NationStates Jolt Archive

Find me one good argument against nudsim! Seriously. If you question decency how can you say humans are only decent when they have man-materials wrapped wrapped around them like cloth chains wherever they go! How can we say anything about women forced to cover their faces in other countries when we do this? It's forced by law and social protocol; forced to by law! Do you know Nudity is catagoried under sexual crimes?
If you say lust, I guarantee you if people walked around nude as much as possible for two weeks, the lust would be at normal levels.
If you say it's because of sanitation, then use a towel to sit down. At resturants they could just sterilize a both as-soon as someone left.
If you say for athestetic reasons, then get a life! First-off, anything beautiful looks better uncovered (sunset, hill, car, ect.), and if you are refering to people who DON'T look good, you don't cover-up damaged paintings do you? Don't be so shallow as to say if someone doesn't look good or isn't sexually appealing you want to force them to cover themselves-up!

Except for certain weather, or for protective reasons, people should go bare! It's more comfortable, it's more natural, it's MORE FUN! If you have a purse, you don't need pockets!

Find me one good argument against nudsim! Seriously. If you question decency how can you say humans are only decent when they have man-made materials wrapped wrapped around them like cloth chains wherever they go! How can we say anything about women forced to cover their faces in other countries when we do this? It's forced by law and social protocol; forced to by law! Do you know Nudity is catagoried under sexual crimes?
If you say lust, I guarantee you if people walked around nude as much as possible for two weeks, the lust would be at normal levels.
If you say it's because of sanitation, then use a towel to sit down. At resturants they could just sterilize a both as-soon as someone left.
If you say for athestetic reasons, then get a life! First-off, anything beautiful looks better uncovered (sunset, hill, car, ect.), and if you are refering to people who DON'T look good, you don't cover-up damaged paintings do you? Don't be so shallow as to say if someone doesn't look good or isn't sexually appealing you want to force them to cover themselves-up!

Except for certain weather, or for protective reasons, people should go bare! It's more comfortable, it's more natural, it's MORE FUN! If you have a purse, you don't need pockets!

Some people don't wipe...

I don't actually have anything to say on this topic but I found it while looking for something and it's just not right that a thread that's called "Naked = Better" should plummet out of General with zero replies. People! Seriously!

Down with pants!

Down with pants!

Way ahead of you.

If you say it's because of sanitation, then use a towel to sit down. At resturants they could just sterilize a both as-soon as someone left.

If you had any clue what we use to wipe down booths, you might not feel so good going out to eat even with people wearing clothes.

Arguments against nudity generally revolve around "but God said so" or some other crap like that

Some people don't wipe...
Hey, you warped my rescue post! :(

i really like clothes but i have nothing against nudism. i saw a woman the other day covered from head to toe (in clothing) and she was quite possibly the sexiest person i've seen in a long time.

Find me one good argument against nudsim! Seriously. If you question decency how can you say humans are only decent when they have man-materials wrapped wrapped around them like cloth chains wherever they go! How can we say anything about women forced to cover their faces in other countries when we do this? It's forced by law and social protocol; forced to by law! Do you know Nudity is catagoried under sexual crimes? one good argument? our skins are not as "tough" as they once were. over exposure to sun = cancer. fragile skins would also allow for infections to invade thus posing a health risk to yourself and others. Neither are we efficent in maintaining our tempurature. prolonged expure to extreme elements weakens our immune system.

also, there is one other benifit of clothes that people don't realize. our dead skin cells are caught and trapped within the clothes. without them, food you eat from Restruants would be covered in the dead cells of not just the cooks, but the waiters, and everyone that the plate passes by.

if you are refering to people who DON'T look good, you don't cover-up damaged paintings do you?err... actually damaged paintings are painstakenly repaired and at great cost. if the damage is severe, then it's sealed away, only to be viewed at a distance... if at all. are you suggesting that ugly people be sealed away?

Except for certain weather, or for protective reasons, people should go bare! It's more comfortable, it's more natural, it's MORE FUN! If you have a purse, you don't need pockets!
err most weather conditions would call for protective clothing. most situations would call for protective clothing.

Capitalism wouldnt work and we would have to wear tatoos to show how high we are in the social scale.

Arguments against nudity generally revolve around "but God said so" or some other crap like that

Every asshole isn't spick and span. Some are hairy, with pimples, scars, midgets, and blood.

:confused:

How many copies of this thread are there, just waiting to be dug up?

