Can someone explain how posing half-naked for a magazine "liberates" a woman?

[closeupready]

From this article:

>>Sila Sahin, a 25-year-old Turkish German living in Berlin, had until now been regarded as a glowing example of how a modern Muslim girl should behave in a multicultural society.

A successful actress starring in German television soap opera Good Times, Bad Times, she pleased her many fans and made her Turkish family proud.

But her latest move has shocked some of those fans, and enraged those closest to her.

Posing provocatively on the cover of German Playboy magazine with one breast exposed, Sila Sahin seems to be sending a clear and deliberate message to her conservative Turkish family.

'I did it because I wanted to be free at last,' she said. 'These photographs are a liberation from the restrictions of my childhood.'<<

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1378455/Sila-Sahin-poses-Playboy-Muslim-model-upsets-family-nude-cover.html

I frankly don't care what she does with herself, and wish her nothing but continued success.

But what is the logic here that posing half-naked for a men's soft porn magazine liberates her from the restrictions of her childhood? And further, would she encourage children of her own to do this, as well? Didn't Patti Davis make the same kinds of arguments (that I never understood either)?

[Le Taz Hot]

1. "My body, my choice."

That right extends beyond abortion. :shrug:

[closeupready]

5. Ok, but was she being coerced into keeping her clothes on?

If women don't choose to pose for such magazines, does that make them less free than those who do?

[snooper2]

7. Yes, she was being coerced from birth to be "modest"

cover everything...


Blah blah blah pay attention to the sky god

[Deep13]

15. +1

[BoWanZi]

22. Yes, coerced by birth probably due to religious reasons

More power to the woman who has the guts to do something like that in the face of their family/friends.

[blondeatlast]

44. +1. Seems simple enough. nt

[sinkingfeeling]

2. If you were raised to believe that your body was shameful and had to be completely covered, to

pose semi-nude would be 'liberating' in the sense of body image. She is trying to 'prove' that there isn't anything shameful about the human body and her self esteem has risen.

[closeupready]

6. Her family is apparently Western-oriented and moderate, given

that she is a successful entertainment personality in Germany. So I don't think the issue here is Burka/no-Burka.

[sinkingfeeling]

8. "...deliberate message to her conservative Turkish family."

Did you read the article before you posted it?

"Ms Sahin's declared intention was to used the controversial Playboy photoshoot as a call to action for other Turkish girls who suffer the effects of their strict backgrounds, where women's choices are often limited, husbands are chosen for the girls and chastity closely controlled."

[seabeyond]

53. so go to the other extreme, strip down for a bunch of males to objectify you....

wow, deep thinking.

[WatsonT]

59. She got to choose

that's a big difference.

[seabeyond]

74. not at all. that has nothing ot do with what i said. nt

[WatsonT]

94. In her culture women are the private property of their husbands

And that right is strictly enforced and interpreted.

By revealing herself to the public in such a way she is rejecting that notion of sexual ownership.

Seems ok to me.

[Ninjaneer]

116. Speaking as a person who

has lived with the damning guilt and oppressiveness of religious restrictions until relatively recently, sometimes actions such as hers are necessary and absolutely justified. With all due respect, until you've gone through something like that, you're in no position to judge. Conviction, as they say, is a luxury of those on the side lines.

[seabeyond]

117. she can do whatever she wants

none of my business. we are discussing her reasoning. that is what a discussion board is about. she is going from one form of patriarchy and feeding another. she choses to do it, it is her business

[Ninjaneer]

121. I understand the purpose of a discussion board.

Her culture forced her to dress modestly. She decided to rebel by not dressing modestly. The willful removal of clothing liberates her from her past forced covering up. Her reasoning is sound. I don't think this is a discussion of her "reasoning" as much as a critique of her means. My last post was regarding that. People are in no position to critique her means without having gone through what she went through.

Again, I hope you realize I am not trying to be rude or argumentative.

[LetTimmySmoke]

128. She's not feeding a patriarchy.

Sheesh.

[closeupready]

133. Many here seem not to understand the purpose of discussion.

Thank you for bringing that point up. :hi:

[seabeyond]

138. such simple words, yet still, they are ignored, lol. nt

[closeupready]

141. I think some here really WANT to see a conservative boogeyman -

it's like some thrive on anger and conflict. You and I haven't always agreed on things, but we've always been able to either respond intelligently or else move on. I probably won't get any Valentine's next year, though. :D

Anyway, I'm actually glad I started this thread, though I think it's run its course. Cheers. :)

[seabeyond]

142. i laughed

about the valentines....

:toast: backatcha

[DutchLiberal]

165. Yeah, how *dare* she not share your militant opinions!

Because, obviously, only your train of thought is "deep" enough.

[truedelphi]

172. I'll share your opinions on upbringing and

Freedom of choice regarding bodies, and lifestyles, any day of the week, Dutch Liberal.

(Don't know who you' re replying to, as they are on my ignore list.)

[lumberjack_jeff]

3. Liberation is the ability to do what you want.

And accepting the ramifications of those acts.

