EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Tree Huggers: 15 Women Take It Off for the Environment
McClatchy Newspapers reporting:
KEY WEST, Fla. - When California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said the green movement needed to get sexier, this may not have been what he had in mind:
Fifteen mature environmental activists -- age 44 to 78 -- took off their clothes for a fund-raising 2010 calendar called Women Sustaining the Earth.
"It took a while to get used to the idea,'' said 74-year-old Shirley Freeman, a former mayor and commissioner of Monroe County. ``I've always tried to present myself as professional and with good judgment. But this is a different side of me I really never have explored. And, it's for a good cause.''
The original 500 calendars have been sold -- raising $8,000 for the "community garden'' fund of the nonprofit organization Green Living & Energy Education. But organizers are willing to print more if there's a demand.
Erika Biddle came up with the calendar idea after she heard Schwarzenneger's comment on the radio and watched the 2003 true-life movie Calendar Girls, in which older British women posed nude, or nearly nude, for a calendar to raise money for leukemia research.
Since then, calendars featuring local people to raise money for local causes have become popular. Among them, 18 librarians with tattoos from Texas showed off their inked bodies in sexy poses for disaster relief of damaged libraries.
"When I saw the movie, I thought: 'Why don't we do it?,' '' said Biddle, 63, who hosts the Keys radio show ECOcentric View.
For the calendar, Biddle began recruiting women 40 or older in honor of Earth Day's upcoming 40th birthday in April.
"Do you have the right number?'' Amy Culver said she asked when she got Biddle's call.
"But then I thought about it,'' said Culver, 44, who works on environmental issues in Key West and Africa. "So many young girls perceive the perfect size to be 0, 2 or 4. This is a golden opportunity to be celebrating natural beauty without face-lifts and everything else.''
Culver posed under a waterfall wearing a white shirt. Freeman posed in the moonlight at the Key West Tropical Forest & Botanical Garden's pond, wearing strategically placed shimmering gold lamé fabric. All the women in the calendar chose how natural to get, depending on comfort levels.
The calendar was shot at several natural settings around the Lower Keys, including Nancy Forrester's Secret Garden, the Key West Garden Club at West Martello Tower and Geiger Key.
Biddle said local renowned photographers Sheelman, Richard Watherwax, Lynne Bentley-Kemp and Carol Tedesco brought the ageless beauty of the women to life.
Tedesco knew just what to bring to ease the nerves: champagne.
"The Dutch courage really helped,'' said Rosi Ware, Miss July. Ware, 54, is a communications executive and avid gardener who once was a consultant for Robert Redford.
Garden Hotel executive Alicia Metzler, 74, who posed for the cover shot with exposed breasts, said: ``I like doing things I've never done before. And I've never taken my clothes off for something like this, although I did win a pole dance when I was 50.''
Each month represented a different element of nature. Miss August, Roberta DePiero, posed on a rooftop to represent wind. Her month's quote, by the late actress Lillian Russell: ``Let the clean air blow the cobwebs from your body. Air is medicine.''
Freeman, Miss February, said the quote by author and social critic Wendell Berry that goes with her photograph fits her perfectly: ``Whether we and our politicians know it or not, Nature is party to all our deals and decisions, and she has more votes, a longer memory, and a sterner sense of justice than we do.''
Biddle and Lucy Carleton, 62, a recycling groundbreaker, posed nude on each side of a tree. Biddle laughed when she recited the quote for November that didn't make the calendar: "Don't just hug a tree, make out with it.''
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
76 Comments so far
Show AllAre we gonna have to start logging into an Age Verification page for Common Dreams? This is the second article about naked people in two days.
Hey, when the emperor's got no clothes, the people can't help but follow (birthday) suit!
I might understand an Age Verification for all the blood and gore in articles on CD, but for this? I don't think so. I think these women are fabulous. Those two on the tree are 62 and 63? Can I get a phone #?
