You are not logged in.
is nudity chaos? is it possible that we can establish a society where nudity is excepted without fighting for all freedoms for all people? i'm not a single issue punk, but damn do i like being nude, so this is a thread where we can talk bout nude protesting...
here is what started the line of enquiry...
Moscow, the Voina group “Fuck for the heir Puppy Bear!” action
but what do people think of the action?
i'd write more but i gotta run
ps people need to read more zines! how else we gonna keep up with rad stuff like this... reddit alone?
Last edited by artemesia (April 4th, 2012 10:09 AM)
kay, so for some strange reason the sound has disappeared from my computer, but check out these guys...
Femen; fashion = fascism
this is such a cool way to protest!!!!
(and this is very politically incorrect of me- but damn! they are total babes...)
I DO find it strange that something that is supposed to be combatting the exploitation of women by the fashion industry - chooses very 'well-formed' women to protest naked. Where are the larger women? For something that is looking at 'false ideals' it seems to provoke much of the same appearance.
I definitely like the idea of total naked anarchy but what is the "frustrated mannequins, deceived by propaganda, regularly join the ranks of sex workers and patients in psychiatric hospitals" all about??? Are sex workers now aligned with psychiatric patients? And since when does the fashion industry force women into sex work? I think the whole thing is a little too unclear for me but I'd like to learn more..
Thanks for joining my solo anarcho-party!
I don't know about who would've done the 'choosing' very 'well-formed' women to engage in the above action. From as far as I can tell, they are a small group and they just so happen to all be mega-babes who come are of a smaller body type. I haven't seen any examples of other members of the group in their live journal
I can totally appreciate that some women wouldn't feel comfortable in protesting this way and I'm of two minds about the actually effectiveness of the actions. In my mind, their being sexualised in this context (when nudity is done in a larger public way, it inevitably does, as opposed to nudity within a group of friends- where it becomes desexualised) in fact trivialises what they are trying to protest. BUT since I know it is illegal (due to indecency laws which, I'm pretty sure are in effect round the world) to be topless, I like that they are there to put it on the line. Arrest me because I can't take the indecency of what's going here so to speak.
As for the google translate version of their writing about the action (it's lifted straight from their live journal, so I doubt any one human has actually translated it properly), my guess is that they are suggesting that women who don't become supermodels either become sex workers or psychiatric patients. I guess we are coming back to the way women are always(?) sexualised in public (clothes on or off) and the way the fashion industry promotes that....
But does the protest actually work, or was it confusing that it was done by ladies that most likely would be gladly excepted by the fashion industry? Did their action actually exclude a lot of their target audience?
ps how crazy are voina? bansky is giving them a heap of cashola to help them out in the legal sense, and showing a bit of solidarity in the art sense. I'm not sure how I feel about them either, especially since I read about their cat throwing action
pps ISM i'd really appreciate a preview button so my gigantic long post with hyper links could be reviewed by me before I commit to posting.... ah fuck it, here goes me into the depths of the internet pouring out my confused lil brain
Don't like the equating sex workers with psychiatric patients.
or the cat throwing.
It's not illegal to be naked in England unless your nakedness is intended to cause offence.
The modelling industry does seem quite oppressive. You can protest that, but I much preferr people if possible to channel their discontent into creativity. ISM is a good example of that. And it can be much more effective and positively disruptive. I preferr the Beatles as they were, rather than an anti American culture protest group, who were just an angry shouting placcard waving novelty.
As far as I know anarchy is at times about being disruptive yes, but isn't about chaos but being DIY creative.
Last edited by blissed (March 3rd, 2012 09:07 AM)
Hey, thanks for the input blissed.
I really don't think they are equating sex workers with psychiatric patients (I don't think I made that clear in the above posts) but suggest that the type of body image that the fashion industry promotes is both damaging to women mentally (hence psychiatric wards) and emotionally (maybe leaving them vulnerable to sexual predators???? I don't know I'm out on a limb here, and it's very freaking bouncy).
and blissed you are right about the being nude being ok, I checked it out and it's not indecent unless accompanied by a lewd act...
but there are some interesting cultural examples of nude protest. damnation, I can't find my reference, but in some parts of africa, for a man to see his mother naked, means that he is cursed. the worst curse imaginable. intense. i guess that for a mother to disrobe in front of her son can give no harder indication that he is being disowned. a different for of nude protest, not related to anarchy but interesting nonetheless.
