Why are tribal photos with topless woman allowed to be publicly shown but all other instances can't?

[Ignacio Upton]

I just finished reading through this article on Nelson Mandela's grandson being installed as as tribal chief for the Xhosa:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070416/wl_nm/safrica_mandela_dc

If you click on the picture shown in the page, and click on the gallery to get to picture 12 (12 out of 20) you'll find it.

Now, if this isn't a good example of a double standard, then I don't know what is.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. These photos are allowed....

Because the women are being shown in their "natural" state.

It isn't considered exploitation.....

I don't see any double standard here, but that's just me...

:hi:

[JI7]

2. i think because it's considered normal in their culture for women to be topless

in public.

[Roon]

3. Boobies!!

eom

[XemaSab]

4. 90% of these women would be more likely to KILL a good time than not

:hide:

[jpgray]

5. The crux of it is whether or not one culture should attempt to document/define another

And if it does, whether it should apply its own moralistic standards or those of the culture it is attempting to document. I think there are good arguments on both sides, and that documenting the natural state of someone does have moral implications even if it isn't done with any intent to exploit or condescend. Because it may be perceived that way.

[Oeditpus Rex]

6. To which 'publicly' do you refer?

I've seen plenty of breasts on PBS — these, for instance, from a Monty Python episode (this screencap is the PG version to pass DU muster):





(Please note that that is not Carol Cleveland, but a girlfriend of Eric Idle at the time, who just happened to be a stripper.)


Just because Reuters posted the photo you refer to doesn't mean any U.S. newspaper is gonna use it. Remember, in 'Merka, breasts are bad. :scared: