|
Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!
|
| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Admin |
Posted - 04/07/2004 : 11:56:38 PM
From smh.com.au F2 Network - April 6, 2004 - 2:31PM
Alanis does a Janet
Alanis Morissette's 'nude' protest at music awards
 Canadian rocker Alanis Morissette didn't bare her breast like Janet Jackson, but she did bare her soul at Canada's annual music awards, demonstrating her disdain for what she called "hypocritical United States censorship."
Hosting the 2004 Juno Awards ceremonies, Canada's version of the Grammys, Morissette disrobed on stage to reveal a skin-colored, naked body suit with cartoonish nipples and pubic hair.
As part of the skit, Morissette was then told by the show's assistant director that "actually, we can't show nipples or pubic hair on national TV", at which time the Ottawa-born singer pulled off the fake body parts.
 The satirical act, says Morissette, was aimed at US government institutions for over-reacting to cultural, free expression, as a result of the fallout surrounding Jackson's Super Bowl faux pas when her breast was exposed to millions of television viewers.
"As you may or may not be aware, recently in the United States, I ran into a little problem with regards to a lyric in one my songs," Morissette told the near-sellout audience of 17,000, referring to her latest release titled, Everything, which includes the lyrics, "I can be an ***hole of the grandest kind".
"It was requested that I change a word in the first verse. Well, I am overjoyed to be back in my homeland, the true north... strong and censorfree."
American radio stations threatened recently to ban the song, forcing Morissette to change the controversial word to "nightmare".
Asked tongue-in-cheek if Jackson should be granted cultural refugee status in Canada, Morissette responded: "Now that's a good idea."
Reuters
See the video of Alanis Morissette's live 'nude' protest here.
 Sketch Transcript:
Alanis: As you may or may not be aware, recently in the United States I ran into a little problem with regards to a lyric in one of my songs. It was requested that I change a word in the first verse. Well, I am overjoyed to be back in my homeland, the True North, strong and censor free. A place where I'm allowed to say things like (bleep), and (bleep), and (bleep, bleep, bleep, bleep). Umm. Apparently I can't say those things. Well at least we still live in a land where we can still think of the human body as being beautiful. And we're not afraid of the female breast. Which is why I am truly proud to be able to stand here, and do this (she takes off her robe).
Announcer: Alanis, Alanis....
Morissette: Hi Harv! That's Harv, that's the Assistant Director...
Announcer: Actually, you can't do that Alanis.
Morissette: What do you mean?
Announcer: Well we can't show nipples on Canadian television.
Morissette: You can't? Okay (she proceeds to take them off).
Announcer: And you can't show your pubic hair either.
Morissette: Oh. Alright (she takes some off)
Announcer: All of it Alanis. All of it (she takes the rest off)
Morissette: Ok. Alright.
Announcer: You're good!
Morissette: Okay! That's right. I feel great. A little cold, though, but really great. So let's heat it up with some 16 hot, sweaty men. Typically in this arena, that would be the Edmonton Oilers playing their asses off. Tonight however, it's four |
| 14 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| nudeisntlewd |
Posted - 05/20/2004 : 03:53:41 AM
I have no gripe with Alanis' act. The problem I have is with Janet's.
"They associate nudity with sex because that is the only time they see it."
Exactly. That's how they showed it. That's how it was seen. The make-believe sexual assault involving Janet and Justin is an example of just that. Nudity portayed with sex. Was that an appropriate setting? The answer is blindingly obvious and requires no contemplation.
"Alanis Morrissette... act was just to highlight the stupidity of such a fuss being made over a bit of bare flesh."
If that was her point, it was a good one and I applaud it. But the point was lost because a fuss was not made simply about bare flesh. The issue with those of us who thought it was in bad taste was not seeing bit of a breast. It was with the sexual presentation of it. Nudity can be public. Intimate behavior should be private and special. Just try a grab at a nudist facility some time and see how big of a bruise their foot can make on your butt as you are kicked out.
