NSFW: Miley Cyrus poses completely naked for Terry Richardson

[jthorn 37]

I'm surprised there isn't a nice artsy fartsy shadow to cover her vulva.

[StrawberryBlond 13,285]

21 hours ago, Harry said:

Stop quoting me all the time and condescending me and my views, and then telling me to stop bullying you when it pisses me off 

How about you stop quoting me all the time and condescending me and my views? You were the one who started quoting me months ago whenever you wanted to be neagtive and its never stopped. Sounds like bullying to me.

20 hours ago, ARTPOPdidntflop said:

Because you're saying it's their fault. And I think that's gross

I never said it's their fault. I was just explaining the consequences of s-xualising yourself. If I'd said "and they deserve everything they get for that" afterwards, I'd see your point. But no, I'm saying that some people don't realise the pitfalls of s-xualising yourself and it makes me concerned for them.

7 hours ago, Kayla said:

She doesn't have dignity? By saying that you're saying she doesn't deserve respect because of how she portrays herself s-xually. The issue I have with this is that it relates someone's worth to how they present their body, not how they actually act. Miley is a kind person. She gives to others, supports equality, and speaks with positive intention. Yet in spite of all that, because she portrays herself as s-xual, you deem her not worthy of respect. 

Society is ****ed up, s-xualized and superficial. But was it less ****ed up back in the 50s when women dressed conservatively and just dealt with abuse behind closed doors? Regarding s-xualization, s-x has always been a part of society. Nowadays it's just used as a selling point in addition to a part of our personal lives. In some ways, that's disheartening, but this is also the reason why I support people who are very aware of and intentional with their presentation of s-xuality. Seeing images of s-x and nudity just mean people are taking the things they do privately and being open about it. 

 

 

I think the fact that Miley hasn't reeled back after the public is no longer shocked is evidence that she's being genuine about it. If she was doing this purely for shock value, purely for attention, purely for sales of any kind, etc. then she would have done something a la Madonna, but she's keeping this part of her image consistent. 

You're against people using human bodies and s-xuality for financial gain and validation, which I agree with and understand. But I wouldn't say Miley is exploiting herself; exploiting implies you're depleting something of its resources or misusing someone/thing in a method that degrades its integrity without appreciation of its worth. The reason I don't believe Miley is exploiting herself is because this use of her body in the public areas seems representative of her beliefs and use of it in private spaces as well. In other words- she does not seem to be depleting herself or her worth by doing this, and it is not done in a way that she feels destroys her. It's an honest representation of who she is. Some people are overtly s-xual. 

I'm a bit confused about the juxtaposition of saying that we're all naked so artists must give us something more and the ways in which you described how nudity should be presented. On one hand you're saying we need something more than a nude body, but then you're saying the way we should present nudity is in ways we see it every day- no makeup, no props, no seductiveness. 
Also note that it's not just nudity that Miley is presenting- she is presenting s-xuality. 

And it's not like Miley doesn't know how the media works. You're saying you feel bad for her because she's publicly damaged her image, but maybe Miley doesn't care what thousands of people she'll never meet think of her?
Madonna pulled back on the s-xuality after her s-x-focused era, Miley hasn't. Sure, maybe Madonna was being smarter about her use of s-xuality in relation to her career image, but doesn't that then mean she's the one using s-x as a method of financial and career gain? Wouldn't that mean she was exploiting her s-xuality for that album era?

Again, I really loathe when people equate respect to expression of s-xuality. So if Miley was doing this behind closed doors it'd be fine, but because she makes it accessible she doesn't respect herself? If someone being naked all the time makes them a s-x object who gets no respect, I think that's disgusting. You said yourself that Miley is talented, and she has a good personality- or at least she's very kind. Yet she loses respect because she....gets naked and explicit. 

And you think being hypers-xual makes society not respect someone? Think back to times where women would have been scorned for showing their ankle- would you say society "respected" women back then?

I think it's more disrespectful to place someone's worthiness of respect on how they portray their body.
We criticize people for using their body instead of their mind, but then treat them based on how we feel about their image more than how we feel about their mind. 

