The naked hypocrisy of Game Of Thrones’ nudity

boing
470

I’m revisiting this because last night I watched a film about the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna. At one point the narrator explains that what is now regarded as high art might at the time have been seen as rap-musician style bling boasting (those Dutch interiors with loving illustrations of plates, clocks, furniture and food) or as pornography. For perhaps no good reason,some of this stuff has ended up labelled art and is very valuable, while other pictures are worthless.
Nudity in high art is very variable. Some of it looks very homoerotic but may not have been at the time. In some cultures female nudity has been quite acceptable, in others taboo.
And what is pornography? Literally it is writing about, or pictures of, prostitutes. If a female life model has never been paid for sex, that’s art. Is that a credible definition, given that powerful men often have trophy wives, which is a kind of permanent legalised prostitution. One one account, Venus in Botticelli’s Birth of Venus was a respectable Florentine woman; on another, a notorious prostitute. Does that affect the status of the painting (if you visit the Uffizi, you will realise that it is one of the wonders of the world. But it was hidden away for many years as being too rude to look at.)

I guess what I am coming round to is the view that GoT gratuitous nudity may actually reflect how things are in an aristocratic world; the HBO exec who made the comment about perverts is the modern equivalent of an aristocrat, and the show reflects his world view. Far from hypocrisy, it may be revealing an uncomfortable truth about thr reality of male power.

1 Like
471

Incidentally and following the remark above about GoS with lower levels of violence, I offer a few possible TV shows:

Game of Bones: Palaeontologists write one another increasingly rude memos as they battle to control bone collections around the world. Lots of reconstructions of what the original female owners of the bones might have looked like.

Game of Cones: Rival groups of traffic wardens attempt to gain control of parking ticketing in various London boroughs. For some reason the most hotly contested areas are red light districts. (This one is British and will have wobbly sets, and a few US actors with even more wobbly accents.)

Game of Moans: Savage infighting as different entrepreneurs seek to control porn film studios in California with armies of lawyers. Lots of gratuitous shots of lawyers and naked women.

Game of Zones: As Game of Moans, but with property developers and real estate lots. Many shots of realtors making calls in pools surrounded by naked women.

1 Like
472

So, on the one hand, Westeros is pretty much a patriarchal society, therefore men in Westeros generally have more power, therefore they’re the ones who get to gaze at pretty young things with no clothes on. Therefore, bewbs!

But, on the other hand, there are loads of women in Westeros, and points further east, who have plenty of power, and presumably at least some of them would enjoy gazing upon pretty young boys with no clothes on. I’m guessing that Renly Baratheon and Loras Tyrell would be happy to abuse their power by having naked men hanging about the place. Varys and Petyr Baelish both strike me as the kind of people who just like beautiful things, including naked men and women, purely for the aesthetics. Actually, Baelish ran a brothel. I find it a little hard to believe that he solely catered for a clientele that was only looking for female companionship.

Also, why do we not see Lady Olenna Tyrell naked?

2 Likes
473

Welcome to BB! Hang around, join some conversations!

Mmm. That’s a bullshit argument, right there. The political machinations and strict geography are fictional but both are quite clearly based on real events and real geography. Furthermore, aside from the obviously fantasy stuff like dragons and white walkers and whatnot, the series - and GRRM - actually does a pretty great job of creating an historically credible milieu. The battle scenes make military sense and a credible from a warfighting perspective, the sword play and armour and clothing are all quite authentic. Using crows, for another example, to carry messages requires only a very slight shift in perspective since pigeons really were used for that very purpose in the real world not all that long ago.

Overall I find the the GoT world to be quite credibly and authentically realised, and I think its resemblance to actual history is really rather strong. And I do not think that was an accident. I think it was a deliberate choice by GRRM and the series’ creators.

2 Likes
474

I take your point. Obviously, if this issue wasn’t so significant, there would not be the vigorous conversation about it.

I think you have veered away from my point though. I don’t look to art to redress social grievances. Art is reflective of social issues, and art can certainly reveal social issues, but the work should be judged as art for its emotive impact, not as a sociology experiment. If we want to argue over whether GoT is art or not, that is a separate debate.

As to the ratio of male to female nudity under discussion, something tells me that if there were far more female viewers that wanted more male nudity in GoT, the producers would find a way to include it. However, to assume that women and men want to equally view the nudity of the opposite sex seems to be an unsupported assumption. It may be true or not, but it seems presumptive to assume that all women want it as much as men do, and also presumptive to assume that the creators are dismissive of what women like to see. I would prefer that the creators be indifferent to what social issues the viewers are concerned about, and simply further the narrative however they choose, and let the chips fall where they may.

The issue of how our society views male nudity seems to apply to your point as well. For whatever reason, the male form is not considered to be as artistically appealing as the female form, and is somehow more graphic, and more rarely seen because of it. Perhaps the creators are actually reflecting this societal issue, as much as they may be inequitably catering to the adolescent fantasies of some of their viewers, to the detriment of women.

