Mike Walker wrote:
PS I liked Brian Diaz's Comment best BTW!

Together we'll be fine!

AYP wrote:
Whether or not a person decides to pose nude has little to do with morality and all to do with fear. Fear of what may happen to their career, fear of what their parents will think, fear that their body will be digitally manipulated into a porn photo, fear that one day their grandkids will see them.

You can deduce all of our emotions to either rage or fear.  But that's too simple.

It takes diff'rent strokes to move the world.

Brian Stewart Photog wrote:
What the hell does any of this matter, if a model doesn't want to shoot nude and you do then find a different model. Why would you bitch about someone not wanting to shoot nudes, unless you have an alternative motive....

If you read the OP you'll see that the poster wasn't bitching about people not posing nude, but was asking for opinions on what he saw as an interesting moral inconsistency, that it's okay to show violence and violent behaviour in the media, but it isn't to show an inch of flesh that has been deemed to be offensive.

I do remember seeing an American tv report on a recent conflict somewhere, and there was more bare flesh on shown than would normally be permitted on US tv.  But the naked people were dead, and they'd had their clothes burned off them, so it was okay to show on television.

Jay Bowman wrote:
Again, most of the people (read: male photographers) would never ever pose nude themselves.  I'm just waiting for the day that a model says to a photographer "Okay, I'll pose nude for you if I can take some nudes of you and post them online."

On the internet? Hell, Jay, a few years ago I appeared nude in a television drama about a nudist family and their friends. But, then again, it was BRITISH ota-TV, not cable either. Funny thing was when models come along and comment that they had seen me on TV... my standard answer is that I would never ask them to do anything that I wouldn't do myself. LOL

Studio36

studio36uk wrote:
On the internet? Hell, Jay, a few years ago I appeared nude in a television drama about a nudist family and their friends. But, then again, it was BRITISH ota-TV, not cable either. Funny thing was when models come along and comment that they had seen me on TV... my standard answer is that I would never ask them to do anything that I wouldn't do myself. LOL

Studio36

Yeah.... well, you're British and you Brits are a weird lot anyway ... 

John Hough Photographer wrote:
I have noticed when I am browsing models information about themselves that quite a few, both men and women make the statement that their morals will not let them do nude photos. Maybe not in this wording exactly but in essence this is what they are saying. We are not talking about erotic nudes, any photos that are in any way hinting at pornography but just plain nudes. I'm almost certain that this  idea comes from their parents and of course, they will probably pass this to their kids too. It is amazing in this day and age that people still equate nudity with being immoral or dirty. Something interesting, a friend of mine told me that his parents in their 40 year marriage never saw each other in the nude. The lights were out when they were having sex.
In America, it is fine for kids to watch tv or go to movies where untold numbers of people are being killed but dare one scene in a film show a body part that shows more flesh than a lot of people think is decent and all kinds of protests will be made against the film or tv show. If people profess to be moral, then why do a lot of kids and adults use language that would shock anyone 25 years ago and no one seems to be concerned about this. It has become the norm. So, if a person claims to have good morals, then it should be across the board, not selective morals

Think you need to check what the term Moral means, it surely has changed in 40 years.  Maybe it is comfortablity that is the issue, some are not sure of themselves naked, they feel exposed mentally also.

Wes Hall wrote:

***This is not an attact on the quoted!!!***

A Model is a canvas. If you are not willing to be that, then you are just taking some expensive hobbie-shots. This is an ART, not an ego stroke. Morals don't really have much to do with this. It's really a manner of who is willing to grow, explore, and hopefully live in a world beyond the restraints of universal conformity.
In english, "Stop blaming your morals, you're just chicken-shit!!"

Think about it...if God had a problem with nudity, why weren't we born in "our Sunday Finest?"

I think Wes just wants to be naked.

AYP wrote:
Whether or not a person decides to pose nude has little to do with morality and all to do with fear. Fear of what may happen to their career, fear of what their parents will think, fear that their body will be digitally manipulated into a porn photo, fear that one day their grandkids will see them.

I also think the reasoning can also be a trust issue between model and photographer. A model may not let a professional photographer photograph her nude but she may let her boyfriend--someone she trusts with the stewardship of those photos. In our digital age, ultimately it boils down to not wanting to lose control of the image.

What they fear is what's termed "moral outrage" tho.  There are some who say they won't do it for their own personal morals, and most of the rest won't because they're afraid of their familiy's reaction (due to it offending the family members' morals) or of it costing them a job (for fear of he employer's or community's reaction based on THEIR morals).

RED Photographic wrote:
There is a male model on MM who who will pose nude, but he will not show his front side, only his back side.  It did occur to me that he may not have thought that one through.

I've seen a number of female models who emphatically post "NO NUDES, don't even ask or I'll report you" who do a lot of the Maxim implied type stuff who'll show the full crack.  Apparently butt crack is no longer naked.

ravens laughter wrote:
I don't think that americans are closed minded... or that the religious right morality crowd has it's talons in the media... I think for many americans... sexuality, sex, nudity, and the lot is a private and personal matter for them and thus... to them.... should be kept in the confines of their own bedrooms. What a person feels personally and specifically however should not be made into a general rule for the masses.

I would strongly disagree.  Most of this country is gripped by a sense of shame about the body, sex, and nudity and there're many groups actively working to push this even further with programs like the "abstinence only" education programs whic're back to teaching children they can get STDs thru simple masturbation.  Polls asking people why these things should be restricted or kept from public view invariably cite moral concerns, generally based on religious pressure.

oldguysrule wrote:
". . . but does that explain my using my penis as a monopod? . . ."

Are you serious?  I tried that too, but all my shots looked like I was using a "shoe-cam" so I stopped.  Also, the mosquitos didn't help, either... 

Mark Susan wrote:

Are you serious?  I tried that too, but all my shots looked like I was using a "shoe-cam" so I stopped.  Also, the mosquitos didn't help, either... 

ack

SLE Photography wrote:

I've seen a number of female models who emphatically post "NO NUDES, don't even ask or I'll report you" who do a lot of the Maxim implied type stuff who'll show the full crack.  Apparently butt crack is no longer naked.

Nope, butt crack is not nudity. Otherwise, there'd be a hell of a lot of plumbers getting the cops called on them.

Find me a worthy female model who is also a photgrapher and I will take up that challenge in December..

Anytakers?