I came home from work last night to find Mr E Man watching one of those survival shows on the Discovery Channel. Some testosterony chap was striding around the Namibian desert killing snakes and being condescending in a way that reminded me of my ex-boyfriend (“not a lot of people know this, but…” and “you might think [X], but you’d be wrong”).<\/p>\n
But the really weird part came when the show restarted after a commercial break. One of those parental warnings came on screen, and a very deep and serious voice announced that “this show contains scenes of indigenous nudity”.<\/p>\n
Indigenous nudity?<\/p>\n
As opposed to regular nudity?<\/p>\n
Indeed, the next segment featured Condescending Man killing a porcupine with a group of indigenous people. There were bums (as in butts, if you’re North American) and boobs on display.<\/p>\n
But…<\/p>\n
But but but…<\/p>\n
Is this supposed to be different to Western nudity? Like, is it supposed to be “better” (i.e. less corrupting to children) to see an African hunter-gatherer’s bum or boob than a bare bum on the street in Toronto, or a boob on stage at the Superbowl half-time show? If so, why? Because “they’re savages and don’t know any better?” There was something about the whole show that got my back up (maybe the similarity to my ex-boyfriend, duh), which might be making me infer more from the parental warning than was actually there.<\/p>\n
But c’mon, people. A bum is a bum and a boob is a boob.<\/p>\n
And neither is inherently corrupting to children.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
I came home from work last night to find Mr E Man watching one of those survival shows on the Discovery Channel. Some testosterony chap was striding around the Namibian desert killing snakes and being condescending in a way that … Continue reading