Talk Elections

Discuss

I will add my view to start things off. I think they should both be legal.

You can't ban me from wearing certain clothes (note: I don't support the burqa ban in France) so why should you be able to ban me from wearing nothing? The justifications for these bans boil down to one thing: people don't want to see it.

Well guess what my friends? That's censorship. Nobody has a right not to be offended and even if you did, my right to free speech trumps that.

Certainly people will bring forth reasonable arguments for restricting these activities in certain areas such as prohibiting people from having sex on public buses/transit seats as it's not sanitary or prohibiting members of the national legislature from working in the nude (not saying I agree with these restrictions) but we should not have blanket bans.

Who is harmed by people walking down the street naked or by a couple openly having sex in the park? Nobody.

The courts wouldn't agree with you on that. 

As for the debate;  I'm not opposed to nude beaches, or topless women/men.  However, I can't say I support complete nudity permitted anywhere.  If people want to join some nude club, or a spa, or whatever it is they do to shed their clothes out of public view, that's cool.  If they own beachfront property, and want to enclose some of it for sunbathing, awesome.  I won't deny their right to enjoy their nudity in privacy, or with those who openly welcome it and join in.  As for sex in public anywhere?  No, sorry.  In the words of one forumite, I'm far to prude to accept such an idea..

As if the courts are unanimous and the perfect arbiters of justice? There's plenty of things the courts should be striking down (laws banning prostitution, gay marriage, obscenity, etc) that they haven't done. Courts aren't perfect.


So that's a good enough justification? You don't want to see it so therefore you can ban it?

Courts are perfect arbiters of Justice.

We already live in such a sex saturated society, why do we need to make it even more there? As Allan Bloom long ago pointed out, our debasement of this intimacy has made us lose the capacity to transform just "sex" into eros--giving relationships consequence. Certainly exhibitionism wouldn't be giving our relationships any more depth...

The quick easy and smart responses:

1. People are too fat for toplessness to be legal for either gender.
2. Being legal would take all the fun out of public sex.

That is all.

I can't think of a better response than this.

Wherever did you get the idea that censorship was inherently wrong?

Government censorship is pretty much only justified when it comes to things like child pornography or national security and even then you can go too far (thinking of military secrets that the public should know about like torture/secret prisons or stupid laws that define pictures of anybody under 18 as child pornography so somebody gets thrown in jail for years for having pictures of a 17 year-old).

Yeah...I'll go with that. Seriously. Its usually the old, fat weirdos who don't wear clothes.

I think I have the right not to see you naked (or not to see you have sex).

I'm in favour of public nudity for good-looking men under 40. The rest better keep their clothes on.   

[Napoleon and TJ says it like it is]

     Even if public nudity were legal, I doubt many would engage in it. We have a pretty strong sense of shame about such things, & it is virtually unheard of for men to walk the streets shirtless, a perfectly legal activity. Not to mention weather hardly permits such an activity in most of the country.

It should be allowed for good looking women between ages 16 and 35, others should be fined.

;)

Seriously: I`m a hippie, so yeah, I have no problem with people running around naked.

Call me a "social conservative" (LOL) if you want, but I don't see any reason to allow it and plenty of reason not to allow it (except for particular places like beaches etc.).

Yes, and letting children run around nude is somehow justified...

You understand the difference between nudity and sex right? Children can't consent to sex and that wouldn't change even if public nudity and public sex were legal. The justification for banning/censoring child pornography is that, if it's legal, people will have a financial incentive/market to create more.

illegal but largely unenforced.

I liked the post except for the word topless, which is why I only quoted the second item.  I have stayed at a clothing optional resort (Hedonism II in Negril) and I felt so foolish.  I spent the whole time walking around covering my genitals with my hands.  Like those pictures of people of Auschwitz just before the cyanide showers.  And I always found it hard to take naturists/nudists seriously.  I found myself constantly giggling at myself and others.  But when I tried to wear a swimsuit around, I felt so awkward and out-of-place, like I thought I was better than everyone else, or I was trying to hide something.  Never would do that again.  I'll stick with the normal hotels and beaches.

But topless is another matter.  I don't care much to have to look at some skank's bush while I'm trying to eat fish, or at someone's schlong when I'm trying to choke down a bratwurst, but nipples, whether men's or women's don't bother me while I'm trying to eat.  And I feel comfortable being topless, with just swim trunks, when I'm at a pool or beach.  And I can take others seriously if they're wearing trunks, but not tops.  I will say that I still think the same rules ought to apply to men and women.  If a man can walk down fifth avenue topless without being cited for indecent exposure, then a woman should have the same right.  Anyway that part of the question was about nudity, not toplessness.  Those are two different things.  Topless is okay.  Nudity is creepy.

