Performing Nude on Campus

I admit that it is hard for us today to get into the Greek cultural mindset because there are so many things in our culture that work against it. From their vantage point, the women of ancient Greece, if they had attended The Dance of Darkness, would have demanded, it's not too strong a word, to see Jonathan completely, and they would have unabashedly looked and made a point of letting Jonathan know that they were looking. Jonathan would have been insulted if they hadn't.

Daily: Dr. Meyer, you do speak in a straightforward manner.

Meyer: I was raised in a Jewish household that didn't mince many words.

Daily: About every subject?

Meyer: Well, on almost everything. We did, however, tend to avoid explicit talk about the appearance of the body. We weren't Puritan about sex, but we didn't, on the whole, much like looking at the body. I was always bringing up inappropriate subjects.

Daily: Like what?

Meyer: I guess it is okay to say that, in Jewish Day School, we learned that circumcision was important, but no one wanted to give details or discuss it in detail. They taught us that it was important, and then they wanted to move on quickly, period. Well, if it was so important, I wanted to see it and to see how being uncircumcised was different. This was beyond bounds of Jewish convention. But I was a rebel. No doubt, I still am. My teacher said, ask your parents. My parents said, ask your teachers. As I did in many matter, I found out myself.

Daily: I am tempted to ask how?

Meyer: Well, I am not tempted to answer. Let's just say that you can learn a lot swimming if you try.

Daily: Okay, back to the topic. Was it all male nudity or was there some female nudity?

Meyer: It was overwhelming male nudity, but there was also significant female nudity. Most female nudity was actually a little different from male nudity. Males were completely nude. Females usually wore aprons that covered their pubic regions. The painting by Dugas, Young Spartans Exercising, which depicts nude Spartan boys exercising with aproned girls, probably has it right. The boys are completely nude, and the girls are partially covered.

Daily: Why the difference?

Meyer: I can only speculate. My guess is that the difference between a nude and not-nude male comes down to a single point, whether his penis is exposed. A woman, even back then, could be nude in varying degrees. She could expose her breasts and cover or uncover her pubic area. She might also cover her front and expose her behind.

Greek society was hierarchical in how it viewed nudity. At the erotic top was male nudity, then complete female nudity, and on down the line. The most dramatic event was the unveiling of the male. I think it is the same today. It was certainly the case in The Dance of Darkness. There were women in this performance who exposed their breasts, but it was the man showing his nakedness that caught all the attention. I don't raise this as a patriarchal thing. No, it has to do with anatomy. When we humans stood up, the female sex organs were hidden between her legs, and the male sex organs were more prominently displayed. It is simply more dramatic, perhaps not more erotic but certainly more visual, to see a naked man. Like it or not, both we and the ancient Greek were into eroticism.

Daily: Eroticism, really?

Meyer: Yes, eroticism. We are, however, much less open about it. The Puritans left their mark on us all. I saw the performance four times. The first as a matter of course, I attend all performances at our school. The second out of professional and scholarly interest. And the third and fourth to observe the audience. I can tell you that every woman in attendance gave Jonathan a very close once over and more than once. She tried to act like she didn't. The men were interested in Jonathan, but were more interested in the women baring their breasts. They also paid attention to watching the women watch.

I fear that I have talked too long. Can we bring Jonathan and Miriam into the discussion?

Daily: Good idea? Miriam, you mentioned that your gaze at Jonathan was one of sensitivity and appreciation and not one of dominance and humiliation. What made the difference?

Goldstein: First, obviously, we were the difference. The stuff on the web is the worse form of objectification. I was never into looking at Jonathan as an object.

Daily: So how did you look at him?

Goldstein: I was obviously looking at his body, but the difference was that I saw a person who was that body. Let's don't dance around. It is hard to look a nude male and not notice his penis. I don't believe women who say they don't notice. At the same time, if that is all you see, then you are missing much that is erotic as well.

I agree with Dr. Meyer, what counts as male nudity is showing the penis. So right off, male nudity has a specific focus. Once you accept that, well, we now have something to talk about. The question is how to broaden it out so that my gaze also sees what is at the margins.

Daily: Anything you want to add here, Jonathan?

Creighton: Not yet. This is all pretty new to me. It's fascinating, but new.

Daily: So, let's pick up your question, Miriam. If everything is focused on the penis, how do you make it sensitive and appreciative?

Goldstein: That is a very good question. First, let's put aside size. If I want to look at a horse, I can go find a horse. Look, I know many women who have quite beautiful breasts that are actually small. There are plenty of buxom women whose breasts aren't that seductive. So, it is more than just size. It is the same with penises, not that I have great experience to draw on.

