Game of Thrones

[Ythan]

It's because television is made for men.

[Ythan]

Straight white American men.

[ChannelDelibird]

Jaime/Cersei original shoot script leaked

http://imgur.com/gallery/9iCHB/

[Tierce]

I would have watched the hell out of that scene. Don't care about the rest of the episode, that would have been amazing.

[absta101]

Just watch Oz, it's a really good tv show based in a male prison. It's also made by HBO.

[absta101]

In terms of nudity it's like GoT but everyone is male.

[Tierce]

And the relevance of that is...? I don't care what happens in Oz, I care about GoT, otherwise I'd be talking about Oz in the main TV show thread.

[Ythan]

Absta why are you posting in this thread?

[absta101]

Lol, I was responding to Reck. Calm down...

[Rhinox]

Jaime/Cersei original shoot script leaked

http://imgur.com/gallery/9iCHB/

lolz

I'm more talking about the fact that we get tits and vag and female nudity every goddamn episode and the amount of male nudity is, I think, 2-3 times the entire show for a brief moment?

Well, generally, even for HBO, female nudity is viewed as more okay (acceptable, maybe?) than male nudity, for some reason I think. Though I wouldn't complain if I got to see some Jaime cock.

Well to be fair there is probably equal if not more male chest than female chest shown, and as for the P vs V argument, I'd argue that more P than V has been shown, as HBO full frontal female doesn't usually actually show much if any of the female organ at all. At best it would be like just a part of the slit usually obscurred. With full frontal male, you pretty much get to see all there is to see, so if you got to see 1 cock, you're technically winning

[Tierce]

absta, the point is that you're comparing oranges and apples. You are saying "this show that has an all-male cast has male nudity, go watch it!" when we are discussing the disparity of female and male nudity on a show with lots of male

and

female characters, and that it is bothersome to see that--not necessarily because of the lack of eye candy for certain groups, but that the show deems it acceptable to have one and not the other. Oz showing male nudity and it being HBO is completely irrelevant to this discussion, and I'm fairly certain that Reck knows where to find male nudity if he wants to watch it for the sake of it.

Your argument is disingenuous, Rhinox. As long as they make warnings for female nudity when you see a naked female, as long as that keeps being censored, and as long as a crotch is a sexual image--it doesn't matter if you don't technically see her vulva. You're dwelling on technicalities to make a silly argument when it's obvious that it's a skewed ratio.

[xRECKONERx]

Just watch Oz, it's a really good tv show based in a male prison. It's also made by HBO.

I don't want to watch a show because it has male nudity. There's enough male nudity on

Looking

for me, plus an entire internet of pornography, plus I have a pretty cute fiance to ogle.

It's about the fact that watching a show with the ratio of female:male nudity compared to the ratio of female:male characters makes me uncomfortable. I'm not complaining about the lack of female nudity in Looking or Oz, because those are shows with an all male cast. Game of Thrones seems to hire a pretty even number of men and women as principal cast, but then only makes the women strip down nude. I'm excited to see more nudity on the male side because, well obviously because I'm gay, but more than that, because I think there's a serious disparity in the show between showing males and females.

I mean, fuck, even in goddamn sex scenes with both men and women, it's always the women who are trotted out like prized strippers while the men get to conceal themselves.

[Ythan]

No that's a serious question though.

[quadz08]

I don't want to watch a show because it has male nudity. There's enough male nudity on Looking for me, plus an entire internet of pornography, plus I have a pretty cute fiance to ogle.

It's about the fact that watching a show with the ratio of female:male nudity compared to the ratio of female:male characters makes me uncomfortable. I'm not complaining about the lack of female nudity in Looking or Oz, because those are shows with an all male cast. Game of Thrones seems to hire a pretty even number of men and women as principal cast, but then only makes the women strip down nude. I'm excited to see more nudity on the male side because, well obviously because I'm gay, but more than that, because I think there's a serious disparity in the show between showing males and females.

I mean, fuck, even in goddamn sex scenes with both men and women, it's always the women who are trotted out like prized strippers while the men get to conceal themselves.

