Why was the eye-less woman naked.

Erm, yes siree!

No, i mean my first thought when i read your thread. I don't think i put much thought into the girls nakedness while watching the episode.

I don't know what that means. Just looked up the movie... justin theroux is in it.

Did you just get back from Strawmanapalooza? How were the bands?

Is there some argument you are trying to make here, such as that Lynch chose to make the woman nude and Coop clothed because he conforms to some goofy double-standard?

BTW, news flash: tits are not a dick. And I'm sure if Lynch et al. thought it was important to have Coop etc. be nude, then he'd just do it, and keep the camera off the dick.... which is again not tits... besides we already saw Coop's tits and saw him objectified, so this is one big non sequitur.

yeah, pretty much a visual thing only. Lynch sometimes can get inconsistent even with his story telling just for the sake of a visual effect [Twin Peaks is full of inconsistencies in the first 2 seasons].

An example I can give you of inconsistency is the theory that is going around about an event in one of the new episodes in which a guy goes running into the RR searching for Billy and it seems to be made of two different time periods of the same action [you can see different people on the bar in those two shots - one is the guy arriving at the bar and the other one of the guy leaving; the entire sequence only takes a couple of seconds]. The theory going around is that there is a "time effect" going on in Twin Peaks, when I'm pretty sure it's nothing more than an editing problem; which makes the shot look inconsistent and more meaningful than what it is [a guy running into a bar in search of Billy]. Lynch must have shot that sequence a couple of times and just decided which one looks best; but ended with the problem of inconsistency that he probably hoped the viewers wouldn't notice.

Why is she nude? Dude, don't look a gift horse in the mouth.