Today’s quote of the day – about nudity, art, Paula Jones, and veterans’ benefits

There is a point to this story, but it appears only at the end.

Striphanger — Here’s Proof Nude York is the Naked City“, New York Post, 20 August 2009 — Excerpt:

A strip club isn’t the only place in town you can see a pole dance — amazed passengers on an L train watched in awe as a naked young woman competed with straphangers for space on a pole. The performance by actress Jocelyn Saldana, 19, lasted just 30 seconds, and some of the passengers probably thought they were hallucinating or dreaming. Most were blasé. But one woman started screaming and an elderly man next to her got the shakes.

That free show in mid-June — as well as similar ones from Times Square to Chinatown — were the creation of photographer Zach Hyman, 22, whose portraits are never under-exposed.

The photographer and his volunteer models don’t spend much time on location. The model quickly disrobes and Hyman gives himself only 30 seconds to fire off 10 shots with his Hasselblad 500 film camera.

Alex Reisner, a 20-year-old Columbia student, had a very appreciative audience when she disrobed in Chinatown. When Hyman snapped her jumping in the air in the middle of the street, the crowd burst into applause. “There was so much adrenaline,” she said. “I was bouncing around for the rest of the day. I told him I want to pose nude every weekend.”

Hyman noted that “photographing females in public is easier than males. “People see a naked woman and they smile,” he said. “They see a penis and they freak out.”

Comment on this posted at Dr. Helen’s website by JG:

If you recall, Paula Jones got a settlement of around $750,000 {FM:  $850,000} after she saw the gubernatorial wiener for a few seconds.

A man who saw a woman’s vagina for a few seconds would get somewhere between zero and nothing.

Just to put this in perspective: Paula got more than military vets with severe injuries get in a lot of cases. If you think about it, society thinks that Paula had far more trauma. Is that right?

For more on this see the Wikipedia entry about the Paula Jones settlement.

I have no idea what this all means.

Afterword

Please share your comments by posting below.  Per the FM site’s Comment Policy, please make them brief (250 words max), civil, and relevant to this post.  Or email me at fabmaximus at hotmail dot com (note the spam-protected spelling).

For information about this site see the About page, at the top of the right-side menu bar.

6 thoughts on “Today’s quote of the day – about nudity, art, Paula Jones, and veterans’ benefits

  1. The sum Paula Jones received had less to do with the type of genitals she was exposed to and more to do with their owner, combined with the existence of a burning desire of some other people to have that particular anatomical feature as a trophy. If I had been involuntarily exposed to Hillary Clinton’s vulva during that same period I’m pretty sure I would have been able to turn that fact into a rather large payout for myself as well.

    As for the young woman in the article I’m glad she’s managed to find a way to turn her exhibitionism into a respectable career, and hope she’s negotiated a decent royalty sharing agreement with the photographer.

  2. FM: “I have no idea what this all means.

    I think it means three things:
    1. Artistic types are good at tweaking the rules.
    2. Bullshit artists are good at pretending to be outraged.
    3. Bloodsuckers are good at finding your weakness.

  3. It’s like this. The penis is like the sun, it provides the light that makes vision possible – but looking at the sun itself is painful, and may cause blindness if looked at too long.

    Which is why men prefer not to look at other mens penises. And have to to pass laws against it, and in the interest of impartiality, are forced to make it applicable to women as well. Which they would prefer not to do.

  4. A UK , MOD-employed lesbian female got £200,000 ( £ , not $ ) for receiveing an email from a male colleage , offering to convert her . She was reported as having previously posted photos on net , of herself nude , and to have had boyfriends.
    She could have a rewarding relationship with another MOD female employee who apparently got £ 450,000 for a repetitive strain injury of the wrist.
    I wish my teachers had made me aware of these brilliant career opportunities , as I would never have become self-employed or got married .

  5. I think characterizing the $850K payoff to Jones as compensation for a “gubernatorial wiener” sighting is a bit of a stretch (no pun intended). It was a settlement to make go away a sexual harassment suit that had the potential for digging up a lot of witnesses against the former president.

    Having said that, I’m generally against compensating people for their “outrage” or “being offended,” or “emotional trauma.” If you can show actual material loss I’m all for compensating a victim materially, but too often these torts wind up being wealth distribution schemes – the distribution acting mostly toward the attorneys involved. Should I sue MTV for stealing my teenage daughter’s soul?

Leave a Reply