Why do people make such big deals at certain body parts? Why so much self hatred?

ColorsWolf

New member
I just saw a series of pictures that move where a woman takes out her breasts and rubs them in public stores and this is what I thought and said:

I like to do this some times to, not a big deal, nothing out of the ordinary here.~ Men whip out their Gorilla chests all the time and I’ve seen obese men with bigger breasts than these, what the fuck is the difference?~

I guess it's a cultural thing, because in some if not many middle-eastern countries showing your ankles is considered indecent.~

But why, why so much hate for others and so much self-hatred, why does this exist and why has it existed for 1,000's of years in our Human species' history?~

It seems like such a HUGE waste of energy and time, why hate every thing so much?~
 
Ah ColorsWolf my friend, it is certainly true that humanity's history is filled with an overabundance of hatred, not the least considering the latest conflicts been Islam and Christianity, or between the Middle East and the United States. Either way, I consider it a "re-run of the Crusades." Does it take us so many hundreds of years to start to see each other as members of the same species (Homo sapiens), with wives and innocent children -- and as President Kennedy said, the shared weakness of mortality?

But let us not carry that concern so far that we consider people "self-haters" who desire to groom or modify themselves in a certain way. Isn't the whole point of inheriting one's own body the privelage of owning that body and expressing oneself through that body in one's own way? I rather rejoice in the wide diversity of ways that people express themselves "through their bodies."

Many people express themselves as "mainstream" by grooming their bodies in the "standardly-accepted fashion," and that's fine. Let them do so. It's an honest statement about how they view themselves.

How do you feel about people who pierce their ears? Mother Nature did not birth them with holes in their ears; they put them there in an artificial fashion. Doesn't that express a hatred toward one's ears? "Stupid ears: daring to cling to the sides of my head with no holes for earrings."

What about "bod-mod" people, those who pierce anything and everything and stick all kinds of painful-looking stuff through the resulting holes? Do they hate their bodies? or do they just want to express themselves through their bodies as a kind of art form?

What about people who get tattoos? Mother Nature didn't birth them with colors inserted all over their bodies. What right do they have to walk into a tattoo shop and say, "Here, print a word or a picture into my body?" Isn't that a way of saying, "I hate my plain body with its lack of messages and art forms." Or is it a way of saying, "I love my body as a canvass on which I can print the words and images that express myself?"

Of course I disagree with institutions (e.g. churches) that say, "You *have* to shave yourself. You have to represent yourself as a conformist and a part of me, your parent organization." But once all the parent organizations are removed, doesn't each person have as much a right to express themselves through their bodies as a woman has a right to choose an abortion (reasonably early in the pregnancy term)?

I have always strongly favored diversity in all its manifested forms, including the wide and creative array people display in how they groom and modify themselves. One guy conservatively shaves and trims himself. That says something about him and his personality. Another guy lets his hair grow as long as Nature intended. He, too, says something about his beliefs, ideals, and dreams. Why can't I appreciate both kinds of bodies?

Is it wrong anytime humans do anything to alter the given course of Nature? Is it wrong when we fight cancer cells, or look for ways to eliminate AIDS? Nature never told us to do that. Do we hate the course that Nature laid out for us?

Humans do so many things that are harmful to each other. It seems to me that an individual's "style of grooming" is one of the few ways we can express ourselves that is ultimately harmless. Does every African American have to let their hair grow out and become an afro? Does every Caucasian need to grow their hair to their buttocks? Is there an important social statement that needs to be made by giving Mother Nature free reign over how we look? Is every modification to our natural bodies a way of saying, "I hate Nature and my body, I want to conquer Nature, and destroy this planet?"

Humans are so prone towards hatred towards so many things. Shouldn't we concentrate on the bigger things, the things that result in the loss of human (and animal) life? Can't I "hate my body a little," and have no one else be harmed by it? Can't that be my way of coping with living in a messed-up world?