475

No, I’ve watched a lot of them though, and most don’t. It obviously doesn’t appear in literally every “adult” show, but it doesn’t even feature in most of them. And even when it does appear it’s usually fairly infrequently, there’s only a handful of shows where it’s anywhere near as regular as with GoT.

476

So… what you are saying is that the author’s claims can’t be substantiated. Gotcha.

As for what the author does understand, I am not certain, but those topics in particular are particularly weak for her. This is so trivial … but lemme try to walk through it.

(1) Nudity. There is a lot of nudity. Both male and female.
Is there more female nudity? No. There simply isn’t. Are more of the women who are nude in traditionally less “respectable” roles (prostitutes for example). Yes. There you go, an actual contentious discussion there! But that has nothing to do with nudity, it’s about gender roles. The topic of nudity here actually distracts from an actual constructive conversation.

In the end, the game of thrones displays a lot of casual nudity. That casual nudity is both female and male. Plenty of both.

(2) Genitalia

Genitalia are indeed genitalia and you see much less of that than casual nudity. Much much less. But, of the two genders, you will see far more male genitalia. I’m not sure how this is misunderstood. It’s not even controversial. Female genitalia has been very rarely glimpsed on the show, whereas an exposed penis can be seen in seemingly nearly every episode.

As for how much of a body part is exposed, yes, there is a difference between discerning the outline of a vulva… and viewing all the way to the cervix. There is also a difference between viewing something in shadow and …etc, etc. I’m embarrassed that I actually have to state that. Is boingboing’s audience this… young? Maybe there is another reason y’all shouldn’t be watching GoT.

Comeon folks. This is simple simple stuff.

…sigh, I still can’t believe I am responding to this…

(3) fantasy and historical fiction
As for the difference between historical fiction and fantasy, I will leave that to the readers to do some research on their own. It won’t take long for you to nod your head and agree that the author of this article somehow mistook this fantasy series for historical fiction. But even if it were historical fiction, there will often be degrees of authenticity dependent on audience, budget, ability to understand dialogue, etc. But that is neither here nor there. GoT is not historical fiction. It’s fantasy.

(4) grooming patterns
Humanity has been around a very long time. (Please research that as well if you need to). I have an idea, simply take a look at various photos of native americans, for just one small example set. Tribe to tribe the grooming patterns ranged from “shave everything off” to “let it all grow out” and everything in between. There you go… So, when you film your own fantasy, you can pick whatever grooming pattern you want. Why? Because it’s a fantasy! But guess what, if you looking for historical grooming patterns to use as a guide… the grooming standards followed 10,000 years ago were as varied as the grooming standards followed throughout various cultures today (probably more varied actually, considering humanity is far more homogeneous today).

(5) beauty standards
Similar to grooming standards, beauty standards also are quite varied historically, though of course constrained by genetic predisposition for attractiveness (health, vigor, etc). From use of makeup to hair coloring, to foot binding, to neck rings (elongating the neck), to piercings and tattoos, to ritual scaring. Etc.

— Okay, I hope that gives guidance to our younger audience to do some research on these topics —

In summary:
The author makes a lot of statements surrounding nudity, genital exposure, grooming, beauty standards, and historical relevance. I don’t know if these topics are a blind spot for her, or simply the result of an utter lack of worldly experience or education, but she is wrong on Every. Single. Point. It’s actually quite a stunning example of inept (or maybe simply naive?) analysis. The comment thread is a comment thread. I assume half the audience is 12 and so I forgive them a bit for that. Research this stuff yourself–but do you really have to though? Really? I have laid the foundation for guidance on these topics. It shouldn’t take that long.

477

It’s so easy! I mean, if you have to drive a road that’s always in disrepair, just find another road, or don’t drive, amiright? Or maybe your boss calls you “Fucken Mealymouthed Dipshit” all the time, don’t say or do anything about it, just don’t be compromised and go find another job! I mean, that stupid ass Jesus Christ moron guy didn’t get the hint to just shut the fuck up already, and we all know what he got, huh?! What a dumbass! Or that Snowden idiot, or dipshit Daniel Elsberg, or Rachel Carson…
I wish all these people understood it’s really about ethics in games journalism.
By the way, that’s entirely sarcasm. I’m being sarcastic here. Completely facetious. I feel I need to point that out because your answer, that bit I quoted above, blows.

3 Likes
478

So why make that claim in the first place if you knew the answer already? Maybe you just wanted to skip the nuance here and jump right to the “You’re Wrong Nyah Nyah” part?

479

Good job on ignoring the part of that sentence which explains why your reply is dumb. The original comment I replied to was wrong whether you interpreted it literally or figuratively.

480

So, if Jon Snow starts using a cellphone to communicate with… whomever, that’s cool, because: dragons?

2 Likes
481

Why not?

1 Like
482

If that’s what you got from my reply, I suggest doing some reading comprehension exercises at your local library.

Oh, gosh, thanks for taking the time to help! You’re so nice!

I do so love condescension in writing, although I also wish you would post your rules on having “actual constructive conversation[s]” because these women just don’t get it, amiright? So distracted by silly things, they are.

Gotcha. End of story. That clears it right up. Although one wonders why so many other people appear to disagree with your understanding of the ratios involved–they’re probably just distracted, like you said earlier.

