Nudity isn’t sexy.

Sex sells, while simple nudity doesn’t.

About 5 or 6 weeks ago, I read a blog from Evan at Planet Nude about the algorithmic amplification of body shame.

On Social Media, Sex Sells, Nudism Doesn't

In the article, Evan observed that sex sells, while simple nudity doesn’t.  He raises the point that people are more offended by the sight of a nude male than they are by overtly sexualised images used in advertising and on social media.

There is a paradox that a picture of a naked person simply being naked is considered offensive, and yet a partially clad person in a sexually suggestive pose is desirable and used to sell products, often unrelated to the situation. The example Evan uses in his article, an ad for a watch, is quite the illustration of this paradox that sexualised images are ok but simple nudity isn’t.  Publishers and many social media sites go to great lengths to avoid total nudity but will publish a picture of a near-naked woman on a leash being held by a man wearing a nice watch.

If the ad were to appear opposite an article about or an image of a woman breastfeeding in public, then I can guarantee that there would be more complaints about the breastfeeding mother than the sexual domination and humiliation of a woman in the watch ad.

Much of Evan's article focuses on the algorithms, their biases and their influence over what we see on our feeds.

“But far worse is the damage it does to reinforce harmful societal norms and promote the notion that nonsexual nudity is shameful or inappropriate.”

Many social media platforms ban nudity but allow all manner of suggestive or sexualised images, so long as the female nipples and the genitals of all genders are obscured.  As long as I can’t see a penis, a vulva or female nipples, anything goes.  These obscured images are the ones that algorithms will let through their complex set of judgements about what is and is not acceptable to society, often making these judgements without context.  The penis is bad, a not-quite-naked woman on a leash is good.

Society is filled with contradictions and injustices.  While people fight about what pronoun to use and how to best avoid offending every minority group in existence, many are oblivious to the broader injustices that affect the majority of the population every day.  A man can walk down the street topless, while a woman can’t.  A woman can wear a dress, a skirt or trousers, yet a man will be ridiculed for wearing a dress, and God forbid a floral patterned dress.  Examples of men being criticised for taking their young daughters to a parenting room to change a diaper, or a woman breastfeeding her hungry child in a shopping mall are far more common than they should be.

Social media algorithms filter out normal non-sexual nudity and therefore simple nudity is removed from being observed, shared and normalised by society.

Because we rarely see non-sexual nudity in the media, and when we do it is often presented with a snigger or innuendo, perhaps we are conditioned that simple nudity is something to be avoided.  Scantily clad people selling us stuff must be ok, as we see it all the time, but actual nudity? We rarely see that so it must be taboo.

How would society react if non-sexual nudity were commonplace?  If wearing nothing was a valid clothing option and the simple naked human form seen as inoffensive and natural?  What if simple nudity was shown the indifference that we currently display to the colour people choose to die or highlight their hair?

If simple nudity were normalised, would these sexualised advertisements and posts be seen more for what they are and perhaps criticised for their content?

What if naturists can turn this situation into an argument for promoting normal nudity?

Many people express concern about the over-sexualisation of our media and society in general, so it is not just naturists that might support steps to reduce the level of sexualisation in advertising and social media.

What if we appeal to people by highlighting the double standard in social media?  Highlighting the ridiculous contradictions between non-sexual nudity and overtly sexualised content.  Why don’t we question the content of advertising and social media?  Which is more offensive, a picture of someone naked in their garden or an image of a man with a near-naked woman on a leash?  In today's warped society, the dominated female is more acceptable.  I don’t know about you but that seems wrong to me.

I know that the images we are fed are largely driven by algorithms and that it may be nigh on impossible to change the way that AI judges context.  After all, AI is simply responding to the responses (clicks) of people viewing content.

Perhaps there is no hope, and society really does want overly sexualised content.  But if these sexualised images are now part of our lives, then there would seem to be plenty of opportunities to highlight that simple non-sexual nudity must surely be more acceptable that the sexually suggestive content we are exposed to daily.

Thank you for reading, have a comfortable day.