For me ethics are priority hence getting naked for charity is a big NO!

Why is it that nude charity workers around the world rouse big-time publicity in their fundraising activities and with it a handsome financial reward … What is the logic of signification underpinning naked charity? It’s ****in utterly shameful and sexual absurd seeing the human body in its most natural state. Nudity, Yes, give me more is the only significance underlined in this claim for charity. There are numerous other ways to make charity, people plz try and explore them first, before putting this crude form of pornography legal.

Today getting naked for a cause is just an excuse for flashers and naturist to have their way without getting caught by law.

The worst is PETA nude campaigns.

I’D RATHER WEAR FUR THAN GO NAKED.

@Madan (site:ecofriend.org/)

the attractive action for something good... do you think you can show your attractiveness to the whole world? is it really that important to learn your attractiveness by getting naked on the streets?

we have come of ages to learn that we are social animals and we need to wear clothes and understand our social limitations. why do you think we wear clothes?

we see ourselves naked everyday but does that mean we should let the others know about have you shaved down there or not.

this though is not relevant when we are talkin about charity but still going naked to get attention or as Jonty puts it (People need shockers to jolt them out of their mental blocks and lethargy.) still sounds ridiculous.

Getting naked for charity? Of course, if it is the last option left. It’s more or less propaganda to come in the limelight than doing something really good for the humanity. So, it is merely the pompous parade and nothing more than much cry little wool. For those who are really bothered about the suffering humanity and are the philanthropists propagating egalitarianism, don’t exhibit what good they are doing.

Furthermore, I am pretty sure that ‘attitude’ is confused about the meaning of morality when he wrote “Morality is nothing but a fabric of imagination.” May be, he is right some where, but if he has this view, then why he is supporting charity. Is charity not the part of morality that tells us to help the suffering humanity? Seeming paradox Attitude, isn’t it?

@Pooja,
Who has right to decide what ethics are?

@ Jonty

So when guys from organizations like PETA use good looking girls to strip (which that do it voluntarily) people turn around to watch.

Some good looking naked women and a bunch of gawkers. What does any of this have to do with animal rights? Dunno.

isn’t it interesting what you call a shocker or jolt to get people out of their mental blocks and lethargy are more focused on their nudity than the cause.

I pay no mind to the moralists, but I don’t think the campaign or the cause for which the nude activists struggle should be a joke either. i think nude activists goes too far, feeding off of people’s emotions, rather
than their logic.

Will most of the people pay much
attention to the cause rather than the ”show” ?

Seriously wondering

Why get naked if you are really for charity? Charity for what? Is it really for charity or public’s eyes delight?

People discussing everything except concentrating why nudity is must for charity works. Nudity can be used to expose the wrongdoing in society. Manipur women marched without any cloths except a banner where it was written that ‘Come and rape us’. It can be used as eye-opener as Jonty said in Pooja’s case. BUT nudity is for charity… It is hard to digest. This is nothing but to get cheap popularity by using beautiful girls and poor-minded males during the charity shows. What kind of advantage one can get from nude shows for charity purposes? No one is here to decide and define the ethics but people should themselves decide the rules of living good life. Even Maqbool Fida Hussain used to make nude paintings of Hindu Goddesses to establish a link between him and god, creator of the world, but when the question comes to the painting of women of other religions, he forgets the advantages of nudity all the time…

People using nudity for wrong purposes by shielding it with charity purpose..one can get funds for his charity works without using nudity anytime…And for Madan…one who gives funds for charity only after watching the nude shows in the name of charity may be called as pervert minded people not the group of people who are opposing such behaviour..They are opposing because they have strong mind..

@ KHUSHI

Ethics and morals...who made them? we...who decided what should be like what...we..

Why do you think we decided that?