 

If you want s-x to be something you indulge in because you want to, not because you're forced to, then I believe we should support people who show signs of indulging out of personal desire to do so. When you demonize all of it you also cast out the people doing it for genuine purposes. 

For example, there's a lot of bad things that go down in the **** industry, but then you have studios like the one Stoya made where they're creating ****ography with an artistic angle. And not just pretty, softcore stuff, but actual artistic imagery and concepts. She's also involved in writing articles about love, s-xuality, the **** industry, and non-s-x related things. She's also involved in an organization, along with other **** actors, that is aimed at putting more power into the performer's hands, supporting **** companies that respect their workers, and educating people (especially aspiring **** performers) about what the industry is actually like and how to remain in control of their career if they do decide to partake in it. 
The people protecting others are the ones who are helping the good side- not the ones who are refusing to make a distinction between the positives and negatives. It's like the difference between s-x education and abstinence education- one actually prevents pregnancies, and it's not abstinence-only education. 

In your other post you said "s-x shouldn't define us," and I disagree for myself. It shouldn't define anyone who doesn't want it to, but I personally would define s-x as a very important part of my life.

You know when s-x caused me pain and hurt? When I didn't understand it.
I spent years of my life ridiculing promiscuous people, insulting people with atypical relationship dynamics, and rejecting s-xual interests I had. I had little to no self-esteem, thought lowly of anyone who showed/shared their body, and would lose respect for people who defended s-x workers in any way. I would sometimes feel physically sick after going on a tirade against someone else's s-xual morals. 

Then one day, I realized I was sick of being so hateful. And instead of rejecting others and putting myself up on a self-righteous high horse for my "moral" s-xual beliefs, I started learning about things. I sought out opinions and words from s-x workers, strippers, **** performers, promiscuous people, people who'd had threesomes, polyamorous people, swingers, etc. 
Do you know how many nights I spent at my computer and in conversations just shaking and in some points crying?
And a lot of my reaction was because as I actually listened to these people, I realized I saw myself wanting what they had. 

I actually didn't feel comfortable with s-x until I accepted it. And now, I love expressions of s-xuality. It comes natural to me. I'm not down to do anything and everything, nor will I do something with just anyone, but I find beauty and peace in being immersed in honest expressions of my s-xual nature, and I support people who do the same in their own methods, even if I personally find it weird or unappealing.

I think that's why I take this topic so seriously. Hate towards s-x was more damaging to me psychologically, and this idea that it's only respectable if it's in private caused me to disrespect people who didn't follow or even believe my own personal morals.  

I never said that she has no dignity or that she's not worthy of respect. I respect her for being the kind of artist she wanted to become, taking the risk of making a free album of very anti commercial music and all the charity work she's done. I just don't like the way that she chooses to represent herself at times, I think it damages her image and isn't healthy for her young fans to see and doesn't send good messages to other women in the music industry.

I think Miley is being genuine, I do really think she wants to do this. But her need to put this side of herself out there so publicaly constantly suggests she knows there's attention and money in this, so she keeps on making the effort to go that bit further to get it. You and plenty of others have said that she clearly knows how the game works and what garners a reaction. Problem is, she doesn't know when its been done to death and isn't going to get a reaction anymore. You can be genuine and not genuine in this scenario. Yes, Madonna may have exploited her s-xuality back in the day but at least she knew when it had gotten old. And I think Miley's exploiting herself because she's not offering anything other than her body in this situation - she's not promoting anything, just herself in general. So if she's representing herself in an explicitly s-xual way, that means that she's suggesting that she wants to be seen as a s-xual commodity, not for her profession or any element of her personality. What she's doing has nothing to do with her music, it's all about presenting her as a s-xual being, nothing more. And I think it's quite dehumanising. Also, I think Terry exploits as lot of the people he photographs, even the ones who want to do it. I don't want Gaga working with him anymore.

I'm not averse to nudity but I think there must always be a point to it. I'm not into gratuitious nudity as it can be very damaging for many reasons. I am fine with nudity presented in non s-xual ways or in tastefully done s-xual ways. However, I think the most explicit stuff should be kept private. I also think Miley's representation of s-xuality is damaging as well.

