Stargate Pilot Episode - Nudity

[Ranger Bob]

Hi,
My wife and I wanted to starting watching some new Sci-Fi and rented the
first three episodes of SG1 on DVD. We were surprised to discover full
frontal nudity on the pilot episode. Did this only occur in the first one or
does this happen in other episodes?
We have a 10 year old who watch to watch it. We assumed it was somewhat
family friendly (PG or so).
Thanks!

It is only in the pilot. The rest of the show should be fine
for a 10 year old.


Ranger Bob

"If you aren't living on the edge, you're taking up too much space."
"Jaffa, TREE!"

[Brian]

Thanks! It just didn't seem to fit the premise or the series to feature the
nude scene. Glad to know it was a one time thing!

Post by Ranger Bob

Hi,
My wife and I wanted to starting watching some new Sci-Fi and rented the
first three episodes of SG1 on DVD. We were surprised to discover full
frontal nudity on the pilot episode. Did this only occur in the first one or
does this happen in other episodes?
We have a 10 year old who watch to watch it. We assumed it was somewhat
family friendly (PG or so).
Thanks!

It is only in the pilot. The rest of the show should be fine
for a 10 year old.
Ranger Bob
"If you aren't living on the edge, you're taking up too much space."
"Jaffa, TREE!"

[InsomniaKev]

Hi,
My wife and I wanted to starting watching some new Sci-Fi and rented the
first three episodes of SG1 on DVD. We were surprised to discover full
frontal nudity on the pilot episode. Did this only occur in the first one or
does this happen in other episodes?

Just about every ep in the first season had nudity :) Joking, it was
just the premier.

Got to remember that the show started out on Showtime and they had to
attract viewers to the premier. What better way than to add V,N&L to a
shows description.

There might have even been a second episode that year that had some
'language?'

Anyone remember?

[Shari]

Hi,
My wife and I wanted to starting watching some new Sci-Fi and rented the
first three episodes of SG1 on DVD. We were surprised to discover full
frontal nudity on the pilot episode. Did this only occur in the first one

or

does this happen in other episodes?
We have a 10 year old who watch to watch it. We assumed it was somewhat
family friendly (PG or so).
Thanks!

My ten year old and my eight year old both watched it .. there is nothing
wrong with the human body! This did not bother my kids at all, they were
more concerned about the snake going in the back of the neck! ... They both
love stargate, and as a responsible parent I sit and watch each episode with
my kids and talk about any concerns :)

S

[Peter Wilkin]

Post by Shari
My ten year old and my eight year old both watched it .. there is nothing
wrong with the human body! This did not bother my kids at all, they were
more concerned about the snake going in the back of the neck! ... They both
love stargate, and as a responsible parent I sit and watch each episode with
my kids and talk about any concerns :)

Lets hope you dont talk about your concerns "during" the episode ;-)

[Shari]

Post by Peter Wilkin

Post by Shari
My ten year old and my eight year old both watched it .. there is nothing
wrong with the human body! This did not bother my kids at all, they were
more concerned about the snake going in the back of the neck! ... They

both

Post by Shari
love stargate, and as a responsible parent I sit and watch each episode

with

Post by Shari
my kids and talk about any concerns :)

Lets hope you dont talk about your concerns "during" the episode ;-)

Bite your tongue!!!! no way :)

[Michael O'Shea]

Post by Shari
My ten year old and my eight year old both watched it .. there is nothing
wrong with the human body!

Well said..:-)

[Joe]

It is so said that people who don't want to see the nudity get ridiculed yet
they respect the ones who do want to view it.

I weep because of the sexual obsession of America.

Stand up for decency!

Post by Michael O'Shea

Post by Shari
My ten year old and my eight year old both watched it .. there is nothing
wrong with the human body!

Well said..:-)

[Epi]

Post by Joe
It is so said that people who don't want to see the nudity get ridiculed yet
they respect the ones who do want to view it.
I weep because of the sexual obsession of America.
Stand up for decency!