Well, I was being completely facetious with my comments.
But I agree with you. These two women are incredibly sexy. And I'm just over half their age!
They are celebrating life on all levels.
I'm still with you!! "incredibly sexy"
Is there a website we can order a calendar from?
Raydelcamino, apparently the first run has been sold out. But here's info to encourage them to do a second printing:
"All 500 copies of the Women Sustaining the Earth 2010 calendar have been sold out. However, there will be a reprint if the demand is large enough. Send your reprint request to Erika at erika.b@earthlink.com or call (305) 295-0153."
-- Via Celebgalz, "Women Sustaining the Earth Calendar 2010."
http://celebgalz.com/women-sustaining-the-earth-women-sustaining-the-earth-2010-photo/
My jokes aside . . . I think this is awesome.
I'm with you!!
Totally awesome!!!!!
Good grief. I don't know what is more stupid, PETA's porn campaign disguised as helping animals, or this. If women want to devalue both other women and the environment, or animal rights, by participating in porn, let them pose for the magazines and get paid big time -- and then donate the money to the cause they're pretending to support.
Good grief. I don't know what is more stupid, the fear and demonisation of sex and the physical body, or the attempt to force your fear onto other people.
I'm not sure you quite appreciate how committed these women must be to do something like this. I couldn't do it for anything less than the immediate salvation of life, and even then I might funk the job because of how aversive the very idea is.
They made a huge sacrifice, and it's not porn. More like Lady Godiva.
You had better take another look at the picture of those ladies my friend. They are beautiful and loving. I think they are making their point very well. Thats not porn.
Aside from which, when did the female body become porn, especially more mature women? I think they are great and they are doing something to raise peoples thoughts about whats important to them. Whats wrong with a woman being sexy in any case?
Read again some of the comments of the women as to why they did it -- reliving being a pole dancer, for example. Consider the African woman (sorry I don't know her name) who is attempting to protect trees in Africa because the indigenous people know they are sacred. What in this commercial enterprise is likely to make people aware that trees are sacred, or likely to commit to learning more about the environment? What pisses me off is that events like this are totally about the women drawing attention to themselves in a way that makes the enviornmental movement look silly, at a time when it desperately needs to be taken seriously.
And if you doubt that there's any relation to porn, read some of the other comments: "scratch and sniff," "where are the pictures," etc. Women's bodies are intriniscally beautiful, as are men's, as are the bodies of animals, trees, and everything else alive. Women wanting to pose nude "while they've got a chance," as one of the other women suggested, has nothing to do with any of that. In our society, pictures of naked women are about porn, and the women's comments make it clear they're well aware of that.
Yes of course. You will define for people what is acceptable beauty.
Challenging stereotypical advertisements wrapped in shallow justifications for one's tepid exhibitionists exploits for profit isn't defining what is an acceptable idea on beauty.
Challenging such events is better referred to as colloquially calling, bullsh-it.
dciconoclast December 5th, 2009 6:34 pm, you reveal much more about yourself than you realize. The women in this calendar are doing nothing that qualifies as 'porn' -- there are no sexual acts performed -- they are just posing nude. Your thinking represents a narrow perverse prudery wherein you condemn that which arouses you, blaming the object for your 'guilty' uncomfortable feelings rather than examining your own mind. It's similar to the shoe fetishist who gets excited by a Thom McAn catalog -- most people don't see a shoe catalog that way, but to the fetishist, it's 'porn.' Should we ban shoe catalogs on that basis?
That said, even if these nude pictures of women did arouse you, so what? Or do you want to return to the mentally-unhealthy hypocrisy and repression of the Victorian Age?
