Quote:
Originally posted by leagleaze
It wasn't a complaint, it was an observation in response to your trying to argue about the MPAA and its determination of what is an R versus an X or NC17 or whatever.
However, yes, it does seem to me people make a much bigger deal about a nude frontal shot of a male than a nude frontal shot of a female. Which is silly if you think about it.
I wasn't speaking to it in my original post, but in the sense of male versus female treatment and the ongoing issue of over sexualization of women (which by the way is even worse if you are a lesbian as I was reminded recently when a fellow employee said something quite awful to me) yes, I would complain about the number of male frontal nudity shots versus female frontal nudity shots.
On the other hand, I personally could do with no frontal nudity shots. I don't go to a movie to see naked people, it doesn't do much for me.
|
1. Well, you do see a bit more in a male frontal shot, whereas a direct frontal shot of a woman is not a "pink shot." But I concur... there should be no distinction.
2. No woman is being sexualized. You're sexualized by birth. Men are wired to view women as sex objects, and there's nothing anyone can do about it. I can no more shut off the mechanism that makes me check out a woman and think about banging her than stop my heart from beating. There's no sexualization going on - its already been there, since the dawn of time.
3. I concur that movie nudity is pointless and silly. It tends to detract from the plot, unless the plot is about the sex (9 1/2 Weeks, Unfaithful, etc..). But yes, I did rent Swordfish just to see Halle's tits.
4. Oh, I'd hate to be a lesbian today. I imagine every guy you ever share a drink with asks the same stupid questions.
