Naked States Film Reaction Paper Essay

The idiosyncrasies of filmgraphy argon nothing new in my book, I happen to have a cameraphile (for lack of a better word) sister, who prides herself of having reserven pictures of every little monument, statue or building she stumbles upon. Every time our family goes on a holiday on a new location, she takes it upon herself to take whatsoeverthing worth storing in her camera (in almost every angle), which means everything and we stopped every time she has to take a shot, which means every mile.I imagination I knew all the quirks of photography until I gaze upon several dozen naked people lying in the streets of New York City and a distrustful guy casually taking pictures of them. Wow, it hit me, now this is a different story. The only purpose for which power can be ripe(p)fully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. In a liberal society like ours (sort of), I have found that this principle provides reasons for constr icting impeccant speech when doing so prevents direct harm to rights.This means that very few acts should be prohibited. It recommends very limited intervention in the realm of free speech. All forms of speech or expression that are found to be offensive merely easily avoidable should go unpunished. Public nudity, for example, causes offense to rough people, just now most of us find it at most a bit embarrassing, and it is avoided by a simple turn of the head. The same goes with sex and unmannerly language on television this principle doesnt support criminalizing bigamy or drug use, or the enforcement of seat belts, crash helmets and the like.As we all know, nude photography is a subject to the independence of expression and unless that form of expression is obscene or offensive in nature, it is completely legal. Nude photography is no to a greater extent different from nudity. And like I said, nudity is a prime example of a possibly offensive but victimless state of being. It is not even an exercise or act, since it is not behavior, but simply the absence of clothing. The nude and the naked should therefore be protected by civil rights and liberties, including natural rights, freedom of expression, freedom of religion, freedom of association, and mysterious property rights.And throwing photography into the mix is, again, no different. Of course, most folks dont want naked people to walk mountain the street. But anti-nudity laws extend way beyond this to prohibit nudity in ones property and even inside ones give birth house, and some places make it illegal to be nude in the company of a child even at home. In some place, breast feed is treated as a crime. Art depicting nonsexual nudity is banned in some places and many shops that develop film routinely undo any film that depicts nudity, and if a child is shown nude, no matter how innocent the context, the shop reports it to the authorities.Before you get the wrong idea I think Spencers philosophy i s complete crap. Utter crap, liberation through nudity? I dont have a slightest desire to be liberated because, well, as far as Im concerned, I am liberated. I feel liberated. I dont have to strip down to the shank and have someone capture that moment to feel good about myself or to wash away any misgivings I have in the past. And I think its enormously unpleasant seeing naked people lying down in a pavement road like Jewish victims sequent from the concentration camps of the Holocaust.Contrary to popular belief, the clothing we wear doesnt promote shame and reservation in the serviceman body but it intensifies the respect for human sanctity of our own body. In other words, the clothing is not here to hide or disguise your body like a cloak but to preserve them and treasure for someone you loved like a wedding veil. Heck, I guess you can even say that we humans, by our very nature, are evil and lustful. And our clothing, on most cases, serves as a cushion from our lecherous indiv iduality we all share since the beginning of adolescence to each other until you have met the right intimate companion.Although unlike many people, I know better. Or at least I did after a brother of mine did his very outmatch to enlighten me. I remember inviteing him quite a long time ago, out of curiosity, about the big deal on stopping nudists from base on balls around all nude and all, and he said that apparently in California, they are considering a local anaesthetic option law that would let local governments determine their own community standards, replacing the current state-wide standard. This means publication depicting nudity in a non-sexual context, or even a photo of ones naked baby in a bathtub, could be classified as obscene by the local standard.Electronic communications and network sites showing non-sexual nudity, such as people at a nude beach, would become criminal in that locality. Such laws are being pushed and passed throughout the homo because most folks a re not a free-thinking activist (or more likely, a cynical artist) like Spencer Tunick, or even a located nudist and think it does not affect them. But these laws are not only unjust to these people, but set terrible precedents against free expression and private property rights.This abridgement of the freedom of expression is a foot in the door to the suppression of all our rights and liberties. Spencer might not have meant it intentionally but his actions will take a greater resonance in the annals of freedom of expression than anyone can imagine. And by the way, if anyone had the witless audacity to approach me and ask me to pose nude for artistic reasons I tell them S no. Find someone else who desperately needs a boost on egoism or a misguided publicity stunt. Couldnt have said it more eloquently.