I agree with you. But I'd add one thing. The least that these same women could do is put on some hemp clothing and raise awareness of the history of our environmental destruction, most of it related to the ban on industrial hemp that started in 1937 and continues to this day. Without the ban on hemp, the timber and tree paper lobbyists would have lost the people's support because people would have stuck to hemp paper and improved on that technology. In fact, the technology to improve hemp paper was being worked out but those GDMFing timber nazis and the vested corporate interests ruined everything and FDR ruined his otherwise great legacy by signing on to this and allowing Corporate America to wreck the environment.
I like the way they look now Max! Sorry!! Aside from that, my wife thinks what they are doing is great and I NEVER disagree with her!
Ha ha! Now that's an endorsement! : )
Somehow my reply was lost in the great unknown...believe me it was brilliant! However, this is all I remember.
The lady that mentioned that she won a pole dance at 50 and the others that made comments were all humor I thought. And most people use humor to hide their fears and trepadations. They probably felt uneasy not knowing how their idea would be received. I don't believe they are doing it to draw attention to tthemselves...look again and I doubt they lack attention. And the enviornmental movement needs little help in occasionally looking silly.
Sexy...yes. Porn?, I just don't see it. Nude women in pictures, drawings and paintings aren't porn. The Venus de Milo isn't porn.
Trees aren't sacred, they are just needed and shouldn't be cut or damaged without real cause.
I find both these ladies extremely attractive, far more so than any picture of an 18-25 year old that pornographers use and I'm proud for them that they still "have it" and are willing to do this to bring attention to what they value.
I believe their action will be beneficial, you apparently don't, so we'll disagree and see what happens. The odds are with us.....one of us is right!
Why so uptight about the human body and sexuality. I can not think of many more creative, charming ways to draw attention to the very serious problem of environmental disaster that could threaten our children and their children.
If anything aside from the environmental aspect is achieved, it's showing that women of any age can be sexy, and not just the skinny, silicone-boobed mutants presented by Hollywood and the fashion industry as womanly 'perfection.' That corporate 'you can never be too rich or too thin' mentality has been destructive to the mental and physical health of women young and old for too long. It's time we called BS on their phony and unrealistic view of sexuality and femininity. It's all based on the corporate 'use them, abuse them and get rid of them' philosophy they've been practicing on the US work force in general. (Margaret Cho has written some excellent pieces on how her producers tried to force her to lose weight and be someone she isn't for her TV sitcom, "All-American Girl.")
Speaking as a man, I prefer a Rubenesque woman who looks like a full-grown woman over one of those boring artifically-enhanced drones any day of the week, and they make much better partners: older, real women have more on their minds, and consequently more to talk about, than the fake 'beauty queens' like Carrie Prejean.
dciconoclast, lighten up. It's a creative idea worth looking at. It may help save the planet.
Let me guess. Your ancestors lived in Salem Village.
Be careful! This kind of hyper-clenching may actually bend your rod!
· Yr Obd't Servant
where are the pictures?
I think there is a disconnect between the image and the intent expressed in this article. If, indeed, these women are expressing imagery to identify their desire to hug/make out with trees (intimate connection to creation, life, death, rebirth)., ... and to challenge the restrictive imagery of (nature's and natural) beauty manifested in a size 2-4 dress, while overtly attempting to bridge larger connections to environment, then the viewer should witness an impressive display of the ego of these women absent of the lens.
Instead, the images are for the viewer's entertainment, and are grotesque not because of the age and proportions of the women, but because of the highly commercial nature of their enterprise at a time when a expression of the ego's intricate connection to environment should profoundly dominate our attention. Furthermore challenging social constructs limiting the idea of beauty.
The subtitle should read, "Witness the Commercial Enterprise of the Nude Environmentalist. On Sale Now"
(Although, Cammy Clark's "take it off" header is equally revealing even if overtly unintentional.)
Get a life.
Yes, in a denatured sort of way there is relevance to your point.
I represent the Super-ego, you represent the Id. Good luck with acquiring a phone number, Mr C.
You got it right. It's exploitation of nature disguised as something high-minded. A concept worthy of Exploiter in Chief Obama.
