Spoiler alert!!! ...2

I’m watching Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. It’s on HBO, which I have here at the beach.

When Scabbers, the rat, turns into Peter Pettigrew, he’s wearing clothes. 

Okay, fine. It’s magic. The clothes he was wearing when he last turned are still with him.

Also, it’s a kids’ story/movie.

I can accept that.

Except that several minutes later, when he turns back into a rat, he shrinks out of his clothes and leaves them behind.

So which is it? I vote for nudity. It makes sense. 

Spoiler alert!!!

Last night I watched The Hangover part II. 

The guys from the first movie went to Thailand for a wedding. They had a few drinks then woke up the next morning with no idea where they were or what happened the night before, and they had to piece it all together in order to find a friend they’d lost somewhere along the way.

Same basic plot as the first movie, just with different details in a different setting.

Oh, there was a scene with some penises.

The gang finds a strip club in Bangkok where they’d apparently been the night before. They were talking with one of the girls, and, well, she turned out to have a penis, as did all the “girls” there.

Early in the scene, before the big “reveal”, I knew they were going to have penises. It just seemed the obvious thing to me. So, then when I did see the penises, they had basically no impact. I assume it’s supposed to be hilariously shocking. Or shockingly hilarious? It was neither.

Was it just that I saw the “joke” coming so it wasn’t funny? Am I jaded? Or just immune to the humor of the penis?

Or, was it just not that funny?

Anyone? Anyone?

reading & coffee

This is what I’m doing this morning. I’ve piddled around online a bit, but this is the plan—keep doing this.

Yesterday I finished The United States of Atlantis by Harry Turtledove. It’s the second in a set of three (so far). I liked the first a lot, but this one was so-so. A lot of repetitious dialogue, etc., and a good bit of the time it just seemed like he was setting up the situation for the next book.

If you’re not familiar with Harry Turtledove, he writes mostly alternate history. It’s like historical fiction, except there’s always a “what if” element that creates the setting. Like, what if the South won the American Civil War? Or, in the case of these Atlantic books, what if the eastern chunk of North America—from the east coast to roughly the Mississippi River—were actually a separate continent out in the Atlantic Ocean? And then he writes a story set there. He’ll often use some actual historical characters along with fictional characters. In The United States of Atlantis there are fictional characters who are analogous to various historical characters from the American Revolution.

Anyway... I just started Ray Bradbury’s Something Wicked This Way Comes. And that’s my plan for the rest of the morning, which, at this point, isn’t very long. So, maybe it’ll also be part of my afternoon—that, and coffee, and being naked.  Whee!

One Year Old

Happy Birthday!

...or Anniversary!

My first post on this blog was one year ago today. And I’ve been posting every day since then.

Okay, I did cheat a couple of times. One time I forgot and another time I fell asleep before posting a blog for the day. Both those times I posted within half an hour or maybe an hour at most of midnight. And then I back dated the blog an hour or so.

Last month I was on the road for several days, and I wasn’t sure I’d be able to get online to post. So before I left, I did posts for those several days and set them to post automatically on those days I’d be gone. But I don’t consider that cheating.

Anyway, with those exceptions, I’ve posted something every day for a year, some days more than one post. And I have to say, it’s not always been easy. There’ve been several times when I doubted I’d be able to keep up the daily posting rate. And there’ve certainly been days when I was lazy and posted something that took relatively little effort. But I’d challenge anyone to do a daily blog that dealt with a specific subject matter and was not just a re-blogging thing, like tumblr can be.

I think the chief difficulty is that I’ve generally wanted to do something worth posting, something different than previous posts, and something as good or better than previous posts. I don’t think I’ve always succeeded in that. But I accept that always doing something different and better isn’t possible. I think that’s just part of the nature of such frequent output: it’s probably inevitable that quality will vary at times.

I was chatting with a new friend recently about the blog. She was looking at it for the first time and was telling me posts that she liked, and a favorite so far. I’ve done so many posts that I’d have a hard time selecting a favorite. Then again, in life I’ve often been reluctant to pick favorites, unless it’s something with a small number of options—like seasons. (I think my favorite season is fall.)

But I’d love to know what posts are other people’s favorites, and why. Or least favorites—also instructive.

-    -    -    -    -

Earlier this year, in the spring or early summer, I decided that I would keep up the daily posting until today—you know, assuming that I made it this far. I did, so yay me! From here on, I will not be posting every day. But I am not ending the blog, nor taking it down. I’ll keep posting whenever I have something to post.

-    -    -    -    -

One big thing that’s come out of this blog is an increased interest in photography in general. I’ve been taking lots of pictures of various things. But mostly that’s been a solitary endeavor. And I’d really like to make it less solitary—work with people, take pictures of people (naked or not), and share pictures with people. I don’t know where I’ll end up in the future, but if I’m near you, get in touch and maybe I’ll take your picture.

-    -    -    -    -

So...Happy Cake Day! 

