Nudist reality Show

[Ed]

Absolutely. I mean, I can understand that you might not think she should actually be embarrassed by being seen naked in that way, because there isn't anything wrong with being naked.

Actually, when your crotch becomes viral on the net because it wasn't censored as it was supposed to be it's more than legitimate to be embarassed, even for nudists!

Well yes :P

But I was talking more in the general sense, that ideally someone being naked wouldn't go viral on the net because it shouldn't actually be a big deal. Obviously that's the hypothetical, though, and isn't how you'd *actually* feel in the real world :P

[skycladsusy]

If the show's casts were actually nudists it wouldn't be an issue. They aren't nudist. They are just people looking for a few minutes of fame. Bringing this to a law suit will not only win her some money (possibly) but give her more fame than just 1 episode of this show. I would not be surprised if she is on a different show soon. Look at how many times people have posed for professional nude pictures that were "supposedly" not supposed to be released.  They get caught up in media scandals and claim it was an accident or a mistake etc, but it goes back to why go nude in front of a camera if you don't want to be seen nude? I have no sympathy for her and hope she doesn't win. Don't go on a naked "reality" show then complain because a split second got missed in editing and now your friends and family will see you. Ironically, I have seen just 1 episode of this show & it was this one. She came off as very open, party going type that would strip just for attention or money. 

[Dan]

but it goes back to why go nude in front of a camera if you don't want to be seen nude?

An analogy might be a documentary on a play where it's agreed cameras are allowed backstage but no nudity must make it in the final cut. While the actors are fine with being naked in front of *some* people while they change, they haven't agreed to be naked in front of the public at large.

As @Infinity Biscuit mentioned earlier, it's a boundary issues. She agreed within certain boundaries she was comfortable with that were made official on a piece of paper. You might have different ones but she's entitled to hers and they had an agreement.

I bet the show is going to rake in millions since the pictures went viral so I don't have much sympathy for the chanel.

I have no sympathy for her and hope she doesn't win.

She can't lose. She's legally in the right.

[Ed]

If the show's casts were actually nudists it wouldn't be an issue. They aren't nudist. They are just people looking for a few minutes of fame. Bringing this to a law suit will not only win her some money (possibly) but give her more fame than just 1 episode of this show. I would not be surprised if she is on a different show soon. Look at how many times people have posed for professional nude pictures that were "supposedly" not supposed to be released.  They get caught up in media scandals and claim it was an accident or a mistake etc, but it goes back to why go nude in front of a camera if you don't want to be seen nude? I have no sympathy for her and hope she doesn't win. Don't go on a naked "reality" show then complain because a split second got missed in editing and now your friends and family will see you. Ironically, I have seen just 1 episode of this show & it was this one. She came off as very open, party going type that would strip just for attention or money. 

I think you're projecting motivations onto somebody you don't know, and I don't think that does any good at all. The only think we know for sure is that the company breached its contract to not broadcast anything uncensored. At that point it doesn't actually matter what her motivations are for being bothered by the distinction between censored and uncensored nudity: it's a simple matter of law. Besides that, maybe her personal circumstances or history are such that it's a very meaningful distinction for her. None of us know, so it's not helpful for us to act like we do and hurl out the parsimony accordingly.

[Infinity Biscuit]

Look at how many times people have posed for professional nude pictures that were "supposedly" not supposed to be released.  They get caught up in media scandals and claim it was an accident or a mistake etc, but it goes back to why go nude in front of a camera if you don't want to be seen nude?

Why let one person kiss you if you don't want to be kissed by everyone on the planet?

Oh right, because people are allowed to set boundaries in their life and as long as those boundaries don't harm others, they should be respected

To push for otherwise is to hurt people and be really gross overall

[skycladsusy]

According the article:

New York model Jessie Nizewitz, 28, says the headline-making freshman reality series (trailer) flashed her crotch during one segment where she playfully wrestles with a date on the beach. Viewers noticed the unexpected reveal despite it being a very brief shot, and Nizewitz says she’s been humiliated on social media. Producers had allegedly assured Nizewitz that her genitals would be fully blurred during the episode. (Dating Naked typically shows bare buttocks, but breasts and genitals are heavily blurred.)

Show me the contract where it explicitly says she will be blurred in every fraction of a second. Everybody here saying the contract says what boundaries were set are just expressing their own opinions about this unless they have seen the contract. Allegedly assured is not the same as a contractually binding agreement. Allegedly infers she told her lawyer they said it or that her lawyer is saying it but has no proof. If you have seen the contract then post a link to it. Until then, I'll keep my opinion as I stated.


According the article:

Adding insult to alleged injury, Nizewitz also noted in a New York Post interview that a man she was dating never called her again after the show aired.


So she went on a dating reality show and the guy was already dating stopped calling because of the show. lol

I'm sticking to my opinion of her. Just think guys, she's single now. 

[Dan]

Allegedly as a very precise meaning in journalism. It means "true as far as the journalist can tell but a judge has to take a decision on the matter".

You'll never see that word on anything that's not before a judge and you'll never see it in front of something the journalist doesn't think has happened.

