Save the Cheerleader!

Hayden Panettiere—

best known as Claire, the cheerleader...or maybe Claire the amazing healing chick...nah, Claire the Cheerleader it is— 

was at the MTV Europe Music Awards several days ago, presenting the award for best song. 

She was “interrupted” by a streaker.

(see the video here)

At first it was said by the streaker, etc, to be an unplanned prank. But soon it was admitted to have been planned, if not rehearsed, and that the guy is an actor who was hired by MTV.
Come on, people who believed it wasn't a planned thing. Do you really think some random naked dude would have gotten all the way out there onstage and "hung out" for a minute and a half chatting on camera with a presenter? No, he'd be dragged off by security. 

Apparently the writers or someone thought it would be a fun bit to have a streaker.

Now, it might be an interesting bit if there were something controversial in the news about Hayden Panettiere and nudity, or maybe a movie she’s in that has a streaker...but I couldn't find anything like that. Just a few contradictory comments by her about nudity and a brief implied nude scene in I Love You, Beth Cooper.

So, what was the point of the MTV streaker? I mean, hey, obviously I don’t have a problem with nudity, but seriously, it seemed to have no point. Just, hey, let’s have a naked dude out there...for no reason.

No reason at all...except maybe the “hey, let’s just throw in something crazy here”...you know, like Lady Gaga’s headgear.

Naked Therapy

Okay, so there’s this woman, Sarah White, who has a naked “therapy” practice.

From her website (http://sarahwhitelive.com/):

Freedom Through Arousal

“Naked Therapy is a form of talk therapy in which the therapist and/or the patient get naked in an environment in which arousal (physical, emotional and/or intellectual) is encouraged and utilized to arrive at unique self-discoveries.”

“Essentially, Naked Therapy is a form of talk therapy carried out between a patient and a therapist in which the therapist (usually) becomes naked in the course of the session, and this nakedness arouses the patient and allows the patient to dive into their arousal and discover things through that arousal.... During the Naked Therapy session the therapist and patient talk about what’s on the patient’s mind, just like in a psychotherapeutic setting, but in Naked Therapy the patient and therapist also engage in arousal-enhancing conversations and activities.”

There are 4 Naked Therapists on her team. They all live in different cities, and do web sessions with clients. But they all do live sessions as well, for a higher fee. And Sarah, for the right amount of money, will also go out with you for dinner or whatever for your session.

“If you’re that kind of man, I’d love to spend a night on the town with you, and we can talk about whatever’s on your mind.
Think of it as a ‘therapy date.’☺”

(Yes, there’s a smiley face on her website. Actually, several.)

And they’ll even consider traveling to meet you, assuming you pay.

So, here’s my thought process about this:

Uh, what? ...jesus, that’s ridiculous...yeah, this looks like porn...(then, after reading a bit) hm, still looks porn-ish, but she’s making some interesting points.

Clearly she’s done a lot of reading and apparently some writing; she’s not just a cute dumb girl making money by getting naked online. I mean, she is a cute girl making money by getting naked online. But I think this is a serious attempt at doing some good for some people. However, the visuals are kinda porn-ish, so part of me wants to shout “no! this can’t be real therapy.”

(I actually have a degree in psychology. When people find that out some will ask if I ever use it, the psychology. I say, of course...I work with singers & actors & dancers, and they’re all crazy.)

Anyway, I would feel better about this naked therapy if the therapists were licensed (they’re not), and if there were legit research and peer review on the practice (there's not). They do not accept insurance, probably because they’re not licensed.

From the website:

“All our Naked Therapists go through a year long training process. During that time, they are listed as Naked Therapists-in-Training. This involves a reading list of psychotherapeutic texts, response papers (which are posted on their blog), plus oversight by and session reviews with Sarah White. As for the educational background of our Naked Therapists, that differs widely but each was brought into the practice because she/he is skilled at talking, listening, and counseling while also being arousing ☺.”