Under no circumstances should we legalize public sex.  That's just nasty.  Get a room.  Most of those public benches are wretched enough as it is, coated with bat guano and ABC gum and snot, but having to wipe off someone's love juices would be a bit too much for me.  Not the world I want to live in.

Pornography doesn't consist of only sex.  I'd imagine a pedophile would have no problem walking out of his door to take a glimpse at Johnny across the street whose letting it hang out because public nudity is "Ok, and not the same as sex".

Well you know if public sex was legal, it wouldn't be a problem for people to masturbate in public.

Again, where does this right to nudity come from?  Why do you feel that this is something people should be permitted to do?

It should be legal only for non-obese women between age 18-40.

One time, about fifteen years ago, my bicycle was stolen in Central Square in Cambridge.  I was living in Somerville at the time and had left my bicycle at a friends door only for a minute while I went inside to get him.  So I called the Cambridge PD and reported the bicycle.  Anyway, a cop shows up and takes me around in her squad car to places where she thought it was likely to be.  Alleys where homeless thieves had been known to park stolen bicycles temporarily.  As we were making the rounds, I see her jerk her head over toward a park bench and say, "Sonofabitch!  I can't believe he's doing that."  And she drives quickly to the other side of the road, to the bench, where I could now make out this old, black dude frantically beating off.  He was going after it hard and angry and fast, with his face contorted in such a way as to make me think that his moment of arrival was nigh.  And she slams the car in park and leans out the window and barks at him.  "Hey man!  You can't do that here!  Get a room!"  Like that.  So he looks around and realizes that he better put mister happy away and pull his pants up.  And then she drives off, cursing under her breath, as we continue to look for my bicycle.

Never found it.  

Both.  Here's my logical argument:

()

By the way, did I mention that I like this greenforest guy?

It is bad enough having people eat their disgusting smelling food and shouting/talking at the top of the lungs in confined spaces.  And you want to give people the green light to fornicate like apes in public, for what reason?  People don't have a modicum of decency and civility as it is. If I have to be forced to see some crazy 80 yo homeless broad's knockers or two meth heads banging on the subway, I would go on a Bernie Goetz style rampage.

Free speech? Freedom?


I'm not seeing your point? What was so wrong about that dude jerking it in public?


The first post ever on this forum complimenting me! I am honored.

um, that one time when a cop was giving me a ride I saw a dude masturbating in public.  I guess that was the point of the story.  Kinda hard to miss, if you ask me.

Maybe you're trying too hard.  This isn't meant to be an allegory. 

Well you quoted a specific sentence of mine and then gave an anecdote. I thought you were trying to justify banning masturbating in public with that anecdote.

Ah.  No, I was being Joycean.  I guess I do that most of the time. 

But I've already stated my reasons for disallowing public sex and, although I didn't think of it at the time, I think they would apply as well to masturbation in which ejaculation occurs.

That's rhetoric, not an answer.

I like how the thread title reads

"re: should public nudity... by [previous poster]".

So. Should public nudity by the preceding poster be suppressed ruthlessly? Go.

Mechaman likes anybody that makes him appear remotely sane.

No. Its vulgar and obscene. It's also not what the people who wrote the Constitution meant by "free speech".

And since when has Free Speech applied to obscenity (hint: never)?  You're up against a good 200 years of legal precedent here re: the Court upholding obscenity laws.

The word "freedom" is only used once in the Constitution, and that is to refer to the freedoms granted by the 1st Amendment.  Even under a loose constructionist approach, one would have to try to defend public nudity and sex under one of those provisions.

Corrected ;D

Really I already answered this in my first post:


Are you saying it doesn't? So why can't you ban me from wearing certain clothes or protesting in public even if you don't want to see it?


Funny you should mention that. In 1987 the Oregon Supreme Court struck down the state law (statute) criminalizing obscenity on the grounds that it violated the free speech provision of the Oregon constitution: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_v._Henry

This is the political debate subforum and I'm trying to have a debate on why public nudity/sex should or should not be legal and so far the only argument from the pro-banning it side is that people's "right" to not want to see something trumps everyone elses' right to free speech. I don't agree with that.

Simple nudity is not obscenity.