There is nothing indecent about the human body. Also if anything America is
ridiculously uptight about sexuality, Europe and Australia don't appear to
have nearly as many hangups. For instance that a naken body is
automatically "sexual". There really isn't anything sexual about the scene
in the pilot.

Post by Joe

Post by Michael O'Shea

Post by Shari
My ten year old and my eight year old both watched it .. there is

nothing

Post by Michael O'Shea

Post by Shari
wrong with the human body!

Well said..:-)

[Bob Byrne]

Post by Epi
There is nothing indecent about the human body. Also if anything America is
ridiculously uptight about sexuality, Europe and Australia don't appear to
have nearly as many hangups. ......

Speaking of Australia, there is a bit of a revolution happening right now with
the right to say those four letter words. There have been some court cases
with regard to foul language and the courts say it is good ole Aussie slang.
Ever since then you can watch any late night live TV show and those four letter
words are used quite frequently and without hesitation.

[BlakGard]

Post by Joe

Post by Michael O'Shea

Post by Shari
My ten year old and my eight year old both watched it .. there is
nothing wrong with the human body!

Well said..:-)

It is so said that people who don't want to see the nudity get ridiculed yet
they respect the ones who do want to view it.
I weep because of the sexual obsession of America.
Stand up for decency!

Who's ridiculing? I don't remember reading anyone ridiculing people for not
wanting to see nudity. I respect their opinion, even if I disagree with it
vehemently.

And uh... Decency is in the eye of the beholder.

-=[ The BlakGard ]=-
"Somewhere there's danger;
somewhere there's injustice,
and somewhere else the tea is getting cold!"

[Rosalita]

Post by Joe
It is so said that people who don't want to see the nudity get ridiculed yet
they respect the ones who do want to view it.
I weep because of the sexual obsession of America.

Nudity has nothing to do with sexual obsession. And even if it
did, so what? Sex is natural and so is nudity. If you
automatically think of sex when you see a naked body, perhaps you
need to worry about your own obsessions.

[Splonge]

Post by Rosalita

Post by Joe
It is so said that people who don't want to see the nudity get
ridiculed yet they respect the ones who do want to view it.
I weep because of the sexual obsession of America.

Nudity has nothing to do with sexual obsession. And even if it
did, so what? Sex is natural and so is nudity. If you
automatically think of sex when you see a naked body, perhaps you
need to worry about your own obsessions.

I think about sex when i see an atractive naked body, and i am not worried
about my obsessions.

--

[Bob Byrne]

Post by Splonge
I think about sex when i see an atractive naked body, and i am not worried
about my obsessions.

Same here and the day I don't they can nail the lid on and bury me :-)

[Rosalita]

Post by Shari
My ten year old and my eight year old both watched it .. there is nothing
wrong with the human body!

Amen!

[diane]

Post by Shari

Hi,
My wife and I wanted to starting watching some new Sci-Fi and rented
the first three episodes of SG1 on DVD. We were surprised to discover
full frontal nudity on the pilot episode. Did this only occur in the
first one

or

does this happen in other episodes?
We have a 10 year old who watch to watch it. We assumed it was
somewhat family friendly (PG or so).
Thanks!

My ten year old and my eight year old both watched it .. there is
nothing wrong with the human body! This did not bother my kids at all,
they were more concerned about the snake going in the back of the neck! ...
They both love stargate, and as a responsible parent I sit and watch
each episode with my kids and talk about any concerns :)

ditto. More worried about my children watching senseless violence and
pointless sex scenes on TV than a brief shot of a female body - they
know what bodies look like - and if a 10 yr old *doesn't* know what an
adult body looks like then they *should*.

diane

[Omphalos]

Post by Shari
My ten year old and my eight year old both watched it .. there is
nothing wrong with the human body!

Ok, you are a freak if you let your kids watch that stuff.

[Property Of SG1]

There is nothing wrong with the naked figure. Many fine works of art are of the
naked figure. So in my mind its not wrong for a child to see a naked body.
HOWEVER, if that naked body is doing something of the sexual nature (i.e. porn,
explicit love scene, etc) then I can see a reason to object to a child seeing
it.