Now, send me presents. You know, submissions and suggestions and, of course, comments. 

Naked Opera 9 (a miscellaneous threesome)

So, I’m spring cleaning, in the fall. Well, almost fall, so last-day-of-summer cleaning.

Also, I’m not sure I have enough to say about these three clips to make them separate entries.

Wagner’s Parsifal at Teatro La Fenice in Venice, 2005:

I don’t know what’s going on here. I don’t know why there’s a mix of clothed and naked people. But it does conform to an often-seen approach to nudity in opera—that is, the singers are clothed, and it’s non-singing extras or dancers who are naked.

Gounod’s Faust (I don’t know the production info. Anyone?):

Another not-unpopular choice—one or two naked people, again, not singing, surrounded by clothed principals and clothed chorus.

Verdi’s Rigoletto at the Royal Opera House in London, 2012:

Ah...what every opera needs—an orgy. 

Aftermath

So, to briefly continue from yesterday’s blog...what now?

I’d planned to move, I’d already turned down a little bit of fall work where I had been living. Well, I wasn’t gonna move to Mississippi without the job at that school. But the reasons for wanting to leave are still true: not enough work, and the “rut” of my personal life. There’s just not much there for me, nothing really keeping me there where I was living. And I’d mentally prepared to leave. So, I still feel that I should leave.

I moved out of my apartment at the end of last month, and I’ve been staying with a friend in another town for several weeks. I’m going to visit some other friends this weekend and visit my parents for a few days. Then, I’m going back to where I was before, mainly to house-sit and pet-feed while some folks I know are gone for a couple of weeks. But after that, I have no idea where I’ll go.

I had looked into another accompanying job at another university, but they hired someone else. And, honestly, I’m not even sure if I want that sort of job right now. I think I need to find a place where I want to live and then look for some work that I can stand to do. I’m not exactly sure how to go about doing that. I really can’t afford to go try out a bunch of cities to see which I like.

Bleh.

Yesterday I watched a TED talk in which the speaker (Stefan Sagmeister) was recommending that people take sabbaticals from their jobs. They increase productivity, etc. 

Maybe I’ll do that—just go away for a few months...again. I did that several years ago; I went to the beach for part of the winter, after having met this incredible woman by whom I was “undone”.

The idea is appealing. But I will need to find some work, some kind of income before too long.

If only I could get someone to pay me to be naked.

Hmm...art class modeling? I should look into that. 

So, what happened to Mississippi?

Okay, this is gonna be a long one. Take your time.

I’ve put off writing about it for a while, as I knew it would be quite a lengthy entry, and the thought of typing it up and trying to put it into some order that makes sense was a little daunting. 

So, I may ramble a bit. Sorry.

-   -   -   -   - 

I was planning to move to Mississippi a month ago, on August 20th. Later that week I would’ve been starting work at a public state university there. It was the school where I went to college, and I had worked there before, most recently 2½ years ago.

Now, I wasn’t super-excited about Mississippi—I mean, it’s Mississippi. But I’d been feeling like I was in a rut where I was living the past few years, and there was work in Mississippi. Along with the “rut” of my personal life (or lack thereof) I’ve been significantly under-employed for a while. And they were “desperate for accompanists” to quote one of the voice teachers at the school there. So, I was going back there, with the idea that I may look into New Orleans as a possible place to live and work in the future.

I had been talking on and off during the summer with the faculty member who organizes and assigns accompanists at the school. (Accompanists are pianists who accompany other musicians. That’s part of what I do for a living).

I had given my notice to my landlord here in North Carolina that I was leaving, and I’d told people here that I was leaving and wouldn’t be around to accompany here, nor to do shows, etc. in the fall.

I’d gotten rid of a bunch of my stuff which I didn’t want to move.

I had gone down there a few weeks before and found an apartment, signed a lease and all that.

Everything was set.

Then on the Friday afternoon before I was supposed to leave I got an email from the director of the music department.

It said, in part, this:

I need to inform you that due to my knowledge of some recently discovered material on your social media site I am not comfortable hiring you in any capacity at this time.  If you have any questions or wish to discuss my decision you may call me at my office number next week.

Now, I had no intention of waiting around all weekend to get more info. I’d made plans. I’d made financial obligations securing an apartment and setting up cable, electricity, etc. So, I called the music department director’s office—no answer—and then his cell phone. I had his cell phone number from before when I was there.

He said that it wasn’t the best time for him, but I needed to know if there was any chance that this was something we could work out. I needed to know right then if this was a definite thing. Because if it was definite, I needed to get working right away on an alternate plan.

So we talked briefly.

I don’t remember everything exactly how he said it. My mind was spinning around with a sort of “what am I gonna do now!?” quality. But he did make it clear that I would not be working there. He also seemed to be clearly saying that someone in Human Resources had become aware of this, had contacted him, and that HR wouldn’t be willing to hire me—it wasn’t just him. He seemed unwilling to specify what it was that made him uncomfortable. I said something like “I assume this is about my blog”. He said yes.