Jonathan's nakedness was dramatic, vivid, ... even intense. But why? It may be that female breasts are flags in that they aren't the main sexual apparatus. They are attractive and sexually erotic, but they aren't where the main action is once sex is engaged. The penis has sex always inscribed on it. It may or may not be aroused, but even flaccid, you can't completely erase sex. Or at least this is what I argued in a paper I did for Dr. Meyer. Let me say that I wrote this paper after my Saturdays with Jonathan.

If you go today to beaches in Europe, most all women are bare-breasted. Not a few have also removed their bottoms. Many, most actually, have also removed their pubic hair so that you can begin to see at least a suggestion of their sex. The play, Equus, has been mentioned before, and Jill, one of the main female characters, performed bare. Her character from the movie made a decade ago, sported a full bush. What's going on? I am not sure but perhaps it is an attempt by women to inscribe sex their nude bodies in a more graphic way.

Let me get back to the point. Sensitivity and appreciation. This may seem a bit farfetched The best sources for my paper were Thomas Scalan's Eros and Greek Athletics and Paul Ludwig's Eros and Polis. In both these books, male nudity expressed character as well as eroticism. This is what a man revealed when he took off his clothes. He became like a god in that he needed to hide nothing. What a man risked that a god didn't was losing his composure. Desire, as in eros, indicates a need. Gods don't have needs because they are self-sufficient. To speak bluntly, an erection was a matter of will for the gods; they simply willed an erection. As I suspect Jonathan can attest, arousal is a non-voluntary response for mortals men. So for a Greek man, remaining flaccid in public was important, and they thought it took discipline.

Daily: Jonathan, as has been the buzz of the campus lately, you didn't remain flaccid.

Creighton: Well, it just proves I am not a god.

Daily: Want to say more?

Creighton: I read Miriam's paper before she submitted it, and I found it sensitive and insightful. It does seem to me—well more than that, since I did put myself out there—I experienced much of what she was talking about. I felt that it took perhaps more courage for me to be nude in this production than some of the women. What you see is what I have. There was no way to hide or camouflage myself.

Daily: Miriam raised the size issue. How did you experience that?

Creighton: I was constantly asking myself: was I big enough or did I seem small? How would women see me? Would they snicker behind my back? These questions were there for me, and I couldn't just ignore them. With Miriam's help, I learned to quiet these voices a little. I didn't shut them up completely, but they are now a little quieter.

Miriam: Let me jump in here because I can speak as a woman. It isn't that size is completely unimportant, and I am speaking visually here. The term I like is substantial. I find men that that are substantial in that way very appealing. Substantial doesn't necessarily mean long or thick or even big. It means ample or generous. Perhaps that is enough.

Meyer: Let me be risqué here. I am older and say a few things that Miriam can't or shouldn't. Perhaps, it will border on being crass, but I think it is very important to raise this issue because it relates to how we women think about our bodies. We worry about our figures far too much. But we won't address this issue if we ignore that men also worry about their penises. Look, large penises aren't the end-all or be-all of sex pleasure. In sex, for a woman, you have to fit a penis in. That can be a problem. Sometimes they don't fit. Sometimes you can't get it in, or if you can, you can't get it fully in. At some point, the whole experience becomes unpleasant. You end up with hand or mouth play, and while that can be fun, it is certainly not as fulfilling. A penis that doesn't fit can make a woman feel inadequate. In the end, nobody wins. Get over it. Men, be glad if you are average. Sometimes average is best.

Let me broaden the issue. In Greek society, a large penis indicated use. Men who exercised had large muscles. Men who used their penises often had big penises. We know today that it is genes and that there is no correlation. Nevertheless, we do entertain subconscious notions that men with large penises are better lovers and have more lovers. Even women who should know better may make this mistake. Let's me ask Miriam if she agrees that some women on our campus have bigger appetites than their places can hold.

Miriam: I would have to say yes. I have been guilty of it myself. I have a friend who went out with a man who, she later discovered one night, was quite well endowed. She said that they went skinny dipping, and when she saw it, she could wait to get him into bed. It didn't go well. He was too large. He wouldn't fit. They tried it again on another night, and then they just called it off. After being with Jonathan, even though we did not have sex, I learned that not everything big is good.

Daily: A friend? Really, a friend?

Goldstein: Alright, alright.

Daily: Anyway, Jonathan, we can't end without hearing from you. You haven't had much to say so far.

Creighton: I don't really have anything to add. It is all very interesting. I think I will definitely take Dr. Meyer's course.

Meyer: May I end with saying that I admire Jonathan for his courage? It was a brave thing to do. And also Miriam for her role. I am not sure that I could have put myself out there like either of you has. Finally, I think it has benefited our school to have this discussion. Not many places would allow this kind of discussion to take place. Finally, I want to encourage Jonathan and Miriam to do it again. I promise to come.

Daily: Thank you to all three of you.