I'm talking about society's view towards this kind of s-xual display, not my own. I may not have particular likeness for someone who does this, but it wouldn't cause me to disrespect them. But many other people would. I really want women to feel like they are worth more than their body and photoshoots like these tap into that old concept of women being nothing but eye candy for men that I just can't stand. You say that the 50's were a far more stifling time. But I think it was just as bad back then as it is now, just in different ways. I think ultimate policing of s-xuality is bad, but equally so is hypers-xualisation. I'm not in favour of women being pressured to cover up, nor am I in favour of women being pressured to show it off. I am always the middle ground supporter in s-xual matters because extremes are rarely healthy in life, especially when it comes to s-x. But society thinks you can only be strictly on one side of the fence. If you disagree about one representation of s-xuality, it must mean you're a prude who hates s-x. It's so judgemental. limiting and close minded. It's no wonder society is the way it is when we put people into such distinct boxes.

Thing is, I've researched the s-x industry extensively. Believe it or not, I supported this stuff once. Admitedly, when I was too young to even have s-x. Because we think s-x can only be a positive thing at that age because adults do it and we want to be adults. But when i was about 17, my views started to change when I saw the realities of the p**n industry and I've been anti-s-x industry ever since. I've based on my views on stories of actual ex members of the industry and found the truth of all the behind the scenes stuff we never hear about. I don't know who to believe is genuinely happy in the industry anymore because so many of them lie about how they really feel.

I appreciate your different opinion. We all become accustomed to s-x in different ways. But we don't all come to the same conclusions. In my case, I actually changed my beliefs further down the line because the original ones that I thought were fine weren't doing it for me anymore. I don't see my views towards s-x as hateful at all. I'm all for s-x as long as it's healthy and I don't think a lot of modern ways are. I'm against any concept that doesn't take real feelings into account and doesn't have any kind of understanding and respect given to all participants. Anything s-xual can be negative if you go about it the wrong way. It's all about finding that balance. Trust me, I am not anti s-x at all. I agree, that is a damaging attitude, but so is going too far in the opposite direction also.

6 hours ago, Kayla said:

Let me just say that I didn't show off my body until I was secure with myself. By saying "I'm secure enough within myself that I don't need that validation," and "I don't feel the need to flaunt it about," implies that people who do show their bodies are insecure and are showing it out of a need for validation. 

I can tell you that it wasn't until I felt confident that I was showing my body more. Back when I was insecure I wouldn't have dreamed of doing and showing some of the things I have in the last handful of years. My personal expressions of s-xuality and nudity happened after I gained self-esteem, confidence, and security in myself. 

Another assumption that grinds my gears is the idea that "Oh, I respect myself which is why I don't flaunt my body." 
That's fine if that's true for you, but there are plenty of people- myself included!- who respect themselves and show their bodies. The two are not mutually exclusive. 

Let me clarify, I think some people do put their bodies out there because they are secure, it's just that there's many more cases of insecurity when it happens. It's assumed that putting your body on show means you're happy with yourself but it's so often not the case. Get talking to these people and you'll find that they're doing it for acceptance and to try to make themselves feel better. Not all, but a lot. You can respect yourself and show your body and be secure but I'm just saying that being all three things is very rare so it's difficult to tell who is genuine and who isn't. I think it's damaging when we encourage girls to flash flesh to find a confidence within themselves. I don't understand the correlation. Probably because we wouldn't say the same to boys. And if they don't have to do it, why should we? I feel that the best body confidence I got came from my inner self. Believing that I did look good and that no one's perfect anyway. If it all came from s-xualised comments, well, that could have hurt my self esteem a lot. Sex is just one part of being human, but it isn't the most individual of things, as anyone can do it. It's better to find our confidence from our personalities, talents and acheivements because not everyone can excel in those things.