Now, I do have more than one blog, and I didn’t specify, nor did he, anything about this blog, about nudity, etc. But it’s quite obvious to me that he meant this blog, and the subject matter one can find here.

I asked if there was some particular policy about this, and he replied with various comments to the effect that it was bad to post such things, etc. The clear impression I got was that he thought I should be ashamed of myself. He didn’t use those specific words. I really wish I’d taken notes, or recorded the conversation. But the things that I took from the conversation were that the decision was made and that wouldn’t change, that Human Resources was involved in the decision, and that he was personally disapproving of me.

Well, I called my landlord, arranged to stay a little longer, through the end of the month if needed.

So that Monday, instead of moving, I wrote the head of the music department this:

I have a couple of questions, or requests, perhaps.
Could you give me the name of the person in Human Resources who informed you of this situation, or who made the decision to not hire me based on materials I've published on the internet?
Also, in our phone conversation Friday afternoon, I believe you did not actually answer my question: is there some particular rule or policy at the university which I would be violating if I worked there and published such materials? And if there is such a policy, could you tell me exactly what it is and where I might find it listed?
Thank you.

His reply the next day:

Sorry for the delay, but school starts tomorrow and I am slammed.  When you called Friday... I wasn't prepared for the conversation and was definitely distracted.  So, with that said allow me to be clear.  The decision not to hire you was mine and mine alone.  I am responsible for all hirings in the School of Music.  As the person responsible for those hirings I have to use my best judgment, based on all the information available to me, to hire people that I feel reflect the values, character, good judgment and integrity I expect from all our faculty.  I also need to ensure that our students are in a safe learning environment.  The offer to hire you was rescinded and no further explanation is necessary.
You don't need a name in Human Resources, as they did not make this decision.  They only counseled me on my options.  As you were never an employee there were no policies to be violated.  This was my judgment call.

Well, I thought that was rather insulting to me. I mean, the obvious implication was that he feels I’m lacking in values, character and integrity, and that my being there would create an unsafe environment for the students. I really don’t know how he’d get that from this blog. I actually think this blog shows character and integrity, as well as an artistic frame of mind. The “integrity” thing I find especially insulting. I would challenge him to find anyone I’ve worked with in the past for any significant length of time who would say I was lacking in integrity. Or probably character, for that matter.

And I’m not sure what values the job, any job at a public university, requires. Perhaps a decent work ethic? Showing up, doing your job well, etc.? And I certainly do that.

So. The unsafe environment issue: I feel certain that he is reacting to a relatively small amount of what’s on this blog, and that a more complete understanding of what the blog is would not cause someone to react that way. 

(I’ll address this a bit more later.)

That leaves “good judgment”. Okay, yes. I suppose that is a real issue. I concede that it’s not unreasonable to ask if my doing this blog, and posting links on facebook, reflects good judgment. However, I don’t post to everyone on facebook. I post to my “friends” with some exceptions, those exceptions including most of the people who I currently work with. And if someone meets me and googles my name, I don’t think they’ll actually find this blog with my name. Maybe I’m wrong there, but I’m fairly sure about that. My name isn’t actually on this blog. And I’m fairly sure that people have found my other blog (which does have my name) while trying to find this blog by searching for “naked blog” with my name.

Anyway...

Let’s see...where am I?

Ah.

Now, since this department director had never actually referred to this blog nor specified the material that he found problematic, I responded with:

I certainly understand about the beginning of the semester. And I thank you for the clarification.
One further clarification would be helpful and greatly appreciated.
I want to be sure that we're talking about the same thing and not just obliquely referring to it; I want to be sure that I am not making any assumptions here about what you're saying. In your email from Friday you referred to "material on your social media site". Well, I do post a lot of things online, and I can imagine various people taking issue with various things I've posted. And I do not know you especially well.
So, can you be specific about the material I have published online which you find problematic, which causes you to find fault in my character and integrity, and which you fear would create an unsafe environment for your students?
Again, I just want to be certain that there is no misunderstanding between us on this issue, as I consider openness, directness, and honesty to be very important.
Thank you for your time.

Now, I feel that was a reasonable question. He and I are both educated adults, who should be able to have an open conversation about this. He rescinded a job offer that I had been counting on, and because of which I had made plans and obligations.

He didn’t answer.

I wrote once more a week or two later, just saying basically the same thing.

He still hasn’t responded.

I don’t really expect him to respond. I think he’s made his decision and, from the end of his last email to me, doesn’t think anything more needs to be said about it.

I, however, don’t let go of some things easily. I want to actually hear him say (or read his writing) what he finds problematic, and how exactly this reflects so poorly on me, how exactly my being there would be a threat for the department.

Because I think he is reacting based on fear. So, I want him to actually explain that he sees open and honest nudity and discussion of nudity as a bad thing (perhaps a sin?), and that he is afraid that the person who is naked and putting that nakedness online has a sexual/predatory agenda.

Yes, those are assumptions, but he leaves me no choice but to make assumptions. I would gladly apologize for an incorrect assumption if he would actually have this conversation and convince me that I’m wrong about his motivations.

See, I think that anyone who is an artist and/or an educator (or even a reasonably well-educated person) should be able to look at this blog and understand what it is.

This blog is, in fact, many things. At times it’s a personal and artistic exploration; it’s sometimes political and social commentary. This blog sometimes talks about news or current events; it contains reviews or responses to books, film, theatre—arts and entertainment—that I’ve read or seen, etc.

I don’t require that everyone like it, or support it, or even approve of it. But I do ask that people try to understand what it is and appreciate it for that.

But this man—despite his being a musician and a teacher—is not acting in this situation as an artist, nor even an educator. He’s acting as an administrator. As “the man”. He’s filling a role that has historically often been at odds with the artist: the guy upholding and defending the status quo; the guy making sure that everything is squeaky clean and doesn’t challenge anyone; the guy who wants “art” to be comfortable. Well yes, sometimes art is nice and comfortable and non-threatening. But often it is not. Art can be ugly and uncomfortable and challenging. Art often needs to be those things.  

I simply think he is wrong in his response to the blog—I assume it’s the blog, the nakedness in the blog, anyway; because he won’t say it; like it’s a cursed word: naked or penis or whatever.

I honestly don’t know what else I might have “published” online that would elicit the comments that he did make, nor to speak to me in our phone conversation in a manner which made me feel that he was trying to shame me.

I’m sure it’s the blog.

And this man’s apparent unwillingness to talk about it reminds me of a former friend who stopped talking to me and wouldn’t tell me why. And another former “friend” who, based on third-hand knowledge of something I did ranted on facebook about my actions and motivations, then unfriended me as soon as I got her to admit she was talking about me. And all the former facebook friends who silently unfriended me in the several months after I started posting links to this blog on facebook. It also reminds me of the feeling I’ve gotten that some people now think of me as only a naked person—as if now that I’m doing this blog, everything else about me, everything that we could’ve had a conversation about has now disappeared and I’m just “the naked blog guy”.

I’m still the same person.  

I have considerable integrity.

And the only danger I would pose to students is that I might encourage them to learn and think and question and be critical; to read and look and listen; to investigate; to not just blindly (or deafly) accept what they’re told.

Yes, I do actually recognize the danger in that.

I guess I’m an idealist in that I’d like to think the head of the music program at my alma mater, or at any school, would not be someone who can’t or won’t understand what I’m doing. But I suppose schools are not really in the business of encouraging open and honest discussion and exploration.

I find that sad.

Uh...what else?

Right.

On the legal issue...

Several people have suggested that I contact a lawyer about all this. But it’s not as if I want to force them to hire me. At this point, I don’t want to work for that guy. Maybe if I were already there in Mississippi might be more likely to look into those kind of avenues.

But I do see this as a clear First Amendment “free speech” issue. If I was already working there, and they fired me over this, I could probably win a lawsuit against them. 

I didn’t have an actual contract. But I never had a contract with them 2½ years ago. I don’t think they do “contracts” for accompanists. However, when I was applying for an apartment there, the woman I’d been in contact with at the school sent the realtor some kind of statement confirming that I would be working at the school. However, she, like her boss, has not replied to my messages asking about it, and the realtor won’t send me a copy of it either.

Ya know, If I were gay and this were a blog exploring and advocating homosexuality, or if I were a conservative Muslim and this were a blog discussing and advocating conservative Islam (but not violence or terrorism), then the school and this department head would be on much more precarious footing in withdrawing a job offer based on material I’d put online. 

-   -   -   -   - 

Okay, enough. 

See, it was long.

Feel free to comment or ask questions. (Or express outrage?)

Topless Duchess No More

(See yesterday’s blog “Topless Duchess” as this is an update to that story.)

The French court ruled today in favor of the Prince and Duchess against the French gossip magazine. The magazine is ordered to pay 2,000 euros in damages and face a possible fine of 10,000 euros per day for not turning over the pictures and files, etc. to the lawyers or representatives of the royal couple. The magazine is further banned from republishing or selling the photos at the risk of a 100,000 euro fine.

From The Telegraph today:

The ruling cited article 9 of the civil code that states that “any person, whatever his fame, his present or future functions, has the right to the respect of his private life and image.”
The photos were taken from a public road several hundred metres from the private residence where the couple were staying. The court agreed that the couple “could legitimately suppose (the residence) was sheltered from prying eyes” and that the violation of their privacy was “particularly intrusive”.
It described the magazine’s use of the photos as a “brutal exhibition” of their intimacy.

Meanwhile Prince William and Duchess Kate continue their Far East & South Pacific tour.

from The Huffington Post

from The London Evening Standard

Topless Duchess

British Prince William & his wife, Kate (Duchess of Cambridge) have gone to court—well, their lawyers have—in France to ask that recent topless pictures of the Duchess be prevented from further use. And they’re suing for damages, apparently calling the publication a “grotesque” invasion of privacy. 

The pictures were published in the French gossip magazine Closer, and can be found online. 

My feeling is this: she was sunbathing topless on a balcony which was viewable from some publically accessible place—granted, the photographer seems to have used a significantly high-power zoom lens—so they shouldn’t be so insanely outraged that these pictures have come out. If you’re that concerned about the public being aware that you do, in fact, have breasts and nipples, then you should always keep them securely covered up when near cameras and when outside or near any windows or mirrors that might be in line of sight of windows. 

Seriously, this is just about preserving the traditional, uptight, “proper” image of the British Royal family, which is an outdated institution in my opinion. To pretend that these are not people, but rather iconic demi-gods who’d never engage in any untoward behaviour is just craziness. It perpetuates an unrealistic ideal of behaviour which could, in time, contribute to unhealthy or perhaps more extreme behaviours by members of the royal family. Pushing down impulsive feelings, by saying “we can’t behave this way or that way, doesn’t make those impulses go away. They just get channeled into other areas, and it all comes out somehow, somewhere, at some time. 

Come on, that’s just PSYCH 101.

The Telegraph, the online version of The Daily Telegraph (a 150+ year old conservative British newspaper), published this video & article, in which the young royal couple visited the Solomon Islands...

...where topless native women in traditional dress greeted them:

Ursula Martinez, I love you

Ursula Martinez:

I love her.

Okay, not really. I don’t know Ursula Martinez. I imagine she’d be an interesting person to know—smart and funny and not uptight. Or maybe not.

Anyway, I do love this piece of hers called “Hanky Panky”. It’s a magic trick/striptease.

I first saw it online somewhere maybe a year ago or more, and have come across it a few times since then.

I thought it was hilarious.

Still do.

Now, despite dabbling a little as a kid, I am not a magician. But I would guess the magic trick involved in “Hanky Panky” is probably not all that complicated. It’s her performance that makes it great. The music choice, the choreography, her facial expressions, the nods and winks to the audience...they’re all perfect.

Well. She had always kept it as a live performance piece, and not put it online herself. But a video of “Hanky Panky” was apparently made and put online without her permission. Then she started getting creepy emails from men in response to it (along with some not-so-creepy emails from men & women.)

A few years later, in response to the whole thing, she created a show called “My Stories, Your Emails”.  

Here she is talking about it in an interview:

I was going to post that original “Hanky Panky” video. Buuuut...in light of what she has to say about it in the interview, I decided against it. (If you’re really interested, I’m sure you can find it online easily enough.)

Her website, ursulamartinez.com, describes some other pieces she’s done. 

I’d love to see any of those, really.

“A Family Outing”

“Viva Croydon!”

“Curing Homosexuality”

...Or to meet and actually get to know her. Then, who knows? Maybe one day I really could say “Ursula Martinez, I love you.”

“Dawn Gets Naked”

I happened upon this last night, after posting yesterday’s entry:

“Dawn Gets Naked”

It’s a 1-hour BBC “special”...well, maybe it’s not all that special. It’s one of a series of shows in which Dawn Porter, a British TV “presenter”, explores various issues.

Anyway, it’s not bad. She does ask a few interesting questions.

But I’ve noticed more and more videos online that seem to be British TV programs exploring nudity. I wrote about another such show not long ago, “My Daughter, the Teenage Nudist”. I wonder if this general topic is just being used for the titillation effect and to boost ratings. Or does it reflect a broadening interest in nudity among the young (and no-so-young) folks watching the BBC? Maybe both.

The video above is part 1 of 4. Here are the other 3 parts:

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Sancta Susanna (naked opera 8)

Sancta Susanna by Paul Hindemith

I believe this is from a production at Opéra de Lyon with Agnes Selma Weiland as Susanna 

and Magdalena Anna Hofmann as Klementia.

I had never heard of this opera until this evening when I was looking for something to write about. 

And now, I only know what I’ve read on Wikipedia (see the link above, at the top).

It sounds interesting. Has anybody out there ever seen a production?

New Camera (4)

I got a “new” camera yesterday. It’s not new, it’s used. It’s a Canon PowerShot A40.

I saw it on craigslist for $20. I was thinking maaaaybe the memory card I have in my other camera might fit.

Yeah, not even close. Here’s the new one.

It new memory card cost $32. And I have yet another memory card in my phone. Why can’t they all use the same stuff? Bleh.

The main reason I got the camera is that it seems to be able to do the stuff my old camera-phone does—sepia, manual control of brightness, etc—and probably a lot of what my other camera does. That one is basically a “point and click” type thing.

