Why are people so offended by the nudity? - A Room with a View (1986) Discussion

[–] Sojaw 13 years ago

I will never understand people that are prudish about nudity.

To males that were bothered by the scene: have you never been to a locker room before?

To females that were bothered by the scene: as a straight man, I can't imagine ANY man wanting to be in a romantic relationship with a woman that DOESN'T want to see male nudity. I mean, if she doesn't like my gender's equipment, that's a complete deal breaker for me. I don't want to get naked in front of a woman that might be thinking "eeewwwww a penis"! Every woman I've ever been in a relationship with reacts positively to male nude scenes in films and that's the way it should be.

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Sojaw 13 years ago

Excuse me but what is your problem, comoxj?

I never said that ALL women are turned on by male nudity. In my experience, most women find male nudity arousing if the context is sexy -- and different women have different ideas about what contexts are sexy.

If you read my post again, you'll find that I said that every woman I've been with romantically "reacts positively" to male nudity in film. I used those words for a reason. It's possible for a woman to react positively to such scenes for reasons other than sexual arousal. Some of the women that have posted on these boards have expressed a variety of positive reactions to the skinny dipping scene that may have had nothing to do with sexual arousal.

Some women are disgusted by male nudity. Some are not disgusted but have little or no reaction one way or the other. Many enjoy it in certain contexts (that vary from woman to woman) and not in others. A few women like male nudity in almost any context.

Are you just having a fit because I said that I don't want to be romantically involved with a woman that reacts negatively to seeing the male body? Why on earth would I? I have no interest in being romantically involved with a woman that thinks my gender's equipment is ugly. It's fine with me if a woman has no reaction one way or the other to a male nude scene in a film (although I greatly prefer women that react positively to it). But if she reacts NEGATIVELY to it, that's a deal breaker for me.

I'm dreadfully sorry if my taste in women doesn't meet YOUR approval.

reply

[–] artistathome 13 years ago

What makes the scene funny, besides seeing naked men running around, is Mrs. Honeychurch, Cecil and Lucy' reactions! Lucy laughing and Cecil trying to carve a path with his walking stick was just too funny.

And when Mrs. Honeychurch says to Freddy "why not have a bath inside with hot and cold laid on?" I died laughing.

Freddy is just priceless as the younger brother.

What a charming and funny scene from the time they all jump in til it is over.
Don't forget that bathing while nude was typical especially on your own property and out in the country.

This movie was set in 1907 not 2011!! I watched it again tonight and laughed so hard my husband made me shut the door to the study.

reply

[–] SnoozeAlarm 13 years ago

I wasn't offended by it. It got me totally horny. Which kind of surprised me, since I'm a heterosexual male.

Spoilers!Spoilers!Spoilers!Spoilers!Spoilers!Spoilers!Spoilers!

reply

[–] Mandyjam 12 years ago

Interesting comment, SnoozeAlarm. The reaction in straight males is competitive.

"great minds think differently"

reply

[–] facebookblows009 12 years ago

People on this board are offended by the nudity because they grew up in a PG-13 world where violence is more acceptable than sex.

reply

[–] ShannonTriumphant 12 years ago

@facebookblows009: Great name, btw!! I think you summed up the prudish-nudity thing quite well, as did others here. It always bugs me that nudity and "obscene" language are censored yet you can see any number of films that are rated PG or G, and there are people getting their heads blown off, knifing each other...and let's not forget all the rape and sexual assault on shows like "Law & Order, SVU"! Somehow, rape is "okay" but three guys having a bathe in a Sacred Lake is NOT! What the hell?

I think the root of this, in America anyway, are those damned Puritans who came over and ruined everything for the rest of us, with sexual repression, fear of women's bodies and of the desires of both genders. It spread and infiltrated other religions and here we are.

In Europe it's nowhere near as "stuffy and farm-yardy" as Galsworthy put it! Americans are far more "religious" than most other nations. And along with that goes repression of sexuality, but not, somehow the very violence that they are supposed to detest!