6 hours ago, MelbHawker said:

Your point regarding the lack of headlines this shoot has birthed is really telling of how music is evolving/where it's at. I'd say that currently, the masses are embracing that high quality, relatable softer stuff - and also, a bit of R&B. I honestly believe that artists who pair nude imagery with their work in today's scene are denounced as cheap and unimaginative. It's literally 'yawn' with Miley Cyrus. She's not doing everything wrong - releasing a free album was solid genius for example. She's overdone the whole 'naked' thing though.. this exemplifies what 'gimmick' really means. If it had any substance, she'd actually do it where it's called for/relevant. I go on her Instagram, I see nothing but explicit, trashy sh*t. I'm not a prude in the slightest, for the record. 

I've been reading a lot of posts pulling out the whole 'you're on a Gaga forum and you're judging someone blah blah'. Are we not allowed to have an opinion on Miley because we stan for Gaga? I like Miley.. I thought she was robbed of a Grammy nomination for 'Wrecking Ball'. I respect her because she's enjoyed such great success and it's come to her of her own accord. I'm just seeing right through a lot of what she does. Not sorry for the way I feel one bit. 

Exactly. Its all become very gimmicky. Gaga saw when her overblown costumes and performances were starting to become too predictable and she was at risk of becoming a parody of herself. So she's wisely toned it down, knowing that that will provide more shock than any meat dress could at this stage. And she could go back to shock factor one day, when the public get bored of her being "normal." But like you're saying, Miley doesn't know when an idea has run its course. I honestly thought she was done with the overtly s-xual stuff after Bangerz, especially when she turned up all classy looking at an awards show and got a teenage runaway to pick up her award. But then she was right back to her old antics again, which felt so backward and like she couldn't come up with any new ideas.

I'm totally with you when you say that we should be allowed to have an opinion on Miley even if it's something Gaga's done before. We don't necessarily agree with everything Gaga's done either.

[Pity Party 743]

Disgusting. 

[Harry 26,836]

7 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

How about you stop quoting me all the time and condescending me and my views? You were the one who started quoting me months ago whenever you wanted to be neagtive and its never stopped. Sounds like bullying to me.

How thick can you be? You're the one that instigated this particular conversation. Bloody fool.

[StrawberryBlond 13,285]

2 minutes ago, Harry said:

How thick can you be? You're the one that instigated this particular conversation. Bloody fool.

I mean in general. You were the one who started the habit of quoting me whenever you disliked what I had to say. I never had a problem with you before then, you just started making it a thing to bring me down whenever possible. If you don't like me, just avoid me. Because we always end up arguing and I get upset when you seem to hate me.

[Harry 26,836]

1 minute ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I mean in general. You were the one who started the habit of quoting me whenever you disliked what I had to say. I never had a problem with you before then, you just started making it a thing to bring me down whenever possible. If you don't like me, just avoid me. Because we always end up arguing and I get upset when you seem to hate me.

Oh do one.

[StrawberryBlond 13,285]

3 minutes ago, Harry said:

Oh do one.

If that's how you feel, please just stop quoting me. We're never going to agree anyway. What's the point in trying discuss something with you if you're going to just shut me down every time and be rude to me for no reason?

[Harry 26,836]

Just now, StrawberryBlond said:

If that's how you feel, please just stop quoting me. We're never going to agree anyway. What's the point in trying discuss something with you if you're going to just shut me down every time and be rude to me for no reason?

oh my god you're insufferable stop talking to me

[HEARTHUNTER 7,611]

Didn't know Miley's puss would make the gheyz talk to much 

I despise her but, slay bish

[TSUNAMI 20,193]

I like all pics from this photoshooting. 

[Kayla 7,595]

7 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

How about you stop quoting me all the time and condescending me and my views? You were the one who started quoting me months ago whenever you wanted to be neagtive and its never stopped. Sounds like bullying to me.

I never said it's their fault. I was just explaining the consequences of s-xualising yourself. If I'd said "and they deserve everything they get for that" afterwards, I'd see your point. But no, I'm saying that some people don't realise the pitfalls of s-xualising yourself and it makes me concerned for them.

I never said that she has no dignity or that she's not worthy of respect. I respect her for being the kind of artist she wanted to become, taking the risk of making a free album of very anti commercial music and all the charity work she's done. I just don't like the way that she chooses to represent herself at times, I think it damages her image and isn't healthy for her young fans to see and doesn't send good messages to other women in the music industry.