At least 3. Page 2 has one also.

If you say for athestetic reasons, then get a life! First-off, anything beautiful looks better uncovered (sunset, hill, car, ect.), and if you are refering to people who DON'T look good, you don't cover-up damaged paintings do you? Don't be so shallow as to say if someone doesn't look good or isn't sexually appealing you want to force them to cover themselves-up!

Er ... have you been to the US? I wouldn't mind staring at a fire-damaged Mona Lisa for hours, but there are plenty of people around here that I definitely do NOT want to see unclothed.

:confused:

How many copies of this thread are there, just waiting to be dug up?

We've come too far to suddenly go nude: maybe during warm summer days, but I'd prefer to keep my clothing on when white fluff starts falling from the sky.

Except for certain weather, or for protective reasons, people should go bare! It's more comfortable, it's more natural, it's MORE FUN! If you have a purse, you don't need pockets!

You were arrested for streaking weren't you?

At least 3. Page 2 has one also.

Three threads good, two threads bad!

well i don't know about you but it gets quite cold where i live in december

and this could cause some very awkward situations...;)

That would be... wierd...

It gets cold.
and there's little enough to show off as it is without reducing it further

In my country, nudism is forced... he he which leads to interesting entertainment on the side walks:fluffle:

In my country, nudism is forced... he he which leads to interesting entertainment on the side walks:fluffle:

NSG is OOC, just so you knows ;)

Find me one good argument against nudsim!

-I'm blond and burn in less then 10 min in the sun.

-Skin cancer

-Oh, and in Quebec we had some freakin snow yesterday!

At least 3. Page 2 has one also.See? That's what happens when you guys don't reply to threads! People get desperate, forget how to bump, and feverishly start churning out repeat threads!

Age and obesity.

That's two.

Age and obesity.

That's two.

Thank you.

Thank you.

No problem.

I've got one.

Try this experiment:
1. Wait till New Year.
2. Take off your cloths.
3. Walk around the block naked.

If all your digits are still intact you win the argument.

I prefer going commando.


Like right now! *wiggles*

*wiggles*
*giggles*

*giggles*

*stares at your jiggles*

Except for certain weather, or for protective reasons, people should go bare! It's more comfortable, it's more natural, it's MORE FUN! If you have a purse, you don't need pockets!

Its been mentioned before but yeah, the first thing that came to my mind is that you dont live anywhere that gets cold. It was 7C out here yesterday (during the day) and there are a lot of well populated areas colder than Chicago.

*stares at your jiggles*
Your rhyming sucks.
And when did you move here?

Your rhyming sucks.
And when did you move here?


Aw shucks.
About 3 days ago.

With everyone being naked all the time, there'd be no fun in it.

Aw shucks.
About 3 days ago.


:p
Where's my housewarming gift?

Strech marks, and breaching are two things that I'd prefer not to see. the former less on myself.

:p
Where's my housewarming gift?



;)
You're supposed to get ME the gift.

Fat people.

Age and obesity.

That's two.

old fat people are people too you bigot.

Fat people.

Way to be completely ignorant of fat fetishests.

;)
You're supposed to get ME the gift.

:(
I already gave you a hammer toe for my birthday!

Fat people.

Age and obesity.

That's two.

believe it or not, some people do find fat and/or old people sexy and beautiful.

:(
I already gave you a hammer toe for my birthday!



:upyours:
"Hammer toe"?
Maybe I'll give you a virus.

"Hammer toe"?http://podiatry.curtin.edu.au/encyclopedia/hammertoe/

I gave it to you in some other thread I forgot. It's a birthday present. :)

Meh, might be nice on a warm day, but the days aren't always warm. What about when the weather consists of chilly rain? Clothes are nice at those times.

http://podiatry.curtin.edu.au/encyclopedia/hammertoe/

I gave it to you in some other thread I forgot. It's a birthday present. :)

You evil bitch! :(

Clothes are comfortable, soft and warm, FTW.

Boxer-Briefs provide proper support when exercising.
Pants provide warmth in the winter.
Shoes are great for walking in under all conditions.

First, sanitation and general hygiene is NOT something to be brushed aside. Not every single restaurant, bench, bus seat, theater, etc, can be cleaned as soon as a person walks away. Welcome to a world of feces, dead skin, sweat, bacteria, and dirt. Everywhere. Public places would be a breading ground for disease because quite frankly, I don't trust people to take good enough care of themselves.

