Comments on: What’s the Problem with Nudity?

By: Kazanova Ash

Kazanova Ash — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 19:57:00 +0000

One of the best documents that i have ever watch ……… NOTHING MORE

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 11 Sep 2011 15:34:00 +0000

Interesting topic but I don’t think this documentary did justice to it. Many questions were answered very cosmetically and unconvincingly whilst others ignored obvious influences like cultural inclinations and modern marketing influences (ex pref for hairless vs hairy men) and why we evolved the need to cover ourselves with clothes. Its surprising the documentary and the science it featured didn’t include a more thorough look at societies that survive to this day that are more or less naked.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 27 Jun 2011 16:56:00 +0000

Sorry but it doesn’t make any sense that they conclude women prefer hairless men just because students in Finland and 8 ppl in London say so… what about cultural influences, for example? I bet 30-40 years ago this wasn’t as important as it is now. This is doesn’t seem like a very critical documentary… but i’ll see how it turns out, it still has some interesting points :)

By: lovelyfluffharmony

lovelyfluffharmony — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 23:26:00 +0000

I love how they say that basically it is more benificial for us as a species to be naked rather than clothed and to be naked is to be Human.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 05:08:00 +0000

I wish Cheney would wish to die!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 04:14:00 +0000

Thanks, BBC. For making a documentary about nearly everything under the sun. Really want to watch the latest one about assisted suicide called, “Choosing to Die”. Seems very interesting!

By: Rolando

Rolando — Wed, 08 Jun 2011 22:09:00 +0000

dude, we do evolved from apes.

By: KsDevil

KsDevil — Sat, 23 Apr 2011 21:48:00 +0000

Tracking the genetic history of nudity was interesting. The emotional aspect of nudity was a bit constrained by bias, however. They really didn’t go much into depth on how society creates an environment that causes emotional distress to nudity by ritual and myth. The references to monogomy seemed a bit conceptualized.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 12 Apr 2011 21:14:00 +0000

Too bad I had to sign up to post a comment.. At least it was quick and painless lol..

Any how, about the documentary:

I had to stop watching half way through..
Not cause of nudity or what have you, simply because this documentary seems to have been made by (put gently) people with intelligence less than average.

They have made references to Humans evolving from apes all throughout the first half of the show, and I could not continue watching such rubbish.

Evolution i believe is true. But no one has proven that we evolved from apes, and I think it is easier to disprove then prove this idea.

These people several times said that they have no clue how this or that happen, or why or what have you. So they admitted that they are just wasting my time, since they have no idea what they are talking about, literally.

PS: No hatin’, just sayin’

By: cezy

cezy — Thu, 10 Feb 2011 00:06:14 +0000

for god’s sake, what happened to BBC documentaries?? All rubbish talk, naked people and no science!

By: Ptolemy_Banana

Ptolemy_Banana — Fri, 14 Jan 2011 08:11:07 +0000

I enjoyed this docu, but that’s probably because of all the nudity :P

Overall I found it to be quite unimaginitive, and I also found that the setting was counterproductive to what they were trying to study. This was quite obvious with the man (neil?) who was focused on people’s faces. I am like him…I make a point of looking people in the eye. The more obviously they are displaying their goods, the more I refuse to look at those goods. and it isn’t more obvious than complete nudity. One thing I found really fascinating though was that the instant her head turned away (she wasn’t looking at him anymore) his eye targeted her breast.

I think a docu with this subject would be much more beneficial and informative with a much larger and diverse research group. ie these 8 people, as well as studying nudist colonies, and then tribes where nudity is normal, groups of people who dress very conservatively, etc. The more different things we can look at, the more similarities we could find.

By: rachelnico

rachelnico — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 08:48:24 +0000

LOL, i wonder if the 3 naked people knew they were chosen to be that way for the experiment, or if it was at random. Either way, the clothed ones were lucky.