Anyway, we need more Hippies again. That was the culture in which, thankfully, I spent my teens and 20's. And the 80's were all about sexual experimentation. This film...the Lake scene...reminded me so much of the many skinny-dipping parties my friends & I had which were NOT (necessarily) sexual, but just another way to have fun or cool off. Why can't people just deal with nudity and sexuality like that? Nobody's going to force you to "have a bathe"!

My other fave line by Mrs. Honeychurch, "Freddy, you're in no position to argue!" as he's crouching in the ferns. She was laughing too, I think.

She deserves her revenge, and we deserve to die.

reply

[–] tovangar2-321-223220 12 years ago

It's a lovely scene and very faithful to the book. I first read it while traveling on the upper deck of a bus and laughed helplessly, tears rolling down my cheeks, while everyone else in the seats around me pretended not to notice. I suppose they assumed I was mad.

The Honeychurch's home, "Windy Corner" is played by Foxwold House in Kent, I house I'm very familiar with. The pond was built especially for the film (it was very close to the house) but didn't last. We'd had some very dry years and last I saw it there was nothing left except a bit of the black plastic liner and a dip in the ground...

reply

[–] Susan-353-996643 12 years ago

Just watched the movie last night and was not offended; rather, I was bored to death. Nudity in films is fine with me if it promotes or explains or is in any way relevant to the story; but only weakens a film when it is gratuitous as it was here. The scene added nothing to the story and, while men may horse around like boys from time to time, do they really scamper around and around in small circles chasing each other?? Really? This scene did not ring true to me, seemed completely contrived-- an excuse to insert nudity and thus some notoriety into this otherwise mostly forgettable movie.
And by the way: I'm a completely hetero female who loves and enjoys men for their minds, spirits, and "equipment". The sight of three flopping penises was not attractive to me on any level; genitals are all about context.

reply

[–] seahorsespa 12 years ago

Well said !!! I totally agree !!! The scene did NOT ring true with me at all. There is NO WAY grown men would crawl out of a pond like that and kick out at eachother, completely nude like that ! That's a great point that the scene was an excuse to gain some notoriety in the movie, just for the sake of publicity ! Great LUCID post, Susan ! :D

reply

[–] ShannonTriumphant 12 years ago

@seahorspa:

Actually, this scene is almost exactly the same as Forster wrote it! In those days (Victorian and Edwardian times), many people did not have running water, or indoor plumbing, so men, especially (and women, but more hidden) would "have a bathe) in a stream or pond. When they did get baths (as Freddie's mother mentions), they still preferred frolicking around outside--it wasn't sexual (unless maybe they were lovers, which also happened).

Not only was it common but seen as quite natural. Men also had sweat rooms where grown men would go, sit in their equivalent of hot tubs and steam rooms, after work--this has gone on since Roman times, and even before that.

People have been "skinnydipping" for tens of thousands of years. It's only since the weird prudery of Puritan America that such activity has beeen seen as "perverted" or unnatural.

She deserves her revenge, and we deserve to die.

reply

[–] CvonQ 12 years ago

As said by many above, it fits in the film, is funny, and can only be shocking to people from cultures where nudity is a big taboo.

The scene is interesting to me for another reason: I saw it when I was 20 and I think it's the first time I noticed the "male gaze" being turned on men (which was refreshing and enjoyable.) James Ivory filmed Julian Sands as a young god (the shots of him tilting back his head and spewing water like a fountain, reaching up into the branches displaying his naked torso, putting on the bowler as he strides around in the water.)

It's quite heady stuff, but not really gratuitous because it's in line with the film's theme--George as the sensual man to whom Lucy is drawn.

reply

[–] nightwishouge 10 years ago

Hmm, I'm not sure this scene would qualify as an example of the "male gaze" turned back on men since there was nothing particularly objectifying/possessive about it. From what I understand that term is used to describe the way filmmakers will reduce females to objects with the way the camera takes in their bodies, detaching or divorcing the physically pleasing aspect of their form from their personalities, their human "wholeness". It's a way of dominating the subject, of imposing the audience's right to voyeurism on the character. When a woman bends over the hood of a car and the director cuts to a close-up of her butt in tight jeans, or the camera roams lovingly over her body while she undresses, that's the "male gaze" at work. It's the director saying, "I have the right to view you as a sexual object without your (or your character's) consent."