Second, the health threats are staggering. Skin cancer, infections from the countless scrapes and abrasions you'd acquire on a daily basis, massive exposure to bacteria, exposure to the elements... Face it, you pick out clothes every single day of your life based on the weather. Aside from the shear discomfort of it, a perpetual cycle of sunburn and hypothermia is not an appealing prospect.

That should be reason enough...

Even so, I don't believe that it should be criminalized or socially unacceptable to the extend that it is today. Nudity on your own property (regardless of who can see you),in specific public places (beaches and the like), and on television/movies should not be a problem. The human body should not be the object of shame and depravity it is construed as.

Find me one good argument against nudsim! Seriously...

...Except for certain weather, or for protective reasons, people should go bare!

I found you a good argument against nudism. It happens to be in your post - for protective reasons.

Do I win the internet?

First, sanitation and general hygiene is NOT something to be brushed aside. Not every single restaurant, bench, bus seat, theater, etc, can be cleaned as soon as a person walks away. Welcome to a world of feces, dead skin, sweat, bacteria, and dirt. Everywhere. Public places would be a breading ground for disease because quite frankly, I don't trust people to take good enough care of themselves.

Second, the health threats are staggering. Skin cancer, infections from the countless scrapes and abrasions you'd acquire on a daily basis, massive exposure to bacteria, exposure to the elements... Face it, you pick out clothes every single day of your life based on the weather. Aside from the shear discomfort of it, a perpetual cycle of sunburn and hypothermia is not an appealing prospect.

That should be reason enough...

Even so, I don't believe that it should be criminalized or socially unacceptable to the extend that it is today. Nudity on your own property (regardless of who can see you),in specific public places (beaches and the like), and on television/movies should not be a problem. The human body should not be the object of shame and depravity it is construed as.

I would agree that places where hygiene and sanitation is of utmost importance (restaurants, cafeterias, hospitals, etc.) should require clothes.

Beaches, on the other hand, should not. Swimsuits pretty much only exist to cover genitalia and nipples.

I found you a good argument against nudism. It happens to be in your post - for protective reasons.

Do I win the internet?

No, just a emoticon :D

I would agree that places where hygiene and sanitation is of utmost importance (restaurants, cafeterias, hospitals, etc.) should require clothes.

Beaches, on the other hand, should not. Swimsuits pretty much only exist to cover genitalia and nipples.
... ever been pinched by a crab "down there"?

or slipped and ended up sitting on some coral.. or worse... one of these?
http://www.humboldt.edu/~natmus/newsletter/Tidepools/purple-urchin.jpg

... ever been pinched by a crab "down there"?

or slipped and ended up sitting on some coral.. or worse... one of these?
http://www.humboldt.edu/~natmus/newsletter/Tidepools/purple-urchin.jpg

No, but it doesn't look like a flimsy piece of nylon would do that much against that anyway.

No, but it doesn't look like a flimsy piece of nylon would do that much against that anyway.

... actually, believe it or not... it does help. :p

Find me one good argument against nudsim! Seriously. If you question decency how can you say humans are only decent when they have man-materials wrapped wrapped around them like cloth chains wherever they go! How can we say anything about women forced to cover their faces in other countries when we do this? It's forced by law and social protocol; forced to by law! Do you know Nudity is catagoried under sexual crimes?
If you say lust, I guarantee you if people walked around nude as much as possible for two weeks, the lust would be at normal levels.
If you say it's because of sanitation, then use a towel to sit down. At resturants they could just sterilize a both as-soon as someone left.
If you say for athestetic reasons, then get a life! First-off, anything beautiful looks better uncovered (sunset, hill, car, ect.), and if you are refering to people who DON'T look good, you don't cover-up damaged paintings do you? Don't be so shallow as to say if someone doesn't look good or isn't sexually appealing you want to force them to cover themselves-up!

Except for certain weather, or for protective reasons, people should go bare! It's more comfortable, it's more natural, it's MORE FUN! If you have a purse, you don't need pockets!