"The civil rights movement in the 60's certainly got in a lot of faces, and I don't think diplomacy would have ever changed America the way that the marches and boycotts did. It forced people to think about what is right and what are simply unfounded fears and prejudices."
That it did. But that situation was to fight true social injustice. Racial injustice warranted strong actions. The same can't be said here, at least in Janet's case. Placing the two events in the same category diminishes the seriousness of the life-threatening struggle suffered by the Black Amercians of and prior to, the 60s. There is no comparison.
Randy  |
| skinnydipper |
Posted - 05/19/2004 : 7:09:35 PM
I think what Alanis did was funny. I think way too much fuss was made over Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction", and Alanis was enjoying some well-deserved satire over how absurd and uptight American mores can be at times.
Don't you think it's perverse that, in America, nudity is more likely to get a movie a restricted rating than graphic violence? You can show blood and gore but must not show the naked human form.
Nudkiwi, I agree with you that nudism isn't just about disrobing, but is as much (if not more) about opening minds. There are countless personal stories of first time visits to nude beaches that all end with 'it wasn't as embarrassing as I thought it would be.' We know nudity is cool, and I think the trend is going our way.
As for those who fear that "getting in your face" doesn't help a cause, I'd give that some more thought. The civil rights movement in the 60's certainly got in a lot of faces, and I don't think diplomacy would have ever changed America the way that the marches and boycotts did. It forced people to think about what is right and what are simply unfounded fears and prejudices.
Lastly, I've noticed numerous opinions on this board that center around the notion of nudism as a "cause." You shouldn't do this or that because you will embarrass the cause, etc. This attitude needs some more thinking, too. Not all who enjoy nudity are "nudists." I certainly don't think of myself as one. It sounds way too organized for me. Similar to how I would describe myself as spiritual, but not religious. Make sense?
So I don't think we have to worry whether Alanis Morissette, Janet Jackson, or Richard Hatch are "nudists." Who cares? They speak for themselves. There are plenty of articulate people who are nudists who can speak for nudism.
I agree that we should be careful in our pursuit of happiness, in all of its forms, to not intentionally offend others. Not so much from a "in your" or "not in your" face point of view, but simply because it's rude. Alanis is entitled to her satire, and I really don't think it had anything to do with "nudism." Advocates of nudism can't claim responsibility for everyone who enjoys nudity.
Eric |
| NUDKIWI |
Posted - 05/19/2004 : 5:52:13 PM
Wake up guys nudity is already "in their faces".It's in ad's,on T.V. and even in song clips and all usually in a way that most of the society looks at it,with a sexual slant,(one exception is Miss Morrissette's song where she is nude through the whole clip,and not a sign of sex.)
Now i am no radical,i am a 41 year old married male with a 7 year old son who just happens to enjoy most things without clothes.I take my family to a nudist club or beach or we go nude around the house.
Now what worries me is that at any time some idiot with the common misconception that nudity is dirty or obscene can turn up at my favourite nudist beach and complain about me enjoying the sun aunatural and quite possibly get me arrested or charged with indecent exposure.It dosen't matter that i am in an "appropriate" setting(whatever that is)i end up being embarrassed or inconvenienced,or worse the beach becomes in danger of being taken from nudists just because of the lurid thoughts in someone elses mind.
Just look at all the cases in the news recently,the nudist youth camp almost shut down,the woman at the pools who had the police called on her because her THREE year old was topless,the lady who was reported because she had innocent nude photo's of her toddler.Is this a balanced society,i don't think so.Why? Because they only ever get to see one side of the story.They associate nudity with sex because that is the only time they see it.
You mention Cheri in one of your posts.I applaude this lady.I have watched that clip that she made regarding nudism in the South,now to me this is "in your face" unashamed display of wholesome social nudity,more of it please Cheri.