Not that I consider it free speech granted. It's similar to as if some teabagger got very intoxicated and started walking around in public to protest that "Obama spends like a drunken sailor" or something like that.

Actually this is a fairly timely and urgent question, as the New Impoverishment means that millions more will be living 'in the open' under the stars.. or if they're lucky, or strong fighters for position, under a bridge, and they may not be able to afford many rags (rags will become valuable as the typical Dumpster will be raided dozens of times per night by desperates, fighting tooth and nail for bits of rotten food and stinking, urine soaked castoff garments).

In any case even if they are lucky enough to posess a rag, they will have to fornicate out in the open, or perhaps at best in a bush, as a room with four walls will be an luxury only enjoyed by the privileged few in America.

And we should also note that any punishments for the new poor will be fairly ineffective, as their lives will already be worse than prison.  Even if you kill them for nudity or public fornications, it is a kindness.

Just like buying ad time, then.

Think of the children. Where will all the children go?  That is why God created sex resorts.

Nice double entendre.

States Right

Please tell me I'm not the only one who feels like this is a cop-out answer (to most political questions, really).

It isn't an answer at all. All possible answers are listed in the poll.

When it comes to civil rights and civil liberties, "states rights" is indeed a cop-out non-answer. It's basically an argument for states opting out of the bill of rights. Free speech? States rights! Trial by jury? States rights! Execute the innocent? States rights!

I do think this should be a state issue because the federal government really doesn't have any reason to make nudity laws. However, saying it's a state issue also doesn't answer the question because states also make laws themselves. In this case I think every state should outlaw public sex and public nudity.

My reason for why they should be illegal is because I think I ought to have the right to walk out my door and down the street to work or the grocery store or church or a friend's house, etc. without seeing your naked body or someone else's naked body in plain sight. I also think I have the right not to see you have sex. If I had children I would want the right to allow them to go out in public without seeing that either. It really isn't that complicated.

It's crazy isn't it? The social left would harangue me personally for refusing to leave my home as though I'm "sheltered", yet make it as difficult as possible for me to do so!

That is the status quo anyway. If any state wanted to legalize public nudity, there is no reason they couldn't. Actually different states do have different standards and whatnot.

Public nudity, yes.  Public sex, no.  Nudity does not, despite what the media and society have trained our minds to think, automatically translate to sex.  The human body is just the human body, but public sex is very different scenario, especially when children are present.

Social libertarian. :)

I support Breast Feeding in public

I live in America.  The majority of the people here are overweight or obese.  I see too much of them as it is.  If I lived in Sweden... maybe.

In parts of Africa its not unusual for people of the same sex to swim naked.

"States Rights" is dog whistle politics.  Unfortunately we all here the whistle so you might as well be screaming the n-word in a crowded theater if you use that term.

Nudity should be legal, exhibitionism should not be.

yeah, who needs the pressure to do as well in private as what can be seen in public. ;)

Female toplessness should definitely be legal. Full nudity should be legal in most areas, except where there's clearly a hazard. I don't think simply most people not liking to see it should trump the right of people to do it. There are plenty of things that are frowned upon that few would want to make illegal.

To add onto what others have said about nudity not inherently being sexual, this is true and even though it is certainly interpreted that way, that's not inherently harmful to society. Also, as far as female toplessness is concerned, it is accepted (and often considered fashionable) for women to expose cleavage (which may be sexually arousing to some), but we rigidly keep the nipple off-limits.

It's very sad that our society is more repulsed by sexuality than violence, racism, smoking, hate, harrassment, and other harmful and hurtful ideas and actions. Keep in mind that societies that are the most oppressive of sexuality tend to have lower status for women, and other human rights violations.

Obviously people wouldn't suddenly all decide to be naked and violently sodomizing people in the streets if there were no laws regarding that.. But I'm a little leery about saying it should be totally allowed if only because of how people tend to react to such things (further puritanical/FOR THE CHILDREN type backlash and all that). Of course I have no problem with toplessness and all that, just ugly people (or people).

Well, I don't think that public sex in children's playgrounds should be legal. Don't get me wrong, I hate empty "for the children!" rhethoric, but that doesn't mean we need to go to the other extreme and completely ignore them.

Since that example reveals I'm not (and you're probably not) totally opposed to "censorship" in principle, it just becomes a question of where to draw the line. I don't think there's any universal answer to this - it depends on the circumstances. The fewer children or prudes likely to see it, the laxer the laws should be. 

