Nudity

Nudity or nakedness is the state of wearing no clothing. It is sometimes used to refer to wearing significantly less clothing than expected by the conventions of a particular culture and situation, and in particular exposing the bare skin of intimate parts and has analogous uses.

Terminology

Although "nude", "naked", "bare", "stripped", and other terms have the same objective meaning (i.e., not covered by clothing), they have differing subjective connotations, which partly match their differing etymologies. "Nude" originally had a meaning of "plain, bare, unadorned" in a broader sense when introduced into English from Latin nudus, originally only as a legal term meaning "unsupported by proof", since 1531; later used an artistic euphemism for physical nakedness in 1631. Meanwhile "bare" and "naked" derive from the common Old English words, with many cognates, for "uncovered". Some consider one term more appropriate than the other. The book Nude, Naked, Stripped suggests that these three terms define a continuum ranging from artistic or tasteful absence of clothing by choice, at one end, to a forced or mandatory condition of being without clothes (e.g., a strip search), at the other. In general, a "nude" person is unclad by choice and is generally shameless; a "naked" person is involuntarily caught undressed and is generally embarrassed.^{[original research?]}

Various synonyms refer specifically — often as a negative — to the absence or rather removal of clothing, such as denuded, divested, peeled, stripped, unclad, unclothed, uncovered, undressed and dis- or un-robed.

Another euphemism for the embarrassing state of nakedness is "exposed", to glances no less than to the elements; not only the expression "to show skin" refers to nudity in terms of the dermis, in Manx Gaelic jiarg-rooisht and Scottish Gaelic dearg rùisgte, translated as "stark naked", is literally 'red' naked, as such exposure may make one 'blush'.

Full nudity

A state of total nudity, with nothing covering intimate parts. In English, phrases such as "nude", "bare" or "in the buff" (a reference to leather, i.e. skin notably hairless, unlike a pelt; compare "buck-naked"; Spanish also has the euphemism "en cueros", meaning "in leathers") carry a similar meaning.

A special case is "stark naked", or "starkers", as these terms were erroneously changed from "start naked" (start is an Old High German word for "tail") to the "stark", an old Germanic word meaning "strong" but used as "utter(ly)".^{[original research?]}

Euphemisms may be used, such as "birthday suit" and "au naturel" (French for "in the natural state"). In the Dutch language a naked person may be described as "spiernaakt" ("muscle-naked", since the musculature is visible under bare skin) or "poedelnaakt" ("poodle-naked", which refers to the often-ridiculed shaving of poodle dog breeds), or as wearing "Adamskostuum" ("Adam's suit", i.e. the original unclothed state of Adam and Eve in Eden). A similar expression exists in Italian ("costume adamitico"). The French "à poil" — "to the (body) hair (or fur)" — and its Spanish equivalent "en pelota" ("in the hair"), emphasize that human hair growth is generally too sparse for one to be considered covered without artificial clothing (while the pubic hair is often thicker, this area of the body is also most critical in the Christian tradition; in a few^[clarify] Germanic languages, the very word for pubic literally means (and is cognate with the English word) "shame": skam in Danish, schaam in Dutch, Scham in German). Likewise in French, "nu comme un ver" ("naked as a worm") refers to absence of visually shielding hair, via a dysphemistic metaphor. While negatives such as "undressed" may also refer to partial nudity (cf. "topless", below) unless explicitly qualified, in artistic modelling the term "undraped" means completely nude, as opposed to such common practices as draping something over the sexual body parts (or over the face so as to make the model anonymous).^{[original research?]}

Full frontal nudity means wearing no clothing and facing the observer showing the pubic area, as opposed to only showing toplessness/barechestedness or bare buttocks. It is usually considered the most far-reaching form of nudity, with exception of a close-up of the genitals. In many cases, full frontal nudity is avoided in motion pictures by purposely placing objects to obscure an actor's or actress's genitals, or the shot is diffused by hazy lighting or focus. In one scene from A Shot in the Dark, actor Peter Sellers infiltrates a nudist colony but avoids full nudity by holding a guitar in front of his crotch. Unlike the nudists, he is intensely embarrassed. Such techniques not only make some actors more comfortable but usually aim to pass censorship or prevent the film from receiving an unfavorable rating, which may impede the film's commercial success. Thus, revealing shots may be cut during the editing; sometimes a more liberal version is released separately: e.g., as director's cut. Few non-pornographic, mainstream American films show full frontal nudity in their theatrical versions, while more complete versions may be distributed in other countries, and/or on video tape or DVD (media which generally are more ready to distribute productions offending various taboos).

