Sex Appeal and Occupation

Remove all ads!

This is an off-topic of the booth-babe thread. I felt that by bringing this up, it would take us too far away from the normal topic, so I started a new thread.

In that thread, some people would have problems with their spouse or significant other being a booth babe, stripper, topless dancer, etc. Others wouldn't. My question is where do we draw the line?

Take the entertainment industry. Britney Spears and Madonna are immensely popular, but I can't help but think that part of their popularity stems from their sex appeal and not just their music. I believe that if they lived 40 or 50 years ago when the main form of entertainment was radio, and we couldn't actually see them, that they wouldn't be as popular. Are they selling themselves the way booth babes do? They perform on stage very scantily clad, and Madonna has been known to grab her boobs and her crotch on some of her music videos. Is their musical talent enough to off-set the fact that they also rely on sex appeal?

Movie stars are another category to consider. Yes, they too must have talent - in this case acting talent - but the most popular movie stars also have a lot of sex appeal. Thus again, in a way, they rely on their bodies to make money.

In a lesser category, we have professional athletes. Especially body builders come to mind, as people who use their bodies to make a living. Where is the line drawn? Is there a line drawn? Is it anything goes?

 

NOTHING says stallion like Computer Programmer! And my wife has learned to live with it.

 

I think sex appeal became much more important than talent.

 

LMAO @ Jack Funk

Because, as we all know, accountants are the true babe magnets.

 

Lawyers get all the girls.

But seriously... stripper not at all and not prostitute. It's beyond me how someone could accept his or her partner having sex with other people just because it's job. Stripping and lap dancing falls close.

Booth babe? Depending what exactly it is, what's worn etc. For example, if the clothes are decent and the girl actually represents a character, then things look different from being a random sex object trapped in a car-style advertisement.

Scenic performance. I would say anything beyond natural and trained charm, charisma etc would be a problem. Essentially: no sex in the shows. It's not like I would make such rules (except wife), but I would consider breaking up (except wife).

Actor. No nudity. No sex scenes, no foreplay scenes, no kissing scenes, unless faked or using a double for said scenes (and not playing them out in person). No excuses here, warranted or not doesn't mind.

Athlete. Not a problem.

Note that any job can create opportunities for using sexuality to climb up the ladder, whether the object of it is the customers and clients or the boss and corporate hierarchy. I don't care enough to follow, track or anything. And it's quite creepy to be paranoid like that. I prefer to trust. But my trust can be failed and that's where we have a problem... Still, if I am convinced that my trust has been failed considerably, it won't normally last. Unless already married but that wouldn't be a happy marriage.

 

How many guys out there can only watch a Britney Spears video if the Mute button is pressed first?

There are those that rely on sex to sell, and they will make money. There are those that make money on talent too.

I guess Chev has it where he draws the line at active sexuality as the line that shouldn't be crossed.

 

Chev,

You are too harsh. No kissing scenes at all? Not even in weddings or romantic comedies?

 

I don't mind kissing scenes myself, unless its graphic french kissing with lots of slurping noises - its just vulgar! Whats the difference between sticking your tongue in someones mouth, and sexually penetrating them?

Sexual content is controled by the media. Look at Englands most popular news paper 'The Sun'. Whats it famous for? Well its not the quality of its news stories, its layout, its style, but its Page 3 'models'. Its usually purchased by old men that prefer to look at 18 yearold females with no bras on, rather than their wives. These girls are younger than the said old mans granddaughters, its just disgusting.

I might sound like a prude, but I don't mind my partner dressing sexy at all, actaully I am always trying to convince her that she looks great in shortskirts etc, I just perfere her to some silicone enhanced hollywood actress with bleach blonde hair, and horrible lips that must stick out at all times.

 

Not even. Look: allowing kissing scenes in weddings or romantic comedies is like allowing sex scenes (not necessarily graphic penetration) in a movie about a married couple. Kissing is still kissing -- why make exceptions?