I think Miley is being genuine, I do really think she wants to do this. But her need to put this side of herself out there so publicaly constantly suggests she knows there's attention and money in this, so she keeps on making the effort to go that bit further to get it. You and plenty of others have said that she clearly knows how the game works and what garners a reaction. Problem is, she doesn't know when its been done to death and isn't going to get a reaction anymore. You can be genuine and not genuine in this scenario. Yes, Madonna may have exploited her s-xuality back in the day but at least she knew when it had gotten old. And I think Miley's exploiting herself because she's not offering anything other than her body in this situation - she's not promoting anything, just herself in general. So if she's representing herself in an explicitly s-xual way, that means that she's suggesting that she wants to be seen as a s-xual commodity, not for her profession or any element of her personality. What she's doing has nothing to do with her music, it's all about presenting her as a s-xual being, nothing more. And I think it's quite dehumanising. Also, I think Terry exploits as lot of the people he photographs, even the ones who want to do it. I don't want Gaga working with him anymore.

I'm not averse to nudity but I think there must always be a point to it. I'm not into gratuitious nudity as it can be very damaging for many reasons. I am fine with nudity presented in non s-xual ways or in tastefully done s-xual ways. However, I think the most explicit stuff should be kept private. I also think Miley's representation of s-xuality is damaging as well.

I'm talking about society's view towards this kind of s-xual display, not my own. I may not have particular likeness for someone who does this, but it wouldn't cause me to disrespect them. But many other people would. I really want women to feel like they are worth more than their body and photoshoots like these tap into that old concept of women being nothing but eye candy for men that I just can't stand. You say that the 50's were a far more stifling time. But I think it was just as bad back then as it is now, just in different ways. I think ultimate policing of s-xuality is bad, but equally so is hypers-xualisation. I'm not in favour of women being pressured to cover up, nor am I in favour of women being pressured to show it off. I am always the middle ground supporter in s-xual matters because extremes are rarely healthy in life, especially when it comes to s-x. But society thinks you can only be strictly on one side of the fence. If you disagree about one representation of s-xuality, it must mean you're a prude who hates s-x. It's so judgemental. limiting and close minded. It's no wonder society is the way it is when we put people into such distinct boxes.

Thing is, I've researched the s-x industry extensively. Believe it or not, I supported this stuff once. Admitedly, when I was too young to even have s-x. Because we think s-x can only be a positive thing at that age because adults do it and we want to be adults. But when i was about 17, my views started to change when I saw the realities of the p**n industry and I've been anti-s-x industry ever since. I've based on my views on stories of actual ex members of the industry and found the truth of all the behind the scenes stuff we never hear about. I don't know who to believe is genuinely happy in the industry anymore because so many of them lie about how they really feel.

I appreciate your different opinion. We all become accustomed to s-x in different ways. But we don't all come to the same conclusions. In my case, I actually changed my beliefs further down the line because the original ones that I thought were fine weren't doing it for me anymore. I don't see my views towards s-x as hateful at all. I'm all for s-x as long as it's healthy and I don't think a lot of modern ways are. I'm against any concept that doesn't take real feelings into account and doesn't have any kind of understanding and respect given to all participants. Anything s-xual can be negative if you go about it the wrong way. It's all about finding that balance. Trust me, I am not anti s-x at all. I agree, that is a damaging attitude, but so is going too far in the opposite direction also.

Let me clarify, I think some people do put their bodies out there because they are secure, it's just that there's many more cases of insecurity when it happens. It's assumed that putting your body on show means you're happy with yourself but it's so often not the case. Get talking to these people and you'll find that they're doing it for acceptance and to try to make themselves feel better. Not all, but a lot. You can respect yourself and show your body and be secure but I'm just saying that being all three things is very rare so it's difficult to tell who is genuine and who isn't. I think it's damaging when we encourage girls to flash flesh to find a confidence within themselves. I don't understand the correlation. Probably because we wouldn't say the same to boys. And if they don't have to do it, why should we? I feel that the best body confidence I got came from my inner self. Believing that I did look good and that no one's perfect anyway. If it all came from s-xualised comments, well, that could have hurt my self esteem a lot. Sex is just one part of being human, but it isn't the most individual of things, as anyone can do it. It's better to find our confidence from our personalities, talents and acheivements because not everyone can excel in those things.