She's 25. If she wants to show me her boobs, that's her business.

[cliffordu]

16. Her fake boobs at that.

[sudopod]

18. meow hiss nt

[ProgressiveProfessor]

21. And how are you so sure about that?

[lumberjack_jeff]

41. Let's go contribute to her liberation by ogling the photos and speculating about that question. n/t

[closeupready]

46. Exactly. Treating women as sex objects is 'respectful' in just a handful of scenarios, IMO.

Thus, her claims that this is 'liberating' strike me not as her own thoughts, but 'suggested' feedback for the press.

[WatsonT]

60. So to prevent her from being treated as an object

we should force her to keep her clothes on?

Maybe something modest, like a veil that covers her entire face and body?

[closeupready]

64. Nonresponsive to my post.

Did you mispost?

[WatsonT]

66. You equate nudity with objectification

assuming you find objectification to be a bad thing the obvious solution would be to do away with nudity.

If voluntarily nudity = wrong then the solution must be wearing clothes. And if they won't do it voluntarily then it must be forced on them.

[seabeyond]

75. no one is forcing anyone to do anything watson. because the hypocrisy is called out and discussed

does not mean anyone wants to force anything on anyone.... except maybe those that insist others shut up and not discuss cause they dont agree with you adn others

[closeupready]

77. I'm thinking that many here who assert that we are 'forcing' her to wear a burqa (or

words to that effect) are likely young and fresh away from home, and not yet have children or not yet accustomed to making their own way in life. Thus, people who sound like their parents (i.e., not so young) are puritanical, 'forcing people to wear burqas,' etc.

[seabeyond]

102. ya

i forget. i also get another dynamic on this board that is not in my real life that colors things. gotta keep reminding myself

[closeupready]

103. There was a time it'd bother me; now, it doesn't - as much.

You gotta laugh about SOME of this heat, because 1) it's just funny and 2) it's not worth getting upset about.

Cheers! :hi:

[riderinthestorm]

80. From the article, the Turkish actress who posed, says she did it so other girls can break free

and not be forced to live under the same restrictive cultural/restrictive upbringing common for Turkish girls. So in essence, she is doing this extreme act - posing in Playboy - as a defiant stance against feeling "forced" her whole life to be someone she isn't.

From the article:

"Indeed, in the 12-page article that accompanies the revealing photographs, Ms Sahin says she feels 'like Che Guevara', adding that the semi-naked photoshoot was a bid to express her freedom. 'My upbringing was conservative,' she told Playboy. 'I was always told, you must not go out, you must not make yourself look so attractive, you mustn't have male friends.

'I have always abided by what men say. As a result I developed an extreme desire for freedom. I feel like Che Guevara. I have to do everything I want, otherwise I feel like I may as well be dead."

[seabeyond]

83. so she strips to feed that very patriarchy that uses sexual objectification of women

to do the very same thing, only in the west.

she traded one exptreme to feed another extreme

[riderinthestorm]

84. She's taking the ultimate western icon of female porn

and using it as an instrument to empower other young women in HER culture to break free of the restrictions of their culture. Don't get me wrong, I'm usually the first to derogate on Playboy and the rest but her usage of it in this context is... well, it's pretty damn interesting in my opinion.

Extreme performance art almost. I said downthread it instantly reminded me of the Buddhist monks who torched themselves in protest against the Vietnam War. These were committed pacifists, committing one of the most violent acts of self-immolation. Buddhism is an intensely private meditative religion yet these guys were doing this act in the public square.

Horrifying. Shocking. Dramatic. Effective. Riveting.

You do know she's only doing a semi-naked shoot right? So she's going to look like any other young woman in St Tropez, or Sydney Australia or any other topless beach.

And probably, her agent thought she'd get some good work out of it too. I can't take the mercenary part of it out when I look at it all together but then I always was a cynic.

[seabeyond]

85. it is like when iranian pres says, cleavage cause earthquakes

so 8 women strip to show him, and there are 30 males with cameras to photograph them... wow, what a statement they made. really told that iranian pres. instead of intellectually advancing womans cause and get away from the patriarchy, they participated and fed into it.

women going against the attack of female issue by republicans it is suggest, use sex as a weapon, send panties, taking argument to womans crotch. instead of intellectually decimating the opposing side, proving our worth.

we women just keep on feeding and participating in the very patriarchy....

as far as how much she stripped, i dont care. she is in a magazine that is exclusively used to reduce women to a thing to jack off to. not on a beach enjoying the sand.

on EDIT... note. though we disagree, i do it oh so respectfully.... lol. :hug:

[WatsonT]

92. What if she stripped naked in a closet

so no one could objectify her.

That would be liberating right? Well no, there is no taboo against that in her culture.

What about if she stripped in front of other females?

Again no, there is no taboo against being nude with other women.

The taboo in her culture, the thing she is fighting against, is the notion that men other than her husband (and I guess father/son, yech) are allowed to see her nude.

If she were not stripping in front of people her culture forbids her to strip in front of then what is accomplished? I think even radical muslims will allow their wives to be nude in the shower, for instance.