We dress up for all the good not because it is influenced by church leaders or politicians or others as some sort of sign that needs to be pointed to and mentioned as if this is defining moral character rather, it was through the ingenuity of our ancestors who understood how to use coverings which allowed them to travel away from the equator to exist and raise their families as they expanded to the far reaches of our planet. This is HOW WE GOT CLOTHES!

i don’t think you are really sure that you want to see people naked for charity? FACE IT, some things are better left covered.i don’t think you would like to see your Grandma and Grandad walking about naked for charity. yuk

@ madan (site:ecofriend.org/)

Congarts!!! a naked body gives you a jolt or shock.......strong mind

it surely don’t give me any jolt but shock, YES

Morality is neither explained nor declared, it is simply ’felt’. Every moral principle stands on its own legs or falls. A defence of ’morality’ implies that it is something other than ’rationale’ or dry ’reason’. This also means that it cannot be argued about. There can be no such question as ’why’ something is moral or ’why’ something is immoral. If a moral ground is assailable it becomes logically indefensible and can be cast aside with ease.

If nudity itself were moral we would all save a lot on clothes. Now, the only question is whether it is alright to shed clothes for what is referred to as ’charity’? And this question has to be essentially answered considering its effects and also the intention of the celebrities who go about walking nude ’for a cause’. Is it genuine or is it just another excuse much like the age-old demand-of-the-role excuse?

Then, you can also reject the intention and only consider the effect. And it certainly draws attention.

Getting nude in desperation is one thing. But is it really true that people like Britney Spears are ’desperate’ to draw attention to environmental causes or the plight of children, women etc.? I am not too sure of their well-meaning ’desperation’.

what example are we setting towards the children by associating charity with nudity?

charity events occur every day in every country, countless number of times, do we have to tarnish them and ruin their good image with these few events that some idiot has drummed up to a) use charity has an excuse to get his personal kicks b)to market the individual getting undressed.

why does the media give so much attention to these kind of events? because it’s out of the social character of human nature (similar to the news of a bad deed rather than a good deed)

Agreed (as I already have), that going nude attracts attention but does it really serve the cause or does it only serve the celebrities?

Dear Mr. Yashpal,
With due regard to your opinion, I still find it difficult to reconcile the Britney Spears and the ’desperation for a cause’. Britney Spears is not the name of a particular celebrity, it’s a category in which most of the celebrities (though not all) unfortunately fall.

The debate of ’nudity and charity’ will always revolve around the question of morality because the aspect of charity is above board.

The action is ’nudity’ and the reason is ’charity’, and since the end is unarguably noble, the only question is whether the means too is so. And the question can only be decided with reference to our collective sense of morality.

So far as ’desperation’ is concerned, the term can only be used in a very personal sense and to be so much one with the ’cause’ one needs to be a ’celebrity by way of being an acitivist’ and not an ’activist celebrity’.

Attention is what keeps the celebrity and ’celebritism’ going. It keeps things rolling for the celebrity in question. But does it really help the cause as much. To some extent it does help, but kindly be aware of the lurking dangers too. Art was ’art for purpose’ before it became ’art for art’s sake’. Nudity for cause may become nudity for its own sake and may just become an art form.

I have no problems with that happening, but lets wait for the time when that happens.

So, Yash, you passion for the ’cause’ is certainly appreciable but would ’end’ justify the ’means’? The ’means’ used it certainly helping the user but not the cause. And there may be consequences.

People love what they see not and may also see the cause, but they would appreciate the celebrity and lust after her (most of them are females, kindly note) but the cause would soon be lost but the celebrity would remain vividly etched in the memory. Celebrity gains, does the cause too?

The punch of nudity lies in its being a ’last resort’, in its appearing to be a ’desperate attempt’, in its ’shock value’. This is because it is not commonplace. If it becomes commonplace or becomes fashionable, it would certainly lose its force irrespective of the ’cause’ or its nobility and would thus become a blunt, ineffective tool.

It remains powerful only so long as it could make one react one way or the other. The more strongly one reacts, the better the effect.

So, in a way the protesters serve ’the tool of nudity’ better than the supporters.

Basic thing. If someone is interested in giving for charity he will give no matter what. Whether there are 10 pretty young women strutting around in the nude or not. The others who come to see the nude women/ men in the name of charity come for nudity and not because they feel for the cause. Hence if the proponents/ protagonists of the cause don’t have the capability to convince donors on the value of the cause then nudity is the last resort.
It is high time they stopped trying to espouse the cause and do something else.

No way....This is absolute nonsense. Getting nude for charity is worst. By doing this kind of things people try to pull the attention but according to me it is meaningless. In life we should do something by which we can be an example for others, we should people around us to feel proud.