The “new” one has an “auto” setting which means the camera decides what to do based on the conditions it’s sensing.  (That’s sort of what the “old” one does.) But the manual setting has a lot of options, which seem to use some photography-oriented terminology. That means I’ll have to learn what that stuff means, and that’s good.  

I’m hoping I can just use this one “new” camera instead of using both the other camera and the old phone. Plus it looks like a camera. Sure, I guess that’s a vanity issue—that it looks like a camera instead of a phone. But I do feel that if I’m using something that looks like a camera, people will take me more seriously. Obviously, that’s not so much for the naked self-portraits, but for taking pictures of other people and things, which I’ve been continuing to do some. (See my tumblr.) 

Oh yeah... I downloaded the manual, which is about 180 pages long, hoping it’d help me figure out some basic how-to stuff. But I don’t know if I have the patience to go through that whole thing. Maybe I’ll just experiment and try to figure out what works.

My using this camera will be dependent on whether I can get the pictures to leave the camera and go into my computer. I plugged it into my computer last night, and the driver failed to install, twice. So I looked for some help online, and eventually found a couple of people who’d had the same problem. And I submitted an email question at Canon’s website this morning. The solution is basically this: it’s a 10-year old camera and the current versions of windows aren’t gonna work directly with this camera; you’ll have to get a memory card reader, which should be relatively inexpensive.

So, I shall be looking for an inexpensive memory card reader while I’m out this afternoon. (I think I’m gonna see a movie.)

pornish

Here is the topic I was writing about a week or so ago when a rant about something else took over:

Why do so many male nudes seem pornish?

There exists a strong tradition in Western art of female nudes, but not so much of male nudes. Yes, there are male nudes in Western art, but if one thinks of a nude, I suppose it’s typical to imagine a female nude. That’s just sort of the standard.

There is, of course, a strong tradition of pornography and pornographic imagery. So, when making nude male images, maybe it’s just easy to sort of slip into that kind of imagery, the sorts of poses, etc, that one might find in pornography.

Or maybe it’s that a lot of male nude images have been incorporated into porn. Okay, I don’t feel so strongly about that point, or the possibility that it’s the real reason.

But here’s something I do feel much more strongly about:

Nudity tends to equal sex for a lot of people. It just does, even some people who like to see themselves as liberal-minded and enlightened folk. It’s just in there. (I’ve written before about this stuff: the way our culture sexualizes nudity and encourages guilt.) And in our culture, the masculine sexual identity seems so very focused on the penis. Sometimes one’s genitalia may be called one’s “sex”. Much like the cultural “ideal” of oversized breasts and tiny waists for women, there exists this sort of “ideal” of the large penis for men, along with various other masculine “ideals”. The easiest place to see an unapologetically uncovered penis is in porn and erotica, and of course in those settings, it’s generally an erect penis.

So I think there’s a certain kind of, maybe unspoken, pressure for a man to appear at his “largest”, i.e., his most fully erect, in nudes. Or at least a pressure to present his “sex” as indication of his sex.

This is, of course, in the “full-frontal”, non-obscured, not “implied” but fully revealed nude. (If you’re not familiar with “implied nudes”, the whole idea of the “implied nude” or, as I’ve seen it lately, simply “implied” is a sort of PG-13 version: no genitalia shown, and no female nipples; but showing enough to imply that the model is actually nude.)

This sort of not-really-nude nude seems to me like the non-nude sex scene in TV and movies. I don’t’ really get it. I’ve seen some hot, sweaty, intense sex being had by people who are just wearing too much clothing. Sure, I guess for some people that’s a thing. But if those people on the screen are anywhere near as hot as they look, why are they still wearing all those clothes? Every time I see that sort of thing, it takes me out of the moment, away from the story or scene or whatever, and makes me wonder why they’re so nearly-fully-clothed. Of course, then I’m out of the movie or show entirely, because I know the reason has something to do with ratings or censorship or maybe an actor’s discomfort with nudity. And that gets me going off on a little mini-rant in my head.

-   -   -   -   -

Well, I’ve sort of gotten off topic again. I did just watch a movie yesterday that had several of that sort of athletically intense sex scenes with fully clothed participants. The same movie had no problem at all showing people being shot: blood, guts, brains even, flying out of newly-made holes in people.

Rant. Rant, rant, rant. 

“My Daughter, the Teenage Nudist”

I found this “documentary” yesterday:

“My Daughter, the Teenage Nudist”

My Daughter The Teenage Nudist by vivrenu-tv

(I found it here: iNAKED.)

It seems to be a program made for British TV.

It focuses on 2 main groups: one, an 18(?) year old girl named Molly and her friends who are exploring public or group nakedness; and two, these people: nakedvegancooking.com. 

There’s also a guy who is trying to recruit new young members for a naturist group.

One thing that’s mentioned briefly that I wish they’d emphasized a little more is the idea that “naturists” or “nudists” are not necessarily naked 24 hours a day every day.

