Love the last pic.... especially how the one on the right has some girl fur peeping over the top...a hint of what will be revealed when that loincloth is at last ripped away...removing her last vestige of modesty.
Yes, I agree wholeheartedly. The prisoner to be crucified should be stark naked throughout the entire ordeal so that his or her body can be displayed as obscenely as possible. The public should not be deprived of the pleasure of gawking at the sexual organs, breasts and anus and the prisoner afforded not even a shred of modesty in the journey to eventually being spread and hung upon the cross.I don't like loincloths!
I believe that for more humiliation, the crucified future must be completely naked for all of his ordeal from his condemnation then his flogging, his "via crucis" and his crucifixion.
I think they're a nice aesthetic to not being completely naked and having a flowing white cloth being the only covering. It's not about practicality but artistic appeal.Loincloths are erotic when they are skimpy or as in Christ's case miraculously just about holding up, but I doubt they hardly existed on crucified victims. Possibly in bog-standard crucifixions, i.e. those done hastily or with large numbers to be executed, victims were quite likely roped up to make-shift crosses with what they were wearing. However with showcase executions where humiliation was part of the punishment (to add to the deterrent factor) victims would have been stripped completely naked. What is the point of removing clothing but leaving something like a loincloth to retain the victim's dignity? The idea of that sort of kindness or consideration on behalf of the laughing semi-drunk execution squad is ridiculous.
Yes I agree about the aesthetic, skimpy coverings are very titillating maybe just because of the anticipation that they will be ripped away at some time very soon.I think they're a nice aesthetic to not being completely naked and having a flowing white cloth being the only covering. It's not about practicality but artistic appeal.
For me now that I’m actually thinking about it it: it provides some sense of elegance with the more flowey Christ like ones. It’s a nice contrast I think with the white and then the darn cross and pain and suffering.Yes I agree about the aesthetic, skimpy coverings are very titillating maybe just because of the anticipation that they will be ripped away at some time very soon.
For me an ideal would be that during the parade through the streets bearing the cross or the crossbeam the victims would be wearing skimpy rags or loincloths that tantalisingly revealed glimpses of what lay beneath, feeble covering to hardly protect the skin from the constant goading with whips all the way. Once at the crucifixion site these coverings would be torn off so that the full nakedness could be seen by all once the cross was raised up. Best of both world!