Is nudity on TV acceptable at lunchtime? (in Off-topic)

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 9 2009 10:22 AM EDT

Is nudity on TV acceptable at lunchtime?

QBJohnnywas July 9 2009 10:23 AM EDT

Oh yes.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] July 9 2009 10:24 AM EDT

that depends, are babies born naked at lunchtime?

AdminShade July 9 2009 10:25 AM EDT

Can't say I have a problem with it, though I can't say I watch much TV at lunchtime either ;)

GnuUzir July 9 2009 10:30 AM EDT

In other news everyone is naked under their clothes...


QBRanger July 9 2009 11:02 AM EDT


Is the person in question hot or not?

Sickone July 9 2009 11:42 AM EDT

Stabbings, shootings, bombings, hooliganism, wars, famine, natural disasters, they're all perfectly natural and nice and unupseting at noon... but show one human being not covered by textiles, and it's suddenly the end of the world.

kronopolous July 9 2009 12:09 PM EDT

absolutelly not...why do people have an endless need to push boundaries. What benefit does that serve to society to show it at 12 noon and how does that seem like a good idea to put that in front of kids?

keep it on late night...

Demigod July 9 2009 12:12 PM EDT

There was an episode of Mr. Rogers that covered breast feeding and actually showed women's nipples and lactation.

I have a feeling that episode is no longer in syndication.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] July 9 2009 12:17 PM EDT

"to put that in front of kids?"

if that can afford their own tv and service, then it is up to them what they watch! if they aren't doing it on their own however, isn't it the job of the parents to actually notice what their kids are watching?

Cube July 9 2009 12:38 PM EDT

If you read the article, he's talking about an art show for sketching. Is that really pushing boundaries for you?

Personally, I wouldn't care in the slightest, but in the US we tend to be ridiculously overprotective as if no one was ever nude or saw anyone nude outside of sexual context. An art show using nude models is perfectly normal, that's one of the first things they'd make you do in an art class. And sorry Ranger, I wouldn't expect them to be hot. =(

QBJohnnywas July 9 2009 12:40 PM EDT

Actually some of them are verging on the hot...

Phaete July 9 2009 12:43 PM EDT

Sure, take something out out context, generalise it and see if the general public reacts wih abhorence.

The above is good example of a leading question.

If you read the whole story and still say yes, then i guess you also think that all greek statues should be covered with a cloth during daytime because they are too offensive in nudity towards children?

Cube July 9 2009 12:54 PM EDT

Phaete, GL just copied the title of the article, and trust me this wouldn't actually fly in the United States.

Lord Bob July 9 2009 1:04 PM EDT

As for the question itself, I'd say it depends on the nudity. Megan Fox yes. Brian Posehn no.

"absolutely not...why do people have an endless need to push boundaries."

Because the boundaries have no value anyway.

And I don't buy the "oh, the children!" argument as an excuse for censorship.

Demigod July 9 2009 1:18 PM EDT

I had a sudden urge to post a YouTube clip of the aforementioned Mr Rogers clip to see if an admin would fine me for being inappropriate. :) I'm afraid I already know the answer.
This thread is closed to new posts. However, you are welcome to reference it from a new thread; link this with the html <a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=002p4P">Is nudity on TV acceptable at lunchtime?</a>