Partial nudity

As the concept of nudity often refers more to perception by the observer than the mere description whether someone's body is covered or not, there can be a grey area, known as partial nudity. Thus, while someone exposing 'private parts' is often called 'naked' regardless of garments on other body parts (indeed, an 'undressed' state is even considered by some more sexually arousing than full nudity) hence the terms half-naked and, a fortiori, near-naked refer to a body that is not completely exposed, but showing more than is customary or considered quite acceptable, at least in a given context. However the quantity of skin exposed is not the determining criterion, it's the "quality" that counts for perception.

Today even wearing boxer shorts, sufficient to guard the modesty of a shooto fighter, is described as near-naked in Japan because the appropriate kimono-type uniform associated with traditional martial arts is missing. Half-naked is also used for a degree of skin exposure that is not offensive (as no delicate zone is shown) but still barer than 'fully dressed', such as a man in bare torso. Yet for swimming the Japanese man feels comfortable in a most revealing fundoshi.

As the exposure of specific, usually intimate, skin zones suffices to be offensive and/or sensual, it is not surprising that specific terms are commonly used for such cases. More specifically:

• Terms like bare balls (not to confuse with freeballs) and bollock-naked are used to explicitly emphasize the naked exposure of the most private parts, often as a dysphemism for total male nudity, even in a context where another part of the anatomy is functionally more relevant.
• Terms like bare-butt and bare-ass or kaalgat in Afrikaans (literally 'bald [arse-]hole', also an illustration that one's own dense body hair is considered to undo or at least mitigate nudity; animal furs are probably the oldest form of warm clothing) focus only on the buttocks; apart from the literal sense (which may be functional, as in the case of a spanking) this is also a popular metaphor (also in other languages) for full nudity, at the same time more explicit than most euphemisms and yet avoiding to mention the genitals.
• The term topfree or topless is sometimes used — especially in reference to females — to describe the lack of clothing covering the breasts. For men, the same state of undress, however less strategic, is called bare chested or shirtless.
• See also cleavage (breasts) and cleavage (buttocks)
• Even a term referring to an apparently less revealing skin zone can be significant in a functional context, e.g., bare-knuckle in certain martial arts, or even sometimes have strong cultural associations, as with barefoot. In the case of bare hand(s), the expression is even commonly extended as a counterpart to handling something with gloves to protect the hands, or even with a mechanical device, whether operated manually or not, allowing to keep the hands at safe distance. The naked eye is a similar figure of speech referring to human visual perception that is unaided by optic equipment.

Nudity may be indirectly exposed through reflection. This may be accidental, or accomplished deliberately by the nude person [1], or accomplished by a voyeur.

Analogous 'nakedness'

In biology, names like Bare-throated Tiger-Heron, Naked Mole Rat or Nude mouse are used to indicate that certain animal species or at least specified skin zones on them are not covered by hair (as opposed to furry species), plumage, scales etc., which is however a permanent (or cyclic, in the case of moulting) and involuntary condition of their anatomy, since man is the only species that wears (removable) clothes (not counting 'housing' like a hermit crab's seashell use). Similarly, plant names like Eriogonum nudum refer to the lack of foliage. In genera where total exposure is the anatomical rule, a mild, in se unnotable hair growth can on the contrary suffice to justify a name like furry lobster.

By a kink in human psychology, the act of revealing skin or even removing clothes, even when only to show another covering layer, is often regarded at least as erotic or offensive as the actual sight of bare skin. Thus one often feels the need to use a dressing-box etc. or at least retreats into a lockerroom with restricted access in order to change, even if one is already wearing underneath one's clothes the swimwear that will be shown without jeans after emerging, so not an inch of embarrassing exposure was involved in the disrobing. This very suggestive power of divesting is the basis of striptease, the very word rather referring to such a 'tease' by partial stripping off, rather than the 'full monty'.

Similarly attitudes quite like those concerning nudity are often displayed towards clothing which covers the skin, but suggestively follows the contours of a sensitive body part, such as the male genitals in tights. Wet clothing which sticks to the skin, e.g. the buttocks or a female breast (as in a wet t-shirt contest), can thus also be regarded as if it had become truly transparent.