Filming Julian Sands "as a young god" doesn't really qualify, IMHO. Yes, he is perhaps eroticized or made beauteous, but this is done within the context of his character, not separated from it. He is allowed to be sexually appealing without becoming a mere object of desire without autonomy, which is a much healthier approach.

reply

[–] rizdek 12 years ago

The funniest thing about this thread is that no one is claiming to be offended.

What? You heard someone, or a few, comment about the nudity and you took that to mean many many were offended by it. Perhaps some actually were, I dunno. It is possible to NOT be offended by it, not to think it immoral or wrong in anyway, but to also not particularly care to see naked men swinging their junk about. I didn't find it all that funny even though I understood it was probably supposed to be. Yes I've been to lots of locker rooms, but being a straight guy, I don't go there to be entertained by watching the men walking about naked. It's just a practical place to change and shower after gym class or after working out, and inevitably there'll be other men there. Not a big deal at all.

Given the overwhelming voice of the commenters both in this thread and in the other thread about the nudity, it doesn't seem to be that much of an issue. Where are you getting the idea it was such an issue? Perhaps you are focusing on a vocal minority? IOW, maybe it's you that has the problem with a few who might find this, and any number of things offensive.

I mean, there are gonna be a few folks who find almost anything you can think of offensive. I can envision some finding nudity offensive. So what? I had an old aunt, long dead, who was offended if someone drank soda from a bottle, because it reminded her of people drinking beer from bottles! Talk about retarded. Even now, folks are offended by words such as f@ck, or g@dd@m it or any number of other expletives. In fact society is so offended that we can't even write them on this website and many jurisdictions have laws against saying those words in public.

I can remember thinking how stupid it was way back when that you can have movies...westerns for example...where folks got killed right and left yet perish the thought if they said a cuss word or showed a titty. I mean shoot the native Americans, but cuss while you do it or show breast skin and you've gone and offended some narrow minded "stick-up-the-arse" religious nut.

Really, as far as finding things offensive, you see it everywhere. Some get their skivvies in a knot if they can't post their barbaric religious creeds in gov't buildings and can't force school kids to pray to an ancient tribal god of war or teach 'em their superstitious creation myths. They get all up tight if everyone doesn't agree with their particular superstition, whether it be a guy in the desert who got some special message from an angel, a slick huckster who believes he got some golden tablets from the angle Moroni, or those who think some guy getting hisself killed a few K years ago and hung on a stick was really a sacrifice of a god to himself to appease himself for things that offended HIM...things HE himself defined as sin. They think this human sacrifice makes it so we can do whatever we want to and always be forgiven (by said imaginary god) and, by uttering incantations while keeping the eyes shut, win a "get out of hell free" card. And they want ME to believe it! They even are pissed if they can't show the manger scene, a "virgin" giving birth to a god-man, on gov't property. Hope that didn't "offend" anyone.

reply

[–] rumipoet24 11 years ago

"Silly humans! As if they didn't have a dick or a pussy... Seriously, it's just the human body. Humans are the only species on Earth that think that nudity is something ''bad''.

WE think so much from these specific repropductive organs and there is so much there we feel the need to hide. Men are creatures that do much disembling, so full of feints, & hidden desire. Man is also a creature that also wishes & needs to control, control all the behaviors that stem from the sex organs, that gives you quite the sway over a large part of the deal.

Love survival procreation, human nature, it was made complicated. The nudity in this is absolutely delightful & as we would all love to remember such moments of frolic & play, not some ostentation or cheap display, just innocent FUN!

If people were offended by the natural setting & nudity this, they should definitely be kept away from drugs, alcohol, sharp objects & guns, not allowed to have children, and many consultations with a shrink. Also not hold positions of power.

reply