Well, obviously, if women were allowed to run naked, men would revert to being mere beasts!
2007-07-24 16:59:06
·
answer #1
·
answered by Theodore H 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
The last time streaking was in fashion was in the 1970s, when nutters ran naked around soccer fields after or during a match, at least in the U.K. So old hat.
2007-07-24 20:10:21
·
answer #2
·
answered by jenesuispasunnombre 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
You hit the nail on the head with the word "Puritanical." America is still suffering with the weight of an oppressive, sick-minded system of "faith-based" oppression based on the outmoded Puritan ethic that has twisted human expression into a witch hunt for that which those in power (or who want to be in power) claim is "perverse."
Many years ago, numerous state supreme courts passed laws stating, in effect, "Nude is NOT lewd." Unfortunately, too many people, including overzealous cops, choose to ignore that fact due to a form of religious fervor that they feel allows them to make moral and privacy decisions for the rest of us.
For example, did you know that it is, in fact LEGAL to be nude in a U.S. National Park, with certain caveats, mostly that nobody else complains that you're violating their rights to privacy or hampering their view. And yet, even with the law on our side, I have met overreaching park rangers who have told me they'd arrest me anyway, no matter what the laws of the land state in my favor.
Once, in 1993, I was in Washington DC, in front of The White House, covering a Gay Rights rally. There were THOUSANDS of nude people marching (I have the pictures to prove it) right in front of The White House. I asked two mounted Park Rangers why these people were not being arrested for indecent exposure, and their reply to me was, "Most of this area of DC, and all of The Mall, is a National Park. Nudity is legal in national parks. In fact, if you want, you can go over to P Street Beach any weekday and see lots of people nude sunbathing on the lawn at lunch!" Their word reinforced what I'd read years before in a book abourt this very subject: nudity is legal in National Parks, and nude is NOT lewd.
But, look at what just happened in Huntington Beach a week or so ago...
"HUNTINGTON BEACH - The City Council unanimously voted to ban public nudity during its Monday meeting after a brief debate that resulted in striking portions of the proposed ordinance.
The council decided to limit the law to being nude where it is visible from a public area. They deleted regulations on a women breastfeeding an infant older than age 2, and restrictions on wearing a costume or device that simulated nudity.
"I just find it unusual that some of the naturists that are here would oppose what we are trying to do – protect our city and our kids," said Councilman Joe Carchio.
Attending the meeting were 13 speakers, most of which were opposed to the ban and all were clothed. There were also 66 letters from around the world that were sent to the council urging members to vote against the ban.
"There is a lack of reference to a current or future threat to public safety," said Allen Baylis, director of the Naturist Action Committee. "Such laws only serve to erode liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
Huntington Beach Police Chief Kenneth Small proposed the law because state and city law allowed police to arrest someone who was nude only if he or she was displaying behavior indicating sexual gratification.
"I have read the e-mails you (the council) have received and listened closely to the public comments tonight," said Police Chief Kenneth Small. "It is my guess that the overwhelming majority of those people have absolutely no idea what the facts or circumstances were."
Police said they want to be able to keep people from exposing themselves in public after a downtown resident, who is a naturist, frequently was seen naked at his home."
I saw all the various news stories. Essentailly, one or two women said that a man had a habit of standing nude in his front door or in his (fenced) backyard, and that these women felt it was perverted and that children should never have to see a nude human. Several other neighbors stated that the man in question had never done anything lewd or sexual, rather he just stood in the doorway or sat in his backyard.
Only in America. European kids are subject to public nudity in the form of both statuary, imagery, advertising, and by live humans sunbathing in public parks, and they don't seem to be negatively affected in any way.
America really needs to grow up and get over itself.
Reading "Mamabear's" ridiculous diatribe, below, just shows what I'm speaking of. How dare she claim that ALL nudity is solely for sexual gratification. What's next, taking a shower in a wool jumpsuit because nudity in the shower is perverse!?
The only thing sick about nudity is her knee-jerk, terror-fed reaction to it!
2007-07-24 16:42:45
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋
I sincerely believe that you understand neither "neurosis" nor "puritianism", to label public concern at inappropriate behaviour with those terms.
There are limits of decent public exposure. Cross those lines, and a person enters the realm of CRIMINAL SEXUAL ABUSE.
I think you will agree that there should be laws limiting what SEXUAL behaviours are allowed in public. Exposing a woman's breasts, or anyone's groin, for display, is a SEXUAL ACT!
If it is done to someone AGAINST their will, it is SEXUAL BATTERY.
If someone exposes themself to you (or anybody else) against the VIEWER'S will, it is CRIMINAL EXPOSURE.
Breastfeeding is obviously NOT sexy, and can be done discreetly.
If a legally consenting adult wishes to view sexually stimulating "art", there are places for them to go do that: the "art" doesn't have to be placed in the public eye, where unwilling adults and children might be subjected to the material.
There is a time and place for coitus, and for displays of sexuality. The local gas station isn't one of them!
I support laws prohibiting public nudity. The sad part is NEEDING such a law, not making one!
2007-07-24 16:44:08
·
answer #4
·
answered by MamaBear 6
·
0⤊
5⤋