Dare I ask? Nudity in sculpture, what say ye?

[larryjf]

I really can't believe some of the posts I am reading. People are equating nudity in a overt and scandalous fashion with nursing. Unbelievable. Simply unbelievable. We are not talking about a woman who strips to the waste in the pew and then begins to latch on her child.

Then, frankly it's off topic. The OP is clearly asking for comments about public nudity. The breast feeding posts in the thread i presumed to be in the same context.

 

[LawrenceU]

Then were you assuming the woman nursing was stripped to the waist?

 

[LadyFlynt]

Larry, I edited my post while you were posting. Hands can also be sexual. We don't require that hands be covered with a blanket or leave the room when writing a letter. Context is everything. A breast being used for sexual purposes vs a breast being used to nurse a child are two very different contexts. A breast does NOT compare to genitalia and neither does nursing compare to urination.

-----Added 12/9/2008 at 04:10:48 EST-----

In a sense it stemmed off of the topic due to breastfeeding in art. Also what types of "nudity" are acceptable...some people consider breastfeeding, even if only the back of the child's head is seen, to be "nudity".

It's like working on the Lord's Day. We need medical personal, military, law enforcement, and firemen on the Lord's Day as much as any other. Are they in sin?

Thus again, context is everything. Can we honestly say that nude art (all forms and in general) are sinful?

 

[Nate]

I agree with ladyflynt, a nursing bib screams "I'm nursing." There is no doubt in anyone's mind when a mother with a small child covers the child's head what is about to happen.

OK - I agree it's apparent that a child is nursing when a blanket is draped over the mother/child, but I thought that LadyFlynt had argued that nursing was completely "natural" and OK in public (provided the correct level of modesty). Evidently when my children nursed with a small blanket covering them my wife was flamboyantly announcing that my children were hungry. Guess I'll have to have a talk with her when I get home.

 

[Notthemama1984]

Hmm, I guess those generations of my, and most likely your, female forbears that nursed their children during church services, at the home of a friend, in the fields, in the wagon outside the store, and a myriad of other places were raving feminists. I think not. Feminism is women wanting to bare their breast for reasons other than nursing, whether it be to attract sensually, to shock the public, or just flaunt their 'rights'.

What about those generations that urinated in public?
1 Sam 25:22, 2 Ki 9:8.

I'm still not convinced that this is not a good comparison. After all, both are natural and both are needed to survive.

-----Added 12/9/2008 at 04:00:57 EST-----

Come on. Urinating in public is unsanitary and can cause the spread of disease and even death.

Breast feeding is not unsanitary, it will not get someone sick, and no one will ever die because someone else was breast feeding.

I say we do not urinate in public anymore because of sanitation reasons.


And to the idea that someone getting their "jollies" off on seeing someone nursing, just about anything can set someone off. You cannot avoid it.

I realize that we have to attempt to not be a stumbling block to our brothers, but at some point the sinner has to take blame for his own actions.

An infant's body is (or at least should be) very regimented. They simply can not wait until it is convenient for the mother to feed. On the other hand, the grown man or woman has the will power to avoid his mind from wandering into sin.

 

[Backwoods Presbyterian]

This is a completely cultural oddity. Calvin or the Puritans and those in the colonial days would not have thought twice about seeing a women topless. It was just normal.

 

[Notthemama1984]

Speaking of babies. What about changing their diapers in public? Or what about taking pictures of them with their tooshes exposed?

Neither of these examples would be considered pornographic by normal people (although there are some sick people who would), but should we play it safe and tell our babies to sit in their feces until we get home?


I honestly do not think a blanket statement on nudity is possible.

 

[larryjf]

Then were you assuming the woman nursing was stripped to the waist?

No, but certainly nude. I was presuming that, given the context of the thread, the nursing would be done with one breast hanging out in the open...uncovered.

 

[Notthemama1984]

This is a completely cultural oddity. Calvin or the Puritans and those in the colonial days would not have thought twice about seeing a women topless. It was just normal.

Agreed and the same goes for areas in the world today. I had a music minister who was French and he talked about in France how women were topless all the time at beaches and the such. It was not considered sexual. As he put it, "They are just boobs."

-----Added 12/9/2008 at 04:20:06 EST-----

Then were you assuming the woman nursing was stripped to the waist?

No, but certainly nude. I was presuming that, given the context of the thread, the nursing would be done with one breast hanging out in the open...uncovered.

A baby is covering alot of the breast. any nudity that would be present would be brief in nature when the baby is either first latching or is just finishing.

 

[larryjf]

Larry, I edited my post while you were posting. Hands can also be sexual. We don't require that hands be covered with a blanket or leave the room when writing a letter. Context is everything. A breast being used for sexual purposes vs a breast being used to nurse a child are two very different contexts. A breast does NOT compare to genitalia and neither does nursing compare to urination.

Biblically speaking, hands are not sensual, but breasts are.