[Ranger Bob]

Post by Property Of SG1
There is nothing wrong with the naked figure. Many fine works of art are of the
naked figure. So in my mind its not wrong for a child to see a naked body.
HOWEVER, if that naked body is doing something of the sexual nature (i.e. porn,
explicit love scene, etc) then I can see a reason to object to a child seeing
it.

Or maybe when that naked figure is being violated in a very
graphic way like, say, having a snake painfully burrow its way into
the neck and violating the person? :-)

Ranger Bob

"If you aren't living on the edge, you're taking up too much space."
"Jaffa, TREE!"

[Val in Boise]

Oh, wow, Ranger Bob. You got me there. Let's switch channels to CSI. Now
there is a show that can make a grandpa gag.


"Ranger Bob" <***@att.net> wrote in message news:***@netnews.worldnet.att.net...
| On 05 Sep 2003 15:06:50 GMT, ***@aol.com (Property Of SG1)
| wrote:
|
| >There is nothing wrong with the naked figure. Many fine works of art are
of the
| >naked figure. So in my mind its not wrong for a child to see a naked
body.
| >HOWEVER, if that naked body is doing something of the sexual nature (i.e.
porn,
| >explicit love scene, etc) then I can see a reason to object to a child
seeing
| >it.
|
| Or maybe when that naked figure is being violated in a very
| graphic way like, say, having a snake painfully burrow its way into
| the neck and violating the person? :-)
|
| Ranger Bob
|
| "If you aren't living on the edge, you're taking up too much space."
| "Jaffa, TREE!"

[Epi]

Post by Ranger Bob

Post by Property Of SG1
There is nothing wrong with the naked figure. Many fine works of art are of the
naked figure. So in my mind its not wrong for a child to see a naked body.
HOWEVER, if that naked body is doing something of the sexual nature (i.e. porn,
explicit love scene, etc) then I can see a reason to object to a child seeing
it.

Or maybe when that naked figure is being violated in a very
graphic way like, say, having a snake painfully burrow its way into
the neck and violating the person? :-)
Ranger Bob

Which I suppose is much worse than watching them being shot, tortured or any
of the other things devised on the show that ten year olds would see on it.
The fact that the body is naked when it happens really shouldn't enter into
it.

[JM Morrison]

Post by Epi

Post by Property Of SG1
There is nothing wrong with the naked figure. Many fine works of art are of the
naked figure. So in my mind its not wrong for a child to see a naked body.
HOWEVER, if that naked body is doing something of the sexual
nature (i.e. porn,
explicit love scene, etc) then I can see a reason to object to a
child seeing it.

Or maybe when that naked figure is being violated in a very graphic
way like, say, having a snake painfully burrow its way into the
neck and violating the person? :-)
Ranger Bob

Which I suppose is much worse than watching them being shot, tortured
or any of the other things devised on the show that ten year olds
would see on it. The fact that the body is naked when it happens
really shouldn't enter into it.

And yet it does. The part of the brain that responds to sexual stimuli
(eg. nudity, for most of us, most of the time) is very primitive, and
very basic to our makeup. As is the part that responds to violence.
For *or* against. Your response to them is automatically programmed in,
and they feed off each other. Your rational mind is able to take all
the cultural programming in and say 'this' is all right, 'that' is all
wrong, but your hind brain knows nothing about such rules. Sex will get
your attention. Violence too. Put them together and it's a double
whammy. Possibly whammy squared. Scientists are only starting to be
able to prove it. Movie and TV writers, producers and advertisers have
known and used it for... forever.

-jmm

[Epi]

Post by JM Morrison

Post by Epi

Post by Property Of SG1
There is nothing wrong with the naked figure. Many fine works of art are of the
naked figure. So in my mind its not wrong for a child to see a naked body.
HOWEVER, if that naked body is doing something of the sexual nature (i.e. porn,
explicit love scene, etc) then I can see a reason to object to a
child seeing it.