I can't speak toward your connection to Mr Chief, but indeed I would say we have plenty in common on the specific thread at hand. Wrapping exploitation of subject in the veil of high-art or high-mindedness certainly isn't new.
Often times we fools find ourselves mistaking the impulse for the emotion. Should we give latitude to our impulsive brothers? But I digress slightly.... Perhaps one day there will be an honest discussion about our need to define ourselves as we are intrinsically connected to earth, and how that represents ourselves in our anthropomorphic culture. I always thought Ana Mendieta really banked shot that discourse, but you know, "T&A rulz, duuuuude".... anyway, I salute you for intelligently expressing your dissent. And thank you for the expression of solidarity on the subject.
let's strive for higher ground even if it requires speaking in tongues, eh? c-ya later, you gar-dang iconoclast.
Just shut up, mr ego.
You're such a clever troll.
You and MichaelC should exchange telephone numbers.
Beautiful.
In all the ways.
Congratulations.
A sublime and eye catching protest that is more efective than a street corner group with signs and the ladies, they are ladies,deserve all the praise and honor they get.The puritan ethic is alive and well here and ever so tiresome.It seems to be always guys;wonder why?Tony
These gals live in Key West?
Here's an idea more effective than stripping for a nature calendar:
move
Key West will be underwater in 20 years, tops.
move
I believe that this is an incredibly beautiful manifestation on so many levels. Although I can appreciate the concerns some have expressed about commercialism, the idea behind this movement is ART (the human body with nature), devotion, bravery, and naturalism. There is absolutely NOTHING pornographic about what these people are doing whatsoever, and I feel that to say so shows a real lack of appreciation for the devotion that these individuals have for what they believe in, as well as a lack of artistic appreciation for the human body.
Whether or not what these pictures have become commercialized for a cause... and whether or not you feel that this is the "best" method of raising awareness, does not mean that it is not a valid and a CREATIVE method of raising awareness.
My hat goes off to all of the people involved in this movement for the creative devotion they have, and for the incredible beauty of this art on a very deep level.
I think you're missing the point that there's no need to include nudity for the pictures to be beautiful. Why the nudity? Because sex sells. So it's not about commitment, bravery (what a hoot), or art -- it's about sex sells. I actually think it's fine if the ladies wanted to show some skin just because they've always wanted to -- but no one, the maker of the calendars or the ladies, should pretend to some noble goal of it being about preserving nature. How many people noticed the tree in looking at this picture? The point of the calendar is the women's nudity, as are the other calendars for "causes" the article mentions were equally inspired by that font of wisdom, Arnold Schwarzenegger. Let's just separate out this is really about, okay? Don't we have enough phoniness in our culture already, with everyone wanting to be a star on "talent" shows, our president making high-faluting arguments about killing children, and on and on? No wonder no one can tell what's real any more. There's no commitment to nature or noble sacrifice of some sort in what these women are doing -- they're fulfilling a personal goal of being seen before a national audience naked. Good for them if it's what they want, but don't elevate it to art or courage on behalf of nature.
Look at the picture of Wendell Berry on the same page. That's a face of beauty, and damn, I think he's wearing clothes. Though of course, if only he'd ever thought to publish a magazine of naked women hugging trees, maybe he could have done some good for the environmental movement.
We're not missing anything. It's supposed to represent a meaning. That meaning, "to me", is to catch the eye's for the purpose of making a point. Sex has absolutely nothing to do with it. Whatever works, then use it. Our stop sign's are RED, with WHITE lettering & sometimes glitter is used. Whatever works..
Nudity, in the correct sence, "to me", isn't offending, if used correctly. If the nude woman was oh say 100 years old, I believe the same outcome would be accomplished. We would see it & being a mature, highly educated Lad as myself, as a way to bring our attention to the story. Don't get me wrong, I'm a devout Christain, & I fear God greatly "if" I do not follow in the correct way. I believe, to put down this woman in any way would be wrong, I would be judging her, & far be it for me to do that. Frankly, it was an enlightenment to me to see what wonderful artwork our God can do. Excelsor!