Exactly. Its all become very gimmicky. Gaga saw when her overblown costumes and performances were starting to become too predictable and she was at risk of becoming a parody of herself. So she's wisely toned it down, knowing that that will provide more shock than any meat dress could at this stage. And she could go back to shock factor one day, when the public get bored of her being "normal." But like you're saying, Miley doesn't know when an idea has run its course. I honestly thought she was done with the overtly s-xual stuff after Bangerz, especially when she turned up all classy looking at an awards show and got a teenage runaway to pick up her award. But then she was right back to her old antics again, which felt so backward and like she couldn't come up with any new ideas.

I'm totally with you when you say that we should be allowed to have an opinion on Miley even if it's something Gaga's done before. We don't necessarily agree with everything Gaga's done either.

I totally agree with your words on Terry. There are just too many sketchy stories surrounding him for me to even enjoy his work, despite it's unique look and artistic appeal. 

Regarding damaging her image I think it depends on what she wants her image to be. "Damaging" is subjective. 

And I don't think nudity always needs a reason, just like I think other forms of expression don't need a reason. Gaga doesn't need a "reason" to walk around in lingerie. Katy doesn't need a "reason" to wear a carousel dress. Ke$ha doesn't need a reason to rip up fishnets every night. Lana doesn't need a "reason" to sing romantically about abuse.

Instead of presenting nudity/s-xuality as something that can only be expressed in A, B, and C circumstances, and when expressing them you must use methods 1, 2, and 3, we should be telling people that nudity/s-xuality doesn't require a reason, but it is something that should be done for yourself, not someone else. When you set up a criteria for when it's morally OK you send the message that occurrences of nudity/s-xuality which exist outside of those criteria are meant to be pitied, scorned, and/or viewed as lesser. 

My criteria is: "Do you want to do this?" and "Do you feel comfortable with the potential consequences that will follow?" If the person can answer yes to both, then that's reason enough. 

I do agree with you on the conflicting views we get about s-x. We're told to keep it all covered then get criticized for being a prude, but then we're also told to show it all then get criticized for being a slut. As a woman I totally can testify to these societal "directions" we get, and I can totally testify that it's harmful. I too try my best to exist in that middleground, like you, albeit it seems clear my middleground falls closer to the s-xual side. 

But that's also why I support less "rules" on this kind of thing. We should stop putting expressions of s-x/nudity into "Good" and "Bad" boxes. Put all the options out on the table and let people decide for themselves what is "Good," what is "Bad," what is "Empowering," and what is "Damaging."

When it comes to the **** industry we're reverse.  I was the one dissing it, bringing up the negative stats, and demonizing ****ography when I was a teen, then in my late teens/early 20s I started learning more about it and instead of focusing on the negative sides of the industry I started listening more to the performers and companies who were purposely going against the norm. Studios who wanted to create artistic ****ography, studios that wanted to respect the performers, and performers who were genuinely in it because of an interest in the work. Nowadays I can't even watch a ****o if I don't know the background. (Which makes **** searches very difficult, sadly ) But there is a movement happening in the ****ography industry that is focused on bringing integrity to their line of work, and I respect and support the hell out of that. 

I do agree on what you said about s-x being something that should take feelings and the respect of every individual into account. No matter how someone acts s-xually, their personal feelings and respect should be Numero Uno!

I also agree with finding our sense of confidence from internal things first. Brains over beauty, without a doubt. :yes: However, I do feel that a lot of my internal confidence did come from acceptance of my s-xuality. Not from being s-xual, but from accepting who I am regarding my s-xuality- I feel that needs to be clarified. For me accepting who I am as a s-xual being felt like 'coming out of the closet,' and in some ways it was. And yes, s-x is something "anyone" can do, but it's not just about doing it. It's about finding connections and seeing a more private side of another person. I think that's beautiful, and the ability to express your individual sense of s-xuality with another person (or persons) can be a talent in itself. It can be a form of love and intimacy, of mutual respect of someone's body and mind. If being kind to others is a talent in and of itself, honest expressions of s-xuality too can be a talent. Being genuine isn't always something "anyone" can do, sadly. 