The taboo by association can go even further: garments which prevent any exposure of strategic skin zones can themselves be given a subjective status rather fitting a revealing one, especially underwear - thus a man whose open trousers fly reveals nothing more than the color of the underwear, no skin, is nevertheless considered embarrassingly exposed. Thus euphemisms are used for undergarments, notably those in touch with the intimate parts, or even, as in the case of the word unmentionables, the trousers worn above these. The word dishabille (from the French déshabillé 'undressed', which still refers to a negligee) uses a common euphemism for nudity to refer to being partially or very casually dressed, a matter of comparison with the fashion-sensitive 'proper' dress, not to an actual revealing characteristic of the 'lesser' garments worn. In certain erotic fethisms, a second skin — which in fact covers up the real skin — is called this because it is perceived as providing a more intense stimulus than the normal response associated with real naked hide.

Finally the 'image' of nudity and the notion of vulnerability are used for various absences of clothing and other symbolical objects where no body visibility is required — thus people say they 'feel naked without...' about uniform, a badge of office, even a weapon.

Historical overview

Main article: History of nudity

Anthropologists logically presume that humans originally lived naked, without clothing, as their natural state. They postulate the adaptation of animal skins and vegetation into coverings to protect the wearer from cold, heat and rain, especially as humans migrated to new climates; alternatively, covering may have been invented first for other purposes, such as magic, decoration, cult, or prestige, and later found to be practical as well. For men and women, public nudity was at least permissible in ancient Sparta, and customary at festivals.

Various modern-era attitudes

Society's response to public nudity varies on the culture, time, location and context of the activities. There are many exceptions and particular circumstances in which nudity is tolerated, accepted or even encouraged in public spaces. Such examples would include nude beaches, within some intentional communities (such as naturist resorts or clubs) and at special events.

In general and across cultures, more restrictions are found for exposure of those parts of the human body that display evidence of sexual arousal. Therefore, sex organs and often women's breasts are covered, even when other parts of the body may be freely uncovered. Yet the nudity taboo may have meanings deeper than the immediate possibility of sexual arousal, for example, in the cumulative weight of tradition and habit. Clothing also expresses and symbolizes authority, and more general norms and values besides those of a sexual nature. It is thus not clear what society and people's spiritual beliefs would have to be like, were nudity to be regarded as universally normal.

Similar to religious traditions in which nudity symbolizes a non-recoverable state of primal innocence, there also exist secular, cynical attitudes, accusing nudism of hypocrisy and repression. Such views are rarely taken seriously, however.

Not all naturists frequently contemplate a society that would accept nudity in all situations, but when the question is put to them they do not tend to shun such a possibility. Still, their own social nudity might be viewed by some as merely an agreement of trust with others who share a rare degree of confidence and comfort in being nude.

Nudity in front of a sexual partner is widely accepted, but there may be restrictions — for example, only at the time and place of sex, or with subdued lighting, during bathing with the partner or afterward, covered by a sheet or blanket, or while sleeping.

Another common distinction, also considered by censoring authorities, is that gratuitous nudity is perceived as more offensive than the same degree of physical exposure in a functional context, where the action could not conveniently be performed dressed, either in reality or in a fictitious scene in art. The intent can also be invoked: whether the nudity is meant to affect observers; e.g., streaking can be considered unacceptably provocative, nude sun tanning viewed mildly as rather inoffensive.

Western culture

Nudity in front of strangers of the same sex is often more accepted than in front of those of the other or both sexes, for example when bathing or showering, in common changing rooms, etc. Sex-specific changing rooms and toilets serve to prevent accidental partial nudity in front of the other sex. Urinals may have partitions between them to avoid the partial nudity of men to be visible by other men. In some cultures, even for people of the same sex to see each other nude is considered inappropriate and embarrassing. Also, the implication of homosexuality among naked members of the same sex can discourage this type of nudity.

Functional nudity for a short time, such as when changing clothes on a beach, is sometimes acceptable when staying nude on the beach is not. However, even this is often avoided or minimized by a towel, going to a changing room, or changing at home before and after going to the beach.