Thoughtful comment, thanks. I understand your point, except that I would add that it really just draws attention primarily to the women, rather than to the cause.
"Let's just separate out this is really about, okay?"
okay:
"The original 500 calendars have been sold -- raising $8,000 for the "community garden'' fund of the nonprofit organization Green Living & Energy Education. But organizers are willing to print more if there's a demand."
I'm having trouble finding the origin of all the confusion.
Ummm, unfortunately dciconoclast, I'm think YOU'RE missing the point. The human body in its natural state photographed in a natural setting is beautiful. It has nothing to do with sex, unless you insist on making it about sex. Too bad the Puritans are still alive and kicking in the 21st century.
The nonsense about Puritanism that attempts to change a discussion from the "value" of this kind of campaign to personal attacks on other posters says a lot about the need of those writers to force other people to live and think their way. Maybe they're afraid to examine their own belief systems.
People are saying that your position is unhealthy and you should review it. How would you have them put it?
@ dciconoclast December 6th, 2009 3:28 pm: Here's my 'belief system': You are free to think and say whatever you want and I would never try to infringe on that. I was merely giving you the 'psychology 101' rundown on those who have a problem with the unclothed female body in this context, and then ascribe the derogatory term 'porn' to innocent examples of nudity. I am not trying to force you to think or live my way, nor any particular way; just bringing up some ideas for why you might think the way you do. (I could be wrong, of course.) If you don't like these pictures of nude women, don't look at them, but also don't condemn them as 'porn' because some might construe that as you trying to force others to think your way.
Yes, but did he HAVE to wear clothes to do this shot?
Diconoclast -
I can see your point, as people are apparently so over-focused on sex that the issue of nude art has become synonymous with pornography... the point that I was trying to make could is actually along the same lines as yours insofar as I also share your appreciation of the issue of non-exploitation of the human body.
I must say that I have a fellow mature activist friend who made the decision to do something of this nature, and I would hope that by telling you this, you could try to understand and respect her decision, which was not an easy decision to make for her either ... this decision involving a great deal of thoughtful consideration from all angles... including the angle of the judgmental perspectives that were sure to come (considering that we both live in a relatively conservative area)... conflicting with her own perspective, which involved a appreciation of diverse forms of art and a strong belief in free speech ... as well as the consideration also of the incredible impact that taking an action like this could have on an issue that she cared about incredibly deeply (as she actually wrote to some of her friends to explain the decision), which, in my opinion, exhibited a fear-free (ie: brave) decision, especially considering that she would not automatically be inclined to get involved in something of this nature (the "bravery" that I speak of was also highlighted as well due to to the fact that one of the main themes in that expression was to highlight the vulnerability of human beings to war). At any rate, by the way, the original idea (in her case) sprouted not from "corporate-magazine-producers-with-sexually-oriented perspectives of an exploitative nature", but rather by a group of radical "feminist" activists and posers (both male & female) who all had a strong appreciation of the ideals of art and free-speech.
I can appreciate the artistic critique you have given, by the way (I would likely not personally go down this type of avenue to raise awareness of causes that I care about and this has been further reinforced by hearing the perspectives you have expressed)... nevertheless, regardless of your artistic critique, I would hope that you could avoid getting stuck in a pattern of judging the perspective of what may have been going through the minds of these individuals when they made the decision to do this, simply due to the fact that sex has become over-commercialized and people are getting exploited over this... I am with you on the commercialization issue - however, I choose not to feed into the mindset that is causing the problem (but rather to put my energy and hopes into manifesting things in a different direction).
What a welcome change from our sincere but tired old street corner protests with the same 200 people who always come! Let everyone do whatever they do best to try to have a better world, even if it is being 63 and still looking good without clothes.
Joe