That said, I don't mind the scene being there and being engineered on the computer or faked (on the cheek or close to mouth or otherwise -- even I can fake it pretty well, like just rubbing cheek bones in a hurry when I don't want to kiss someone's cheek given to me).

That said, I know that sometimes people kiss friends on the mouth instead of the cheek and I have no problem with that (and I doubt I would force them to go for the cheek in my case unless my partner objected), but kissing in romantic scenes with random other actors doesn't really sound like a great idea to me. I probably wouldn't mind a romantic but not so sexual looking kiss in a romantic scene with a guy I wouldn't mind being kissed on the mouth for a hello (cousin, great friend, whatever -- depends on the person's customs). But the idea of lips contact with strangers or mere acquaintances creeps me out. It's too intimate and unseemly.

I suppose a good analogy would be a dancing party with slow tunes. You can dance slow tunes in two ways -- classic ballroom style with one arm behind the partner and the other arm out, and the typical slow dancing (wrists or hands joined on the small of the partner's back). I surely wouldn't mind my "SO" slow dancing with a friend but it would be strange if a stranger guy approached us two, asked her to dance, went for the close slow dancing hold and she agreed.

Same way, I wouldn't want to date a girl who goes on huggy and kissy dates with more than one guy at a time. I have no problem with going out with half the town (the more friends the better) but when it comes to romantic kissing, sending love cards etc, it must be one person only. I know "non-exclusive relationships" are trendy, but I don't want a partner with such inclinations.

A lot in such things comes down to some sort of propriety in intimacy. It's not always the same. For example, normally it doesn't put a person in a good light when intimacy comes too fast or is a given, but there are various circumstances which modify this.

Then, there are individual borders. For example, if you found yourself a girl who casually kisses casual friends on the mouth instead of the cheek (such a specific region, culture or whatever), it would be strange to get worked up over a scenic kiss, even played to look romantic. But if you found yourself wiith a girl who doesn't kiss before she's engaged to you, it would be quite strange for her to make such a big exception for scenic acting.

So I was speaking about a person from a standard Western background.

A lot also depends on the attitude. I think one shouldn't act such things if the "SO" objects, nor should one insist on permission -- it will be given but as a sacrifice. On the other hand, it's totally different when it's treated like just a part of the job and when your SO comes home after playing a romantic dinner with dancing and kissing and goes on and on about how cute the scenic partner was, how gentle and how good a kisser. That sort of thing, I would never put up with.

Also, while a wedding scene or playing a character who has an "SO" is still somewhat in line, why would a non-single person want to play in a romantic comedy, concentrating around kissing, embracing etc? Because he/she likes the novel, script or whatever? Maybe I could be convinced. Because it's a contract that brings money? That's not a reason.

...Which brings about another conclusion: art is different from merely earning money. Playing in kissing scenes for the sake of a fat contract is kissing for money. It's selling oneself. Sure, still not the same as stripping, but hey, would you like your "SO" to earn bucks by posing nude to photos for medical manuals? There's hardly any sex in it and the cause is somewhat noble, but still, would it be exactly the same as posing clothed?

Agreed.

There's a difference between dressing to look attractive and dressing to attract. What you describe is a pretty girl dressing nicely, not a girl dressing to give sex-hungry guys a hard time. Pun intended.

I have no problem with dressing to look nice or attractive. I have no problem with putting little on for comfort. When a girl's looks say "see, I'm pretty" or "it's way too hot for anything more than this", I don't have a problem. But a "sex with me is what you (can only) dream of" kind of message puts me off and looks wrong. I'm still not speaking about stirring a little blood but about something overtly sexual in a gross way, pushing people's imagination into sexual thoughts and scenes. A short skirt surely isn't there, but a close cleavage close-up is too much and a thong crack close-up is way beyond the line (booth babes, models, presenters, actors etc).

