We're Talking Olympic-Sized...

or A Short Rant on the Difference Between Male and Female Nudity in Popular Film

Recent happening...

(Backstory- I was out of town for the weekend.  My parents went to see Up on Saturday night.)

Me:  Hey, what'd you do Saturday night?

My younger, 17-year-old brother:  Eh, I went out with Ross.  Why?

Me:  Oh, I was just wondering if you went to see that movie with Mom and Dad.

Brother:  Hell no.  That would be so uncomfortable watching that movie with them.  There's so much male nudity in it!

Me:  (Jaw drops.  Silence.  15 seconds pass as I try to figure out what exactly the title "up" is in reference to.)

Brother:  Why are you looking at me like that?  Oh, you mean Up!  I thought you meant The Hangover!

(All heart rates return to normal.)

Well, I saw The Hangover recently, and my brother's right- there was a lot of male nudity.  However, these days, that still means not a whole lot.  It seems like you can't get through a movie without seeing a topless woman, but male nudity is hard to come by (no pun intended).

Of course, shirtless guys abound in films...I'm looking at you, Matthew McConaughey.   But, there's a difference between a topless man and a topless woman, and revealed breasts still count as nudity.  

Now I'm going to use a fruit metaphor, so stick with me.  It's like comparing apples and oranges...or rather berries and melons.  It doesn't really matter when it comes to the fruit salad of nudity.

Don't get me wrong, I really have no desire to see every male actor's business in every movie, but I do applaud The Hangover for evening out the male-female nudity ratio.  Because if the nation's cinematic endeavors are going to take an express train to the hellfires of sin, swinging a sword (okay, that pun was intended) at any semblance of decency, I'd like that train to be an equal-opportunity system of transportation.