I will agree that not everything has to be shown on screen. I'm not sure what is and isn't allowed but not everything should be displayed. But consider the context: the man in the Masters of Sex scene is dealing with sexual dysfunction, probably brought on by social ineptitude and years of shaming. He was not used to seeing women naked. Dr. Masters aimed to rectify this issue by introducing to him a woman who was obviously not inept or ashamed in any way. It would've been a complete betrayal to the audience if the show (and the characters in the show, like Dr. Masters and Emily's character) promoted body/sex positivity and not show nudity. There is nothing wrong with the human body or sexual activity and yet nobody on the show is willing to disrobe in situations that would demand for nudity? There would be enormous hypocrisy involved.
This is a situation that should be commended not condemned. Because this particular scene (and the show itself) sends an important message about sex and the human body and, at the same time, stays true to that message by not being cowardly or squeamish about the very thing it advocates for.
This isn't at all similar to the Friday the 13th reboot. A movie that features voluptuous babes dropping their tops solely for titillation. For excitement and spectatorship. That film is an example of exploitative nudity. Nudity for the sake of nudity and, even worse, promoting ideal body types that could be damaging to the way an audience (especially the male demographic) perceives the perfect physical form.
reply
share