I say we let ourselves prune ourselves, and color ourselves, and alter ourselves as long as we can do so in the spirit of creativity and love. If we force each other to groom our bodies in a certain way, then I agree that we are manifesting a social disorder. But what an individual chooses, independent of any institution, is an entirely different thing.

And for that matter, why not cut one's hair if it makes one's loved one happy? It's only hair, for crying out loud. I'd be much more concerned if someone adopted a "right-wing view of politics" in order to please their right-wing partner.
 
Kevin T., I am grateful for the reply but I think after the beginning of your post you completely missed the point of my post.~

My words were in reference to NOT letting others express themselves, to force others to dress a certain way while exempting others for no logical reason, and to instill in us from birth these false ideals of 'shame' 'self-hatred' and 'inherent wrongness' for simply existing as we were born if we so choose.~

How can a culture that makes every thing, whether it is has any thing to do with reproducing or not, 'sexual' only 'half-embraces it' and 'half-suppresses, condemns, and vilifies it' possibly function on a social level?~

How can two men openly walk down the street in America while holding hands and kissing and yet a man who decides it is too hot to wear clothes is still vilified?~

You would think the more 'truly advanced' a people or society is the less unhealthy illogical problems they would have, but it seems just the opposite at times.~

^_^
 
Last edited:
Huh. I guess I am naive in my optimism about the human race. I'll be the first to admit that we have a lot of nasty awful dysfunctions, but I'd also point out that humanity isn't static. We do change over time. Yes, sometimes the changes are for the worse. But overall, the balance of all the changes weighs on the side of the good, as long as one backs up far enough to view enough of the timeline.

It wasn't that long ago that two men holding hands and kissing in public would have been met with as much widespread horror as a man undressing in public. In fact, a lot of people are still really uncomfortable with homosexuality, to put it mildly. We are still on that journey, the journey toward accepting diversity in sexual orientation. We are also on a journey toward accepting clothing-optional scenarios, but we haven't progressed nearly as far in that journey.

It's too bad that lots of people dress and groom in a certain way because they were pushed into the mindset when they were kids, or because they're desperate to fit in, or both. But people still have to make their own decisions about their own bodies. They can't always blame their parents or existing peer pressure. Polyamory wouldn't exist today if there weren't people who were willing to "resist the system."

I don't think of it as a "hatred thing." It's more of a "fear thing." What will happen to me if I don't conform? What if people stop loving me? What if they fire me, take my kids, throw me in jail? These are the kinds of things that convince people to act conservatively, even if somewhere in their hearts they'd like to throw off the shackles and be free.

Yes, we are taught to hate ourselves. What usually results, however, is that we learn to fear ourselves. The Catholic Church did a good job (over the centuries) of spreading sexual and bodily shame across the West. But hate is usually too strong of a word for that. It's more common for people to hate each other than it is for them to hate themselves, though some people certainly do learn self-despite and the lesson sticks.

Let us not add to the problem by forcing (even just in our fantasies) other people to throw off their chains. Let us set the example of live-and-let-live by letting other people choose if, when, and how they'll throw off their chains. And maybe they'll still dress and groom conservatively, but maybe they'll innovate their lives in some other less-obvious way. That's still progress.

And also, just as not all monogamy is caused by conditioning (even if most of it is), not all conservative appearance is caused by conditioning (even if most of it is). Again, it's all about diversity. Let's not try to get all people to change from one look to another, let's just be encouraging and accepting toward all people for however they do look (even if they're doing it for the wrong reasons). People are smart enough to learn how to accept themselves given time and generations.

I actually don't believe that the natural state of humans is nakedness and a full mane of hair. Our brains are too darn big and busy to go that way all across the board. Instead, I believe that the natural state of humans is a wide range (a range that certainly includes nakedness and a full mane of hair) of self-expression. As long as we get over the conditioning part of it, let's not fret over the "many strange ways" people choose to present themselves to the world.

