a nude group in the spa, and a few bare bottoms. 
    
    Overall the segment was very positive and RINR was made to sound a
    delightful place to "get away from it all" (which it is).
    
Peter.

Not really naturism but nudity (and it wasn't a documentary, too! :-)

I wonder how many complaints there were about the made-for-TV movie which
air'd last evening called "My Breast" (or something like that, I really
didn't watch it).  Our television was turned to that channel and I saw
the first 20-minutes or so. It showed Merideth Baxter having a breast 
exam with full frontal exposure of her left breast.  

I don't recall seeing any -warning- messages at the beginning of the 
segment so I would expect *someone* had to complain, no matter how
sterile the environment.

-Andy

Oh, but there were warnings something like "Due to the mature subject matter,
parental discretion is advised"....or something along that line was given
at the beginning and throughout the show.  I watched the beginning and turned
it off since I was taping it and can wiz thru commercials later.  I almost
bought the book...read part of it in the grocery store waiting for Bob to
decide what magazines he wanted.  According to the TV guide, she finds out
her boyfriend was a ditz that didn't stand by her side thru the whole ordeal.
I think that is a bummer to produce so many movies with this theme.  It doesn't
always happen that way.  Bob and I are a good example.  He was beside me the
whole time.  :-)  So did the movie end with the boyfriend not being supportive?
I'll probably find out tonight when I view my tape.

Judy