But in a sense, it’s just some woman who thought this would be a good thing. And who convinced a few others to join her. Clearly this has sex industry elements. One of the of the therapists, in fact, is a former exotic dancer. This does seem rather like they are “sex-workers”—an ancient line of work, the practitioners of which could easily tell you that some clients just need someone to talk to. I used to know a woman who worked for one of those sexy-lady-voice telephone chat lines, and she said that a lot of the guys she talked to just liked having someone to talk to about stuff, someone other than family or friends. And that’s what a lot of therapy is, a client talking to a (supposedly) neutral set of ears—a set of ears attached to a knowledgeable and experienced brain that may help to guide the client to some understanding about him- or herself.

Anyway...

I guess I would also feel better about its legitimacy if it weren’t so blatantly geared toward enticement as a way of getting clients. This is the opening page of the website:

Many of the pictures on the website are very sexy model-type pics.

Here’s Sarah

Carli

Penelope

and Randy.

Well, of course they can get clients. Here’s how it works (apparently):

They start with web sessions—with either a one-way camera and IM chatting, or a two-way camera and actually talking—during which they discuss whatever the client wants and during which the therapist removes his or her clothes. The client may remove his (or her) clothes as well and may masturbate or whatever. That’s part of the point; it’s “arousal therapy”.

The idea is that during a state of arousal people—especially men—get into a different sort of mental state, which can be important for making psychological breakthroughs. Sarah White relates it to the importance of dreams, which, before Freud, weren’t considered psychologically revelatory. She seems to think that eventually arousal states will be more generally accepted for their value in this regard. Of course, she also freely admits that the whole naked lady thing is a way to get men, who, as a group, may be more reluctant, into therapy.

So the naked therapist uses arousal to get to the “good stuff”. Where Freudian psychoanalysis tries to access the unconscious to help the patient achieve a happier, healthier life, naked therapy tries to use the arousal state to help the patient achieve a happier, healthier life.

Now, if you’re a person who thinks that sex is supposed to be hidden and shameful and all that “civilized, Judeo-Islamo-Christian” crap, then I can’t imagine any argument convincing you that Naked Therapy has any psychologically legitimate use. Ironically, if that is the case, then you might be exactly the sort of person who would benefit from naked therapy. (For that matter, if you are such a person, why are you reading my naked blog? If you’re even looking at it, you’re probably just scanning this entry for more pictures of my penis. Sorry, not this one.)

So, I think this sort of therapy may be a decent idea. The naked thing is a tool. It may draw clients who would benefit from and who otherwise wouldn’t consider therapy. And it may help create in the mind of the client a sort of connection, an intimacy, allowing them to open up in ways they might not in traditional therapy. It may help the therapist and client access thoughts and feelings they would have trouble getting to. It could be a very effective tool.

But, again, I’m wary of the lack of advanced pysch degrees and lack of pysch establishment recognition. Of course, in itself, those things don’t mean that it’s not legit. I mean, tons of people can get licensed to do things that they are not any good at or may even cause harm by doing. 

And I’m also a little put off by the presentation, which, of course, may be exactly the sort of presentation they need to attract clients: people who are aroused by what they’re presenting; people who might be into the whole webcam porn, chatting with a naked woman (or man) type thing. And that’s not really me.
Also, they could lose the smiley faces from their website.

Silence is Deafening

“Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society.”

–Mark Twain

I don’t know that Twain meant exactly this, but, to me right now, this is saying that clothed people either don’t take naked people seriously or they ignore them (us).

Is that it? Just two choices? Leer or avoid?

Well, I’m going to address the avoiders.

You can see what I mean here, toward the end of Erykah Badu’s “Window Seat” video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hVp47f5YZg

People see, react for a moment, or less than a moment—surprise, shock, dismay, whatever—then nothing; they turn away, or they stoically avoid reacting, or rather avoid showing any reaction.

But that in itself is a reaction. It’s also a sort of dismissal.

If you look at the “art school” definition of “nude” (I wrote a bit about this in “Nude vs. Naked") it’s a sort of presentation, a costume of sorts, or, yes, perhaps an objectification. It’s an invitation to view, to consider, to respond to the nude person. Or perhaps it’s a challenge. And avoidance of the nudity is a response of sorts. But it’s refusal to participate, a refusal to consider, to think, to be involved; it’s a rejection—a rejection of the invitation, of the challenge, and, ultimately, it is to some degree a rejection of the person or persons presenting the nudity.

