Public Nudity acceptable or not?

[madurobob]

What innocence is being lost by seeing a naked person who is not behaving in a sexual way? In fact, wouldn't it be a novelty and a benefit for children to see that naked does not mean sexual?

That's the way I see it. Innocence is more quickly lost when kids see adults taking pains to cover specific parts of their bodies, then being titillated by someone exposing some small piece that was once covered. That's how society teaches young kids that naked = sexual. That's how society teaches young children that parts of their bodies - parts everyone has - are naughty. I don't think this is a good thing.

 

[Cainkane1]

I wasn't referring to the media aimed at adults sexualising children, but the products, adverts and TV shows aimed directly at them.



What innocence is being lost by seeing a naked person who is not behaving in a sexual way? In fact, wouldn't it be a novelty and a benefit for children to see that naked does not mean sexual?

You're probably right. I admit I have no effective arguments against what you're saying. If I am in error its only because I want to protect children from harm at any cost.

 

[Damien Evans]

Hi everyone,

I'm still new here so I believe I'm unable to post links.

I recently saw a video where a man was standing around in the nip and is approached by a couple of cops and told to re-robe, after he refuses the police begin to get physical and end up tasing (sp?... tasering???) the chap.

I have always considered a law demanding you wear cloths to be faintly ridiculous, so to see it enforced with such brutality was a little shocking, more surprising though were several of the comments under the video, which often expressed support for the actions taken by the police and denouncing the man as a trouble maker who had it coming.

I was wondering what the general feeling is on this board about the law against indecent exposure. Do you think it would be better to have no law (like Barcelona) or something like the Netherlands where it is allowed in certain areas and is really only considered indecent if someone complains. I would be especially interested to hear from anyone who likes the law the way it is (in the UK/USA).

Kind regards,

Sam



As I said I can't post links, If you want to find the video just type "naked man tasered" into google (I accept no responsibility for what you may end up watching) . The comments I referred to in my post were from boingboing.

We have plenty of clothes optional beaches here. I have no problem with it at the beach, but I probably would if it was in the CBD. Context is everything.

 

[Salerio]

A man is threatened with spending his life in prison for walking around naked in the UK?

What a sad, pathetic country I inhabit.

Technically it's not for walking around naked in the UK. He's been happily walking around England for years, including going shopping, into restaurant, pubs etc and because there is no law against being naked in public the police leave him alone. I think he was arrested twice and the police couldn't find anything to charge him with so left him alone after that.

The trouble came in Scotland and he's not in jail for for being naked he's in jail for contempt of court when a judge ordered him to not go around naked. He refuses to purge the contempt by wearing clothes. Every time he's kicked out of jail the police are waiting round the corner to re-arrest him.

Frankly it's a waste of time and money and judges and the police should have better things to worry about. He's done a couple of walks from Lands End to John O Groats with no incidents at all. His girlfriend gave in and apologized to the court or she'd still be locked up as well.

 

[Idiot Wind]

The public deification/urination laws would not have to be changed.

That's a relief, I always hate it when people ascend to a higher level of consciousness out in the open and then start throwing lightning bolts at the infidels... Especially when they're also naked.

 

[Mark6]

No, but I would be fully clothed. Just because people may be allowed to be naked does not mean that most would actually choose to do so.

Reminds me of a this definition of a nudist: "Someone who always knows exactly why he is wearing clothes"

 

[Two Toed Sloth]

That's a relief, I always hate it when people ascend to a higher level of consciousness out in the open and then start throwing lightning bolts at the infidels... Especially when they're also naked.

Whoops... I meant defecation, however I still think there should be laws about deification (clothed or not).

 

[quarky]

I like nudity.

Except when I trip over my penis. That can be embare-assing.

 

[Naddig74]

Having finally bothered to hunt out the videos in question (there are several along similar lines) it seems to me that the guys got tased not because they were naked but because they were resisting arrest, disturbing the peace etc. and that in every case they appear to be in the throws of some kind of breakdown.

I don't think they were naked because they prefer to be that way...I think they were naked because they've lost the plot.

 

[Mark6]

I don't think they were naked because they prefer to be that way...I think they were naked because they've lost the plot.

They lost the part of the script which tells what clothes to wear??

Or is this some Britishism I am not aware of?

 

[Naddig74]

They lost the part of the script which tells what clothes to wear??

Or is this some Britishism I am not aware of?

Yes sorry, it means, 'gone ◊◊◊◊◊◊* crazy.'

 

[Dave Rogers]

If everyone walked around au starkaire, then what would all the strippers. porn stars, and nudie mag publishers do for a living?