By: steve

steve — Sun, 26 Dec 2010 19:00:21 +0000

Rating pictures of body hair / no body hair was just an exercise in how mentally homogenized a small group has been formed by media to view nudity. How many Tommy Hilfinger adverts do you see of men with hairy chests?
Why didn’t we “evolve” a patch of red, blood-engorged skin on our upper chest where it would be both less likely to be covered by hair or clothing – and so still show “health.”

@Uroskin
“cod TV science” I think you may be right.
We need more videos on this topic, but better quality than this.

@js
“…frigidity, people don’t get arouse and don’t enjoy the normal pleasures of sex.”
I disagree. I think what we’re seeing now is a lot of (emotional) frigidity or hyper-arousal. People don’t know how to react normally anymore.
Oh I think nudists definitely enjoy normal sexual pleasures. It’s just not cruxed on visual stimulation. People won’t be able to be artificially focused to cleavage, or artificially lifted by bras.
The problem is that people are focusing on the quick, easy fix of implants and fashion, instead of the true difficulties of developing interpersonal intimacies and working out inner insecurities. So much for the “sophistication of man” {see also: sophistry}.

“nakedness … will definitely bring the inevitable breakdown of society.”
What?! We are born naked! “Naked” is the epitome of normal and natural! (The breakdown of society will only come because of lack of trust – of course with strong impetus with lack of water & such. {Do you know how much effort, (e.g. guards, locks, police, security video), is put into guarding our stuff from other people?})
I think civilization is just fine in small groups too.

And to that lady in Africa, and what of the “water-ape” hypothesis?

The “touching” part was interesting, but that could’ve been done with simple pictures so everyone could have painted everyone else without knowing how others were first painting them.

@UnseenStrings
yep!

By: Robyn

Robyn — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 15:48:07 +0000

I found the video interesting but not very scientific. When tracking eye movement, the test would have been much more revealing if there were a collage of various images shown for a period of several seconds with nudes placed in amongst them. Then, I think anyway, it would have been a more realistic and natural way that the mind, using its eyes, gathers pertinent information. And the acceptance of nudity after the ‘experiment’ isnt very scientific either. The two who didnt accept it were women, who can understandably be more ‘modest’ because of every day concerns of rape. After watching the video I got the impression that the ‘experiment’ was conducted more by radio hosts than scientists.

By: Uroskin

Uroskin — Sat, 21 Aug 2010 01:47:07 +0000

The Documentary Channel in New Zealand screened this the other night.
It tried to figure out why nudity is such a social problem for our species by asking 8 total strangers who have never stripped or been nude in front of other people (and a battery of TV cameras) to do exactly that. Coupled with a potted history of homo sapiens and more ancient forebears, it tried to figure out at what stage in our genetic and cultural history we decided that it was not OK to be around others without “clothes” on.
As this kind of cod TV science goes, it was rather un-illuminating on practically all questions it set out to answer. On the contrary, it left me with a great deal of other queries about aspects that never got touched on.
The obvious clanger was asking 21st Century males and females to rate male chests’ sexual attractiveness based on hirsuteness or baldness of said chests. This was supposed to give a clue that evolutionary we have lost our body hair because females preferred to mate with hairless men. But what this really showed was the scientific incompetence of the sex researchers setting up such a thoughtless, biased and uncontrolled experiment: even intuitively (if I may) I would have shown the subjects a range of hairy and hairless women to rate, and I bet the outcome would have been far more pronounced in favour of hairless-ness than the male-only version. Hairy females did far worse evolutionary speaking than hairy males, just look at the number of hairy men still with us compared to the amount of hairy females (ladies with moustaches notwithstanding) and the relentless marketing of lady-shaves, depilatory products and the opprobrium heaped on unshaven continental women.
And we all know that when woman are at their most fertile era in their cycle, they prefer hairy bad boys as bed mates over plucked metrosexuals – and this has a long history too: interbreeding with hairy Neanderthal men apparently was far more common than many of us would like to remember.