You are not really convincing me simply by stating your ideas as a fact.

-----Added 12/9/2008 at 04:26:16 EST-----

Come on. Urinating in public is unsanitary and can cause the spread of disease and even death.

If urinating in public could be done sanitarily you would be for it then?

An infant's body is (or at least should be) very regimented. They simply can not wait until it is convenient for the mother to feed. On the other hand, the grown man or woman has the will power to avoid his mind from wandering into sin.

Nobody is asking the infant to make any decisions. It is the mother who would make the decision of covering up while breast feeding.

 

[LadyFlynt]

OK - I agree it's apparent that a child is nursing when a blanket is draped over the mother/child, but I thought that LadyFlynt had argued that nursing was completely "natural" and OK in public (provided the correct level of modesty). Evidently when my children nursed with a small blanket covering them my wife was flamboyantly announcing that my children were hungry. Guess I'll have to have a talk with her when I get home.

A shirt can be lifted and settled, covering the mother's breast. Not all babes are tolerant of being covered...only one of mine was, the rest would fight it anytime I tried; they liked waving their arms around or looking at me in the face as they nursed. Some women feel more "hidden" with a blanket...others feel more obvious (and some are very obvious...have you seen some nursing bibs? The one time I wore a nursing bib, I had half the church staring at me! THAT was embarrassing! While the mother in the back of the church with no cover, everyone thought her babe was asleep when in fact she was nursing).

My point is, it shouldn't be dictated either way.

 

[larryjf]

This is a completely cultural oddity. Calvin or the Puritans and those in the colonial days would not have thought twice about seeing a women topless. It was just normal.

Is that true about the Puritans? Where can i read up on that?

 

[Notthemama1984]

But the mother's decision affects the child's well being. The child cannot stop being hungry, but the grown man can stop lusting.

 

[larryjf]

But the mother's decision affects the child's well being. The child cannot stop being hungry, but the grown man can stop lusting.

Nobody is saying that a child should go hungry...just that the mother should cover her breast when she feeds the child.

 

[LadyFlynt]

Larry, let me know when you've had the great joy of fighting with a nursing infant on keeping a blanket over them. I've been there, many times...in order to keep the child latched, and my breast NOT exposed, I've had to leave off the blanket. I've exposed more breast when I've fought to keep a blanket on, thus defeating the purpose.

 

[larryjf]

But the mother's decision affects the child's well being. The child cannot stop being hungry, but the grown man can stop lusting.

If a grown man can stop lusting then i guess we can all presume that you have stopped lusting? You don't struggle with it?

-----Added 12/9/2008 at 04:32:29 EST-----

Larry, let me know when you've had the great joy of fighting with a nursing infant on keeping a blanket over them. I've been there, many times...in order to keep the child latched, and my breast NOT exposed, I've had to leave off the blanket.

It seems that words keep getting put in my mouth by others.
I never said a woman needed a blanket. I am simply arguing that a woman should feed her infant while covering her breast. My problem is only with nursing with exposed breast.

 

[LadyFlynt]

But the mother's decision affects the child's well being. The child cannot stop being hungry, but the grown man can stop lusting.

Nobody is saying that a child should go hungry...just that the mother should cover her breast when she feeds the child.

And her shirt generally accomplishes that goal. Just many people tend to think that if they can see the child's head and "know" they are nursing, then you might as well be nude.

 

[larryjf]

But the mother's decision affects the child's well being. The child cannot stop being hungry, but the grown man can stop lusting.

Nobody is saying that a child should go hungry...just that the mother should cover her breast when she feeds the child.

And her shirt generally accomplishes that goal. Just many people tend to think that if they can see the child's head and "know" they are nursing, then you might as well be nude.

Then we are agreed. I don't ever recall saying that a shirt covering the breast wasn't enough.

 

[LadyFlynt]

This is a completely cultural oddity. Calvin or the Puritans and those in the colonial days would not have thought twice about seeing a women topless. It was just normal.

Is that true about the Puritans? Where can i read up on that?

May not have been totally topless, but they certainly showed more breast to nurse than we do today.

 

[larryjf]

This is a completely cultural oddity. Calvin or the Puritans and those in the colonial days would not have thought twice about seeing a women topless. It was just normal.

Is that true about the Puritans? Where can i read up on that?

May not have been totally topless, but they certainly showed more breast to nurse than we do today.

I would still like to read up on what you all are referencing.

 

[Notthemama1984]

But the mother's decision affects the child's well being. The child cannot stop being hungry, but the grown man can stop lusting.

If a grown man can stop lusting then i guess we can all presume that you have stopped lusting? You don't struggle with it?

-----Added 12/9/2008 at 04:32:29 EST-----

Larry, let me know when you've had the great joy of fighting with a nursing infant on keeping a blanket over them. I've been there, many times...in order to keep the child latched, and my breast NOT exposed, I've had to leave off the blanket.