Not only would ugly people scar the children for life (like the obese or anorexic) but it would encourage rape. I mean if a hot dame was walking down the street with no clothes on what would many men do? What would some gay men do if they saw a hot guy walking down the street naked? At least with clothes less is revealed and thus people are not infatuated or disgusted 27/7 which'll prevent children from being scarred or sexual assault/harrassment. Plus it'll be harder to see whose been attacked or not making the jobs of cops unnecessarily harder. I mean if a robber or rapist attacked you and you escaped but unhurt (only your torn shirt and missing pants will be the only thing that'll back up your story) ruffed up clothes would be evidence that you were attacked, as opposed to going to the cops with no evidence whatsoever. Also clothes leave behind fibers so it's easier for the forensic team to get incriminating evidence so justice can be done, without them there'll be less to work off of. Clothes are an advantage not a liability like many fashion nuts make it to be. Thirdly our ancesters who were cavemen used clothing to help keep alive. I know that without clothing we'd have less protection from insects, the elements and from other things nature and man (intentionally or by accident) can throw at us. Would you rather have a cigareete from the guy a few balconies above you innocently drop a butt on your shoulder without knowing your there if you had a shirt on (which'll take the heat and you can throw to the ground an put out) or have it fall on your bare skin?

Not only would ugly people scar the children for life (like the obese or anorexic) but it would encourage rape. I mean if a hot dame was walking down the street with no clothes on what would many men do? What would some gay men do if they saw a hot guy walking down the street naked? At least with clothes less is revealed and thus people are not infatuated or disgusted 27/7 which'll prevent children from being scarred or sexual assault/harrassment. Plus it'll be harder to see whose been attacked or not making the jobs of cops unnecessarily harder. I mean if a robber or rapist attacked you and you escaped but unhurt (only your torn shirt and missing pants will be the only thing that'll back up your story) ruffed up clothes would be evidence that you were attacked, as opposed to going to the cops with no evidence whatsoever. Also clothes leave behind fibers so it's easier for the forensic team to get incriminating evidence so justice can be done, without them there'll be less to work off of. Clothes are an advantage not a liability like many fashion nuts make it to be. Thirdly our ancesters who were cavemen used clothing to help keep alive. I know that without clothing we'd have less protection from insects, the elements and from other things nature and man (intentionally or by accident) can throw at us. Would you rather have a cigareete from the guy a few balconies above you innocently drop a butt on your shoulder without knowing your there if you had a shirt on (which'll take the heat and you can throw to the ground an put out) or have it fall on your bare skin?

I didn't rape you! It's just that I had an erection and bumped into you!

If it weren't for pants, I would live in constant and mortal terror of my penis becoming caught in a blender. It isn't that I spend a lot of time (or any, really) holding blenders near my crotch, but I never said that it would be a rational fear.
Unable to focus on my exams, I would promptly fail out of college, and take to living in a box under an Interstate. There, I would grow crazier and crazier while my fears grew stronger and expanded from penis-blender accidents to penis-fan accidents, penis-bicycle tire accidents, and penis-automatic door accidents. Eventually, unable to take the stress anymore, I would trade my box to a local crackhead for a gun and begin shooting at everything I see that is crotch height, including (by which I mean, especially) small children.
So, think of the children next time you want to disrobe before you get up on your high horse.

What ever, skin is water proof. Each to their own, If you have it flaunt it, if you are comfortable then I can't see what harm it can do. I personally wouldn't as I feel I am not in peak pysical condition.

Not only would ugly people scar the children for life (like the obese or anorexic) but it would encourage rape. I mean if a hot dame was walking down the street with no clothes on what would many men do? What would some gay men do if they saw a hot guy walking down the street naked? At least with clothes less is revealed and thus people are not infatuated or disgusted 27/7 which'll prevent children from being scarred or sexual assault/harrassment. Plus it'll be harder to see whose been attacked or not making the jobs of cops unnecessarily harder. I mean if a robber or rapist attacked you and you escaped but unhurt (only your torn shirt and missing pants will be the only thing that'll back up your story) ruffed up clothes would be evidence that you were attacked, as opposed to going to the cops with no evidence whatsoever. Also clothes leave behind fibers so it's easier for the forensic team to get incriminating evidence so justice can be done, without them there'll be less to work off of. Clothes are an advantage not a liability like many fashion nuts make it to be.
You seem to have put an awful lot of thought into what rape would be like in a nudist dominated world . . .

Arguments against nudity generally revolve around "but God said so" or some other crap like that

no one could say that because god had adam and eve frolic naked in the garden. it was actually satan who taught them to cover up:)

old fat people are people too you bigot.

apparently you havent seen an old fat lady naked, cause if you did you'd know people is a relative term.

What ever, skin is water proof. Each to their own, If you have it flaunt it, if you are comfortable then I can't see what harm it can do. I personally wouldn't as I feel I am not in peak pysical condition.

actually skin isn't water-proof. it absorbs water. slowly, but it still does.