In talking to a few people about this blog I’ve been trying to work out, to figure out and articulate, the reasons I started this.

Yes, it's a sort of “coming out”, but also I was hoping to prompt discussion, reaction, comment...something. But sometimes the silence is deafening. On the facebook, where I post links to the blog, a few people have responded on their own; some others I’ve asked for a response, and mostly gotten something. But some people don’t respond, even when asked directly. For example someone “liked” a (cropped) picture I posted on the facebook. I wrote and said “Hey you liked that picture. Thanks.” Her response was the she wished she were that brave. So, assuming that she at least was aware that the picture was from my blog, I asked if she had any feedback on the blog. And since then, nothing, even after I wrote again to say sorry if it was awkward or uncomfortable and feel free to change the subject. Still nothing.

Add to that the continuing loss of friends. Another sometime in the last 24 hours.

Deafening.
Sure, you might say that many people just don’t know how to respond to this blog. Well, to that I say bullshit. To that I say too many people just go through life trying to be safe.

When I was in college there was once a girl who I thought was really cute; I started chatting with her and after a little while I asked her out. She gave me some excuse that she couldn’t. It was a perfectly reasonable excuse, so I asked again—another reasonable excuse. Third time, same thing, so I asked if she was really that busy or if she just wasn’t interested, and if it was the latter, I just wished she say so. See, I wanted to believe that she was telling the truth. I would’ve told the truth. I’ve pretty-much always felt like this. Just say that you don’t want to go out with me, or hire me, work with me, whatever. I’d much rather you be clear and say what you mean. I can take rejection. I’ve certainly been rejected before and I expect to be rejected again. But I’d like to know, maybe even have the chance to ask if there’s some reason that would be helpful for me to know about for my own edification.

It turns out that girl in college was a lesbian. When I asked the third time, she told me. Okay. Fine. She could’ve said so the first time and saved us both the effort—of my coming up with a possible date idea and her coming up with a reasonable-sounding excuse. But I guess she was trying to be safe. She didn’t know how I might react to her being a lesbian.

So let me say, loudly: I’m not gonna yell or make fun of you for being a prude or feeling uncomfortable or perhaps having a job which you fear losing if my links to this blog show up on your facebook newsfeed. I respect directness and honesty. However, I might “call you out” for running away, unfriending me without a word.

Birthday soon

Yeah, my birthday is coming up...again. Right now I’m feeling about it the way I usually do.

So again, I’m taking my birthday off of the facebook to avoid the onslaught of “casual” birthday wishes. If you don’t know what I mean, read my blog from about a year ago: http://christilley.blogspot.com/2010/10/birthday-schmirthday.html

Last year there were people who read the blog, knew that I didn’t want casual birthday wishes, and referred to that fact in their casual birthday wish post on my wall on the facebook.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Well, here’s an analogy to explain how I feel about that.
(Yes, I know this particular analogy may offend some people. Offense is not my intent. My intent is, rather, to communicate my point in such a way that people will really get it. If you are offended, sorry. But I’m not gonna lose sleep over it.)

So, you post a casual birthday wish when I’ve stated that I don’t want it. Maybe you do it anyway because you really, really mean it.

But that’s like a man casually groping some unwilling girl who’s said she doesn’t like it. I mean, you sort of expect that some relative may to do it. They’re family, what are you gonna do?

And then there's the guy who does it anyway because he really, really wants to grope her. He likely thinks— you know, if he's thinking at all— that deep down she really wants it as much as he does. Dude, she doesn’t.

Instead of the casual grope, why not take her out, buy her flowers, have dinner & conversation, ask her what she really wants in life and share your own hopes & dreams & fears. If you make her feel special, then she might not mind so much your groping her. In fact, she might want it then, and really enjoy it, and grope you back.

Naked woman in horse

A friend of mine posted this on my facebook wall, thinking I might be interested. I was.

Seattle Weekly article ...with pictures

An “aspiring model” (she has a profile on some modeling site) in Portland, Oregon, along with a friend, bought an old horse, killed it, gutted and skinned it, and took some pictures of her inside the carcass. Later they ate the horse.