And the whole point of the proclamation, besides control, is to prevent women from being the object of other mens' lust. That is reserved for her husband.

So she has to be sexually objectified in a sense, by men not married to her, but under her own terms to be a successful rebellion against the status quo. She is choosing who gets to look at her in such a way.

I find this preferable to an Imam telling her who can look at her in this manner.

[cliffordu]

110. If you think one extreme is the same as the other, you have my sympathy.

If you think the Burqa is the same as nipples in a magazine, that is.

[seabeyond]

112. it is about repression and control, not about burqas and nipples. nt

[cliffordu]

114. Sorry.

Fail.

[DutchLiberal]

167. But don't you see? This girl can't decide for herself what's liberating for her. She needs feminists

to tell her how to liberate herself. :eyes:

[WatsonT]

90. Stating without any doubt that

portraying a women nude makes her a sexual object (with the assumption that this is a bad thing) does imply that allowing such nudity is wrong.

[DutchLiberal]

166. "Those that insist others shut up & not discuss cause they dont agree with you & others."

Like you?

[Warren DeMontague]

98. So not only is she not capable of making the decision, she's not capable of having an opinion?

The opinion that she has was... what... planted in her head against her will?

Maybe one of the things she feels 'liberated' from is self-righteous ninnies who want to infantalize everyone who makes a decision they don't approve of. :shrug:

[cliffordu]

111. Yep.

[cliffordu]

148. So: she's obviousy too stupid to have made her own decision in the matter?

Yep, just another gal, easily led and exploited.

:sarcasm:

[closeupready]

150. Yet, if she decided she wanted to wear a burka, you'd be telling us she'd been brainwashed.

Wouldn't you?

[cliffordu]

152. If wearing a burka meant the difference between life and death??

Lots of women, FORCED BY THE PATRIARCHY in their countries, wear them under the threat of death.

No one forced her to show her nipples in Playboy.

False equivalence.

Here in the West if she wants to wear a burka, so fucking what, if she wants to do porn films so what, if she wants to show her breasts in magazines so what.

[closeupready]

153. Now you employ the term Patriarchy. I guess it's only patriarchal oppression when you say so,

right? :eyes:

[cliffordu]

154. Where do you get that? When did I refuse to employ the term?

What kind of bullshit loop de loop are you trying here???

[closeupready]

156. Post 114.

nt

[cliffordu]

157. ....Annnnnnnnddddddd

Another fail.

[DutchLiberal]

168. Luckily, we have militant anti-sex feminists to guide her!

[cliffordu]

169. Yep.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

113. The prior poster was seemed so sure about it, so it seemed fair to ask why

[lumberjack_jeff]

160. I have a little difficulty with the concept of blaming those who view the pictures...

... as being to blame for the objectification which she signed up for.

[TorchTheWitch]

125. It should be obvious

Though it's quite a nice job except for the nipple being too far to the outside which is unfortunately an extremely common occurance with breast implants.

Pretty scary how so many people don't even know what real boobs look like anymore.

[burrfoot]

163. Have you seen the picture? n/t

[Maine-ah]

105. you can tell they're fake...

they forgot to put the nipple back on...





:hide:

[cliffordu]

106. LOL.....

[snooper2]

149. Oh damn

:rofl:

[msanthrope]

4. Well, it does liberate her from her 'foundation garments.'

And while I feel their pinch, I do wonder at her reasoning.

[ZombieHorde]

9. People tell us our bodies and our sexuality are bad.

Posing nude counters this horrible belief.

Some people take it further and decide their bodies are sacred, and therefor, everything which comes from the body is sacred. So seemingly degrading sexual situations, such as golden showers, also become liberating.

[JustAnotherGen]

10. You know what?

We, over here in the United States are posting about it at DU right? :-) I'd say it liberates her to make more money, get publicity, get noticed perhaps in the U.S. and elsewhere, so she can grow her income - by getting more jobs, etc. etc.

See - it worked for Madonna rolling around at the MTV awards in her white lingerie singing like a virgin - and I think a month or two later her uh - nudie photos popped up. <--- Worked for her! Why wouldn't she say ANYTHING outrageous or do ANYTHING outrageous when she sees how well it works for the 'world renowned' :rofl: Jersey Shore cast? :rofl:

[closeupready]

12. LOL, I think you nailed it.

:rofl: Or a big part of it. :D

[Deep13]

11. The restrictive Islamic dress code and other rules it imposes on women...

...are oppressive. Posing for racy photos shows she refuses to be fenced in by traditional tribal or parochial expectations.

[Speck Tater]

13. A feeling of being liberated is a subjective thing, not something that can be objectively measured.

Therefore, if she FEELS liberated then her action has succeeded in providing her with that subjective feeling of being liberated. Good for her. There are those who would ridicule me for practicing meditation for the purpose of feeling liberated. What right do they have to judge my choices? What right to we have to judge hers? Passing judgment on another's lifestyle choices is just too "Republican" to set well with me.