In certain structured settings in which nudity serves a practical purpose — such as providing access to a patient's body during a medical procedure, examination or therapeutic massage, or providing figure drawing students or artists with unobstructed views of the human body — an individual may be naked in front of one or several clothed people. In most such situations, the exposed individual will be given a loose robe or cloth to cover themselves partially, even if their "private parts" must be exposed. Total nudity for the model remains the norm in figure drawing studios, however. Similarly, pornography is typically photographed with the models fully nude and the crew fully dressed. None of these settings are routinely experienced by most members of society, however, so they are not normative; attempts to have subjects pose in the nude in public view as Spencer Tunick stages all over the world are often received with more mixed feelings, if not repressed as indecent exposure.

Although exposure of women's breasts is considered perfectly acceptable in most western countries in appropriate settings, such as while suntanning, in the United States of America exposure of female nipples is still considered criminal by many states and not usually allowed in public. Public breastfeeding, since the exposure it involves is functional, may be looked upon more mildly, but still it is sometimes considered problematic. However, courts in every single US jurisdiction where legal challenges have arisen, and other North American jurisdictions like Ontario have legalized the exposure of women's nipples on equal protection grounds (see United States Constitution/Amendment Fourteen). The movement of "topfree equality" promotes equal rights for women to have no clothing above the waist; the term "topfree" rather than "topless" is used to avoid the latter term's sexual connotations. However, there are still extreme reactions on the parts of many to exposure of the full breast, as in Janet Jackson's partial breast exposure during the half-time show of the 2004 Super Bowl.

Nakedness (full or partial) can be part of a corporal punishment or as an imposed humiliation (especially when administered in public). In fact, torture manuals may distinguish between the male and female psychological aversion from self-exposure versus being disrobed.

Nudity is closely associated with sexuality in most cultures where some level of body modesty is expected. This is evidenced by the existence of striptease in these cultures. Sexual dimorphism when depicted in the main stream media of these cultures is often seen as sexually related. As an effect of Catholic cultural heritage, in Latin cultures the common definition of modesty does not generally admit genital nudity, but the definition of what is lewd has changed and women's breasts are now commonly exposed or depicted without scandal.

The trend in some European countries (for instance Germany, Finland and the Netherlands) is to allow both sexes to bathe together naked. Typically, older German bathhouses, such as Bad Burg, remain segregated by sex. On the other hand Finnish saunas can be mixed and are always attended nude.

Some people enjoy public nudity in a non-sexual context. Common variants of the clothes free movement are nudism and naturism, and are often practised in reserved places that used to be called "nudist camps" but are now more commonly referred to as naturist resorts, nude beaches, or clubs. Such facilities may be designated topfree, clothing-optional, or fully nude-only. Public nude recreation is most common in rural areas and outdoors, although it is limited to warm weather. Even in countries with inclement weather much of the year and where public nudity is not restricted, such as the United Kingdom, Germany and Denmark, public nude recreation indoors remains rare. One example is Starkers Nightclub in London, a monthly nude-only disco party.

Others practise public nudity more casually. Topfree sunbathing is considered acceptable by many on the beaches of France, Spain and most of the rest of Europe (and even in some outdoor swimming pools); however, exposure of the genitals is restricted to nudist areas in most regions. In the United States, topfree sunbathing and thongs are common in many areas, with a number of nude beaches in various locations.

Even where the general public is fairly tolerant of public nudity, it is still notorious enough to be used as a deliberate, often successful means to attract publicity, either by naturists promoting their way of life or by others for various purposes, such as commercial nudity in advertising or staging nude events as a forum for a usually unrelated messages, such as various nude biker tours demonstrating for different causes or celebrities revealing their natural state by removing a fur coat to support a campaign against fur sales.

In Judaism and in Jewish communities, men and women use ritual baths called mikvahs for a variety of reasons, mostly religious in the present day. Immersion in a mikvah requires that water covers the entire body (including the entire head). To make sure that water literally touches every part of the body, all clothing, jewelry and even bandages must be removed. In contemporary mikvahs for women, there is always an experienced attendant, commonly called the "mikvah lady", to watch the immersion and ensure that the women have been entirely covered in water.