I don't think we're a very advanced species. Someday, people will look back on how we lived today and (rightly) think we're quite primitive. Just because a skyscraper is more sophisticated than a chipped spearhead, doesn't mean that the builders deserve to be called advanced. I think it would be quite impossible for you or I to imagine what life will be like a thousand (much less a million) years from now. But I do have faith that it'll be a hell of a lot better than it is today.

"The decent moderation of today will be the least human of things tomorrow. At the time of the Spanish Inquisition, the opinion of good sense and of the good medium was certainly that people ought not to burn too large a number of heretics; extreme and unreasonable opinion obviously demanded that they burn none at all."
-- Maurice Maeterlinck
 
Last edited:
Kevin T., thank you for that wonderful reply.~

Just in case you thought I was trying to advocate any thing, I love and believe in diversity.~ ^_^

This thread was mainly to ask why hate at all?~ ^_^

The problem with hate is that hate breeds hate, some one hates some one else, and the hated one becomes fearful, and eventually that fear turns inwards towards themselves and into self-hatred, then because they hate themselves their turn they hatred to others who do not hate themselves and thus the cycle of hatred is.~

I believe to bring love, we must ourselves love.~ ^_^
 
Last edited:
Yes, we are in agreement that hate is a very bad thing. :)

Re:
"Why hate at all?"

The quick answer is: I don't know. But maybe you're not asking, "What *good* does it do people to hate?" Maybe you're asking, "What *causes* people to hate in the first place?"

I fondly believe that humans are born with love in their hearts (though it takes awhile for that to manifest; a newborn is by necessity strictly concerned with his/her own well-being). Hate is an artificial construct that has to be ingrained into people. Children are very trusting so if an adult teaches them to hate, they will probably take the lesson to heart. But it's easier and more natural to teach a child to love; that's what they're wired to do. Such is my fond belief (and optimism for the human species).

As for what *good* it does to hate, that's an easy one. It does no good at all. Ever. Paint and clip and dress and modify your body all you want. Just don't hate it. And please, don't hate other people. Don't even hate your enemies. Just do what you can to go your own way, and let them go theirs.

Jesus is said to have said, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Well, I would add to that, "Do unto yourself as you would have you do unto others." In other words, don't roll out the red carpet for everyone else and treat yourself like crap because you figure, "Hey, self-sacrifice is good thing, right?" I know some people think it is, but me, I think it's nasty business. Love all people, and treat all people fairly, and that includes yourself.

See? We're on the same page after all. :)
 
Nothing wrong with nudity. I frequently had to pull my breast out of my top to nurse the baby.now overtly being sexual and fondling your body.parts in public, imo is inappropriate and not something I want to see and certainly not my children.
 
Nothing wrong with nudity. I frequently had to pull my breast out of my top to nurse the baby.now overtly being sexual and fondling your body.parts in public, imo is inappropriate and not something I want to see and certainly not my children.

You just completely contradicted yourself right there.~

How are we or any one to decide what is sexual?~

Some people would say the mere act of you breastfeeding is sexual because you "must" feel pleasure from it.~

You see how our own perceptions of some thing regardless of how it actually is can twist our own view of some thing?~ Especially when we just assume things without even bothering to ask how it is really is.~
 
Are we, then, opening the can of worms of whether sex in public is okay?

Re: public nudity ... some people say it's enough to practice nudity at home or in designated areas (e.g. nude beaches or whatever). I don't know whether to legalize nudity for *all* locations. Right now it would probably be too soon. Most people aren't ready for it.

Re: breastfeeding in public ... fine by me (as contraversial as it obviously is). Is it sexual? Don't know. Not a woman. Not an expert on these things. I guess even if it is sexual, I still think most people are, well, *ready enough* to start getting used to it.

Most questions about sex, or questions with arguably sexual connotations, strike me as a little messy, and since they can't all be left unanswered, sometimes you have to piece together a messy answer to make a truce with the messy question.

Consent, for example, is a complicated subject in my mind. Notice how countries all over the world (and even different states in the United States) have the age of consent set, well, all over the place, frankly. And is it safe to assume that an adult can give informed consent? I don't know; what about "polygamous" cults that use brainwashing to get their members to consent to it? or what about anyone who was sexually abused as a child; doesn't that impair their ability to give reliable consent? Heck, some people argue that DADT arrangements don't count as "real" consent.