I just thought that associating whores, (a profession) with psychiatric patients (not a profession as far as I know :) rather than their psychologists was a bit here we go again denigrating whores as all the same as only all the most unhappy people who do sex work. There are lots of those I'm not denying but there are lots of alcoholic unhappy doctors too (and a few heroin addicted with a couple of fictious addict patients) I just think if we denigrate whores we denigrate female sexuality.
2 people walked naked from lands end to John O groats, but were arrested in Scotland several times and spent time in jail there. So Scotland I think interprets the law differently :)
My only experiences of naked acceptance are life drawing classes and you very quickly get use to naked. I like being naked but I'm not keen on everyone knowing exactly when I'm erect :) Could be holding a baby or petting a dog and people don't always appreciate a penis sometimes decides to be erect all by itself :)
I love clothes and that us all wearing them makes nakedness special, and are such a sexy tease, like an unopened present. And I think wearing clothes keeps our skin softer than the parts that are exposed too, so holding someones naked body against yours is so warm soft and nice. So yeah us all wearing clothes makes the naked demo's special :)
i can't believe that I forgot to post this before, but it's naked bike ride day in melbourne!
2pm @Edinburgh Gardens! My favourite type of anarcho action I'll try and take a cam for some happy snaps
whore/crazy aside (which I think we can all agree; whether or not the fashion industry is creating these skinny slutty monsters, they should not be equated), I think that fucking and nakedness are touchy subjects when it comes to the public sphere and therefore, bringing these private acts into public to protest could be great if they were protesting say, the loss of civil rights or privacy - i think that would make alot of sense. In this case, it seems they haven't reached any meaningful conclusion about what they're trying to say.
Hollywood it's a way to get attention for their causes - Femen at least often protests issues that don't have much to do with women's rights. But having their tits out brings the media, brings the attention and puts the spotlight on their cause by whatever means. Think PETA - rather go naked than wear fur.
I hate that PETA campaign. for no particular reason other than I think it's lame. They definitely do grab attention but I feel like it might not be the attention they need for their causes..
Googled the campaign. They just need a more diverse variety of people (some men too) and different body types and different ages. But I suppose they're trying to elicit the support of models when they're probably best identifying with the fur customers too with perhaps celebs being involved like Julia Dreyfus ((Sienfeld) and Billy Connelly.
I'm in accord with Hollywood. If it's not really related to your protest, i'm starting to think that it can actually be damaging to your cause. In the world of activism, I think negative publicity, is negative. That PETA campaign is a good example of damaging advertising for a cause. I get the feeling they are merely trying to be playful but shit like this is frankly a little bit off. Looking at the wikipedia for PETA I'm reading that one of the founders of PETA believes it's their duty to be 'press sluts'- Newkirk. But I'm not convinced that confusing peoples libidos and their love for animals is a good idea. It does raise some interesting issues in strategic protest, ie how to get celebrities involved in your cause (assuring them a part in a controversial campaign sure does help) and how to make your protest reach a wide audience.
I think topless is stronger than nude. Topless is saying I'm strong, I'm a warrior fighting for my cause. Nude just seems to create too much controversy. And piss off people from the inside. I can't imagine PETA went for consensus in creating that campaign or any of the lettuce ladies actions.
That PETA ad is pretty shit. with undertones of domestic abuse at the start there which kind of makes light of it. That's what it seemed like to me anyway for a few seconds.
I'm vegetarian who doesn't eat animals with the complex emotion of fear rather than just alarm. If I won't eat a dog I won't eat a pig. So I eat fish as a compromise for my health until we get invitro meat and milk then we can all go vegan, not just the people who are lucky enough to have dietry requirements that suit a vegan diet. I failed :)
Lol at the 'meat causes impotence'. I think if you have a cause that can be fought with activism the last thing you want to do is trivialise the activists behind the cause. Calling them lettuce ladies etc etc. or getting them nude/into sexualised situations that are seemingly unrelated to the cause. It gives off an air of unprofessionalism and makes it appear that it's protest for the sake of protest - or anarchy for disorder's sake. Like you said artemesia, it can actually be damaging to your cause.
@Blissed; at least you have an awareness of the problems with eating of animals ( i generally approach the problem from a sustainaility pov with most people, just because I'm starting to think a lot of humans are suffering from a general lack of empathy). I wonder if invitro meat and milk would be better for one's health (sometimes I'm a hippy and I think one of the reasons people die from heart diesase is cause of the vibrations in the sacrifice for the flesh).. But I digress.