Or maybe when that naked figure is being violated in a very graphic
way like, say, having a snake painfully burrow its way into the
neck and violating the person? :-)
Ranger Bob

Which I suppose is much worse than watching them being shot, tortured
or any of the other things devised on the show that ten year olds
would see on it. The fact that the body is naked when it happens
really shouldn't enter into it.

And yet it does. The part of the brain that responds to sexual stimuli
(eg. nudity, for most of us, most of the time) is very primitive, and
very basic to our makeup. As is the part that responds to violence.
For *or* against. Your response to them is automatically programmed in,
and they feed off each other. Your rational mind is able to take all
the cultural programming in and say 'this' is all right, 'that' is all
wrong, but your hind brain knows nothing about such rules. Sex will get
your attention. Violence too. Put them together and it's a double
whammy. Possibly whammy squared. Scientists are only starting to be
able to prove it. Movie and TV writers, producers and advertisers have
known and used it for... forever.
-jmm

Yet as you say, your rational mind is able to take it in and seperate it.
It doesn't really matter what your "primitive mind" says IF your rational
mind has been taught what is right and what is wrong. How can that be
learned if one is "protected"from it? I'm sorry I just don't see a problem
with a ten year old seeing that scene, unless you have reason to believe
that seeing someone SNAKED will bother them. I don't believe the nudity
issue should enter it at all in this particular case as there was nothing
sexual going on. The original post which raised this issue was simply
concerned about their being a NUDE body being shown. There didn't appear to
be any concern at all about the violence aspect, which in my opinion should
be much more troubling.

It *is* our culture which makes basic nudity almost exclusively
sexual--there are cultures, which are considered primitive and located in
hot climates, where everyone walks around more or less nude(aside from bits
of cloth or dried grasses perhaps) all the time, they work that way, they
play that way, they are that way pretty much from birth 'til death. So
obviously if people without our "advanced" ways and scientists to tell us
what things mean can manage to function going about their daily business in
an advanced state of undress, it can't be all that hard to get over the
sexual aspect of it. I mean Victorians used to get all hot and bothered
over a bare ankle--it's cultural programming more than anything.

[Paul O'Neill]

Post by Epi
Yet as you say, your rational mind is able to take it in and seperate it.
It doesn't really matter what your "primitive mind" says IF your rational
mind has been taught what is right and what is wrong. How can that be
learned if one is "protected"from it? I'm sorry I just don't see a problem
with a ten year old seeing that scene, unless you have reason to believe
that seeing someone SNAKED will bother them. I don't believe the nudity
issue should enter it at all in this particular case as there was nothing
sexual going on. The original post which raised this issue was simply
concerned about their being a NUDE body being shown. There didn't appear to
be any concern at all about the violence aspect, which in my opinion should
be much more troubling.

If you agree that there's a difference between that scene and, say, a scene
in which a woman just steps out of the shower and puts on a dressing gown -
in terms of acceptability - then you must also awknowledge that that
difference (whatever it is - violence, rape/violation etc) might make a
parent not want their child to see it.

If you see no difference between the two scenes, then... wait. There was a
huge difference wasn't there?

--
"Are you being sarcastic?"
"No, I'm being ironic. It's much more sophisticated."
http://www.lazyeyedpsycho.cjb.net
--

[Epi]

Post by Ranger Bob

Post by Epi
Yet as you say, your rational mind is able to take it in and seperate it.
It doesn't really matter what your "primitive mind" says IF your rational
mind has been taught what is right and what is wrong. How can that be
learned if one is "protected"from it? I'm sorry I just don't see a

problem

Post by Epi
with a ten year old seeing that scene, unless you have reason to believe
that seeing someone SNAKED will bother them. I don't believe the nudity
issue should enter it at all in this particular case as there was nothing
sexual going on. The original post which raised this issue was simply
concerned about their being a NUDE body being shown. There didn't

appear

Post by Ranger Bob
to

Post by Epi
be any concern at all about the violence aspect, which in my opinion

should

Post by Epi
be much more troubling.

If you agree that there's a difference between that scene and, say, a scene
in which a woman just steps out of the shower and puts on a dressing gown -
in terms of acceptability - then you must also awknowledge that that
difference (whatever it is - violence, rape/violation etc) might make a
parent not want their child to see it.
If you see no difference between the two scenes, then... wait. There was a
huge difference wasn't there?