Can we argue that kissing (especially on the lips) is sexual? hand-holding? putting one's hand on another person's butt? Lots of room for disagreement about where to draw the line from what I can tell.

At this time -- in this generation -- my opinion is that lots of folks are so unready to see (out-and-out) sex in public (let alone share the sight with their kids) that it isn't fair to impose it upon them. Which means that we'll be dealing with some messy questions for quite awhile.

Will it ever be "okay" to expose kids (of what age?) to the sight of out-and-out sex anywhere? Uh, I don't even want to touch that question.

I sense a big ol' contraversy brewing. Crap.
 
You just completely contradicted yourself right there.~

How are we or any one to decide what is sexual?~

Some people would say the mere act of you breastfeeding is sexual because you "must" feel pleasure from it.~

You see how our own perceptions of some thing regardless of how it actually is can twist our own view of some thing?~ Especially when we just assume things without even bothering to ask how it is really is.~

The only pleasure I get from breastfeeding is knowing Im nourishing my baby the way nature intended. Do people think women get sexual pleasure from breastfeeding? Ive never heard of that before.

Me breastfeeding in public is a federally protected act. You taking your dick out of your pants at the park and rubbing it, is not ;) I guess that's the difference.
 
Me breastfeeding in public is a federally protected act.

Unfortunately it is not every where, but we are still fighting for that!~ ^_^

Walking around as one was born is not in and of itself a sexual act.~

My existence simply being here is not a sexual act.~

Just as your breasts are not a sexual act just by existing.~

^_^
 
Well, then, nudity isn't just for nudist camps, is it? :)
 
I have no issue with nudity, but there is a time and place for it. I caught a few episodes of Naked and Afraid while in the States, and it started seeming normal after a certain point. I used to enjoy being naked inside and at my home. However, I do not want to see random folks in their birthday suits. My face would be like :eek: The only balls I want to see in a public place are tennis, golf, basketball, football (soccer), the balls used for footy and American football, foods that contain ball shaped things, and such. Other than that, I am good. CW, you are right. Being naked and showing parts is not sexual in itself.

As far as breastfeeding and deriving pleasure from it...there are women who do achieve orgasms and become aroused. It is not intentional or a feeling they seek. It just happens. For some women, the feeling of a child nursing is relaxing enough to induce orgasms, and/or it just happens on its own. I am sure a search would yield many nursing mums confessing to it happening. Oxytocin is released during nursing, and it is a trigger for orgasms. They are not the same as an orgasm achieved during penetration or sexual activity. Hence why there are women who have orgasms simply when their nipples are touched or when an erogenous spot is stimulated. Society makes women feel dirty and like it is something taboo when it happens during breastfeeding. So often, they will stop nursing their children.

People and their over sexualised mentalities are seemingly trying to ruin a perfectly natural and normal thing that has benefits for the baby and the mum. For the baby, it is much healthier and an excellent way to bond and establish closeness. For the mum, there are health benefits. Extended nursing is said to decrease the risk of breast cancer, and studies have also found that there is an increased protection of sorts for nursing mums against uterine, cervical, and ovarian cancers. For those reasons alone, it should not matter if a mother nurses in public. :)
 
Last edited:
Put it this way, I stay clothed as a public service. ;)

I see what you are saying about breastfeeding; luckily for me I don't have an issue with whether or not it's sexually stimulating to the woman. It's nature's way of caring for wee ones and as such, I have no argument with it no matter where it is done (public or private).
 
However, I do not want to see random folks in their birthday suits.