I agree that the Janet Jackson incident had nothing to do with nudism and that she is in no way a nudist,but i think Alanis Morrissette is,just read her interview(in another thread i think) where she talks of body acceptance,and her act was just to highlight the stupidity of such a fuss being made over a bit of bare flesh.Be honest if the breast had have been covered when the same act was done would there have been such a fuss.NO!!
Our nudist federation down here has just begun a campaign to lure more people to the nudist lifestyle.They are asking the clubs to be more open and suggesting that groups organise beach outings and sporting events,and publicise and invite the general public to come along and join in.The aim is to show people that we aren't flashing sexual deviants but rather that we are ordinary folk who enjoy recreation in the nude,and maybe get a few people hooked.
If we are to change societies thinking with regard to social nudity and sexual promiscuity we need to open up a little and present our side of the story.Yeah we may piss some people off but when you take a step forward your always bound to disturb the soil a tad.
Naturally KIWI |
| nudeisntlewd |
Posted - 05/19/2004 : 3:03:18 PM
Getting in people's faces doesn't win supporters. It pisses people off. Diplomacy, not force, wins supporters.
Randy |
| nudeisntlewd |
Posted - 05/19/2004 : 2:47:56 PM
quote:
Originally posted by spadoc
Folks,
While I remain committed to the furtherance and enhancement of public acceptance of social family nudism, I do not believe that "in your face" demonstrations encourage that acceptance. We have to be seen as mainstream where nudity becomes unremarkable because of public acceptance in venues where nudity would be appropriate, like nudist beaches, nudist clubs and resorts. If we as nudists wish to have our lifestyle accepted, we MUST be aware that there are others who do not (for whatever reason) share those beliefs and accord them the same respect we wish for ourselves (which is why parenthetically, I think that Richard Hatch is NOT a nudist, but that's another topic).
Janet Jackson's Super Bowl "performance" and Ms. Morissette's satirical response to the reaction certainly doesn't help our cause. I as a nudist was somewhat offended by Janet Jackson, not because of the breast baring, but because I thought the sexual connotation of the performance was wholly inappropriate for the setting.
To paraphrase our friend Cheri, I don't think this type of "performance" does anything to positively promote nudism. On the contrary, I believe it hurts our attempt to become perceived as mainstream.
Walt
Walt,
Your post was exactly what I've felt and said all along, and you've expressed it eloquently!
Does anyone after all, really believe that either Janet or Alanis did this in an effort to promote body acceptance? Especially Janet, the way it was done. I don't think so. I sure don't believe that was the motivation. They were no more than cheap sensationalist stunts. And that's how they made nudity look. Dirt cheap! It does nothing for our cause, because the cause they have is not ours.
During the months since these events, a lot of the tone here and on other forums has hinted to me that many nudists express the attitude that any nudity is good nudity. No matter who it offends. No matter what the context. Without logical consideration as to how it affects our cause. If we condone bad behavior, we are categorized along with those that do it, rather than those who harmlessly enjoy the practice in appropriate settings.
Randy |
| grand kai |
Posted - 05/19/2004 : 06:36:35 AM
I agree with you KIWI. It has been said that bad publicity is better than no publicity. If no one gets up and does anything then nothing will get done. There are many aspects of life which show that someone that is in the public eye be it a politician, athlete or media personality needs to come forward and express their beliefs before anyone will listen. As for example medical research and the like. I think that what Janet did was a benifit to nudism for those who are open to the fact that those looking for a sexual implication found it and those looking at it as a nude display found that as well. What Alanis did was a statement about the closed minded highly openion minded and overly controlling nature of the US citizen. Everyone is different and whether you are a nudist or not you can find sexuality in what they did, but can also find sexuality in the way a woman walks down the street.
Albert Ramirez
grand_kai@msn.com |
| naturalgar |
Posted - 05/05/2004 : 12:48:40 PM
Back to the forum concerning Alanis Morissette....