[NakedShadow]

I bet the judge will throw the case out. After all the moment she appeared in a show called 'Naked Dating' that would have ruined her creditably is automatic gone with some people.

Speaking of the show did you guys see the episode where the girl who was suppose to be a 2nd date for one of the fellas ending up leaving the show because she couldn't stand to be naked with other naked people.  Seriously did she think this out before auditioning? 

[Ed]

Speaking of the show did you guys see the episode where the girl who was suppose to be a 2nd date for one of the fellas ending up leaving the show because she couldn't stand to be naked with other naked people.  Seriously did she think this out before auditioning?

What if she just wanted to try it because she thought it'd be fun and exciting, and she's an outgoing person who likes trying new things, and then it turned out it wasn't her kind of thing so she stopped, like any sensible person would?

So she went on a dating reality show and the guy was already dating stopped calling because of the show. lol

I'm sticking to my opinion of her. Just think guys, she's single now. 

You do know that there is a time gap between recording a show and broadcasting a show, right? I'd have thought the sequence of events went something like this: Month 1 - films episode. Month 2, starts dating guy. Month 3, episode broadcast, guy sees her on the show and can't handle it.

I genuinely don't get how we can be here saying that we don't think there's anything wrong with being naked on one hand, and on the other basically stopping only just short of calling a young woman a slut for doing something naked, just because it's in a different situation to the hundreds of situations when we'd be naked. It's absurd and nonsensical. Of all the people who should be most aware of why it's a bad idea to just pass out judgement based on one's own limited and relative experience, I thought it would be, well, us.

I'll say it again. You do not know this person. You don't know her motivations for going on this show: you don't know whether it was just for fun, on a dare, because she needed the money, just to experience something new, for the fame, or because she thought it might help her modelling career (similar to 'for the fame', but the underlying motivation's a bit different). You have no idea whether she's a lovely person who's made a mistake, an attention-seeker, or a naive and gullible person who's been exploited, and you have no idea why she's very concerned about the boundary between being shown naked but censored, and naked and uncensored, so you're in no position to decide whether or not her reasoning for drawing that boundary is reasonable.

BUT you're still perfectly happy to assume all the worst (for your own personal value of worst) options about her because it conforms to the mental picture you've built up in your head before you started actually thinking about it. It's depressingly stupid - you'd be complaining about exactly the same thing if you told someone you were a naturist and they assumed that meant you were a sex-crazed pervert.

[biobruin89]

Speaking of the show did you guys see the episode where the girl who was suppose to be a 2nd date for one of the fellas ending up leaving the show because she couldn't stand to be naked with other naked people.  Seriously did she think this out before auditioning?

What if she just wanted to try it because she thought it'd be fun and exciting, and she's an outgoing person who likes trying new things, and then it turned out it wasn't her kind of thing so she stopped, like any sensible person would?

So she went on a dating reality show and the guy was already dating stopped calling because of the show. lol

I'm sticking to my opinion of her. Just think guys, she's single now. 

You do know that there is a time gap between recording a show and broadcasting a show, right? I'd have thought the sequence of events went something like this: Month 1 - films episode. Month 2, starts dating guy. Month 3, episode broadcast, guy sees her on the show and can't handle it.

I genuinely don't get how we can be here saying that we don't think there's anything wrong with being naked on one hand, and on the other basically stopping only just short of calling a young woman a slut for doing something naked, just because it's in a different situation to the hundreds of situations when we'd be naked. It's absurd and nonsensical. Of all the people who should be most aware of why it's a bad idea to just pass out judgement based on one's own limited and relative experience, I thought it would be, well, us.

I'll say it again. You do not know this person. You don't know her motivations for going on this show: you don't know whether it was just for fun, on a dare, because she needed the money, just to experience something new, for the fame, or because she thought it might help her modelling career (similar to 'for the fame', but the underlying motivation's a bit different). You have no idea whether she's a lovely person who's made a mistake, an attention-seeker, or a naive and gullible person who's been exploited, and you have no idea why she's very concerned about the boundary between being shown naked but censored, and naked and uncensored, so you're in no position to decide whether or not her reasoning for drawing that boundary is reasonable.

BUT you're still perfectly happy to assume all the worst (for your own personal value of worst) options about her because it conforms to the mental picture you've built up in your head before you started actually thinking about it. It's depressingly stupid - you'd be complaining about exactly the same thing if you told someone you were a naturist and they assumed that meant you were a sex-crazed pervert.

 

Brilliant.

[nudistboy26]

Has anyone else seen this Swedish reality show? I think there's an American Spinoff coming out soon. Though the Swedish one is uncensored and I doubt the American one wouldn't be. Thoughts? Who understands Swedish? haha

There's now five full episodes of that show up on youtube.
But all in Dutch with no subtitles.

[ocin]

we have that show in germany too, its fare away from nudism, the people in there mentioned more then once that they think beeing nude is odd. the whole thing is kinda weird in my eyes, as its more voyeuristic, and kinda boring

[Dan]

the whole thing is kinda weird in my eyes, as its more voyeuristic, and kinda boring

So, standard reality show fare then?