Seeing as how there is so much female nudity in movies, isn't it fair if there is more male nudity too?

I think it would shock many people to see full frontal male nudity, but they show women like that all the time. What do you think?

If there were more nudity, be it female or male, it would shock any person. Even though its things like that that make movies sell, its bad enough exposing kids to that sort of thing when they are legally old enough to, so there's no real good point for everyday life. I think nudity is unnecessary in movies and please! Show no more than you have to!

I think that if they show women nude they need to show men nude what so f-ing special about them?(no offense anyone)

if i want male nudity id look down when im naked

Is it really that much faster to type "da" than "the"? Or "dey" instead of "they"? Sorry, but seeing stuff like that has always bugged me. Plus it makes you sound like Jar-Jar Binks.

Besides, what's so uninteresting about male nudity? I'm sure some people find it very interesting.

well male nudity is not very interesting 2 watch! especially since i noe young children sneak 2 da television n watch late night shows n put da volume on mute! but seriously i feel dat whoever keep doing male nudity movies theyre just bored with their life all dey want is money!! but plz no more male nudity 4 god sake!!

nudity in movies is just for distraction so you cant see the killer thing/person coming

Personally, nudity doesn't really disturb me, its part of life. Yet, I'm also the person who went to see RENT with his mother (the Live Broadway cast not the movie....cause the movie sucks) and, though the show was amazing, sat the scene where the cast sings the song "contact" (a rather risque song about the frustrations of safe sex) next to his mother.

I agree that unwarranted nudity is annoying, yet, though it may not be essential to the plot of the story, it could be vital to the message. Some directors want a movie that defies tradition and shocks the audience. I think it is up to the movie goer to screen their choices. Though there are some obvious flaws with the current rating system.

So let's cover up an unseemly act with more of it. Great philosophy.

DEFINITELY......... Why shouldn't we? We see plenty of the woman's body! The only one's I can see objecting is the less than endowed male who may feel inferior.......but how many women throughout all the years have felt inferior when seeing enhances chested women.

I don't know...vaginas are not the most glamorous of body parts. The primary "legitimate purpose" for showing them is not really something that the average person would want to see when going to see the next great blockbuster. And I know that's not just me...

showing a penis on-screen is not equivalent to showing breats. It IS equivalent to showing a vagina on-screen, but you dont see many vaginas on-screen in mainstream cinema

and i agree with clpo13, nudity of anykind in a movie needs to be there for a legitimate reason, if i just wanted to see breats id watch pornography

pornography is not great cinema

heh. I'm not totally how to reply to this thread except to agree with most people on how, if it's not necessary, don't show nudity... It's more a question of the morality of the people... i think that made sense at least...

Huh. Well, I can agree that it wasn't the most glamorous thing to see, but then, childbirth never is.

As far as I'm concerned, nudity in movies should really have a point. When it's gratuitous, it's just boring.

quote:

Wait, I've seen Children of Men and I don't recall seeing a vagina. I remember the birth scene clearly, but there was nothing graphic about that.

The point is you can see the child coming out.

(I just wanted the guys making a big deal about wanting to see one to get grossed out and drop it)

Wait, I've seen Children of Men and I don't recall seeing a vagina. I remember the birth scene clearly, but there was nothing graphic about that.

quote:

This was a birth scene that was necessary to the plot and certainly was not graphic or shocking in the least. You can't even see it.

I know, but others have made a big deal saying they should see one, so I let them know where there was one.

(Then there was the potential of them getting grossed up and dropping the subject altogether.)

quote:

Originally posted by Ikki14Reed:
Oh! If you want to see a vagina, watch Children of Men. There's a scene that shows one, it's a mainstream movie, AND it's only rated "R."

This was a birth scene that was necessary to the plot and certainly was not graphic or shocking in the least. You can't even see it.

Penises and vaginas have no reason to be in rated r movies. I don't want to see either and have seen to many penises lately and continue to hear women and gay men wanting more in films as revenge for female breasts being shown. No logic at all. Its not our fault we don't have breasts, but a penis is not an equivalent.

Yeah well I rented Shadowboxer with Stephen Dorff, Cuba Gooding jr. and Hellen Mirrem and figured it would be a pretty good movie. I watched it with my girlfriend, my 2 sisters and my sisters husband. The male nudity was extensive and there was a few female nude scenes as well. Like I said breasts and male or female ass is not too bad, but there was a scene with Dorff having sex with a woman and he pulls out of her and shows his semi-erect penis flopping around with a condom on. It was a long scene and extremely graphic. It is unnecessary to show something like that. It was so uncomfortable in the room and it ruined the movie for all of us. This was a movie that was shown at the theater, and blockbuster had about 30 copies in the new releases so we figured it was a good popular movie. To me it was nothing more than porn and my point is if people want to see stuff like that go rent porn. There is no reason for it in mainstream movies.

Lee Daniels, the director, who is gay, was asked why he put the graphic male full-frontal nudity in and his answer was because he wanted to shock people and he wants more "dick" in movies. That is a great reason. Directors and people who want penises in movies just to shock and for revenge against female breasts make no sense. It doesn't add anything artistic to the movie, doesn't help tell the story and is only there for shock value. Its not needed.

The person who started this post complained about feale nudity and said it would shock people to see male full frontal nudity and we should see more of it. I want to know how a penis is equal to a breast. The female nudity in movies is not explicit. It is breasts and asses, no vaginas. Many male actors show their chests and asses nude as well, but recently there has been a lot of penises and no vaginas. There should be neither in mainstream movies unless it is completly needed for the story.

quote:

Well yeah. That's why when unless it's detrimental to the plot, there should be no nudity for sake of nudity. It takes away from the movie.

Yes.

I hate watching a movie with my mother and cringing the entire time because I'm watching something like this with my mother...

I don't think that's showing inmaturity on my part either, I can't imagine a lot of people are comfortable enough watching graphic sex scenes to watch them with their parents...