All protests aside, is she an open advocate of nudism? I guess I know her music a bit, but there have also been interviews with her that discuss nudism. I'm not sure in what context though> Indeed in one of her sonds she"..Recomends getting naked in your livingroom".. but that leads to another question. Are there any other celebrities who openly practice nudism or attend clubs. They could be a good mouthpiece for the nudist movement. Please advise.
Gary |
| Kimberly |
Posted - 04/12/2004 : 04:06:56 AM
Spadoc is right in that it does not further our cause as nudists. I do think though that being able to laugh at our shortcomings is a better way to protest.
Kim =^.^= |
| NUDKIWI |
Posted - 04/10/2004 : 4:47:14 PM
I think to a certain extent we have to get"in their face" not in a radical sense but we have to show the archaic censorship laws that countries have regarding nudism up as what they are,SENSELESS.That is why i applaude Alanis and what she did.Nudism is not only about removing your clothes,it is about changing your way of thinking regarding nudity and sex.If everytime someone ,flashed or exposed themselves in a"sexual" way we just said,oh ho hum so what it's only a part of the humanbody,seen it before,how long do you think the flashing would go on.The purpose of it is to shock,if it don't shock they wont do it.
Think back a few years when it was a great sin to be homosexual,society frowned on it,nobody admitted to being one,it was kept behind closed doors(see any similarities here?).Then the movement got real "in their face",protests,parades,calling themselves"gay" instead of just homosexual,or one of the many derogatory terms most people called them.Now,in some instances,it is more acceptable to be gay than to be a nudist.
I am not saying we should march nude down the streets(though if any one wants to i say go for it,exposure=familiarity=acceptance)what i am trying to say is if we join in with the so called "mainstream" and condemn someone when they do a stunt like Janet's on the grounds of nudity,we in effect are making the same ties between nudity and sex that they are,we are enforcing their views,strengthening their argument to the detriment of our own.
Naturally KIWI |
| tucsonnude |
Posted - 04/10/2004 : 12:39:01 AM
So true Breadman..we can dish it out but we can't take it..if it wasn't so cold up there I would move..same goes for Holland..my dutch is non existant..I sent letter to fcc about the hypocrisy of it all..too bad I won't get a reply..so again violence wins out over beauty.. |
| The Bead Man |
Posted - 04/09/2004 : 11:04:57 AM
At least Canadians are aware of their prejudices to laugh at them!
Cheers!
David
"The Bead Man"
www.thebeadman.net
The Bead Artist formerly known as Revilo42 |
| spadoc |
Posted - 04/09/2004 : 10:32:49 AM
Folks,
While I remain committed to the furtherance and enhancement of public acceptance of social family nudism, I do not believe that "in your face" demonstrations encourage that acceptance. We have to be seen as mainstream where nudity becomes unremarkable because of public acceptance in venues where nudity would be appropriate, like nudist beaches, nudist clubs and resorts. If we as nudists wish to have our lifestyle accepted, we MUST be aware that there are others who do not (for whatever reason) share those beliefs and accord them the same respect we wish for ourselves (which is why parenthetically, I think that Richard Hatch is NOT a nudist, but that's another topic).
Janet Jackson's Super Bowl "performance" and Ms. Morissette's satirical response to the reaction certainly doesn't help our cause. I as a nudist was somewhat offended by Janet Jackson, not because of the breast baring, but because I thought the sexual connotation of the performance was wholly inappropriate for the setting.
To paraphrase our friend Cheri, I don't think this type of "performance" does anything to positively promote nudism. On the contrary, I believe it hurts our attempt to become perceived as mainstream.
Walt |
| Kimberly |
Posted - 04/09/2004 : 03:31:09 AM
I think it is more who controls your networks Calmnude.
Kim =^.^= |
| calmnude |
Posted - 04/08/2004 : 5:59:36 PM
well if you want to see how the first amendment should work in the us, maybe we should take a tip from canada. |
|
|
|
|
| Nudist-Resorts.Org Discussion Forum Bulletin Board Nudism Clothing Optional Resort Naturism Nude Beaches |
© 2002-2020 SUN |
 |
|
|