 

Wow. You have a problem with kissing in movies? Even if it's just a regular kiss (I'm not talking open mouth or anything like that). Heck, I'd say almost every actor and actress in the business would be out of work if we followed those rules.

What if the actor/actress isn't married? If they are completely single is it OK? Heck I remember in high school we did a play "Our Town" (I think that's the name) and in the one scene there's a wedding (between the two lead characters) and we even had them kiss in the high school play. You would really have a problem with this?

To me, part of the issue would be if it means something between them. If you're married, and you are an actor/actress, I don't see any big deal with a normal kiss in a movie. You aren't being unfaithful to your partner because the kiss doesn't mean anything to you. It would be different with sex scenes obviously, and you can even make a case with open mouth kissing, but really, you think even closed mouth kissing is a problem?

 

My wife ran around in shorts and a revealing top for years in front of thousands of people (she played basketball for a DIV1A school). Not a big deal. The new professional softball league uses normal baseball uniforms -- just as they should. Beach volleyball is blatently sexist, as is tennis.

If your job requires certain dress codes then why have a problem. Obviously, chev is not going to date/marry a Hooter's girl -- but I would have when I was single. The line is an individual line we draw, I know some men who really enjoy other men being attracted to their wives -- one guy I knew married a stripper (and he was very happy with her).

As long as the couple is happy together, what does it matter?

 

Business doesn't precede morality. There are many factors one needs to consider when choosing a career. Someone who intends to play out romantic or sexual scenes perhaps shouldn't consider marriage. Plus, as I said, there are many ways of faking such scenes. There are always doubles and computers, so the concern is not signifying that kissing takes place between the characters, but the degree to which the actor wants to keep it real. Making it more realistic is not an excuse.

Yes. If the teacher ordered the kids to play that, he committed sexual harassment and he should be prosecuted as a sex offender. Especially if the kids were reluctant or didn't want to play that. I also have a big problem with parents allowing children to play such things and I believe they deserve a long conversation with someone from the local family court. I only have no problem if such a scene is played with someone who would normally be kissed the same way (if even less flashy or dramatic than in the scene), for example a blood relation or a friend if the person has such a custom.

A sex or nude scene doesn't normally mean anything to the actor, either.

Yes, unless the scenic partner would be kissed the same way in real life. The fact that kissing is less than sex doesn't make an excuse. The fact it's acting rather than life doesn't make an excuse, either. Do we use real blood or do we hit people hard in fighting scenes so that the shouting and crying would be more real?

If I were single and the kiss were closed-mouth, the partner were a good real-life friend and also single, I could play such a kiss myself, depending on the circumstances. Same with a blood relation. Definitely with an "SO", although still nothing too sexual if we weren't married. Call me an elitist bastard, but no kissing with strangers or acquaintances. Yuck. Also, the message it sends to the "SO" is that "another can get what you get if the script requires and I get paid".

Job doesn't matter. The less likely women to put out on first date (third... fifth...) are professional prostitutes. So what? If they are married, engaged or otherwise coupled up, they would probably consider all intercourse outside of job or the relationship to be cheating and would frown on the "SO" visiting a brothel to be serviced for pleasure alone. So what?

With kissing, you could make some point. Probably also with clothing which doesn't cover much instead of un-covering. But whenever sexually arousing others is included, I don't believe it ever is up to the spouses to determine the scope of sexual exclusivity. There are other people involved and it may matter to them if the person is single or not. Have you ever been on a date with a married woman without knowing?

Also, I don't understand guys who can watch a strip show knowing the stripper has a husband and children, or even a boyfriend.

I may be proud of my gf being the prettiest girl I've seen, but as far as other guys are concerned, I wish they would all find someone who reciprocated their interest. I'd rather spare her all uncomfortable situations associated with unwanted advances, as well. As I said, I may be proud but other guys' tastes or opinions aren't relevant to mine.

