| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Stu_Fox
Forum Member
|
 Posted - 10/26/2004 : 4:03:20 PM
|
Jochanaan
But the activists among us want to expand the context;
I know you do, but do the rest of us - the majority - want this context expanding?
we see illogic and self-contradiction in society's current practices.
Maybe you're right. But if people are content to be as they are, why force them to change? Human beings aren't always motivated by pure logic - if we were then nobody would fall in love, give money to charity or grieve the loss of another.
I realize that this makes you and many uncomfortable; but we're working for a more merciful, consistent and just world.
Why do you think it's OK to make me and others like me uncomfortable? What gives any particular minority the right to inflict discomfort on the majority? You are working for a world that will impose changes that most people don't. It's like trying to impose communism or some religious doctrine on a population by the back door. That's neither a 'merciful' nor a 'just' thing to do and it's also totally unnecessary. Why not accept that, in one respect, you are different to the rest of society in that you like nudity instead of requiring others to change?
Nudists have every right to ask the wider society to make provision for them. But they should not expect society to abandon its existing value system and cultural norms merely because this particular minority considers them to be illogical. If nudists want respect and consideration from the rest of the world, they must first demonstrate respect and consideration for textile norms and sensibilities. Surely you can see that Jochanaan.
Stu
|
Edited by - Stu_Fox on 10/26/2004 4:06:07 PM |
|
Country: United Kingdom
| Posts: 18 |
 |
|
|
DougK
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/26/2004 : 4:21:02 PM
|
Jochanaan says:
Very true! But the activists among us want to expand the context; we see illogic and self-contradiction in society's current practices. I realize that this makes you and many uncomfortable; but we're working for a more merciful, consistent and just world. This, as you know from history, doesn't happen without making some people uncomfortable. Like a T-shirt here says, "Well-behaved women seldom make history." Nor do well-behaved men.
You can do what you want, but I don't see you being very successful. It would be imposing on others in public areas that they pay for-and use-and doesn't meet the balance of fairness.
With the troubles in the world-there are better and more pressing causes.
Stu says:
Nudists have every right to ask the wider society to make provision for them."
Stu, If nudists want respect-they need to treat others with respect. They are asking for something-and there is no obligation to give it.
|
Edited by - DougK on 10/26/2004 4:50:33 PM |
|
Country:
| Posts: 24 |
|
|
|
Bob S.
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/26/2004 : 10:03:14 PM
|
"It's not about breastfeeding which I admit allowances can be made-and a woman can use discretion-and attempting to link caring for a child-with exposing parts considered erogeneous zones without regard for others."
Doug, I simply mentioned a breastfeeding incident where a woman was unashamed to do so in an area with others around. By the way, during a sexual encounter, the entire body becomes stimulated including the lips. So the lips could also be considered an errogenous zone.
"Towards Africa, I have copies of National Geographic..."
I was mentioning a calendar, which usually does not have bare breasts unless sexually. We are talking about something that people will be putting up to see with that picture lasting for a month.
"...they know what is called absolute poverty..."
And you talk to me about dragging baggage from another site. Why would you have brought this up?
"If nudists want respect-they need to treat others with respect."
Now this is something that even stu agrees with nudists with. We, by and far, treat the general society with the utmost respect and are given little in return.
"Why do you think it's OK to make me and others like me uncomfortable?"
Why do you think it is OK to discriminate against women, stu? And yes, no matter how you try to explain it away, it is disctrimination. Women can't show off a part of their body simply because it is bigger and works. Or worse, simply because they are lacking that all-powerful y chromosome.
You would even deny girls beyond the age of 5 that priveledge for what reason? That they are girls? Despite the fact they look just like their boy friends? And to think you can't even use the sexualization aspect for them.
Bob S.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 39 |
|
|
|
DougK
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/26/2004 : 10:38:19 PM
|
Bob,
I know it's a hassle, but go back over my posts-and I recount a woman breast feeding in front of me. I have actually had it happen twice-although I only relate one incident.
Towards Africa, my comment was relevant because if you are so poor you die-you could well be unable to afford to buy clothes.
Bob, you are not owed anything. Society has no obligation to support nudism-thats your hobby-and for you to support yourself.
I have never understood what you want, so please tell me . What would make BobS happy...
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 24 |
|
|
|
Admin
Forum Admin
|
Posted - 10/27/2004 : 12:37:03 AM
|
I'm going to make Bob S. and number of other folks "happy" by making just a few little adjustments here—now Stu and Datona, this won't hurt a bit...
There—that's better. Nice and peaceful, lots of wide open space for intelligent and meaningful discussion. Gone is the constant chatter from our two friends in the UK and Winnipeg.
Once again I owe another big THANKS to the Secret Service at NRO! You guys are good. My Internet tools confirmed the double identities of these two talkative characters. The endless argument irritates me too. They're outta here.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1888 |
|
|
|
nudeisntlewd
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/27/2004 : 11:23:04 AM
|
Thank you for ridding us of this nuisance!
Randy 
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1191 |
|
|
|
FireProf
Forum Member
|
 Posted - 10/27/2004 : 2:51:54 PM
|
Wow.....did I miss something? Did the Administrator just bump Stu and Datona?
If this is true, I wonder why that it took so long for that other board to do what only took this moderator a short time to do.
