Wednesday, September 3, 2014

Nudity, Public Knowledge, and the Self

I recently read a blurb of an online magazine article about nudity and that "posing nude is (one of) the greatest feminist act(s)."  I thought about this.  The author wrote about having posed nude twice for photographers (at her own behest, of course):  once when she was in her 20's, and once again now (presumably at a much later age).  She spoke of feeling powerful in her ownership of her body, and that it was important to feel that ownership.

I have been a nudist for the better part of my life.  My body was/is not (often) an issue.  My attitude has always been this:  here I am, whether you like it or not, it's me.  I was never so ashamed or embarrassed that I felt it necessary to hide my physical self from others.  As far as privacy, my mind is what nobody can enter or claim without permission.  And that permission is only granted if I even care.  I never had an "image" I had to protect, so I suppose I am lucky, as a private citizen, to not be in the public eye.

I understand that developing the body is important to maintaining one's mental and psychological sense of self and sell-being.  This is true.  When I exercise (when I can be bothered to hold myself to a regimen), it does improve the way I feel, and I believe it helps the way I think, as well.

However, I never felt my sense of Self to be so attached to my corporeal presence that my body meant very much.  I concentrated on my Self as a person who acts and worked to gain respect and regard from people through my actions.  As I said to one of the guidance counselors about socially "fitting in" when Kat was in Middle School, I said of other kids:  If they don't like it, fuck 'em. I don't think I'm inordinately proud; my self-confidence is a quiet one, and comes with the premise of "what's the worst that can happen?"  I was never a rape victim, so I don't know the fear and insecurity that comes with feeling personally physically threatened.  I never saw myself as a target, so I never behaved like a victim.  Perhaps that nonchalance was enough to ward off any potential attackers.

Granted, I've played it safe with my surroundings:  I don't walk down dark alleys by myself in unknown (or known) cities, though much of the time, I'm not alone and therefore am too busy conversing to take too much notice if there were any threat.  When I did travel more by myself, I limited my activity to places with high traffic or light (ie, daytime) so that I could always see.

I don't understand why people engage any religion that makes them feel shame for that reason (among others).  Most organized, male-dominated religions (at least the ones I've come into contact with) force women to hide themselves "for their own safety"!  If the world were a muslim one, yes, women would be threatened because all the men they're dealing with (or not dealing with, as the case may be) would be muslims who seem to have nothing on their minds but sex, and not just sex, but forcible sex.  Religion's preoccupation with sex is disgusting and wasteful at best, and sickening and terribly destructive at worst.

That brings me to the continuing conflict over muslims and the rest of the world (so it appears).  Other religions have aged to the point where they've either become complacent or (at best) irrelevant.  The worst ones (and they all seem to be concentrated in the United States) still practice the direct subjugation of women, like mormonism and the worst of christian fundamentalism.  All Abrahamic religions have at least this in common.

I can only address that with which I feel most familiar:  Why do christian and muslim men, almost universally, feel the need to keep women subjugated?  What is it that is so threatening that they lash out at those whom they believe to be inherently weaker?


No comments:

Post a Comment