And I utterly hate it when impertinent morons hit on ladies who are in male company. They serve one good purpose of allowing you to witness first-hand how your "SO" reacts to other guys' advances, but the situations are annoying. When a complete stranger approaches a couple that looks like lovers and asks one of them to dance, something is obviously questionnable in the person's intentions. See the slow dancing section in my previous post for more details.

 

Q. What's the difference between an accountant and a lawyer?

A. Accountants know they're boring.

 

Even if you have an actor playing a part that has nothing to do with sex appeal, you will still find someone, some where, who will judge that person's acting ability on how 'hot' they are. Take it another step further, and you have magazines that only talk about a movie if someone in that movie is a generally accepted 'attractive' person. (For instance, the movie I was *so* excited about, "The Hitchhiker's Guide" never got a single story in a single american magazine...there just weren't enough hot people.) So now every casting director knows, if you want attention for your movie, you have to have an attention getting person in it. So yes, whether intentional or not, acting has become a form of virtual pornography, where you HAVE to look good, but don't always have to have talent. (I'm talking the mainstream, of course, not the few people who really care about talent over anything else.)
And in a similiar thread of thought, when you have a movie that has two people with loads of sex appeal and one of them happens to be married, and the movie requires them to pretend to have a serious relationship, with or without the sex scenes... how often have we seen hollywood marriages broken up over something like that? (I'm thinking specifically about the Jolie/Pitt thing, but it's happened plenty of other times.)
But you know, it trickles down to other jobs too... in a position where it only requires that you have certain appreciable skills, like retail, you will still have people hire others because they are pleasing to look at; it permeates our society. (Of course, there are weird versions of that too... I was hired at my current part-time retail job more or less because I'm pregnant, and the woman who hired me can't have children.... seriously. I mean, I have all the skills necessary, but that was certainly the deciding factor.)

 

Thats why I prefer European and Asian films. Even when they do feature sex scenes, its done in a more realistic setting, and more than not, the peole they use are more like people you see on the streets.

 

I'm a big fan of kissing, and see no problem with it happening in films. At least the clothes are still on.

Acting has included kissing for decades if not longer, and part of some roles involves kissing. I highly doubt that a teacher could end up in court for sexual harassment for staging a play

Asking for nudity would be a different story. That's where my lines are drawn, anyhow.

 

Unfortunately, I doubt he would. But I would try my best, if I were the public prosecutor.

Why? There's much more sensible reason for nudity than for kissing scenes. Plus, nudity doesn't necessarily include any contact with another actor's body. So why do you stick so firmly to the line on nudity, while you're such a big fan of kissing that you wouldn't mind your "SO" getting as much of it as possible and even enjoying it the usual way? That's how it sounds from your post.

I understand that nudity would be more traumatic with children or youngsters than kissing, but morally, I'm not sure if it isn't actually less wrong than kissing scenes being acted out instead of convincingly faked.

Remember that when kissing serves realism and not giving the audience something sexy to make them buy tickets, that kissing can be done without and without much loss in realism. As DJ points out, it's about stimulating the audience and not really about anything close to realism.

I ask my question again: Why would a married person want to play a role which relies largely on romantic kissing? I do not understand such a wish.

When I am less than confident is when actors play a brother and sister who happen to kiss on the lips instead of the cheek (that's a custom in some countries). I think I could get over this one, even if the scenic partner weren't anyone to get kissed on the mouth in real life. I would still have mixed feelings about the actors playing friends who kiss on the mouth instead of the cheek unless the actors can fathom kissing friends on the mouth in real life. But if the same actors started preaching about the immorality of indiscriminate mouth kissing, then something would be wrong.

I have a huge issue with actors who:

1. Have an "SO" but still act the kissing scenes out with pleasure and the pleasure increases proportionally to the partner's attractivity.

2. Use the script requirement as a moral excuse and say it's not real, but still enjoy the kisses as if they were real romantic kisses, thinking they are excused, so they can as well enjoy it. Like in the joke about a nun getting raped and thinking, "at least a good shag and without sin".