I'm kind of confused on what you mean? Yes there is a difference between
the two scenes you mention. In one the woman is being snaked, having her
body taken over against her will by an entity, in the other she is simply
stepping out of a shower. It is different because of the violence, not
because of the nudity, IMO.

The original post was solely concerned about the nude aspect of the scene,
as I said in my post. I'd imagine they probably wouldn't have wanted their
ten year old to see the woman stepping out of the shower naked, and walking
over to her dressing gown either. However had she been in her dressing
gown, it would be perfectly fine for the ten year old seeing her body taken
over against her will and being snaked.

Which of course they have a right to do, I just happen to think that for
myself, the emphasis is on the wrong thing. I'd be more concerned about a
child seeing the woman's body being taken over by an alien lifeform against
her wishes, in which she is powerless to stop it, in whatever state of dress
or undress she happens to be in at the time.

[Val in Boise]

My question is this: Are you trying to protect the child or are you trying
to protect yourself from having to explain sex to the child?

Someone said: HOWEVER, if that naked body is doing something of the sexual
nature (i.e. porn,
| explicit love scene, etc) then I can see a reason to object to a child
seeing
| it.

[Val in Boise]

I never stopped my two sons from watching things or hearing things. If
there was nudity I was there to answer questions, if there was cursing it
was something they were going to hear anyway. I have raised two find,
upstanding individuals.

The only thing out of the ordinary was when my oldest son worked at a
casino in Jackpot, Nevada, and he wouldn't let my husband take me to a strip
show. He was trying to protect ME!!!

Someone said" Ok, you are a freak if you let your kids watch that stuff."

[forge]

Post by Omphalos

Post by Shari
My ten year old and my eight year old both watched it .. there is
nothing wrong with the human body!

Ok, you are a freak if you let your kids watch that stuff.

Pfft, what's the big deal. We're all naked under our clothes. Now if
someone had been having sexual intercourse on screen I might be
uncomfortable with it, but plain old nudity? Pfft.

[Mls0055]

Subject: Re: Stargate Pilot Episode - Nudity
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 09:58:52 -0400
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 00:08:40 -0500, InsomniaKev

Post by InsomniaKev
There might have even been a second episode that year that had some
'language?'

I can't cite a specific episode, but there has been a couple of times
that I've been watching a re-run on "Stargate Monday" where a word or
two has been noticeably edited out.

There was a moment in the episode where they are on Sokar's hell planet
(the episode title escapes me right now) and Jack was injured in the leg and
I'll swear he said f**k. I played it over and over again to try and check. It
sounds like that. I can't imagine it is, but it sure sounds like it.

Mandi

[JM Morrison]

Post by Mls0055
There was a moment in the episode where they are on Sokar's hell planet
(the episode title escapes me right now) and Jack was injured in the leg and
I'll swear he said f**k. I played it over and over again to try and check. It
sounds like that. I can't imagine it is, but it sure sounds like it.
Mandi

I checked it out on my brand new Season 3 box set of DVD's... ;-) and if
you're talking about the scene in The Devil You Know where Jack gets
shot in the leg ... I think he starts to say it, but only gets the "fff"
part out. That much is acceptable for broadcast.

-jmm
"Oh, Sh--" Fox Mulder, Bad Blood.

[MadiHolmes]

Post by JM Morrison
I checked it out on my brand new Season 3 box set of DVD's... ;-) and if
you're talking about the scene in The Devil You Know where Jack gets
shot in the leg ... I think he starts to say it, but only gets the "fff"
part out. That much is acceptable for broadcast.
-jmm
"Oh, Sh--" Fox Mulder, Bad Blood.

"You're such a chickenshi-<alarm goes off> it."

-Sam to Jonas. Don't remember the ep.