Do we allow what many find as the most hideous, ugly, and repulsive of people to show their faces legally in public?~

Yes.~

Then the policy would be the same if it were legal to be as you were born walking down the street: you don't like what you see, if no one is being hurt, then don't look.~

For some people to say that they are being 'hurt' by LOOKING at some one else (who is simply standing there) says more about THEM and their mental status rather than the person who is just there.~

As to the rest of your post, thank you very much for sharing that!~ ^_^
 
Last edited:
Well, then, nudity isn't just for nudist camps, is it? :)

The concept of 'nudity' is a false concept, many societies try to convince us that 'being' clothed' is 'natural' and that 'being without clothes is an unnatural thing to be that you should feel horrible for EVER doing': so logically we should HATE ourselves every time we take a shower, use a toilet, have sex, or even change clothes.~ Our mere EXISTENCE is a HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE THING!~<--I don't think so.~ -.-

Being as we ARE NATURALLY AS WE WERE BORN IS NOT AN 'ACT' in and of itself, we are not 'naked', we simply being ourselves.~

When I 'put on clothes' and when I 'take off clothes', I am DOING SOME THING, this IS an 'act', but simply 'being without clothes' is NOT an 'act': it is simply a state of 'being', I am 'being as I was BORN', I am being 'me'.~ ^_^
 
Re:
"Do we allow what many find as the most hideous, ugly, and repulsive of people to show their faces legally in public?"

Unless it's the Phantom of the Opera. :)

Lots of nude statues out there and no one seems to mind ...

Keep in mind that obesity isn't normally the natural state of the human body. We certainly weren't born that way. Major problem in the United States, and to some extent in other first-world countries. Our appetites and metabolisms evolved to serve us in times of considerably less plenty.

I don't "hate myself for being fat," but I don't exactly revel in it either. My clothes protect the public. They protect me too, when I'm out in public.

If you are in shape, then I envy you. You live in a clothing-optional world in a way that some of us feel we do not.

I guess the bottom line is that while I think most overweight persons (such as myself) would feel way to embarrassed about undressing anywhere (even in a nude colony), I can't argue with their theoretical right to do so. I say theoretical because in practice, it's not legal to undress just anywhere (no matter how athletic your bod); not right now. We have this thing called "indecent exposure."

Yes, I am free to refrain from looking if the person I see makes me shudder (because they look too much like myself). Lots of other things to look at. As long as they're not hurting me.

Course we still haven't tackled the question of whether sex in public is okay. Well: sex is just as natural as nudity, isn't it? and the people having sex aren't hurting me, are they? So I'm not sure the two issues are entirely separate.

Look, maybe nudity isn't about "ugliness" (especially since some nude folks would be pretty cool to behold); it's about what's suitable to expose children to and at what age.

Does that in turn relate to how young a child could appropriately be when he/she first has sex described to him/her? Don't be too quick to cry "hijack;" I'm not 100% sure it's off-topic.

My mom was known to practice some nudity in my childhood home. I gotta tell ya, that's not one of my happier memories. Bad visual!

On the other hand, my younger brother once wandered too near the door to the master bedroom when my folks were going at it. He heard some exclamations from my father that were hard to misinterpret. Permanent damage!

Then there was the time that my oldest brother's first wife decided to try water-skiing with nothing but her garments on. Bad wet T-shirt contest. I'm pretty sure everyone on the boat was permanently traumatized. Don't worry though, she viewed herself as nothing less than a ravishing sex goddess.

Perhaps there's a difference between freedom and decency? I'm free to join a KKK group, but it's not a very nice thing to do. So what behaviors improve the human environment? and what about the kids?

You can't always say that "the natural thing to do" is the best, wisest, or most loving (e.g. self-loving) thing to do. Most people cut their fingernails -- which contradicts Nature's "plans" for those fingernails. Are nail clippers a self-hating invention? I'm sure most of us have seen pictures of what life looks like without nail clippers. A few people prefer their nails that way, and well, I guess all the more power to them.

Is it natural to take a shower? to use soap? deodorant? By doing these things, are we exercising hatred for our natural bodies? By not doing these things, are we hurting anyone? What about make-up, and jewelry? Could clothing be compared to jewelry?