I will? Actually, although I’m distracted, I don’t see “far more male genitalia” in GOT. But…

…I’m likely misunderstanding these non-controversial things. B/c distraction, clearly.

So it’s like a lot of rare-ness? Did rare wake up today and think, “You know, I’m feeling like I’m just not enough, that I’m less-than in a not-so-less-than way, that I don’t adequately convey the lack of something, because I just don’t connote the condition of infrequency!” Maybe you’ll say that’s very true?
Also, “seemingly nearly every”…fucking hell, just go with something–say it and be done instead of beating around the godamn bush. Do you see too much cock in your GOT? Or is it that you’re unable to adequately convey the vagina/cock ratio without re-watching the entire series and therefore the OP’s contention is bullshit? Hey, maybe the vag/cock ratio isn’t the thing, and the thing is that GOT shows female breasts for no reason other than to show female breasts. Again, I’m probably very un-rarely distracted. Or something.

Awwwwwwwwwwwwwww, it’s so easy! So glad you’re here to help clear up the 470+ comments by the schoolchildren of Dipshit U. Lemme skip ahead.

So helpful to us young’uns! Stick around, maybe you can help me understand the adiabatic lift rate of air, or perhaps physics, or words in general! OUR SAVIOR IS AT HAND!!

These “Feminazis” and their dumb feminine femininness femininity, trying to give us all the menstruation thing, amiright?

And that guidance is very seemingly nearly every rarely glimpsed. I think. Wait, maybe your research is nearly every rarely seemingly neverly glimpsed? Ah! The distractions! But I’m 13, so maybe I get forgiven.

It’s okay, I’ll wait. :smiley:

5 Likes
483

484

“Frankly, I’m surprised more straight dudes aren’t annoyed at being catered to in such a patronizing way.” Oh, really??

485

Whoah. That might explain both why my clothes are so tight today, and why I’m so crabby.

OR IT COULD BE BECAUSE OF ALL OF THESE IDIOTS WITH THEIR IDIOTIC “ARGUMENTS”.

But probably I’m just manstruating.

Plenty? Yet, so many are raising their voices for MOAR MALE NUDITY.

So: NOT Plenty. Not nearly enough.

 

oh, hell. here you go:

2 Likes
486

I find it interesting that women’s breasts are “just like” men’s breasts, therefore women being filmed topless ain’t no big thing, but men’s penises apparently have only one function (sexual) instead of a much-more-used-and-in-fact-necessary-for-survival function, which is to expel urine from the bladder.

So I might argue that topless woman = bottomless man, which would mean we’re definitely not seeing an equal quota!

2 Likes
487

Actually… this is a great way to illustrate this point.

Let’s set the stage. This is USA -focused (my apologies):

  • In nearly 100% of the USA, men are allowed to be nude minus the genital region.
  • In many many places in the USA, women are similarly allowed to be nude minus the genital region.
  • In much of the USA, away from population centers, full nudity for both men and women is completely legal.
  • The legality of public sexual activity similarly varies, but that is a separate topic. It is only mentioned here because often the two are conflated.

So you want a list; how about this: In most (probably almost all) places within the USA where nudity is not legal, but a woman is being sentenced for public nudity, her sentence will generally be lighter than (often tossed out of court) a man’s sentencing due to the level of exposure of the genitalia. There is a ton of precedence for this. And it is well known, but often it takes a decent lawyer to ensure this point is made, especially in the more backwards corners of our nation.

Note: The visibility of genitalia for women versus men permeates our legal code, our ratings systems, etc.

Now, this doesn’t mean you will not be harassed. Many MANY people are arrested, forced to fight the arrest, and then are released. This is true for many things beyond nudity of course.

If you are not in the USA… the biology remains the same, but legal codes are varied.

Aside: My niece just informed me of a new dress code rule change in her high school: “No exposed shoulders.” Explanation given (by my niece to me): “Exposed shoulders are too ‘sexy’”

sigh Progress is two steps forward, one step back.

488

Funny! Though … the whole urination thing holds true for women as well. Heh.

489

“Plenty? Yet, so many are raising their voices for MOAR MALE NUDITY.” (and thanks for the gif of penis objects… funny)

Male nudity already occurs far more often on the show. Maybe the request is really for more naked male prostitutes. Sure. Why not! It’s not all that… suspension of disbelief-believable, but why not? In the end, as long as the story is being driven forward, and whole classes of people are not being denigrated, I am all for it. Hell… make the entire show cast in the nude, “Winter is Coming” or not!

The level of nudity for both sexes is a non-issue. Really, it isn’t. And if you are from a non-western country where any random 1-square-inch of a woman’s body is sexualized (but not a man’s!), I have no patience for you (today’s lesson in cultural non-sensitivity).

Really, the only criticism of the show that I think holds some merit is that the world is very patriarchal. The patriarchal nature of the world though has been exploited to illustrate how screwed up that is. I.e., It’s been used to criticize patriarchal societies. Maybe it hasn’t been as overt as it could be, but that theme is pretty prevalent.