If it weren't for pants, I would live in constant and mortal terror of my penis becoming caught in a blender. It isn't that I spend a lot of time (or any, really) holding blenders near my crotch, but I never said that it would be a rational fear.
Unable to focus on my exams, I would promptly fail out of college, and take to living in a box under an Interstate. There, I would grow crazier and crazier while my fears grew stronger and expanded from penis-blender accidents to penis-fan accidents, penis-bicycle tire accidents, and penis-automatic door accidents. Eventually, unable to take the stress anymore, I would trade my box to a local crackhead for a gun and begin shooting at everything I see that is crotch height, including (by which I mean, especially) small children.
So, think of the children next time you want to disrobe before you get up on your high horse.

Bicycle tire accident, I hope for my moral sake that that's an irrational fear.

Bicycle tire accident, I hope for my moral sake that that's an irrational fear.
Moral or Mortal?
Anyway, I saw a kid who got her fingers torn off by a spinning bike tire on one of those reality-ER shows (She stuck her hand in the spokes while the wheel was being spun). It isn't the sort of idea that escapes the mind easily.

Moral or Mortal?
Anyway, I saw a kid who got her fingers torn off by a spinning bike tire on one of those reality-ER shows (She stuck her hand in the spokes while the wheel was being spun). It isn't the sort of idea that escapes the mind easily.

No, Moral is correct.

If it weren't for pants, I would live in constant and mortal terror of my penis becoming caught in a blender. It isn't that I spend a lot of time (or any, really) holding blenders near my crotch, but I never said that it would be a rational fear.
Unable to focus on my exams, I would promptly fail out of college, and take to living in a box under an Interstate. There, I would grow crazier and crazier while my fears grew stronger and expanded from penis-blender accidents to penis-fan accidents, penis-bicycle tire accidents, and penis-automatic door accidents. Eventually, unable to take the stress anymore, I would trade my box to a local crackhead for a gun and begin shooting at everything I see that is crotch height, including (by which I mean, especially) small children.
So, think of the children next time you want to disrobe before you get up on your high horse.

AHAHAHA! That is something I thought I'd only hear on a British comedy lol. SIGWORTHY! :D

apparently you havent seen an old fat lady naked, cause if you did you'd know people is a relative term.

Got to ytmnd, put "chick wants you" in search and then go to "this chick wants you..." and you'll see what I mean. Sorry folks can't post it here.

... actually, believe it or not... it does help. :p

Meh, I haven't had any incidents with crabs or sea urchins, so whatever. If people are that concerned over it, fine, wear a suit.

Not only would ugly people scar the children for life (like the obese or anorexic) but it would encourage rape. I mean if a hot dame was walking down the street with no clothes on what would many men do? What would some gay men do if they saw a hot guy walking down the street naked? At least with clothes less is revealed and thus people are not infatuated or disgusted 27/7 which'll prevent children from being scarred or sexual assault/harrassment. Plus it'll be harder to see whose been attacked or not making the jobs of cops unnecessarily harder. I mean if a robber or rapist attacked you and you escaped but unhurt (only your torn shirt and missing pants will be the only thing that'll back up your story) ruffed up clothes would be evidence that you were attacked, as opposed to going to the cops with no evidence whatsoever. Also clothes leave behind fibers so it's easier for the forensic team to get incriminating evidence so justice can be done, without them there'll be less to work off of. Clothes are an advantage not a liability like many fashion nuts make it to be. Thirdly our ancesters who were cavemen used clothing to help keep alive. I know that without clothing we'd have less protection from insects, the elements and from other things nature and man (intentionally or by accident) can throw at us. Would you rather have a cigareete from the guy a few balconies above you innocently drop a butt on your shoulder without knowing your there if you had a shirt on (which'll take the heat and you can throw to the ground an put out) or have it fall on your bare skin?

What a bunch of moronic drivel. Nudity does not encourage rape. Archaic beliefs about sexuality, such as exhibited by yourself, do.

Good clean naked fun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Rain)

Got to ytmnd, put "chick wants you" in search and then go to "this chick wants you..." and you'll see what I mean. Sorry folks can't post it here.

that sounds like a recipe for disaster:p

Some people don't wipe...

not only that, what about people that use adult diapers? I wouldn't want to be the one to sit where they just were:eek:

Meh, I haven't had any incidents with crabs or sea urchins, so whatever. If people are that concerned over it, fine, wear a suit.