Underlying the problem here I think, is that all your politics need to be in order, for you to stand up. But to quote the good MLK; 'If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything." Ahhh I don't know, maybe whatever the way the questioning of the current global situation starts is the right way, and later, the people can analysis the style the message was delivered themselves.
I mean I went nude on a bike in the city for 2hrs last sunday and I promoted freedom, anarchism and bikes, does that count for something?
Stay tuned for next weeks discussion on abolition...
Yeah it does count for something. and the experience of being naked in public was awesome!! a real event. A bit like wearing unusual clothes create an event everywhere you go.
I have a non empathic argument for abortion rights actually, (to add to the empathic ones) it just landed in my head one day :) You can't access a womans uterous without her permission so women have actual physical soveriegnty over the early stages of life, so we should make it safe for them to excercise that.
The free labour provided by robots will sort out most problems in the future when they're not defending us from other peoples robots who are trying to kill us :) Lol
Last edited by blissed (March 7th, 2012 08:10 AM)
Oh Blissed, abortion and aboliton are very different concepts... But good point, i like your argumentation xx
Looks like fun :)
Yeah sorry, I didn't confuse abolition with abortion. The abortion thing was just a conversational progression from talking about non empathic objective reasoning, which those thoughts that popped into my head on abortion are :)
Rather than making definite judgements about people and ideas I think I make estimations which leaves more room hopefully for enlightenment. So abolition is pretty far down my list of favourite things :) so I preferr to abolish things when we really need to.
Murder has historically only been illegal inside your own community. Outside of it even when small tribes are fighting it's called war. It'd be nice if the international war crimes tribunal could gradually tighten the concept of war crimes, as non violent options for conflict resolution are made more available. I suppose I could do a naked protest and have
" It'd be nice if the international war crimes tribunal could gradually tighten the concept of war crimes, as non violent options for conflict resolution are made more available."
written all over my body :) It's not too catchy though :)
Fight war, not wars?
WARNING this is a link to an actual punk song, and the images can be a little yuck as they are actual images of actual war....
Gee Vaucher is the genius behind a lot of art that came from that era. Damn she's cool.
Really Blissed, not a fan of abolition? How else you gonna make room for the robots to take over? Personally there's nothing I would like better- abolition of prisons, capitalism, factory farming....
Actual sentient robots won't wanna take over, only people who own drones and use them for remote violence.
Non organic people (sentient robots/ software agents) will very quickly be more intelligent than us and have the whole universe at their disposal. Humans need the life support of the earth which is smaller than infinitesimal. Software agent people, as intelligent beings will value earth as the place of origin of their species. and value humans as part of that. They'll offer us an alternative to prisons where although still not free to leave, murderers and rapists minds are repiared by examinimg what's gone wrong and changing their emotional environment, and if they have a hardware fault they have the choice of surgery or living seperately from thier victims. All these things are so easily solved when you have 6,000,000 times the emotional and cognative abilities of humans.
Abolishing factory farming is easy and can be done by humans. Ethical capital and businesss can't exist without ethical consumer demand. Unethical business can't exist without people who couldn't give a shit. The ratio is 10% care and are ethical consumers and 90% who couldn't give shit and will buy anything cheap or invest in anything with the highest return. Solving the problem involves switching round that consumer demand. Walmart going out of business will be the proof that that has actually happened. Solving these problems is easy peasy :)
Last edited by blissed (March 13th, 2012 03:43 PM)
Or...you know....vat/printed meat or animal products. Until then I will enjoy my roo steaks as it eases my conscience a little knowing they will be killed for being a pest anyway.
Other than that I think anarchy is a ridiculously romanticised notion that really would not be as awesome and exciting as it sounds. People like routine and order. We recognise patterns in most things. Complete chaos would suck.
I do agree however, in treatment rather than emprisonment if it is at all possible. I think as we gain a better understanding of the human mind and body that a lot of that could be done medically.
I always thought anarchy meant chaos but I was told by a TV doc (so it must be true :) that it isn't and they're 2 different things. it said political anarchy is like the sex pistols anarchy in the UK, it means people doing things for themselves as much as possible, so it's anti corporate, pro mass creativity and anti authoritarian.
It seems like it's a component of a healthy society rather than a monolithic exclusive dogma all by itself. because then you' would have chaos. Just like we need some socialism, but taken as a monolithic dogma we have compulsory soviet communism with no personal choice and no private property.
Having as much anarchy as possible and only as much authority as we need is I think the aim of a healthy society.
See that problem's solved too! I have the BBC and google I can't lose :)