Madi"I'm thinking season 6..."Holmes

[John Cholewa]

My wife and I wanted to starting watching some new Sci-Fi and rented the
first three episodes of SG1 on DVD. We were surprised to discover full
frontal nudity on the pilot episode. Did this only occur in the first one
or does this happen in other episodes?
We have a 10 year old who watch to watch it. We assumed it was somewhat
family friendly (PG or so).

Huh? Dude, in this show, people shoot and kill each other. Shouldn't you
be more worried about exposing your child to things like violence and
mutilation and murder than you would about your child seeing people in
their natural states?

--
-JC

[Richard]

Brian wrote:>>

Hi,
My wife and I wanted to starting watching some new Sci-Fi and rented the
first three episodes of SG1 on DVD. We were surprised to discover full
frontal nudity on the pilot episode. Did this only occur in the first one
or does this happen in other episodes?
We have a 10 year old who watch to watch it. We assumed it was somewhat
family friendly (PG or so).
Thanks!

In the original movie there was the scene of the transformation where the
stargate team were witnesses.
The female sergeant was stripped of her clothing but shown from the back.
But the black woman was shown totally naked for a minute or so.
I was a little surprised they showed this on the first episode.
Since the nudity was brief and had no sexual involvement, the scene had
little impact what so ever.

With that scene in mind, remember the shower scene in psycho?
Was she naked?
Recently she was on a talk show and was asked that question.
She says no she was not. The masters of props came up with a prosthetic
thing she could wear for the scene.

But I believe the nude scene in startgate was cut out on reruns.
They only showed her naked from the back and the "snake" going into her
neck.

[David Doane]

Also I believe a lot of cable made shows have some nudity since it is common
in Europe and alot are released there first and edited for airing in the US.

Post by Richard
Brian wrote:>>

Hi,
My wife and I wanted to starting watching some new Sci-Fi and rented the
first three episodes of SG1 on DVD. We were surprised to discover full
frontal nudity on the pilot episode. Did this only occur in the first one
or does this happen in other episodes?
We have a 10 year old who watch to watch it. We assumed it was somewhat
family friendly (PG or so).
Thanks!

In the original movie there was the scene of the transformation where the
stargate team were witnesses.
The female sergeant was stripped of her clothing but shown from the back.
But the black woman was shown totally naked for a minute or so.
I was a little surprised they showed this on the first episode.
Since the nudity was brief and had no sexual involvement, the scene had
little impact what so ever.
With that scene in mind, remember the shower scene in psycho?
Was she naked?
Recently she was on a talk show and was asked that question.
She says no she was not. The masters of props came up with a prosthetic
thing she could wear for the scene.
But I believe the nude scene in startgate was cut out on reruns.
They only showed her naked from the back and the "snake" going into her
neck.

[Helen Cornejo]

Post by Richard
The female sergeant was stripped of her clothing but shown from the back.
But the black woman was shown totally naked for a minute or so.

That is what disturbed me in retrospect. I don't care about the nudity.
But the white blonde woman is completely shielded from view in every way,
whereas the non-Caucasian woman was shown completely nude, top and bottom,
and for more than just a split-second. I suppose it involved contract
clauses and such, but the unequal treatment makes me uncomfortable.

Helen

[Property Of SG1]

The blonde probably wasn't comfortable doing a "nude" scene for what ever
reason. Where Vaitiare Bandera (Sha're) had no issues doing the scene.

[Property Of SG1]

Also something else I have referenced is that usually during "sacrafices" in
many cultures the one to be sacrificed was usually stripped of clothing. And
the way it appears is that the Goa'uld "sacrifice" the host.

[Helen Cornejo]

Post by Property Of SG1
The blonde probably wasn't comfortable doing a "nude" scene for what ever
reason. Where Vaitiare Bandera (Sha're) had no issues doing the scene.

Oh yeah, the blonde actress's appearance has "no nudity clause" written
all over it, and obviously she has every right to make that choice.
After all, casting could have gone with someone else. It's just that
the difference on the screen is so jarring (to me, anyway). Perhaps
it's just that I've watched the pilot a couple of times recently.

Helen - just itching to get season 4 - one more day to go!