Kinda noticed you left out the coral... :eek:
;) :p :D :D [just joking!]

not only that, what about people that use adult diapers? I wouldn't want to be the one to sit where they just were:eek:
or walking behind them... remember, Nudity = no foot wear as well.

Find me one good argument against nudsim! Seriously. If you question decency how can you say humans are only decent when they have man-made materials wrapped wrapped around them like cloth chains wherever they go! How can we say anything about women forced to cover their faces in other countries when we do this? It's forced by law and social protocol; forced to by law! Do you know Nudity is catagoried under sexual crimes?
If you say lust, I guarantee you if people walked around nude as much as possible for two weeks, the lust would be at normal levels.
If you say it's because of sanitation, then use a towel to sit down. At resturants they could just sterilize a both as-soon as someone left.
If you say for athestetic reasons, then get a life! First-off, anything beautiful looks better uncovered (sunset, hill, car, ect.), and if you are refering to people who DON'T look good, you don't cover-up damaged paintings do you? Don't be so shallow as to say if someone doesn't look good or isn't sexually appealing you want to force them to cover themselves-up!

Except for certain weather, or for protective reasons, people should go bare! It's more comfortable, it's more natural, it's MORE FUN! If you have a purse, you don't need pockets!

men with purses are not men,the parable of a sunset or hill are two of the stupidest examples i ever heard, cars are covered cause otherwise you'd see the motor, wires etc. and who would sit and admire a damaged painting, considering that if you compare it to someone old or fat you won't know what it was supposed to look like cause it looks nothing like the original:rolleyes:

or walking behind them... remember, Nudity = no foot wear as well.

good point lol:D

good point lol:D

Oh GOD!!!! OHGOD!!! the image in my head... CURSE THIS THREAD...

Highlight at your own risk.
I just had an image of people standing in line... and the first person has a sudden attack of explosive diarriha!

What a bunch of moronic drivel. Nudity does not encourage rape. Archaic beliefs about sexuality, such as exhibited by yourself, do.

Good clean naked fun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Rain)

that's true actually, the more you see nudity the less of an aphrodisiac it becomes, thus lowering sex crimes.

Oh GOD!!!! OHGOD!!! the image in my head... CURSE THIS THREAD...

Highlight at your own risk.
I just had an image of people standing in line... and the first person has a sudden attack of explosive diarriha!

well based on the size of the average ass of today it's actually no different than riding behind the horses at homecoming:gundge:

1. People would have to spend an exorbitant amount on waxing/laser hair removal
2. Scratching your crotch in public would be even more digusting
3. Shrinkage
4. Sagging
5. Men walking around with erections
6. Women walking around with their period

Yeah, nudity in a public context is a bad idea

well based on the size of the average ass of today it's actually no different than riding behind the horses at homecoming:gundge:

except...
1) horses usually just plop down. but I will accept the possiblity of an explosive experience.
2) Horses are usually... corked up... (Watch OVER THE HEDGE for the reference.)
3) you get some warning when the tail lifts up...

with you lot no thanks i feel a lot safer in this
http://halo.wikia.com/images/c/c1/Master_Chief_with_his_MA5C.JPG
when around some of you

The ugliness of most people's bodies over, say, 35.

One good reason? Well, how about this: ever had frostbitten fingers? Imagine frostbitten genitals. Want two reasons? Ever had sunburned shoulders? Imagine sunburned genitals. :p

More seriously, sanitation really would be a real and necessary concern. One could make a perfectly valid argument for only mandating underpants of some sort, but there are all sorts of really good reasons not to want to put your naked genitalia/anus on a surface that has recently rubbed up against many other people's genitalia/anuses.

(There is also, of course, the simple personal reason that I would be embarrassed beyond words to go out in public naked. Eek.)

Find me one good argument against nudsim! Seriously. If you question decency how can you say humans are only decent when they have man-materials wrapped wrapped around them like cloth chains wherever they go! How can we say anything about women forced to cover their faces in other countries when we do this? It's forced by law and social protocol; forced to by law! Do you know Nudity is catagoried under sexual crimes?
If you say lust, I guarantee you if people walked around nude as much as possible for two weeks, the lust would be at normal levels.
If you say it's because of sanitation, then use a towel to sit down. At resturants they could just sterilize a both as-soon as someone left.
If you say for athestetic reasons, then get a life! First-off, anything beautiful looks better uncovered (sunset, hill, car, ect.), and if you are refering to people who DON'T look good, you don't cover-up damaged paintings do you? Don't be so shallow as to say if someone doesn't look good or isn't sexually appealing you want to force them to cover themselves-up!