[blondeatlast]

45. +1. nt

[SidDithers]

97. Well said...nt

Sid

[Dappleganger]

14. Because she is choosing instead of submitting to her family's religion.

It's her choice--the body is beautiful and muslims/christians have treated the female body as a sin for far too long.

[Cal33]

17. Sure, if she were to make enough money from this, it could liberate her from

financial debt, or being in poverty. :)

[phleshdef]

19. If she says it felt liberating, then thats all the explanation you need.

Its up to her. Not you.

[closeupready]

25. If she told me doing somersaults made her angry, I might still seek explanation.

That doesn't invalidate her interpretation of how doing somersaults make her feel, nor does it indicate that I disapprove.

It merely means that I don't understand how doing somersaults makes her angry.

By the way, that's science at its most basic - observing things that happen, and finding the cause-effect.

[phleshdef]

40. Your tone came across as being critical towards her.

But your comparison ignore common sense context. "Somersaults making someone angry" would be considered an irrational reaction by mainstream standards. But shedding ones clothes in a society that tends to tie taboos around nudity, especially nudity of women and someone who has been subjected to that meme finding a sense freedom in breaking that taboo, that barely requires any thought in order for it to make sense.

[closeupready]

42. Perhaps. Yesterday, though, there was a thread about allowing children to dress 'inappropriately'

And now people here affirm that this woman's rejection of the childhood restrictions of her own family is liberating and good.

I guess I'm just sort of confused about how it is that modest dress is 'oppressive' and nudity is somehow dignified. Some people argue here that the human body is beautiful, but that is false in ugly people. Further, would she have been featured if she had been 65 and overweight? Unlikely.

[riderinthestorm]

43. No! The thread yesterday was about children, this Turkish actress is a woman

and the restrictions that her religion places on her about dress are placed on grown up women. Two very different things that you are conflating that are not analogous at all.

Other points at random: "modest dress" is very different than burkas, which are the garment that most people find offensive. "Modest dress" means a lot of different things to a lot of different cultures.

Nudity is and can be dignified. Who are you to say who is "ugly"? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Playboy is not known for taking any women aged 65 and overweight for their centerfolds, ever. So again, not an analogous point.

Lastly, you don't seem "confused" at all but seem to be shit stirring.

[AngryAmish]

50. "Nudity is and can be dignified." Especially when I do it in the Library.

[phleshdef]

49. Um, these aren't "childhood restrictions". WTF are you talking about?

Its a cultural restriction that isn't specific to any age.

And I don't think that underage teenage girls not being allowed to dress all sexy and revealing is oppressive at all. If you are a parent and you have an honest heart felt concern that they are doing something that may seriously harm perceptions of them, you have the right as a parent to set some standards. Of course some parents set standards that are ridiculous, but there are so many gray areas and different reasons as to why, that there really isn't any point of debating it. When all is said and done, this woman is an adult. And she was raised in a very socially conservative culture and she has spent time as an adult in that same culture. She felt that culture was oppressive to her. So she "broke the rules". Your question was how does that cause a sense of freedom and my answer is that its painfully obvious.

[closeupready]

51. They are. Did you even read the article???

:eyes: Sheez. Welcome to ignore.

[thereismore]

26. Exactly! nt

[Vinnie From Indy]

36. +1

cheers!

[Ninjaneer]

119. Nail, meet hammer.

:yourock:

[ProgressiveProfessor]

20. Because it is her choice

And that is in many ways the essence of feminism, women being free to choose what they want to do without undue influence from others and society. Part of me questions some of the aggressive public sexualism since it encourages the stereotypes held by some troglodytes, put in the end free choice must win out.

[RedCloud]

23. Oh why can't they just expose the left half or the right half?

Bilateral symmetry!

[Dorian Gray]

24. I respect that she's chosen to do this

against her family and culture's wishes. That takes strength. But I hate that people may think of this as noble, too. She's posed for Playboy, a magazine that people buy 95% of the time to objectify women.

[closeupready]

27. There was a video I rented, with a short docu. on an English Muslim female porn star -

she actually did full-on porn, and as I recall, and she stated something similar to the woman in the OP, that she felt participating in porn liberated her.

Her family had also disapproved.

Frankly, I think that many here would disapprove of that choice if it were their own children, but in the abstract (as here), when it concerns a woman with whom we have no connection outside cultural media, we like to rationalize why this is a good thing.

[Poll_Blind]

29. +1

Well-said, IMO. And of course the interesting thing is that if she'd post for Hustler, say, would we really be having the same Freedom Fest about it? And that indicates to me that while we view some things as liberative, going farther than our still-somewhat-puritanical tastes care for would receive less "symbolic appreciation".

PB

[closeupready]

32. That is really an excellent point! I was an art student in college (initially)

and we'd have model come to school and model nude, and in that context, it seemed more legitimate than this context. That may not be fair, but Venus de Milo is one thing; commercial soft porn is something else. Isn't it?

[Poll_Blind]

34. There's the rub, of course: The difference is all in our eyes. And in that regards, we....

...share much more (in our judgement) with her puritanical parents than practitioners of some liberated ideal.