[StrawberryBlond 13,285]

1 hour ago, Kayla said:

I totally agree with your words on Terry. There are just too many sketchy stories surrounding him for me to even enjoy his work, despite it's unique look and artistic appeal. 

Regarding damaging her image I think it depends on what she wants her image to be. "Damaging" is subjective. 

And I don't think nudity always needs a reason, just like I think other forms of expression don't need a reason. Gaga doesn't need a "reason" to walk around in lingerie. Katy doesn't need a "reason" to wear a carousel dress. Ke$ha doesn't need a reason to rip up fishnets every night. Lana doesn't need a "reason" to sing romantically about abuse.

Instead of presenting nudity/s-xuality as something that can only be expressed in A, B, and C circumstances, and when expressing them you must use methods 1, 2, and 3, we should be telling people that nudity/s-xuality doesn't require a reason, but it is something that should be done for yourself, not someone else. When you set up a criteria for when it's morally OK you send the message that occurrences of nudity/s-xuality which exist outside of those criteria are meant to be pitied, scorned, and/or viewed as lesser. 

My criteria is: "Do you want to do this?" and "Do you feel comfortable with the potential consequences that will follow?" If the person can answer yes to both, then that's reason enough. 

I do agree with you on the conflicting views we get about s-x. We're told to keep it all covered then get criticized for being a prude, but then we're also told to show it all then get criticized for being a slut. As a woman I totally can testify to these societal "directions" we get, and I can totally testify that it's harmful. I too try my best to exist in that middleground, like you, albeit it seems clear my middleground falls closer to the s-xual side. 

But that's also why I support less "rules" on this kind of thing. We should stop putting expressions of s-x/nudity into "Good" and "Bad" boxes. Put all the options out on the table and let people decide for themselves what is "Good," what is "Bad," what is "Empowering," and what is "Damaging."

When it comes to the **** industry we're reverse.  I was the one dissing it, bringing up the negative stats, and demonizing ****ography when I was a teen, then in my late teens/early 20s I started learning more about it and instead of focusing on the negative sides of the industry I started listening more to the performers and companies who were purposely going against the norm. Studios who wanted to create artistic ****ography, studios that wanted to respect the performers, and performers who were genuinely in it because of an interest in the work. Nowadays I can't even watch a ****o if I don't know the background. (Which makes **** searches very difficult, sadly ) But there is a movement happening in the ****ography industry that is focused on bringing integrity to their line of work, and I respect and support the hell out of that. 

I do agree on what you said about s-x being something that should take feelings and the respect of every individual into account. No matter how someone acts s-xually, their personal feelings and respect should be Numero Uno!

I also agree with finding our sense of confidence from internal things first. Brains over beauty, without a doubt. :yes: However, I do feel that a lot of my internal confidence did come from acceptance of my s-xuality. Not from being s-xual, but from accepting who I am regarding my s-xuality- I feel that needs to be clarified. For me accepting who I am as a s-xual being felt like 'coming out of the closet,' and in some ways it was. And yes, s-x is something "anyone" can do, but it's not just about doing it. It's about finding connections and seeing a more private side of another person. I think that's beautiful, and the ability to express your individual sense of s-xuality with another person (or persons) can be a talent in itself. It can be a form of love and intimacy, of mutual respect of someone's body and mind. If being kind to others is a talent in and of itself, honest expressions of s-xuality too can be a talent. Being genuine isn't always something "anyone" can do, sadly. 

By "damaging to her image," I mean, people are less likely to take her seriously, meaning they won't want to buy her music or even listen to it. Or if they do, they'll be conditioned to think it's bad. I've seen this happen to artists before when they got too attention seeking or sold out or went through a scandal. Some can recover, some never do. And I can't imagine what's worse when you're an artist, for your work not to be looked at with fairness or for it even to be looked at period.