At the same time, religious Jews are very protective about their naked body. Under the laws of tznius (modesty), both men and women cannot reveal the body parts considered to have sexual connotation (including upper arms, collarbones, legs, and — for married women and all men — hair, which is covered completely or partially). It is postulated in the Shulchan Aruch (the Code of Law) that one must uncover as little body as possible when in the toilet room and even when changing before sleep (trousers are often taken off and exchanged for the pajamas under the covers). By Jewish law, no clothes or jewelry at all can be present during sex; at the same time, it must be done completely under covers, and in complete darkness^{[citation needed]}. This ensures maximum acuteness of the sensation experienced during sex and also decreases the risk of self-awareness and shame about one's body.

Non-Western attitudes

Attitudes in Western cultures are not all the same as explained above, and likewise attitudes in non-western cultures are many and variant. In almost all cultures, acceptability of nudity depends on the situation.

Cultural and/or religious traditions usually dictate what is proper and what is not socially acceptable. Many non-western cultures allow women to breast feed in public, while some have very strict laws about showing any bare skin.

In some hunter-gatherer cultures in warm climates, near-complete nudity has been, until the introduction of Western culture, or still is, standard practice for both men and women. In some African and Melanesian cultures, men going completely naked except for a string tied about the waist are considered properly dressed for hunting and other traditional group activities. In a number of tribes in the South Pacific island of New Guinea, the men use hard gourdlike pods as penis sheaths. While obscuring and covering the actual penis, these at a longer distance give the impression of a large, erect phallus. Yet a man without this "covering" could be considered to be in an embarrassing state of nakedness. Among the Chumash Native Americans of southern California, men were usually naked, and women were often topless. Native Americans of the Amazon Basin, usually went nude or nearly nude; in many tribes, the only clothing worn was some device worn by men to clamp the foreskin shut. However, other similar cultures have had different standards. For example, other native North Americans generally avoided total nudity, and the Native Americans of the mountains and west of South America, such as the Quechua, kept quite covered.

In the ancient culture of Southern Asia, there is a tradition of extreme ascetism (obviously minoritarian) that includes full nudity, from the gymnosophists (philosophers in Antiquity) to certain holy men (who may however cover themselves with ashes) in present Hindu devotion.

Islam on the other hand has a much more conservative and modest view regarding nudity. In Islam the area of the body not meant to be exposed in public is called the awrah, and while referred to in the Qur'an, is addressed in more detail in hadith.

• For men, the awrah is from the navel well to well below the knees, which mean that in public Muslim men have to cover themselves at least from navel down below the knees.
• For women, Islam may require them to observe purdah, covering their entire bodies, except the face (see burqa). However, the degrees of covering vary according to local custom and/or interpretation of Islamic Law.

Still very different traditions exist among, for example, Sub-Saharan Africans, partly persisting in the post-colonial era. Whereas some tribes and family-groups including some Togolose and Nilo-Saharan (e.g., Surma people) still commonly parade fully naked or without any covering below the waist (especially at massively attended stick fighting tournaments, where well-exposed young men can hope to catch the eye of a prospective bride), amongst Bantu people there is often a complete aversion from public nudity — thus, in Botswana when a newspaper printed a photograph seen here:^[1] of a thief suffering lashes on the bared buttocks imposed by a traditional chief's court, there was national consternation, not about the flogging (actually extended soon to age 50 and to women) but about the 'peeping tom'. The Ugandan Kavirondo tribes, a mix of Bantu and Nilotic immigrants, traditionally went practically naked, but the men eventually adopted western dress.

See also

References

Sources and references

• Rouche, Michel, "Private life conquers state and society," in A History of Private Life vol I, Paul Veyne, editor, Harvard University Press 1987 ISBN 0-674-39974-9
• Brandom, Robert, "Critical Notice of Blind and Worried", Theoria 70:2-3, 2005.
• Etymology OnLine- various lemmate & [2]

External links

• Theory of the Nude - How and why we create the nude in art
• Nudity in art Today by Art Lister
• 20 century Nude in the "History of Art"
• Nudity in Ancient to Modern Cultures by Aileen Goodson (This chapter excerpt is from Aileen Goodson's Therapy, Nudity & Joy)

Further reading

• Storey, Mark Social Nudity, Sexual Attraction, and Respect Nude & Natural magazine, 24.3 Spring 2005.
• Storey, Mark Children, Social Nudity and Academic Research Nude & Natural magazine, 23.4 Summer 2004.

Donate to Wikimedia