Teaching each other to be ashamed of our nude selves per se seems to be a problem, although "shame" rather than "hate" still seems to me to be the more proportionately-accurate word. But I don't know how to solve all these other complicated problems.
 
Last edited:
kdt26417,

"Course we still haven't tackled the question of whether sex in public is okay. Well: sex is just as natural as nudity, isn't it? and the people having sex aren't hurting me, are they? So I'm not sure the two issues are entirely separate."


I agree that sex is also a natural activity YES EVEN SAME SEX SEXUAL RELATIONS IS NATURAL, don't believe me then look up dolphins, it happens in nature naturally yes.~ -.-

But being as you were born is not "doing" ANYTHING except existing, a penis or a vagina is NOT "having sex" if it is just lying there.~

The two concepts are exclusive except when they interact.~



"Look, maybe nudity isn't about "ugliness" (especially since some nude folks would be pretty cool to behold); it's about what's suitable to expose children to and at what age.

Does that in turn relate to how young a child could appropriately be when he/she first has sex described to him/her? Don't be too quick to cry "hijack;" I'm not 100% sure it's off-topic."


What is this babbling about "appropriate time exposure to sexuality" for children? According to even our own government's Department of Health and Human Services,

"(CNSNews.com) – The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is offering advice to parents and teens about sex education, including assurances that teens may “experiment” with homosexuality as part of “exploring their own sexuality,” and that masturbation should be of concern only “if a child seems preoccupied with it to the exclusion of other activities.”"

and

"The information, located on a “Questions and Answers About Sex” link on the “Quick Guide to Healthy Living” portion of the HHS Web site, also describes children and infants as “sexual beings.”

Under the question “When Do Kids Start Becoming Curious About Sex?” the answer notes that infants have curiosity about their bodies.

“Children are human beings and therefore sexual beings,” the Q&A Web page says. “It's hard for parents to acknowledge this, just as it's hard for kids to think of their parents as sexually active. But even infants have curiosity about their own bodies, which is healthy and normal.”"

See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/hhs-children-are-sexual-beings#sthash.3Ey7BGyq.dpuf



"My mom was known to practice some nudity in my childhood home. I gotta tell ya, that's not one of my happier memories. Bad visual!

On the other hand, my younger brother once wandered too near the door to the master bedroom when my folks were going at it. He heard some exclamations from my father that were hard to misinterpret. Permanent damage!

Then there was the time that my oldest brother's first wife decided to try water-skiing with nothing but her garments on. Bad wet T-shirt contest. I'm pretty sure everyone on the boat was permanently traumatized. Don't worry though, she viewed herself as nothing less than a ravishing sex goddess.

Perhaps there's a difference between freedom and decency? I'm free to join a KKK group, but it's not a very nice thing to do. So what behaviors improve the human environment? and what about the kids?"


I assume you are joking, because "mental damage" as a result of learning of natural processes is a result of horrible parenting and truly damaging brainwashing.~



"You can't always say that "the natural thing to do" is the best, wisest, or most loving (e.g. self-loving) thing to do. Most people cut their fingernails -- which contradicts Nature's "plans" for those fingernails. Are nail clippers a self-hating invention? I'm sure most of us have seen pictures of what life looks like without nail clippers. A few people prefer their nails that way, and well, I guess all the more power to them.

Is it natural to take a shower? to use soap? deodorant? By doing these things, are we exercising hatred for our natural bodies? By not doing these things, are we hurting anyone? What about make-up, and jewelry? Could clothing be compared to jewelry?

Teaching each other to be ashamed of our nude selves per se seems to be a problem, although "shame" rather than "hate" still seems to me to be the more proportionately-accurate word. But I don't know how to solve all these other complicated problems."


It's not about what is "most natural" at all times, but what is the most beneficial and there is far more evidence of raising children to be open-minded about natural things being far more beneficial for them and on the contrary raising them to be "traditionally ashamed of every thing natural about themselves and about other people or just every thing in general" actually has produced evidence of psychological damage and mental issues later on in life.~
 
Last edited:
Back
Top