Except for certain weather, or for protective reasons, people should go bare! It's more comfortable, it's more natural, it's MORE FUN! If you have a purse, you don't need pockets!

Clothes are a way to differentiate between us humans and the animals. I'm not an ape, therefore I cover my nudity.

its not right because yes the lust levels will lower but there will always b pervs and well rape would increase majorly i mean really trhey dont even have 2 undress them its a good idea if u can prevent those

that's true actually, the more you see nudity the less of an aphrodisiac it becomes, thus lowering sex crimes.

I want it to be an aphrodisiac.
I love the thought that when I see my girlfriend naked I know its something special that only her and I can share and that it gets me turned on. I do not ever want to be de-sensitised to that.

AMK
xxx

With everyone being naked all the time, there'd be no fun in it.

Bingo!

The clothing lobby would never stand for it. Also, we'd all get cold. Also, most people don't look good naked.

Someone made an argument about how God said nudity = bad. Nudity wasn't bad until Adam and Eve ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge and then THEY decided it was bad. =P

Also, it boils down to rights. Yes people have the right to wear what they want, but they also have the right to what they do not wish to see. As natural and better for you as naturalism is, it doesn't work when people aren't comfortable with seeing other people's bodies and especially aren't comfortable with the look of their own. It would cause greater emphasis on body image than there already is and would raise the suicide rates drastically. Who wants to be told they don't have the perfect body? Clothes hide a lot of imperfections people don't want to make known, so why abolish that shield?

Besides, you should be thankful the American government doesn't control WHAT you put on your body, just how much you are showing. And that restriction is very liberal.

This country is simply too diverse in their opinions to allow this to go about smoothly. Several different groups with different reasons for disliking public nudity would cause so much of a fuss our country would be further on the brink of anarchy. Let's face it, our government can't handle the diversity NOW let alone after a thing like this would be passed.

Have you considered that there are groups of people that wouldn't want this because it would expose things that would get them discriminated against? Take, for instance, transexuals who are born female, but feel male and do what they can to make themselves look male. With clothing on, most of them look just like typical men but without clothing would be different. Most F-Ms don't get any sort of bottom surgery (except for hysterectomies) because the available surgery is too pricy for the rist - it has a very low chance of being affective and can often leave people in a position where they can be neither male NOR female down below. How would you react if you saw someone who looked totally like a male from head to toe except he didn't have a penis? Most people would be incredibly mean to that person, to be honest. And there are other groups with other reasons for not liking this, and the fact that most people don't want to see naked people every where they go in their day-to-day lives no matter the level of attractiveness.

You have to consider how diverse people's opinions are when thinking of a thing like this.

Someone made an argument about how God said nudity = bad. Nudity wasn't bad until Adam and Eve ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge and then THEY decided it was bad. =P

Also, it boils down to rights. Yes people have the right to wear what they want, but they also have the right to what they do not wish to see. As natural and better for you as naturalism is, it doesn't work when people aren't comfortable with seeing other people's bodies and especially aren't comfortable with the look of their own. It would cause greater emphasis on body image than there already is and would raise the suicide rates drastically. Who wants to be told they don't have the perfect body? Clothes hide a lot of imperfections people don't want to make known, so why abolish that shield?

Besides, you should be thankful the American government doesn't control WHAT you put on your body, just how much you are showing. And that restriction is very liberal.

This country is simply too diverse in their opinions to allow this to go about smoothly. Several different groups with different reasons for disliking public nudity would cause so much of a fuss our country would be further on the brink of anarchy. Let's face it, our government can't handle the diversity NOW let alone after a thing like this would be passed.

Have you considered that there are groups of people that wouldn't want this because it would expose things that would get them discriminated against? Take, for instance, transexuals who are born female, but feel male and do what they can to make themselves look male. With clothing on, most of them look just like typical men but without clothing would be different. Most F-Ms don't get any sort of bottom surgery (except for hysterectomies) because the available surgery is too pricy for the rist - it has a very low chance of being affective and can often leave people in a position where they can be neither male NOR female down below. How would you react if you saw someone who looked totally like a male from head to toe except he didn't have a penis? Most people would be incredibly mean to that person, to be honest. And there are other groups with other reasons for not liking this, and the fact that most people don't want to see naked people every where they go in their day-to-day lives no matter the level of attractiveness.