It's all about what we find "socially acceptable". Versus what they (her perents, et al.) find socially acceptable.

Those who are more liberal than us, too liberal. Those who are more conservative than us, to conservative. All morality has X,Y,Z coordinates. We often don't realize just how localized and subjective that morality can be until we read Plato or something like that, where he goes on a tear about man-boy "love".

I'm not against the concept of morality altogether, but like fashion you think something is universal only to find the reality of the matter, especially on such a large, varied, planet on which we live, is terribly subjective.

PB

[muriel_volestrangler]

37. And yet, it's her own name that is known. The model for the VdM is unknown

Which one do you think has been more objectified - the one only known by the Roman goddess she stood in for (or, in modern times, the anonymous art school model), or the one with her own name known, and an interview in which her words are heard?

[WatsonT]

61. What's the difference?

And by that I mean what is objectively different between the two that is not subject to personal taste?

The border between art and porn is always blurry.

If you jerk off to a naked lady in a painting does that make it porn? If you enjoy the imagery of a porno with no sexual interest whatsoever does that make it art?

[closeupready]

65. That question is a subject of study without a clear answer whatsoever.

Robert Mapplethorpe's photos, to some, are pornography; to others, art. I don't pretend to know the answer, do you?

[WatsonT]

67. The definition of art is simple

It's "what I (the viewer) deem to be art".

That's it. The rest of art theory is just a variety of ways that people use to claim their preferred pictures are superior to someone elses preferred pictures.

Also why I wouldn't say things like: That may not be fair, but Venus de Milo is one thing; commercial soft porn is something else. Isn't it?

[closeupready]

70. I disagree with you.

Further (to use a well-worn fundamentalist counter-example), you can't take a crap and then tell me that your pile of crap is art because you say so. I mean, you CAN do this, but it isn't art just because you say so - it isn't art at all.

[riderinthestorm]

72. Uh "Piss Christ" actually IS a pile of crap, and actually IS art.

So says I and many millions of others.

Of course, there are millions of others that disagree with me who say it's just a bottle of crap.

See how that works? Welcome to Art 101.

[WatsonT]

89. So there is no objective standard for art

but you can determine exactly what is an is not art.

What exactly differentiates the two?

For instance: I can say conclusively that if something is a triangle it is then not also a square, and vice versa. There are clear definitions for both and they do not coincide.

You say one thing is art and something else is porn and there is a clear line between them. Ok, what defines that line?

[cliffordu]

140. That's a very interesting question. I like it.

What if it depends on mood, what if that border is crossed on occasion, as in the painting one week and the porn tape the next???

[Wounded Bear]

28. The irony is, of course......

that if it weren't for the repressive ideals of "conservative" societies in general, there would be no market for young, attractive women to sell photos of themselves, or to pose or dance nude.

The prurient content can only be so if it is forbidden fruit.

[sinkingfeeling]

35. +1

[leftstreet]

47. Why doesn't that work the same way for men?

If "repressive ideals of conservative societies" are "in general," men should be able to make huge fortunes posing nude. There's no more forbidden, hidden body part than male genitals.

[WatsonT]

63. Because generally if a woman wanted to see male genitals

all she'd need to do is ask.

[U4ikLefty]

122. True.

[AndyTiedye]

30. Rebelling Against a Culture That Requires Her Whole Body to be Covered

makes perfect sense.

[DevonRex]

31. She may find she has traded one restriction for another.

Perhaps not. But there has to be something between chaste and sex object.

[MineralMan]

33. Liberation is in the mind of the person who wants to feel

liberated. So, if this makes her have that feeling, then it's her choice. I don't care. I don't ogle women in magazines. It's completely irrelevant to my life. Since approximately half of the adult world has typical female breast development, it's not really that extraordinary a thing to see. :shrug:

[elleng]

38. No

[eowyn_of_rohan]

39. In this country I can't

Because doing it here only plays into the sexist vulture - oops culture

[Modern_Matthew]

48. Sometimes I have to make sure I'm not at conservativeunderground. nt

[blondeatlast]

108. I don't doubt that for a moment. nt

[closeupready]

136. Because those who want their daughters to grow up to be rocket scientists and prime ministers,

not sex workers or soft porn models, are always conservatives.

[librechik]

52. I took an advanced post-grad class on the subject (Madonna among the examples)

I still don't get it.

I understand that they are using the male's enslavement to the fetishized sex object to achieve power over the male, but how can that be true power when the position is still so abject re the sexualization?

It's just a silly proposal, IMO. The female is still enslaved.

[closeupready]

54. You don't get it because you are a conservative/disrespect women's choices/yadda yadda.

:sarcasm:

I should know better than to attempt to have a reasonable discussion here about a topic like this. I guess it's important to violate that unwritten rule every six months or so just to know what push-button topics to avoid here. ;) :hi:

(Olive Garden, circumcision and gay cavemen being three others. LOL :D )

[EOTE]

73. There's been plenty of reasonable discussion on this thread.

You just ignore any points made that disagree with your entrenched world view. You've even put a poster on ignore who had the audacity to suggest you might not be thinking about this in the best manner. Why is it not surprising that you post a thread and look for self-validation every chance you get?

