Author |
Message |
Jimmer
Moderator
08-30-2000
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 4:27 pm
If God didn't want naked people why didn't he give us all furry coats? Seriously, I don't have a problem with nudity other than this was just dumb because it served no purpose for the HGs or the show to have the crew see them naked when they were obviously going to have to blur things out for the TV audience anyway.
|
Calimom3
Member
07-12-2007
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 4:28 pm
I don't understand this 'they did it before..' thing. So WHAT if they did it before... a LOT of things have been "done before" that either shouldn't have been done, or should not be condoned simply because others have done them.
|
Gail
Member
08-11-2000
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 4:36 pm
I am glad someone started this thread because I thought this a bad thing to do also. It is one thing for the houseguests to have something slip here and there and for it to get caught on camera. That is going to happen. My objection to this is "what was the point?" This was done for the TV show and everything was smudged out. Why not have bathing suits on for it? What bothers me is that the houseguests were pretty much forced into this. There is a trust issue here. I am sure they did not just have women editing the women and guys doing the editing for the men. (in these days, it wouldn't matter anyways). What's preventing the actual footage from getting posted up on the internet? Just because the cameramen and the producers and the editors all work for CBS, that doesn't make them trustworthy. There are all kinds of bad people out there and they would not have any hesitation posting this footage. Me, I think this was someone's perverted fantasy to see the houseguests nekkid.
|
Nutsy
Member
08-14-2001
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 4:51 pm
Perverted is right. Especially when two of the hamsters are father and daughter. Baaaaaa-d taste to be sure.
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-31-2000
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 4:59 pm
Gail!!!! 
|
Spygirl
Board Administrator
04-23-2001
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 5:03 pm
Gail! Gail Gail!!!!!!!!
|
Gaylestorm
Member
08-25-2005
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 5:06 pm
Perverted and DUMB!! ITA with Gail, even though she spells it the "other" way. 
|
Jarriluvs
Member
07-27-2006
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 5:07 pm
I never said God did not want naked people, I never said Christians are not human beings, I never said they were BAD people for taking their clothes off on TV and I certainly never said God doesn't accept nudity! MY point, AGAIN, can be summed up in the recent post from Eris: (quote) While I get what you are saying here...my answer to this would be YES! Yes, if she was strong in her belief and wanted others to see her that way-and not like she is putting on an act, then that is exactly what she should have done. She might have gained some respect for the move to stay strong....then again this is BB..... I feel my original post has been extremely misunderstood and taken out of context.
|
Tobor7
Member
07-19-2002
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 7:09 pm
I have to wonder if it was in their contract that they had to agree to be nude.
|
Kitt
Member
09-06-2000
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 7:15 pm
I wondered that too Tobor. Because otherwise if someone actually refused, lost a competition and therefore didn't get a prize they could make a lot of fuss, as could the media. I suspect they were asked on application if they would appear nude and they all agreed they would, however reluctantly. (Still think it was tacky of BB though.)
|
Tobor7
Member
07-19-2002
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 7:18 pm
Yeah. They have to worry that "somewhere" footage exists of them nude, even though it was blurred on tv. The raw footage exists. Doesn't take much for a PA to burn a quick copy. I wonder how long it takes for that to pop up on Utube? Or it doesn't take much to take the blur out and PRETEND it is the raw footage.
|
Jimmer
Moderator
08-30-2000
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 7:19 pm
It was probably included in the contract they signed. It is a 24 hour live feed and you accept that you will/may be appearing nude on the feeds at some point or otherwise in the game …. Blah blah blah. I imagine that they sign away almost all of their rights.
|
Sharinia
Member
09-07-2002
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 7:24 pm
I'm surprised they didn't do this comp while Jen was still in the house.
|
Tntitanfan
Member
08-03-2001
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 7:41 pm
Well, at the risk of offending almost everybody - I did skinny-dipping in my teens and twenties and life modeling into my mid-thirties, and I truly believe that the human body is the ultimate work of art. Yes, its beauty can be used and abused, but that is in the eye of the beholder - not in the origin.
|
Kitt
Member
09-06-2000
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 7:41 pm
Another thing fishy about the comp was that the teams were uneven, four women on one side, three men on the other. They could have easily said that the HoH couldn't play to make things even, but then they wouldn't have seen Jessica with her kit off.
|
Eris
Member
11-13-2003
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 7:44 pm
I wonder if they would have left it Men vs Women if Dustin or Joe were still in the house....hmmmmm
|
Sharinia
Member
09-07-2002
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 7:45 pm
the whole thing was probably a ploy to see Jessica. am I wrong guys???
|
Sunshyne4u
Member
06-17-2003
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 7:56 pm
If God didn't want naked people why didn't he give us all furry coats? we are covered in Hair! from top of our head to our toes. naked means 'without clothes' and even Doggies wear clothes so that point is moot.
|
Christina
Member
08-07-2005
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 8:10 pm
I just have to say that nudity is fine in certain situations, I dont think I would want to see MY dad nude(shudder) Nor would I want him to see me. Dont feel he would like it either.
|
Atcaroline
Member
08-13-2007
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 8:17 pm
Kitt & Tabor, I mentioned the same thought about their contracts last night on the Spoiler thread after the show...regardless, it did seem a bit prurient and designed to titillate the crew, perhaps...no pun intended.
|
Gaylestorm
Member
08-25-2005
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 8:30 pm
the whole thing was probably a ploy to see Jessica. am I wrong guys??? I'm not a guy, but I tend to agree. I'm sure every crew member showed up whether they were scheduled to work or not.
|
Rubyroo77
Member
08-13-2005
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 8:32 pm
Optimystic- I am glad you started this thread! I have not read thru all the posts, but my family and I totally agree with you. We had the same reaction..but I also was appalled that they had them nude because of Dani and her father. That was over the top for me..her father saw amber naked-so what's to say he didn't see his daughter. This bb has really gone overboard.
|
Eeyoreslament
Member
07-20-2003
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 11:42 pm
I don't usually have a problem with nudity, but this just seems unnecessary, and creepy. Sure they can see nekkid girls via the shower cams. But it just wasn't NECESSARY. They could have done the challenge with bikini's on. I also thought it was unfair that the suds only came up waist high. Just another tacky, creepy challenge. Kind of made me lose respect a bit for BB. I can put up with vote tampering, and whatever else crap they pull to make the game not play out he way it should. But the nudity was completely unnecessary for the game.
|
Sunshyne4u
Member
06-17-2003
| Monday, August 27, 2007 - 11:45 pm
the girls dont take off their clothes in the shower. they wear bikinis This was needed so the control and camera guys could see them naked
|
Mark13
Member
07-01-2001
| Tuesday, August 28, 2007 - 12:06 am
And just why are we assuming that the entire BB staff consists solely of lecherous guys looking for a peek? I would imagine that these people are professional men AND women that have been in the business long enough to see more than their share of the naked human form. This is Hollywood people. Actors and actresses are routinely seen naked behind the scenes doing wardrobe changes etc. even on shows or movies that have no on-camera nudity. No production staff has to work for Big Brother to see this kind of stuff. The nudity was solely for ratings. That's it.
|