I get what you're saying about having fixed ways of looking at representations of nudity. We can restrict ourselves and put things too much into a good or bad category. But ultimately, I believe it's because we're trying to go about things in a healthy way. I don't want the participants to feel exploited and I don't want viewers to feel uncomfortable with looking at someone who's clearly feeling exploited. Like I said, it's all coming from a place of compassion. I don't like to see people get hurt. I guess if the person's happy with it, it's fine, but I worry about the long term effects. You can regret something after the fact, especially if you didn't realise there were consequences to begin with.

The only thing is, if we put ideas on the table and let people make up their minds, well...people's minds have become so warped by society that they don't really consider other ways of looking at things. So many people think stripping is empowering, say, because the woman is getting paid for her beauty and she's getting all this money out of a man. But they don't stop to realise that the power is all with the man. He will decide if you will dance for him, he will decide if he wants to tip you, he will decide how many dances you can give him for payment. In the end, you're only getting paid if the men in the club think you're good enough. If you don't meet their standards, you go home with nothing, it being a freelance job. Many strippers don't earn much, it's a myth that they do. Usually, it's just the really pretty ones who have been there the longest that make the real money and the others get peanuts. It's no wonder so many walk after a few months. I don't know how that can be empowering. But so many people don't consider that aspect, they just see the glamorous side that the media presents and think it's positive.

I understand that there is more "humane" p**n out there and the stars are founding their own companies and even working in their own personal studios and homes and using protection and know all the their co-stars. But I still am against it because I don't think making money off your body, putting it out there like a commodity, is healthy even so. I mean, it p**n's going to carry on existing, I can accept this form, but it's still not for me. I think s-x should always be private. I'm totally fine with simulated s-x scenes. They can be very erotic and I can actually find them more alluring and interesting than p**n. When you've seen someone warts and all, there's nothing to go back to, I find, so you get bored and left wanting. There's got to be some mystery there. Sounds so quaint, I know!

Yes, I think there's ways to do s-x that respect everyone involved and I don't like to see that being disregarded. Me personally? I'm actually into being submissive (don't know if that's a surprise, some people might think my no-nonsense attitude would make me more of a domme, but no!) and almost all my fantasises involve me being submissive. BDSM stuff too. Which seems to counteract all this stuff I've been against like the degradation of women and being anti abuse. But these ideas can be done with respect to all involved. The submissive role is just acting, full respect will resume afterwards. The BDSM should only go as far as the partcipants want and there must be safe words and things must stop if the sub starts to feel real pain or simply wants to stop. As long as that respect is there, there's nothing wrong with it. Ideally, because of the nature of things, I could only do this with someone I loved and trusted (no way in hell is a stranger doing this to me). But in p**n, it would be a different story. Things are very extreme to meet viewer demand, the sub gets acts forced upon them they don't want, they have to keep going until the scene is done, they're getting all this done to them by a stranger who may not care about their wellbeing. This is disrespetful, this is unhealthy. I've heard of this very story from p**n stars and its horrific. So, as we can see, there's a "right" way and a "wrong" way. I only hope I meet someone who can let me indulge in these things without treating me like a p**n star, but as a human being.

I ike your intimate interpretations of s-x. You're clearly a person who values a connection in s-x and that's great. I feel this is something that kids need to be taught in school. They need something to counteract all the p**n they're going to inevitably see when they're too young to tell fantasy from reality and start thinking the role of a man is to be dominant and that the role of a woman is to be a degraded victim (I read a lot of stories in a book concerning this and it makes me want to cry). I think what's really s-xy is when we form a connection with another person so we know how to please them and please ourselves, so both people are left satisfied. I can't find anything s-xy about the seedy world of the s-x industry where pleasure is faked and strangers are having s-x with people they can't connect with.

[pink sushi 4,351]

Trashy. 

[Epione 10,896]

She's hot. 

[VTV 10,790]

 

On 11/24/2015, 12:24:12, AmericanHSlave said:

Why would she do that? I'm usually fine with nudity but what does this even show?

for fame, more fame, fashion designers, and vulgarity