Straight up.

[Rhinox]

Your argument is disingenuous, Rhinox. As long as they make warnings for female nudity when you see a naked female, as long as that keeps being censored, and as long as a crotch is a sexual image--it doesn't matter if you don't technically see her vulva.

You're dwelling on technicalities to make a silly argument when it's obvious that it's a skewed ratio.

Umm yeah I thought it was pretty obviously just a silly argument

[chamber]

when we are discussing the disparity of female and male nudity on a show with lots of male and female characters, and that it is bothersome to see that--not necessarily because of the lack of eye candy for certain groups, but that the show deems it acceptable to have one and not the other.

That's a really silly argument. I like seeing naked women more than naked men. Honestly in Game of Thrones I find all of the nudity to be more of a detractor than anything, but that's another argument, male nudity is still a stronger detractor. I assume that there is a non-discrete spectrum of such preferences. I also assume, however, that they are largely grouped towards heavily preferring one over the other. It makes perfect sense then, that some shows would cater to specific demographics of those spectrums. You can argue against the current distribution at a macroscopic level, its likely skewed but not something I look for in TV. But to argue that every show must have a completely even display from both is ridiculous.

[zoraster]

This map is kind of great: http://quartermaester.info/

You can set it either by episode or chapter, so you avoid spoilers.

---

And that would be a much more convincing argument if there were other shows that showed a lot of dong. But even shows that draw a higher proportion of straight females and gay males don't show it much. I don't think people are asking for even an even distribution. Just some.

Oh, also:

[chamber]

And that would be a much more convincing argument if there were other shows that showed a lot of dong. But even shows that draw a higher proportion of straight females and gay males don't show it much. I don't think people are asking for even an even distribution. Just some.

I don't know what shows you watch, but I don't see much female nudity either.
I admitted that one could likely make an argument for it over the scope of every show. One could even make a more specific argument about GoT. The stated one (even number of cast = even amount if nudity) is absurd though.
There are shows that show at least some.

[quadz08]

I don't think it is absurd at all? I'm not saying I don't get it from a financial / business / viewership perspective (I imagine that female sexy bits tend to sell better than male ones), but from a social justice-type of perspective, it'd be nice to see some more dicks.

[Bella]

We interrupt this argument to bring you this important piece of humor:

What do you call the staff entrance to a Brothel?

Spoiler:

You may now resume arguing.

[chamber]

I don't think it is absurd at all? I'm not saying I don't get it from a financial / business / viewership perspective (I imagine that female sexy bits tend to sell better than male ones), but from a social justice-type of perspective, it'd be nice to see some more dicks.

Why is it more socially just.

[Korts]

Your argument is disingenuous, Rhinox. As long as they make warnings for female nudity when you see a naked female, as long as that keeps being censored, and as long as a crotch is a sexual image--it doesn't matter if you don't technically see her vulva. You're dwelling on technicalities to make a silly argument when it's obvious that it's a skewed ratio.

To be fair to Rhinox, portraying male nudity in a "tasteful" manner presents more challenges in terms of pure anatomy. The penis is as explicit as it gets, especially since most if not all nudity on film is in a sexual context - so it would make sense that it would have to be an erect penis as well. And there are no other real frontiers in terms of male nudity - the penis is the only thing left to show.

Comparing that level of explicit sexual imagery to breasts and butts is just as disingenuous. The most female actors have to do is undress in front of a camera, but male actors would have to be genuinely aroused. Not to mention the personal anxiety of penis length and shape, which I'm not sure compares to the body image issues of women - the right kind of exercise and diet can make most people look the way naked people are supposed to look on cable television, but an ugly cock is an ugly cock forever.

I agree that there is an imbalance in the sexual portrayal of the characters, but there are legitimate issues in terms of filming.

[xRECKONERx]

Why is it more socially just.

chamber you're not actually this thick are you

[chamber]

Why is it more socially just.

chamber you're not actually this thick are you

Apparently I am, because I see no social injustice.

[InflatablePie]

Korts I think that's the first post of yours I've agreed with in a very long time. +1.