For some reason, women who star on reality TV shows suddenly become candidates for posing nude – or next to it – for popular magazines and even movies.
Kim Cauldwell, a contestant and good friend of mine on Season 2 of “American Idol” was asked to pose in her underwear for Maxim magazine. One day, a crew member who was on tour with us came up to me and asked if I would ever consider posing for Playboy. My answer was an emphatic no.
“Even for a million dollars?” He asked. “You really wouldn’t, even if you would get one million dollars?”
I stuck with my first answer and told him that it was something I personally would never consider. Period.
I’ve stayed in touch with several people from the show since then, and I have always thought of the host of the show, Ryan Seacrest, as somewhat of a big brother. So I was sort of shocked to hear that Julianne Hough, former “Dancing With the Stars” pro champ and now successful country artist – and soon to be actress – who is roughly my same age was dating him. But more shocking than the relationship between Seacrest and Hough was a comment she made to FOX news about appearing in the new movie “Burlesque”:
“I think there is really big difference between burlesque and stripping. There is that line of sensual … and then there’s sexual. Nudity isn’t something I will do right now, but things change and you never know.”
First, sensual and sexual seem to be mean the same thing to me. I know some people think there are different levels of appropriateness when it comes to dancing or photo shoots, but to me, if that’s the message you’re trying to send, sex is sex.
I was disappointed to hear that it was something she would consider doing. I think Julianne is a beautiful, extremely talented young woman and that posing nude or appearing nude in a movie would only bring her disappointment and regret. It’s something so permanent – she could never take that back.
Is there ever an argument for “tasteful” nude scenes or photos? If so, where should the line be drawn?