[Paul O'Neill]

Post by Helen Cornejo

Post by Richard
The female sergeant was stripped of her clothing but shown from the back.
But the black woman was shown totally naked for a minute or so.

That is what disturbed me in retrospect. I don't care about the nudity.
But the white blonde woman is completely shielded from view in every way,
whereas the non-Caucasian woman was shown completely nude, top and bottom,
and for more than just a split-second. I suppose it involved contract
clauses and such, but the unequal treatment makes me uncomfortable.

Nah, TWO nude scenes would have been overkill, and gratuitous.

They only needed to show one to get the point across (the goa'uld are evil
and treat human like cattle), so they chose to go with Sha're.

Even if she did have uneven nipples.

--
"Are you being sarcastic?"
"No, I'm being ironic. It's much more sophisticated."
http://www.lazyeyedpsycho.cjb.net
--

[Helen Cornejo]

Post by Helen Cornejo
But the white blonde woman is completely shielded from view in every way,
whereas the non-Caucasian woman was shown completely nude, top and bottom,
Nah, TWO nude scenes would have been overkill, and gratuitous.
They only needed to show one to get the point across (the goa'uld are evil
and treat human like cattle), so they chose to go with Sha're.

Well, you do kind of have a point there. I can't believe I'm going to
argue how to evenly distribute nudity among women... however it just seemed
too lopsided. Better would have been a tiny bit for the 1st one -- just a
split second of barely nothing. Some more for the 2nd, to make your point.
Not absolute nothing for the 1st, then full on gratuitous lingering ogling
for the 2nd. That, combined with race, is what I find a little disturbing.

Post by Helen Cornejo
Even if she did have uneven nipples.

Are you nuts? She is gorgeous! Or perhaps, having purely an esthetic
interest in the subject, I haven't freeze-framed her and counted the
pixels on my screen.

Helen

[Paul O'Neill]

Post by Helen Cornejo

Post by Helen Cornejo
But the white blonde woman is completely shielded from view in every way,
whereas the non-Caucasian woman was shown completely nude, top and bottom,
Nah, TWO nude scenes would have been overkill, and gratuitous.
They only needed to show one to get the point across (the goa'uld are evil
and treat human like cattle), so they chose to go with Sha're.

Well, you do kind of have a point there. I can't believe I'm going to
argue how to evenly distribute nudity among women... however it just seemed
too lopsided. Better would have been a tiny bit for the 1st one -- just a
split second of barely nothing. Some more for the 2nd, to make your point.
Not absolute nothing for the 1st, then full on gratuitous lingering ogling
for the 2nd. That, combined with race, is what I find a little disturbing.

They did. I remember seeing some nudity of the SF. I was thinking "That's
what got so many people so upset?" Then I saw Sha're's scene, and I was like
"aaahhh".

Post by Helen Cornejo

Post by Helen Cornejo
Even if she did have uneven nipples.

Are you nuts? She is gorgeous! Or perhaps, having purely an esthetic
interest in the subject, I haven't freeze-framed her and counted the
pixels on my screen.

Well, it's more of the "one points up, the other down" kinda thing.

And, no I haven't freeze framed it either.

--
"Are you being sarcastic?"
"No, I'm being ironic. It's much more sophisticated."
http://www.lazyeyedpsycho.cjb.net
--

[Andrew Venor]

Post by Helen Cornejo

Post by Richard
The female sergeant was stripped of her clothing but shown from the back.
But the black woman was shown totally naked for a minute or so.

That is what disturbed me in retrospect. I don't care about the nudity.
But the white blonde woman is completely shielded from view in every way,
whereas the non-Caucasian woman was shown completely nude, top and bottom,
and for more than just a split-second. I suppose it involved contract
clauses and such, but the unequal treatment makes me uncomfortable.
Helen

Or my theory is that the director decided to show Vaitiare Bandera in a
longer nude shot because her character Sha're would be a major
reoccurring character in the series. So playing up what the Goa'uld do
to her would help set up her character for the audience for when we see
returns in later episodes as a host.

As for the AF sergeants nude shot, I figured it was cut back because her
character was only there for the one episode as a sacrifice to Apophis.