If anyone could sing any time they liked, what would musicians do for a living? Most of the time we pay people to do things because they're better at it than other people, not because what they do is forbidden to other people.

Dave

 

[Mark6]

If anyone could sing any time they liked, what would musicians do for a living? Most of the time we pay people to do things because they're better at it than other people, not because what they do is forbidden to other people.

Not always. For example, it is illegal for someone without medical license to practice medicine...

OMG, it makes sense now! Anti-nudity laws exist because of porn lobby!

 

[Blue Mountain]

OMG, it makes sense now! Anti-nudity laws exist because of porn lobby!

Sounds like you have the start of a nice little CT there

Like most other posters here, I think North Americans should be less appalled at seeing the occasional naked person in public, but it shouldn't be a free-for-all either. Except I'm not sure where to draw the line, nor what criteria should be used for doing so.

It's sad that here in Manitoba there is only one public beach where nudity is acceptable, in a province that has the same land area as Great Britain and Ireland combined.

I disagree somewhat with the reasons a couple of posters have given about being uneasy with nude shoppers in supermarkets. After all, people touch produce with their hands—and who knows where those have been?

 

[Two Toed Sloth]

Not always. For example, it is illegal for someone without medical license to practice medicine...

OMG, it makes sense now! Anti-nudity laws exist because of porn lobby!

This thread should now be moved to conspiracy theories

 

[Nosi]

Pardon me for being old fashioned but I believe children should go through a long stage of sexual innocence. They should be aware of certain differences in sexes and I don't believe that their natural curiousities should be punished but to have an adult deliberately display their private areas so that children can see them is wrong to me.

Please tell me why you think I'm wrong.

When I was very young I saw both Mom & Dad nude. I knew they were different from each other, but I also knew males and females of all species were different from one another. (We had quite a few pets.) Of course, how humans made little humans and the particulars about that mystery didn't come clear until MUCH later. Nudity and gender difference doesn't go hand in hand with sex education specifics.

 

[TraneWreck]

A new department shall be founded. I will, of course, be in charge.

I will sacrifice my career to serve the public and determine which young women will be required by law to bare their breasts between the months of May and August.

 

[Segnosaur]

All those who are happy for people to go around naked, try taking the tube train in london during peak working hours, where you will most likely have to spend the trip with a man's bare penis pressed up against your bottom.

No, but I would be fully clothed. Just because people may be allowed to be naked does not mean that most would actually choose to do so.

Ummm... without being too gross, have you ever thought of the problems of, well, leakage? Granted, you might be clothed so you wouldn't have direct contact, but consider the cleanliness of any naked guy bumping into you on the subway. Any, ahem, fluids hanging around since the last time he 'cleaned' would still be around, and that would also get on your 'fully clothed' bottom.

And frankly, I'd rather not have to clean my clothes of other people's bodily fluids.

(Not that I'm saying everyone will be that way, but I'm sure there will be at least a few nudists who don't bath regularly, or who don't quite use the bathroom properly.)

 

[RhodyDave]

Pardon me for being old fashioned but I believe children should go through a long stage of sexual innocence. They should be aware of certain differences in sexes and I don't believe that their natural curiousities should be punished but to have an adult deliberately display their private areas so that children can see them is wrong to me.

Please tell me why you think I'm wrong.

I respect your feelings on this, but here's why I think you're wrong. The human body is not just a sexual object. In many cultures, nudity is quite common among family members (Japan, Finland, as well as almost every "primitive" culture) and for good reason - we all possess the same equipment (gender specific), and the sexuality of the body has nothing to do with the general day to day functions that we all share, adults and children included.

A child seeing a penis, vagina, or breasts would attach no meaning to it other than what an adult tell them it means. As maturity grows, sexuality of course becomes an issue, but sexuality and the nude body are not necessarily synonymous. You can be nude and not sexual - you can be sexual and clothed.

 

[TraneWreck]

I respect your feelings on this, but here's why I think you're wrong. The human body is not just a sexual object. In many cultures, nudity is quite common among family members (Japan, Finland, as well as almost every "primitive" culture) and for good reason - we all possess the same equipment (gender specific), and the sexuality of the body has nothing to do with the general day to day functions that we all share, adults and children included.

A child seeing a penis, vagina, or breasts would attach no meaning to it other than what an adult tell them it means. As maturity grows, sexuality of course becomes an issue, but sexuality and the nude body are not necessarily synonymous. You can be nude and not sexual - you can be sexual and clothed.

We walk around all day with our mouths just out there for everyone to see. I've born witness to many a use of said orifice that I wouldn't want to describe to a 6 year old.