Someone once suggested that I must be naked all the time. Well, if I’m at home and it’s not too cold, then I most likely am naked. But if someone is coming over, I put something on...unless they just drop by unannounced, or significantly earlier than expected. But that basically never happens. I mean, people don’t even come by announced that much.

Another thing that was mentioned in the program, and which is related to my post from a few days ago, is that if someone is naked all the time they must be really comfortable with their body. One guy responded to that idea by basically saying no, he’s not, but he’s getting much better thanks to being naked.

So while this isn’t necessarily the best video that could possibly be made about nudism, it’s not bad. And it examines the issue in a non-sexualized, non-titillating way. Also it verifies those couple of things I’ve said about being naked. (Yay! It’s not just me.)

-     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -

Here’s a morning news clip with a couple of the same folks who were in that longer video. 

Last night

I started out to write about something else today, but this took over. I’ll try to finish the original topic later this week.

(Yes, this is a rant, and no, there are no pictures.)

I’m pretty sure I’ve written about this before, but... I was talking with a friend last night, and one thing that came up was that this blog has helped build my confidence about my body. Now, I wasn’t ashamed of my body before. I didn’t have the kind of feelings about my body that would keep me from being naked, or make me terrified of the idea of someone else seeing me naked. I mean, obviously not because I started this blog.

To me, those kinds of attitudes just seem insanely ridiculous. I cannot imagine actually feeling that way myself. However, I do understand that those kinds of feelings are real and horrible for some people.

To anyone who has those kinds of feelings, I’d suggest spending some time with your body. Get to know it. Look at it. Don’t be afraid. Or maybe be afraid, but don’t let the fear paralyze you; don’t let it control you. Expose your body to, if nothing else, at least the air in your bedroom, or bathroom, or somewhere. And then be bold. Claim your body and its right to be, without apology and without covering.

Anyway...

I used to feel about my body that it was okay, and I was okay with it. I liked some parts more than others; there were areas that needed work but which I really never bothered to work on; you know...whatever. I was okay with it.

However, I did feel that I had a small penis. Not really, really tiny, but small. Noticeably smaller than average.

The thing is, I didn’t actually have a realistic idea of what average was. I wasn’t exposed to a lot of penises in my daily life. And the ones I did see were generally in porn. So yes, compared to those, my penis is small. Sure, I knew in my brain that those porn-penises were on average rather large and I shouldn’t be concerned with comparing myself to that. In fact, I imagined that some straight women or gay men might find such phallic abundance to be a little scary. And sure, I’d read a few books—things like Sex for Dummies; yes, there is such a book, and Dr. Ruth wrote it—and again in my brain I knew that my penis wasn’t exceptionally small. But I still had that feeling.

But it wasn’t just about penis size. I’m a small-ish guy. I’m not exceptionally short, but I’m kind of short and fairly thin. Not really muscular. I’m not all those things that men are “supposed” to be. I would compare it to the sort of pressure that women get from magazines and movies, etc. in our culture to be a certain size or shape or whatever. It’s not quite that strong a pressure, but it’s definitely there. It’s not easy for a guy growing up being small.

Well, once I started doing this blog a couple of things happened. One, I got some compliments from people about how I looked. Some were general comments, while others seemed to be specifically about my penis. (See an earlier entry: “impressive”.) And two, I sometimes looked for images to include in various topics that I wanted to write about. And in looking for specifically non-porn nudity, more and more of the penises I found were not so huge. Also as I looked more and more at the pictures I was taking of myself, I felt more and more that I looked okay.

I still feel like there are parts that I ought to work on but which I probably won’t put a ton of effort into. And the difference between how I felt about my body before the blog and now isn’t a really huge difference, but then again, I already felt mostly okay about myself. But I do feel better, more confident. Yes, I could feel even better, mostly if I started exercising, working out, whatever. But I know that this blog has helped me feel better about my body.

I recently asked someone to pose for me, who considered it but replied that they weren’t comfortable enough with their body to do it. I thought that was really a shame. This happened to be a very attractive person who I think has a great body. But it would’ve been a shame even it wasn’t a conventionally attractive person.

We should all try to like our bodies, even if we can’t love them yet. They’re our bodies, right? We don’t get another body. So why not try to find the things that are great about our bodies and celebrate that?

I honestly and most sincerely believe that if people were more accustomed to seeing real, “normal” (or even not “normal”), average, everyday bodies undressed, it would be tremendously helpful for a lot of people’s self-esteem...that is, if we could get over the shame and horror that someone else might be seeing us. And if we didn’t hide away and shame ourselves, our bodies, we’d be better off psychologically. I’m not suggesting that everyone go naked 24 hours a day and in all locations. Sometimes it’s too cold. And sometimes we need something protecting our skin from the sun.

Someone once suggested to me that if people—specifically women— were more commonly naked, then men would go around with erections all the time, and that would be just awful.