ALV

[Poop Dogg]

Post by Helen Cornejo

Post by Richard
The female sergeant was stripped of her clothing but shown from the back.
But the black woman was shown totally naked for a minute or so.

That is what disturbed me in retrospect. I don't care about the nudity.
But the white blonde woman is completely shielded from view in every way,
whereas the non-Caucasian woman was shown completely nude, top and bottom,
and for more than just a split-second. I suppose it involved contract
clauses and such, but the unequal treatment makes me uncomfortable.

This has nothing to do with Stargate, but I was watching a National
Geographic documentary on 2 tribes, one African, the other South
American, who walked around virtually buck naked. For some reason
the network obscured the genitalia of the African men, but showed
the genitalia of the South American Indian men. And the women's
boobies of both tribes were shown unaltered. But the boobies would
have been obscured had the women been white. I can't figure it
out, why are primitive women's boobies acceptable while Western
women's boobies are not?

[Paul O'Neill]

Post by Poop Dogg

Post by Helen Cornejo

Post by Richard
The female sergeant was stripped of her clothing but shown from the back.
But the black woman was shown totally naked for a minute or so.

That is what disturbed me in retrospect. I don't care about the nudity.
But the white blonde woman is completely shielded from view in every way,
whereas the non-Caucasian woman was shown completely nude, top and bottom,
and for more than just a split-second. I suppose it involved contract
clauses and such, but the unequal treatment makes me uncomfortable.

This has nothing to do with Stargate, but I was watching a National
Geographic documentary on 2 tribes, one African, the other South
American, who walked around virtually buck naked. For some reason
the network obscured the genitalia of the African men, but showed
the genitalia of the South American Indian men. And the women's
boobies of both tribes were shown unaltered. But the boobies would
have been obscured had the women been white. I can't figure it
out, why are primitive women's boobies acceptable while Western
women's boobies are not?

Silicone content?

Or a raging double-standard.

--
"Are you being sarcastic?"
"No, I'm being ironic. It's much more sophisticated."
http://www.lazyeyedpsycho.cjb.net
--

[Splonge]

Post by Ranger Bob

Hi,
My wife and I wanted to starting watching some new Sci-Fi and rented
the first three episodes of SG1 on DVD. We were surprised to discover
full frontal nudity on the pilot episode. Did this only occur in the
first one or does this happen in other episodes?
We have a 10 year old who watch to watch it. We assumed it was
somewhat family friendly (PG or so).
Thanks!

It is only in the pilot. The rest of the show should be fine
for a 10 year old.

Yes, soldiers running around and shooting lots of people is definitely fine
to watch for a 10 year old.


--

[Ranger Bob]

Post by Splonge

Post by Ranger Bob

Hi,
My wife and I wanted to starting watching some new Sci-Fi and rented
the first three episodes of SG1 on DVD. We were surprised to discover
full frontal nudity on the pilot episode. Did this only occur in the
first one or does this happen in other episodes?
We have a 10 year old who watch to watch it. We assumed it was
somewhat family friendly (PG or so).
Thanks!

It is only in the pilot. The rest of the show should be fine
for a 10 year old.

Yes, soldiers running around and shooting lots of people is definitely fine
to watch for a 10 year old.

Yep. What? You have a problem with soldiers defending
themselves? Maybe Jack and Company should just drop their pants and
bend over?
Pul-eeeze...

Ranger Bob

"If you aren't living on the edge, you're taking up too much space."
"Jaffa, TREE!"

[Randy Sweeney]

Hi,
My wife and I wanted to starting watching some new Sci-Fi and rented the
first three episodes of SG1 on DVD. We were surprised to discover full
frontal nudity on the pilot episode. Did this only occur in the first one

or

does this happen in other episodes?
We have a 10 year old who watch to watch it. We assumed it was somewhat
family friendly (PG or so).
Thanks!

You saw the one and only example.

This was back when pay TV seemed to have a requirement of one full frontal
nude scene per show... I guess the SG-1 producers were just demonstrating
that their concept could support sex as needed.

Fortunately, it was not needed.