It seems that words keep getting put in my mouth by others.
I never said a woman needed a blanket. I am simply arguing that a woman should feed her infant while covering her breast. My problem is only with nursing with exposed breast.

Seeing a grown woman breast feeding is no where near a temptation to lust at all.

and yes men can learn to stop lusting. If they say they can't, they are just trying to find an excuse to blame someone else.

 

[LawrenceU]

If one looks at the garments that were worn in the colonial days and before it is fairly obvious that more breast and even torso were exposed during the feeding of infants. I have a friend who reenacts that period. In order to remain on good terms with modern societal norms regarding nursing his wife was unable to construct garments in a correct fashion and instead went farby on the construction.

 

[LadyFlynt]

I will look.

But my first advice is to study up on the clothing they wore. Then figure out how a nursing mother would nurse. It's also known that they didn't go hide in the bedroom (most families didn't have a private bedroom) and they didn't cover with a blanket. They say, they nursed. Or in some areas, they wore their babes and they nursed.

 

[larryjf]

Seeing a grown woman breast feeding is no where near a temptation to lust at all.

I understand that it may not be a temptation to you, but there is a particular perversion where men lust after lactating breasts...even if babies are attached to them.

and yes men can learn to stop lusting. If they say they can't, they are just trying to find an excuse to blame someone else.

Let's not talk about some generic group of men here...
Have you have learned to stop lusting?

 

[Backwoods Presbyterian]

This is a completely cultural oddity. Calvin or the Puritans and those in the colonial days would not have thought twice about seeing a women topless. It was just normal.

Is that true about the Puritans? Where can i read up on that?

I actually wrote a paper on this for a class in college. This is a book I referenced.

Lucy Gent and Nigel Llewellyn, eds., Renaissance Bodies: The Human Figure in English Culture c. 1540–1660.

 

[shackleton]

Somehow a question about nudity became a thread about breast feeding. I don't even see the connection. All the women I have seen breast feeding had their boobs and their kid covered with a blanket or they went to a private room. I don't see that God ever equated breast feeding to be in the same ball park as nakedness.

Does the Torah have any stipulations about breast feeding? I don't think it is the same thing. It is comparing apples and oranges, pardon the pun.

 

[staythecourse]

To the pure, all things are pure; but to those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their mind and their conscience are defiled.

That is my first impression regarding nudity in art but Calvin writes that it's not proper. He's a better man than me so I believe it's better advice

 

[larryjf]

To the pure, all things are pure; but to those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their mind and their conscience are defiled.

That is my first impression regarding nudity in art but Calvin writes that it's not proper. He's a better man than me so I believe it's better advice

I don't think that passage fits the context of this thread.
Yes, to the pure all things are pure...but that's a reference against Judaizers, which has nothing to do with God's moral commands.

 

[peetred]

Hmm, I guess those generations of my, and most likely your, female forbears that nursed their children during church services, at the home of a friend, in the fields, in the wagon outside the store, and a myriad of other places were raving feminists. I think not. Feminism is women wanting to bare their breast for reasons other than nursing, whether it be to attract sensually, to shock the public, or just flaunt their 'rights'.

I nurse my child in various places as the ones mentioned above, and I can still do so very discreetly with a cover. To say that those women didn't cover with a blanket is just silly. You don't know either way.

I am also a nursing mother, I do not use a blanket or a large bib, I also do not "let it all hang out"...you do not see my breast as I do keep my top on. If anything, a blanket or nursing bib screams "look at me, I'm nursing!" I'm not against those that CHOOSE to use one. But there are those that find them more a nuisance, glaringly announcing something that they wish to do quietly, or simply unhealthy and uncomfortable for the babe. On the other hand, I've known many women that I've walked up to and started chatting with, not even knowing they were nursing at first, because I didn't see anything and it "appeared" the child was sleeping, when in fact the child was nursing.

Granted, there are SOME women who can nurse discreetly in public without showing everything off. I am not one of them (at least not without a cover). It's physically impossible for several reasons. It is the same for many women.

A.) I wasn't accusing any nursing mother on this board of "letting it all hang out".

B.) It IS a very feminist idea that we should just let it all show and not worry about what other people think when breasts are shown in public. I know b/c I was once immersed in the current breastfeeding cultured that is such.

Women have every right to breastfeed in public which is great. However, I think that Christian women should think twice about the issue of modesty when they are nursing. To say that somehow breasts become UN-sexual when an infant is attached to them is just silly. We must recognize that although some men will be able to make that distinction and disconnect, MOST will not.

 

[py3ak]

Everyone on this thread who hasn't done so needs to read Joyce's Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, where there is a conversation about the question of nudity.

When it comes to perverts, perhaps there are times where we need to say, "let him that is filthy be filthy still"; and for ourselves, let us try to be the kind of men who can set a nursing mother at her ease.