[riderinthestorm]

62. Boy you could have come down to my local women's shelter and had this convo for free

it's a fairly recurring conversation.

I think in the context of this particular woman and her action with Playboy, her religion and culture have warped the concepts of female sexuality and power and equality and clothing to the degree that she's taking an extreme action to heighten awareness. It's designed to be shocking.

As an actress, there are a fair number in that world who also define themselves as artists. I'm wondering if she's doing this more as a performance artist to raise cultural awareness or to spotlight the issues of female roles. Lots to think about.

In some weird way, my mind went to the Buddhist monks in Vietnam who torched themselves to protest that war. Non-violent people taking such a violent action in protest. An intensely private, personal religious practice and spirituality juxtaposed with an almost performance artist public maneuver of the most spectacular (and gruesome) kind.

[Keith Bee]

71. I'm with you

In the particular case of this young woman in Germany, I can see how asserting her sexuality would be liberating. But in this country? Puh-leeze! I always get a hoot whenever I hear Bill Maher say that Playboy liberated woman. Yeah: Being in your twenties and serving in the harem of a shriveled, dessicated octogenarian is a real Virginia Slims moment!

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

55. I thoroughly approve her take-that against the fundies. Fuck them all.

:thumbsup:

[lunatica]

56. Having and making choices is liberating

there are plenty of women and men who love to be naked and if they have a choice they would act on it.

[closeupready]

57. That makes sense, yes.

I don't think she said that in the article, but if that is why she did it, then it makes sense to me.

[WatsonT]

58. Well from a muslim background it means she is rejected notions forced on her

and living her own life. She isn't beholden to ancient customs that have no place in modern society.

For someone from a society that places no particular taboo on nudity it is meaningless. But for her it is a pretty bold move. People are murdered over this sort of thing all too frequently in the Muslim community.

[walldude]

68. I have an idea.. How about we don't talk about

European sexual attitudes until we pull out that fucking stick we have shoved up our tight little American asses.

Fuck. I live in a country where a womans breasts are cause to hide the childrens eyes but Abu Grahib photos are on the front page. :crazy:

[seabeyond]

78. yet in france they hide apollo. nt

[cliffordu]

135. Not any more, putting his explicit self back up.

Why, it was right here on DU just the other day......

[seabeyond]

139. yes... i know. wehre i got info. in the oh so sexually sophisticated france

they hid a statue

but much better to pretend all of europe is utopia

[cliffordu]

144. I don't pretend any such thing.

And I want to know if you feel the same way about the fertility symbols they dig up all over the world, stone icons - fetishes - of obviously pregnant women or women portrayed as large (ripe??) vessels of life and great sexuality?

what about Indian temple porn? what about traditional Japanese porn?

Is this about oppression or just the infantile boobie obsession men in western countries display?

I know a stripper/sex worker who was raised Pentecostal - Yet another fundie extreme oppressive religion - she started stripping to make her own way and NOT be little more than a brood mare for some fucking religious nut of a husband. (Her statement on the subject.)

She is studying to be a hairdresser, so she can make other women more appealing so they can be oppressed as sexual objects.....and on and on.

[riderinthestorm]

145. Awww, my friend there are so many famous nudes of men in Europe....

Michealangelo's "David", "The Thinker", that famous Greek discus statue (yummy), the nude known as "Hector" (love that painting), the statue of Adam, or Davinci's Vetruvian man....

I do think Europe is far less hung up on nudity than the US. Of course I'm Irish which is probably as religiously uptight and repressed society as there ever was... so take my perspective with a grain of salt. But that certainly means my eyes pop out at the lovely nudes in Europe that seem (to me! heh) to be everywhere.

[county worker]

69. It would be the same for you if you were forced to live like your parents

as a fundie even though you didn't believe in it. If you made a decision to think for yourself you would be doing the same thing that she did. What she did or how she went about "thinking for her self" is not the issue here.

[PeaceNikki]

76. You don't have to understand why things make people feel any specific way.

[closeupready]

79. I don't have to understand why tides ebb and flow, or why people fall in love.

Need doesn't define the limits of my curiosity. And some of us feel a 'need' to understand things we don't understand. I'm sorry if that threatens you.

[PeaceNikki]

86. Threatens me? What on earth gave you such a ridiculous idea?

[closeupready]

87. Your suggestion that a lack of need-to-know renders discussion rude and/or pointless.

Isn't that what your original point meant? I mean, you didn't explain, you just stated that I didn't need to know why.

Perhaps you can re-phrase your original post? thanks.

[spanone]

81. choice is choice....

[closeupready]

88. But that is a tautology, and doesn't shed light on her reasoning. As

others have stated, I have no need to know, but I would like to know, both specifically but also more generally, is posing for a men's soft-porn magazine liberating, and if so, how?

