Last night I watched an episode of Naked Attraction; the new dating show on Channel 4 where people choose a date purely on physical attributes.
For anyone outside of the UK, or if you haven’t seen it, a chooser stands in the studio faced with 6 coloured boxes, each containing a completely naked person. The shutter on the box lifts up in stages, revealing first the person’s bottom half, then mid section, then head. At each stage, the chooser must eliminate one naked person and give their reasons.
Let me start by saying I’m not a prude in anyway. I don’t find nakedness offensive or embarrassing, I don’t turn over the TV when a sex scene is on and I’ve sunbathed on a nudist beach (tip, it’s not fun when things start to burn). But I just find this programme completely unnecessary and gratuitous.
Sure, it’s delivered in a “this is a social experiment and aren’t we all great for pushing the boundaries and being cool with nakedness” manner. They throw in scientific facts, like what it might mean if someone has a toe fetish (bleugh). But, in truth, it’s just a headline grabbing cheap titivation show. And I can’t imagine for one minute why anyone would choose to go on it!
As I said, nakedness is fine. It’s how we all come into the world. But in the days of catch up TV, and the internet, why would the average Joe want their bits immortalised forever more? Think it’s bad when prospective employers search Facebook profiles and Google? Imagine knowing your new boss has probably seen your short and curlies before they’ve even interviewed you?
I just don’t like how purely appearance based this show is. I mean, we’re all guilty of judging people on looks. You fancy someone or you don’t. But this is going one step further. This is looking at men and rejecting them because of a hint of ginger pubic hair. This is eliminating women because their boobs aren’t quite big enough.
A guy on yesterday’s programme was looking at the women’s bits closely and making comments about their neatness. “That one’s all very tightly packed” was one observation. I had a pang of “mine doesn’t look like that!” And if I’m thinking that, then how many other (younger and more impressionable) people are doubting themselves too?
The female chooser, an attractive women with two children (whhhhhyyyy do that to your kids?) stated “it’s like Christmas – all these men in boxes. I’ve never been faced with 6 penises before”. I’m sorry but peens just aren’t attractive. They’re not pretty. It’s what they stand for (oo-er) that’s the good bit. But when they’re just there, well, they’re just there!
Most of the contestants, both men and women had no pubic hair. I know that’s a preference of many people, but I don’t think the percentage on the show is representative of real life. One woman with a Brazilian was judged as trying to show her maturity by still having some hair. Realllly? Who knew?! (heavy doses of sarcasm). My point there, is this bringing unrealistic expectations to young people growing up? After all, this show is the kind of voyeuristic crap kids will be watching and then switching over the minute their parents walk in. Is it teaching people that what’s underneath your clothes is more important than what’s in your head or heart?
Negative comments on floppy foreskins, big nipples and hairy chests – all of which are completely natural – don’t exactly promote body confidence in someone who might have one (or all!) of these attributes!
Maybe I’m being too deep (ahem). Maybe it’s good that nudity is being normalised? I just think there are better ways of doing it than inviting strangers to ogle each other.
The one redeeming feature is presenter Anna Richardson, who I’ve always loved on TV. She’s smart, she’s spunky, she’s attractive and funny. And, as she rightly pointed out, as someone who’s swung both ways who better to stand in a room full of naked johnsons (a willy word I hadn’t heard before!) and vaginas!
You can’t really argue with that!
Have you seen it? What do you think? Am I being a boring old maid??!!
Thanks, as always, for reading! x