I don't think there's any inconsistency in supporting relatively strict public nudity/sexuality laws and very low censorship of media. If a book offends you, you don't have to read it, but it's a lot harder to avoid nude people walking around city streets.

I do think there's some inconsistency in opposing nudity/sexuality while not being as opposed to other potentially repugnant activities in public, though. Very ugly people probably impose more of a cost than nude people, but that can be rationalised by saying that ugly people can't help themselves and we shouldn't punish them for egalitarian reasons. But what about people who have proactively made themselves offensive to look at, for instance with clothing and/or makeup?

I have no problem with either public nudity, toplessness, or breastfeeding and would certainly advocate on behalf of them.  That said, these are issues we can leave for more prosperous times than now.  I would rather focus my energies on more pressing issues, like reviving the economy...  

Breastfeeding is something totally different.

Surely by making outdoor sex illegal in such a scenario we will prevent the poors from having sex altogether, and thus their ability to reproduce. Then they will go extinct, and then the only ones allowed to reproduce will be the wealthy, and then everyone will be wealthy, no?

Neither should be legal. Both strongly violate public decency, just like mastrubating in public.

Some people fail to take proper care of their own hygene.  It is gross enough when someone hasn't showered and you have to sit next to them.  Now imagine someone who hasn't properly cleaned their bottom.

Public sex...not sure, but public nudity should under no circumstances be illegal. The government has no right to force people to wear clothes.

I happened to mention it since it seems the underlying theme of this thread is 'public decency' as the poster below you has termed it.

Agree to an extent, though the sad reality is that the reason we have such strong taboos/laws on nudity is that the right-wing cares and acts so much against anything sex related that they disagree with, while the left lets it be.


I suppose exceptions could be made for sanitary reasons without being Victorian. At least that would allow topless women, as well as private property that can be seen from a public place.

It's impossible to get the informed consent of everybody in a public space who has to watch you. So no.

I don't go around asking the people in the park if they mind watching me play catch with my buddy.

Yes to both being legal and I don't give a f**king damn that some whinny ass "please look out for children" says that I'm immoral, it's the freedom to show whatever way you want to dress.

This.

If some unhygienic 300 pound hairy sweaty guy is suffering from diarrhea and decides to ride the bus or subway do you really want to use that seat after he is done with it?  People need to use common sense.  It's first and foremost a hygiene consideration.

Can you honestly not see the difference between that and having sex?

I can't, could you explain it to me?

Do you really want a naked guy sitting on your seat in the bus/train before you do?  Sweating into it, getting his dick all over your seat?

First!

Can you see the difference between raping somebody and starting a game of catch with a dog without asking the dog first?

Do you think that there's a right to have domestic disputes or rows in public?

People, taken generally, tend to view playing catch as completely inoffensive on every conceivable level. Extremely personal activities such as having sex or fighting tend to be viewed as having at least some of the character or aura of privacy about them. I'm honestly not sure how one can grow up in a civilization and not at some point realize this.

For men, no. For women yes, but only if they are not obese and between the ages of 18-40.

I don't really want to see your disgusting naked body, so I'll vote no and come up with a reason later.

Also, are you seriously suggesting public masturbation be legal? Hahaha, oh God.

I'm tempted to say one of two answers so I'll say both

A - Only if she's hot
and
B - I'll need some pix before I can judge

would this violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment?

I believe it should be generally legal. But their should be some restrictions around schools, kindergardens etc. because the sexual eduction should be  up to parents and schools.

Regarding the comments about some people feeling disgusted I don't believe the state should legislate wether some people feel disgusted.

This thread and the bestiality thread have really helped me in the process of rethinking my feelings on social liberalism as a construct, to be perfectly frank.

I think sex should be illegal with exceptions, while nudity should be legal with exceptions.

Yes. It is not evil to look at the nude form whatever the age. We live in a nude universe. People need to accept that. It is up to the person who is mortal to see God as light or fire based on how they are. Unsafe people will be burned up on judgment day.

Public nudity, sure. People need to get over nudity and appreciate the natural form.

Public sex, no. The whole world is not your bedroom, and sex is a very personal and intimate activity. And, to untraditional couples, do you really want people protesting around you while you have sex - govt. would be powerless to stop that unless it was violent protest because of the 1st amendment.

No, and even men should be required to wear shirts (prude).

I see that BRTD was a degenerate even back then.

On my principles, I do not believe one should criminalize public nudity or public sex. They should both be legal.