[Obamanaut]

82. If she feels liberated, then she is - it is her feeling, not ours. nt

[RagAss]

91. Fuckk SS and Medicare ! This is an issue we really need to be addressing.

[InvisibleTouch]

93. Germany is a lot less uptight about that kind of thing.

A woman's breast is no big deal, and the magazine covers are routinely displayed in stores where anyone (including kids) can see them (other than the really hardcore stuff, which is covered). It comes across to me like a dig at unnaturally repressive cultures, including our own. A way to say "Lighten up, people, it's just a breast."

[Cleita]

95. I sort of understand it. When I first wore a

mini-skirt to work in the sixties, I was told I would be fired if I didn't lower my hem. The next day I went to work with a skirt that was even shorter. I didn't get fired. It would have been counter-productive for them to train another person to do the specialized work I did for them. However, in the following weeks a few more girls showed up with mini-skirts and by the end of the year, everyone under forty was wearing them. To tell the truth I wasn't looking for attention but wanted to be fashionable, but by the time HR started hinting that only a slutty girl would wear such a thing and it gave the company a bad image, I dug my heels in just to be a bitch.

[closeupready]

100. There we go. I can totally cheer you on there.

:hi: :) Thanks for the personal anecdote.

[Warren DeMontague]

96. It liberates her because she feels that it liberates her.

That's how.

[closeupready]

101. Tautologies are, by definition, irrational.

nt

[Warren DeMontague]

123. Not in this case, when you're dealing with a subjective phenomena. Liberation is subjective.

As has been noted elsewhere in the thread.

Or maybe you asked the question but didn't really want to hear answers?


Why would you do that?

:shrug:

[closeupready]

130. Liberation is not subjective.

I do that because, as you suspect, after thousands of posts on DU and a clean record here for over 5 or 6 years, I have decided to come out of the conservative, misogynistic closet. Hard to fool people as smart as you, who use NASA avatars. :rofl:

[Warren DeMontague]

170. There's nothing so liberating as letting others define liberation for you, huh?

Now that's not a tautology, that's just irony.

Anyway, you say liberation is not subjective. I say it is... I guess that means I'm right, at least in a sense. (see what I did there? I'm telling you, it's the gul-durned NASA avatar)

I disagree. If this woman feels that posing nude liberates her, it liberates her.


You, of course, are welcome to order her to put her shirt back on and behave herself, in the interest of true, actual, you-approved objective Liberation.™



Not sure what the fuck a NASA avatar has to do with any of it, though. :shrug:

[TNLib]

99. Because she wanted to and didn't let her fundie family values stop her

good for her!

[Motown_Johnny]

104. Spend 10 years in a Burka and then come ask again

[themadstork]

107. Nudity in general is liberating.

It goes against the widespread belief that our bodies are dirty, shameful-- something to be kept safe from view. Hypersexualization is just the other side of this same coin. I suppose if she wanted to be really radical she would have appeared completely starkers, in a non-suggestive pose, with no makeup or photoshopping, and with full-bore bedhead and eye-crust. And gnarly unkempt pubic hair. Alas.

We should all be nude as frequently as possible. We would be better off.

[closeupready]

137. Probably, lol.

:hi: Makes me think of those photos that guy does - you know, he did one here in New York and another in Mexico City?

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

109. You're right. Half naked wouldn't make a lot of sense to me. But fully naked, that's a whole

different story.

[pinkkillersheep]

115. Read an article about a parapalegic female athlete who posed nude for a sports magazine

I actually thought it accomplished a lot. It forced me to re-evaluate how I initially react to people with physical disabilities.

[seabeyond]

118. because she could not have gotten that across to you with all her accomplishments, only in getting

naked

which is kinda the issue

[pinkkillersheep]

151. I more meant how I view the physically disabled sexually

My instant reaction to her picture was to think it's wrong to show her in a sexual way. It was an almost...paternalistic feeling. And that was incredibly revealing to me, as a woman. Should someone have to pose nude to get people to realize that? No. But I'm very grateful to her for doing it.

[defendandprotect]

120. Haven't read this but how about females going bare-breasted on beaches?

[closeupready]

131. That makes sense to me. Some women will march bare-breasted in the Gay Pride Parade.

Typically, it's hot and humid on that day, so ... so what, I figure.

The context here was important to my question.

[okieinpain]

124. there are nude works of art and there is exploitation. that's

exploitation. "no dear stick your chest out, make your face look like you're having an orgasm, open your legs you know you want it", blah blah blah. I stopped watching a lot of movies because of that attitude, it's really kind of sicking and makes you wonder about our future.

[LetTimmySmoke]

126. It's not the posing that's liberating.

It's the choice of whether to do it or not, without judgment either way.

[grahamhgreen]

127. Americans are way too hung up about nudity.

[TorchTheWitch]

129. voluntarily shedding of one's clothes is classic symbolic liberation

Even changing one's clothes can be as well as cutting off one's hair or letting their hair hang loose instead of pinned up.

