Topic: The sexualization of nudity
My Take: As a nudist and as a photographer, I like the poeticism of the phrase "simple nudity". But the reality is that nudity is complex. That's why we keep having these discussions about what nudity means and what it entails.
My belief, and my approach as an artist, is that we should just let nudes be nudes. If somebody interprets them in a nonsexual way, that's fine. If somebody else interprets them in a sexual way - well, that's fine, too.
Trying to interpret the artist's intent can be interesting as an academic exercise, but I think that trying to regulate images based on something so nebulous is a fool's errand. That's why I prefer the mechanical approach to content filtering that you more often encounter on photo sharing sites, to the more subjective approach that social media sites often use.
Forget whether there is a sexual "context", or what the intent of an instance of nudity might be. Either you can see certain body parts or not - implied nudity does not warrant censorship, in my view - and either there are sexual acts depicted or there are not.
I'm not saying it's always straightforward to answer these questions (e.g., should visible arousal be considered a sex act?, and should men and women have to follow different rules?), but it's a far more effective (and fairer) methodology than trying to govern people's thoughts.
No comments:
Post a Comment