I'm generally pro-nudity, but I would rather not have to sit in a seat that has recently been sat in by a nasty dirty fat sweaty ***. So I guess I would be in favor of legal toplessness everywhere, and let nude beaches and nude sunbathing (in like a park maybe) be legal, but walking around going into shops and restaurants and businesses and busses would be illegal.

I'm a reasonable guy, but public sex should be illegal.

This is about where I am now. I don't associate nudity and sex as strongly as I did a few years ago.

Public nudity should be regulated to a select few areas, like nude beaches. That way we know everyone who attends that locale consents to seeing groups of nude people.

Social Liberalism is cancer, and this thread demonstrates that fact, anyway god f*k no.

No.

both should be legal

Public nudity, sure. Public sex? Hell no. Really we don't need those kinds of juices everywhere, and I think we all know that there will be a large amount of people who will want to screw in public and will do it every chance they get, or a drunk couple walking down the sidewalk and just decide to drop everything and go at it in front of peoples houses. There is just no way such policy would end well. Personally, I wouldn't want to deal with that stuff and I certainly wouldn't want my kids seeing that on a routine basis.

Liberty trumps want and comfort. The law should not be constructed to appease the people on a "moral" front, for that would be an affront to secularism. On this principle, I will never yield.

Lol. Shall our governments also function entirely independent of culture, or, y'know, popular will?

Plenty of cultural norms are not enforced by law.

Neither should be legal and I'd go further and say people exposing their underwear by wearing sloppy clothing, aka walmart shoppers, should be fined.

What about people exposing their underwear by wearing a skirt on a windy day?

Dirty, sleazy future-felon scum of course.

Hell no! People should not be allowed to display their dicks in public

()

This, pretty much.

The fact that anybody here thinks this is a good idea shows how much intellectual rot liberalism causes.

Maybe in terms of public sex, but why should liberalism not apply to public nudity? It's not inherently harmful, and plenty of social norms are not enforced by law, why should public nudity be singled out?

I'm pretty open to the idea of people creating an open culture for public nudity, public masturbation, and public sex. I think this should be normal. It's like Chaturbate without the internet. I also think guys and girls should familiarize with each other to the point to where there is no seemingly gender difference. I believe this will open a culture of consensuality where an individual chooses what they like sexually and by who. With less emphasis on sexuality, I think sexual behaviors will become rationalized. Young girls will have more respect for the intimacies of procreation and maybe masturbate instead of having intercourse with guys. I think it should be allowed but not to the point where everything is like sodom and gomorrah where everything is completely immoral. There should be agreed common moral boundaries, such as not using animals or those not of age. I would like to think this would bring about a world of unique etiquettes and friendships. For example, I came up with the idea that friends would casually fap with each other, regardless of gender, as if hanging outside in their own backyard. It could be a casual past time activity. I would love a society that has this feature. The less emphasis on nudity and sexuality, the more society will see each other as equal and have nothing to hide or be ashamed of. I find the idea refreshing and delightful going out for a jog in the morning without caring if I have clothes on and passing my neighbors making love in the park and me having the ability to wave at them as I pass them by. Or going to Kroger in my boxers and a robe, not fighting the morning wood, and casually doing my shopping. Or even casually masturbating while waiting at an office for my turn to go inside a room before a report. Of course that would mean people would have to bring towels, disinfectants, and wipes wherever they go, but I could see this being main stream in the future. I think maybe a good idea would be to have a social trend that nudity and sexuality in public is more for the younger generation than the older generation and for those who keep their body healthy and fit and to avoid people who are obese. I could imagine many innovations in clothing, fashion, sub culture and media would be created for companies to increase their profit margins. I mean imagine young girls using body jewelry, hair cut styles for their pubic hair, clothes that are meant to be with topless or bottomless body styles. Imagine commercialization of openly selling sexual toys (like from a vending machine), creating public rides or machines for adults that give them pleasure in public, the ability to have open showers and sleeping benches, have nude or sexualized olympics and sports, have a nude holiday, celebrate Japan's Kanamara festival in the US, and have ads or movies that feature full nude celebrities and actors. And obviously this would just be the start. Eventurally people would find this normal one day and not think anything of it. Moreover, I guess I'm open to the idea because it's always been somewhat of a fantasy of mine. I hope this doesn't sound too disturbing, but these are my opinions. I would definitely vote for it.

How risqué. Are these the musings of an ambitious erotica novelist :P ?

What a first post.

In designated locations but not everywhere.

Did you sign up specifically to write this?

LOL no. Never has, and never will.