Most people who are forced to wear conservative dress at work feel liberated when after work they get to go home and and change into the type of clothing they prefer. Is it so hard to understand that removing the suit and tie or skirt and pantyhose the employer(society) requires is worn feels liberating even when such clothing is not physically uncomfortable?

Remember "ban the bra" and "bra burnings" in the 60's/70's? Same thing. It was liberating for many women to remove their bras in public and go about in public without a bra because society decided that no one should see boobs that hang or move as they naturally do, therefore, women felt forced into wearing bras as though there was something wrong with their boobs even when they weren't visible even though many of these women physically felt more comfortable wearing a bra. Is it so hard to understand that removing one's bra and going about in public without it can be liberating even though one feels more physically comfortable wearing a bra?

Before the 1920's society dictated that women have long hair though when in public it was also dictated that said long hair had to be pinned up so as not to appear long. In the '20's women in droves liberated themselves from society's ironic and ridiculous stricture concerning acceptable hair length on women and how it should be seen in public and cut it short. And they did it mostly because it was liberating, and not necessarily because they hated having long hair. Is it so hard to understand why women would feel liberated in cutting their hair short as rebellion against society's stricture concerning their hair even when they don't hate having long hair?

Why would it be so hard to understand why some women feel liberated by publicly being shed of their clothes for the same reasons? Just because YOU wouldn't feel liberated by doing it... or wouldn't cut off your hair or burn your bra or do any number of things that make people feel liberated... doesn't mean nobody else would. What the hell is so hard to understand just because it isn't something you would do?

[closeupready]

132. The commercial taint to the act is an important part of the context to the question.

I wouldn't have started the thread if it was merely about, for example, nude-sunbathing. What the hell is so hard to understand about that?!

[riderinthestorm]

143. Except this woman possibly stands to lose as much money as she gains

she's known within her industry for being "the Turkish actress". It's quite possible she's destroyed that "angle" of her career that perhaps was pretty lucrative (think Bollywood where that kind of chasteness is desirable). Furthermore, she's already lost her family over this - they've disowned her. Kind of hard to think it's all about the money when the result is this extreme (which she fully acknowledges was a substantial and very real risk).

As many people have told you over and over and over on this thread: this woman appears to be doing this for both personal liberation, and to make a statement to her religious and cultural oppressors, as well as making a statement of personal empowerment for other young women. You however seem to be having a very hard time understanding that, regardless of how many times people have tried to explain it to you.

Now you appear to just be trying to be confrontational without a productive discussion.

[cliffordu]

147. Her awareness of the risks of the loss of career choices and, possibly

her family speaks volumes about courage, maybe or at least conviction........

[no_hypocrisy]

134. Independence from social mores.

Good or bad choice, it's still yours.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

146. Money is liberating

and posing for a cover brings money.

Maybe a few months of rent are covered, so one less worry. That might be liberating.

[Iggo]

155. If the restriction is that you can't do something...

...then, yes, doing that thing IS liberating.

[Blue_Tires]

158. eh...Miss Turkey from the Hardee's commercial looks about 10x better...

:evilgrin:

[closeupready]

161. Shame on you!!!!

:evilgrin: Yes, she's very attractive.

[cottonseed]

159. The odd thing is. I've never seen a fat chick "liberate herself" in such a way.

Which gets me to thinking, that it might just have a bit more to do with fame and exposure than it does liberating herself from the bondage of conservative ideals.

[Forkboy]

162. Plenty of BBW nudity out there.

[DutchLiberal]

164. Because she's the one making the decision. End of discussion.

Nobody needs to be outraged or 'concerned' in her place.

And now, I'll have to go do some Googling.

[ismnotwasm]

171. It's never been done before!

A new frontier!

Oh wait, it's really the same old shit.


Sorry darlin, you all are just another one in a long line of nekkid women in men's magazines. Best of luck on your career though.

[JI7]

173. many western parents would be upset with their daughters doing this also

considering they supported her in her acting career i don't think they were the religious fundie type of family.

i guess it might make a story sound better.

turkey also isn't as conservative as other muslim nations.

she can do what she wants but i don't think it has anything to do with restrictions on her childhood. she wanted to pose to show how hot she was and that's it. she has a right to do it and i have no problem with it.

[sendero]

174. If it has to be explained to you..

... I doubt you would get it anyway.

[closeupready]

175. So here's a shocker: A man writes that he approves of her posing,

and he even comes up with her arguments FOR HER - wasn't that nice of him? :sarcasm:

>>Purists of female emancipation and cultural critics may sniff at the fact that Sahin sees an act of liberation in posing naked for men who are not primarily interested in intellectual discourse. But the tastefully shot nude photos of the young Turkish woman remind us that the reviled commercialization of the female body that seems just like an unavoidable part of everyday life today has played an important role in the history of female emancipation in the Western world.<<

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2066491-1,00.html

[lumberjack_jeff]

176. She wants to be objectified, and she's an attractive object.

If she considers it liberating, it's a win-win.

I'm not going to tell either the model nor those who buy her photos what to do. Besides, the direction of currency flow suggests that it's not the model who is being exploited.