Well, no, they wouldn’t. For one thing, past a certain age, men tend to require actual physical manipulation to achieve and sustain an erection. And anyway, an erection doesn’t have to be a scary, awful thing. I guess that’s one of the reasons that nudists carry towels. But more importantly, we would get used to seeing naked people, and we would stop automatically sexualizing nudity, so men wouldn’t always have erections all day—even the younger guys.

Don’t be afraid of nudity. And, for that matter, don’t be afraid of sex. People are sexual. 

Now if you’ve specifically been hurt or victimized in such a way that makes it very painful for you to deal with such things, then I say I’m so very sorry that such things have happened to you, and I hope that you are getting help to deal with those issues; I hope that in time you can come to a happier, healthier place concerning sex.

Otherwise, to everyone else who has issues about sex, I say get over it; don’t be a slave you some moralistic shame or fear-based ideology that you were taught as a child. Put away childish things...and childish attitudes. Make a damn effort. 

The Rite of Spring

My first semester in college I took a music class—I think it was Intro to Music Lit, one of those courses for music majors that you were supposed to take before your main music history classes—in which, at some point half-way through the semester, we watched a video of part of The Rite of Spring. 

The Rite of Spring, or Le sacre du printemps, is a ballet with music by Igor Stravinsky.

And Vaslav Nijinsky

choreographed the original production for the Ballets Russes in Paris in 1913. Both the music and the choreography were considered outrageous and nearly caused a riot by the audience.

It was definitely “pushing the envelope” in its day.

The score is now considered a major work of early 20th century “classical” music.

Well, when I watched this video in that class, just a little over 20 years ago, it wasn’t “outrageous”, but to me it seemed quite new and a little shocking. There was some nudity.

(AHHH! Naked people! AHHH!)

There was a solo dance in which the female soloist sort of danced her dress off. I didn’t know the piece then. I didn’t know that it is often performed with nudity. I was just surprised by the fact that her dress was falling down and she didn’t stop dancing, and no one stopped her to tell her. I thought at first that perhaps it was just one of those live performance accidents, but it eventually became quite clear to me that she couldn’t not be aware of this situation.

I don’t remember what the class discussion involved after we watched the video. So I don’t recall if the nudity was even brought up.

I have occasionally looked for that version, but I haven’t found it yet. I don’t recall any names—the dancers or company involved.

(None of these are from that version.)

Thinking about it now, I find it shockingly ridiculous that I found it surprising and shocking and had never seen any artistic performance before then which included nudity. And I can’t imagine I was the only one in the class who had that same level of ignorance or, if you’ll pardon the pun, that lack of exposure.

We still find nudity shocking today—at least nudity that doesn’t fit into certain acceptable or expected categories. Naked babies are fine. Nakedness in pornography is pretty-much a “given”. Nakedness in (some) cable TV and movies is okay as long as it’s set up right: a love scene or a shower scene or if it’s done for comedic effect. But it must be “pointed to” in a sense; it must be filmed in such a way as to bring it to our attention and played for the most titillation possible.

(BLECH! We suck.)

Ya know folks, artists are entertainers. Yes, we sometimes present nice, fun, sweet, pretty, socially non-problematic work which is extremely unlikely to offend anyone. 

BUT!!! We also are instigators, commentators, instructors, and many other things ending with “-ors”. Sometimes we present challenging, uncomfortable, ugly, shocking, surprising work that you very well may find offensive or may not even fully understand. If you’re shocked or surprised or offended, then you should ask yourself why.

What is being presented here that I find problematic in whatever way?
What is the author or creator of this work trying to do?
Should I be offended? Am I supposed to be upset about some external thing?
Or perhaps should I be re-examining myself and my assumptions about art and life?

.   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .

Well...

If you’re still with me... 

This turned into more of a rant than I expected. I’m quite certain I know why that is. Most likely I shall share that here sometime soon. 

the skinny-dipping congressman

A congressman from Kansas—Kevin Yoder—

Yep, I am "that guy"!

—while on a recent, privately funded, congressional “fact-finding” trip (whatever that means) went skinny dipping in the Sea of Galilee.

That's right, the one that's in the Bible.

He was one of several members of Congress, their staff &/or family members who went in for a swim after diner and drinks. But apparently he was the only one to go naked.  

Well...okay. So what?

Yoder later made a statement to Politico.com:

“It is my greatest honor to represent the people of Kansas in Congress and [for] any embarrassment I have caused for my colleagues and constituents, I apologize.” (politico.com)

Wow. Really? This man did what, in that moment, probably seemed like a natural sort of thing. Why in the world is this an issue? Why should anyone need to apologize for this?

Apparently he and the others in the group were “rebuked” by Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Virginia).

Grr...Eric Cantor not happy.

Ya know, unless there’s a whole lot more that’s not being told in the news reports (and why is this even news-worthy?), then this is ridiculous nonsense. Maybe some prudish, uptight people would find Congressman Yoder’s behavior to be upsetting. But I simply do not see how skinny-dipping has any impact on his ability to do his job.

The world is clearly fucked up.