Thanks to the Administrator for listening to all those who have complained and keeping this board for those who don't mind discussing issue relative to NUDISM.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 3175 |
|
|
|
Bob S.
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/27/2004 : 9:23:56 PM
|
If I may, Admin, if you are purging the non-nudist from these boards, DougK needs to also go. He was, as I mentioend, also Datona (I believe) and is most definitely the harasser at the INA forums.
For what it is worth, I have always enjoyed debating with stu_fox over at the INA and was looking forward to it again here. In fact, debating with him has helped me strengthen my own arguments for nudism and non-sexual nudity. It was so fun to pick apart his arguments.
Bob S.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 39 |
|
|
|
Admin
Forum Admin
|
Posted - 10/28/2004 : 12:06:32 AM
|
Yup, DougK was banned as well, since he was also Datona.
StuFox and Stu_Fox were included, as well as Stirbaby.
I think that got all of them! 
Yes, the better arguments are fun to read, but very little of this material was anything but annoying! I think perhaps that is the whole underlying purpose of these guys, to create an unpleasant atmosphere of endless aggressive argument.
That's definitely not nudist. Part of our purpose here is to demonstrate how nudists behave. So- just as would happen at the average nudist resort, these characters have been (electronically) escorted to the front gates. 
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1888 |
|
|
|
Admin
Forum Admin
|
Posted - 10/28/2004 : 12:11:32 AM
|
Hey- don't get me wrong! I'm not at all against Topless Equality, the topic of this thread!
So— was there a coherent argument there worth debating? I didn't really digest every morsel while making administrative decisions.
If someone could pick up the valid points made, perhaps we can rescue this thread! 
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1888 |
|
|
|
nudeboy
Forum Member
|
 Posted - 10/28/2004 : 09:15:56 AM
|
I never knew something as simple as a woman wearing a top (or not) could get so politicised.
Politicians pander to what they think voters want -there end of story. I mostly apply the same cynical logic to most things involving politicians.
Personally speaking I do not get offended by women who feel comfortable exposing themselves in public or private places. I would not even question their motives. Its people who do get offended who have the problem.
nudeboy..
because its how I was born
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 98 |
|
|
|
FireProf
Forum Member
|
 Posted - 10/28/2004 : 09:28:12 AM
|
This issue is gonna take time for most people to accept but I do see a forward trend. Not many but some women are breast feeding their babies in the open. Some cover completely but there are a few I have seen that will cover only their babies faces which covers their nipple slightly.
With more and more younger women thinking that breast feeding is accepted in public, I think that in a short period (maybe several years yet) in time we will see more and more women exposing more of their breasts without everyone coming unglued.
Just like going braless has come to be quite common but has taken years to get there, topfreedom for women will develop at it's own pace unless we have a revolt from women that start burning their shirts!
|
Edited by - FireProf on 10/28/2004 09:29:46 AM |
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 3175 |
|
|
|
sailordave
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/28/2004 : 12:12:29 PM
|
At some point in time in the past, more and more women were beginning to stop breast feeding. Don't know if it was a conspiracy from the baby formula companies, bad medical advice, or a part of the feminist movement. But now that the movement is going back to breast feeding, perhaps more and more will be doing so in public. I seriously doubt if it became legal for women to bare their breast in public that women would be walking down mainstreet bouncing with pride so to speak. I'd just like to see bare breast decriminalized. If a woman is laying out in her yard or in the city park or public beach topless and isn't creating a distubrance then she should be allowed to do so. If she's creating a distubrance, a sensible woman would put her top on without having the police ask her to do so. If the police have to ask her to do so and she refuses then she's guilty of creating a disturbance or disturbing the peace.
We the willing who are led by the unknown must do the impossible for the ungrateful.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 388 |
|
|
|
Bob S.
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/30/2004 : 01:00:36 AM
|
Dave, there is caselaw in New York that gives women topfreedom. In fact, there have been topfree picnics put together by a nudist woman. The women cannot be cited for doing something that is not illegal. Florida is still being decided (anyone heard about the case down there lately?
In Ohio and I Texas, there are also no laws specifically naming the breasts as objects of indecent exposure so in effect, topfreedom is alive there as well.
If something is not illegal, the police cannot force anyone to do anything (at least not legally). Simply sunbathing topless is not sufficient for disturbing the peace in places where toplessness is allowed.
A person could be smoking in a public park and no one can force them to stop smoking. A couple could be kissing in public and no one can force them to stop.
Bob S.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 39 |
|
|
|
jdr
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/04/2004 : 11:31:23 AM
|
Admin,
That was really cool!! I started on page one, where I had a post or two before backing out of this because the arguments got a little too heavy for my good nature. As I read through and checked the profiles of these guys, I was starting to think how obvious it was that they were the same people or person. Glad you made the right move and eliminated them. Why would they even look for a site like ours if they are so pure and so easily offended? Why would they even think to do a search for "nudity" or anything related to it? The fact of an empty profile might be a first indicator that they are not serious about our site?? Anyway, good move and thank you for it. And, as I said, women being topless is perectly legal in Hawaii, but bottomless is not... yet...
JDR
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 110 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Nudist-Resorts.Org Discussion Forum Bulletin Board Nudism Clothing Optional Resort Naturism Nude Beaches |
© 2002-2020 SUN |
|
|
|
Topless Equality