Okay, so you may think, "Ew." Yeah, I thought that too, but mostly I thought it’s just odd. The police investigated, but it seems that no laws were broken. She posted the pics online, and then claimed to have “no idea why people care.” Apparently she wanted to “be one with the animal” and was inspired by Star Wars.

Yay, Star Wars! But I don't think she's a huge fan or anything.
I think, as she is an “aspiring model”, (her model profile) that she’s just hoping to jumpstart her modeling career.

Well, of course, lots of people are outraged. The comments on the article fall into the 3 typical categories of comments on anything surprising &/or unusual:

1. This is sick and twisted; we hate her; she’s a horrible, horrible person OR she so ca-ra-zee.
2. What about all the other animals that are routinely slaughtered for us to eat? (This response on some other topic could be “what about all the starving people...the uninsured...victims of abuse...global warming...whatever”.)
3. OMG, she’s HOT, I wanna hit dat.

Comments on others people’s comments also fall into those same categories, with one additional group: your so dum sombody should get rid of you to; often followed by another comment pointing out the ironic misspellings, lack of punctuation and other grammatical errors. Yes, poor writing bothers me, and I occasional stifle my own grammar-nazi impulse. Because just calling someone stupid or pointing out grammar issues does not really add anything truly useful to the discussion. 

Probably my favorite comment, one which I might’ve made if I were paying more attention when I first skimmed though the article, was to point out a mistake in the Star Wars reference.

"I am so disgusted! This article is SO WRONG!
Han Solo did not use HIS light saber.  He used Luke's.  Get your story straight!"

Sci-fi nerds are hilarious, and yes, I mean me too.

“Size matters not. Look at me. Judge me by my size, do you? Hm?”

Tableau Vivant...a bit more

(This is more about the piece from my this morning's entry.)

Okay, so... a “Tableau Vivant” is a living picture: an artistic picture or series of pictures made with live people, as opposed to being painted or sculpted or photographed; often tableaux vivants (that’s the plural) are recreations of pre-existing works of art.

Several examples (obviously, pictures of paintings & pictures of tableaux vivants based on them):

A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte (Georges Seurat)

The Last Supper (Leonardo da Vinci)

Olympia (Édouard Manet)

Girl with a Pearl Earring (Johannes Vermeer)

Vieja Friendo Huevos (Diego Velázquez)

The (too soon cancelled) TV show Arrested Development had an episode featuring an annual “Living Classics” pageant, in which families or groups would do tableux vivants.

The Creation of Adam (detail from The Sistine Chapel, Michelangelo)

Mrs Henderson Presents is a film about a theatre which did tableaux vivants.

The DeliriumConstructions is an ongoing photographic project by artist Sarah Small in which she explores emotional responses of bringing together unexpected people.

One example:

Pearl Ring (Sarah Small)

Tableau Vivant of the Delirium Constructions is a series of pieces that involve live musical performers/models/movers, some clothed and some nude. It’s a sort of extension of Sarah Small's photographic work intended to “celebrate humanity by representing a visual and sonic encyclopedia of the human condition.” (quote from http://www.livingpictureprojects.com/)

I think watching it on video (you can find a link in this morning’s entry) creates a distance from the piece which I assume wouldn’t be there if experienced live. I think it would be a really interesting thing to experience, as either a participant or an observer. Although, I suspect from what I’ve seen in the videos, I would desire more interaction and specificity from the performers.

I found myself wanting to know more about the various couples, groups, even individuals. What were their relationships? Why are some clothed and some not? What’s going on with this or that individual who seems very different from the others in some way or another?

I also think it would be really neat to put together some sort of performance not unlike hers, here where I live. I can’t imagine how I would find enough people who’d be willing to do it. Or a venue that didn’t cost a bunch o’ money to rent. Anyone?

Tableau Vivant (a morning quickie)

This is another of those days where I'll have to leave soon to actually go do some "work". So I may do another entry this afternoon.
But here's this:

Sarah Small's Tableau Vivant of the Delirium Constructions

I guess you'd call it either performance art or maybe an "installation". Not sure. I haven't read up on it too much. I'm not sure I understand exactly what she's doing, but it's very interesting, if, at times, boring.


Here's a (26 minute) video (not a "morning quickie"):

http://vimeo.com/27949634