Why is "indigenous nudity" ok ? (Please read additional details)?

Question

On national geographic, they can show the entire bare breasts of women for minutes at a time and call it "indigenous nudity."

Yet, when Janet Jackson momentarily showed a star covered nipple , there was a big uproar.

Children have as much access to National Geographic as the superbowl.

This is a double standard that the western world has. Are they implying that the "indigenous" women are less human, so it's ok to show them naked like animals?

Answer 1

I live in India, born and brought up here as a Hindu. I revere all forms of life. If it is okay to show animals, it is also okay to show me like animals.

Apart from that, the big uproar when Janet Jackson momentarily showed a star covered nipple was because Janet Jackson did that to cause an uproar. Indigenous naked people do not *show* their naked body, they just walk around naked.

Answer 2

I personally believe the Janet Jackson incident was blown way out of proportion, and was probably a publicity stunt anyway. Also, it was on cable t.v., there are a lot more restrictions on what you can show on cable TV than on themed TV stations such as National Geographic. The "indigenous" nudity is non-sexual, and shows an aspect of their culture, so its a lot more tolerable.

Answer 3

the janet jackson incident is considered exploitation at worst and sensationalizing at best.

also there was no prior warning...even discovery warns of questionable content with the standard pre-program disclaimer.