You have to consider how diverse people's opinions are when thinking of a thing like this.

You people totally misunderstand me. I suppose I should have phrased the thread better. I wasn't saying nudity should be mandatory, just LEGAL. That's all, just LEGAL! Even though it may have sounded like it, I wasn't even trying to convert anyone to nudism! I'm just asking why is it a crime?

Down with pants!

Up with skirts!

Sitting next to a fat sweaty guy on the train in 40 degree heat isn't pleasant.
Sitting next to a fat naked sweaty guy on the train in 40 degree heat is surely something that would only happen in hell.
clothes hold in lots of stench.

they also hide figures - and most of the fun with perving is imagining what she looks like underneath all them clothes. If everyone was naked, I'd be forced to mentally dress the object of my perving, just so I can then mentally undress her.
or something.
man, I'm getting a headache thinking about it.

Someone made an argument about how God said nudity = bad. Nudity wasn't bad until Adam and Eve ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge and then THEY decided it was bad. =P

Also, it boils down to rights. Yes people have the right to wear what they want, but they also have the right to what they do not wish to see. As natural and better for you as naturalism is, it doesn't work when people aren't comfortable with seeing other people's bodies and especially aren't comfortable with the look of their own. It would cause greater emphasis on body image than there already is and would raise the suicide rates drastically. Who wants to be told they don't have the perfect body? Clothes hide a lot of imperfections people don't want to make known, so why abolish that shield?

Your argument only works if you force people to be naked. If you give them the option to wear as much, or as little, as they want there isn't a problem in this regard.

If I were to say that I disliked the look of clothing and it offended me would I have the right to force everyone to be naked?

Besides, you should be thankful the American government doesn't control WHAT you put on your body, just how much you are showing. And that restriction is very liberal.

I dislike the argument that I should accept what is there because it could be a lot worse. It is possible to be grateful for what you have while also changing things for the better.

This country is simply too diverse in their opinions to allow this to go about smoothly. Several different groups with different reasons for disliking public nudity would cause so much of a fuss our country would be further on the brink of anarchy. Let's face it, our government can't handle the diversity NOW let alone after a thing like this would be passed.

Have you considered that there are groups of people that wouldn't want this because it would expose things that would get them discriminated against? Take, for instance, transexuals who are born female, but feel male and do what they can to make themselves look male. With clothing on, most of them look just like typical men but without clothing would be different. Most F-Ms don't get any sort of bottom surgery (except for hysterectomies) because the available surgery is too pricy for the rist - it has a very low chance of being affective and can often leave people in a position where they can be neither male NOR female down below. How would you react if you saw someone who looked totally like a male from head to toe except he didn't have a penis? Most people would be incredibly mean to that person, to be honest. And there are other groups with other reasons for not liking this, and the fact that most people don't want to see naked people every where they go in their day-to-day lives no matter the level of attractiveness.

You have to consider how diverse people's opinions are when thinking of a thing like this.

Maybe but I have to give my opinion as well

As for the rest i've quoted here I gave my opinions above

I see the fine minds of NSG have already made the points I sought to cover...

Apart from the smell, the unsighliness and the 'balls freezing off', theres also this - in a country that drinks beer, what are the state of the nations asses on a monday? Not good I think. And who wants to sit in somebody elses skidmark naked? (apart from a few with a certain fixation).

anti-nudism is part of the repress sexuality to make everyone frustrated so you can raise armys to fight wars pseudo-morality horse puckie.

depending on where you live, there are good reasons to put something on to keep from freezing your bits off, but that isn't part of the anti-nakkedness bs either, just a reason to wear something some of the time when you have to go outside where there isn't hvac to keep you comfie otherwise.

growing our own pretty floofy fur would be much nicer then wearing clothes for that too.

just because we walk standing on end was no good reason for evolution to rob humans of tails and fur and pointy ears and pretty faces.

maybe other worlds that have their own dominant sentients, not all of them are furless, maybe even most of them arn't.

=^^=
.../\...

If you say for athestetic reasons, then get a life! First-off, anything beautiful looks better uncovered (sunset, hill, car, ect.)That's 1) assuming it's beautiful in the first place, 2) that the covering isn't beautifull in itself, 3) that presents don't come best giftwrapped, 4) that beautifull things are only beautifull as long as you don't grow accustomed to them and start taking it for granted.
etc.

and if you are refering to people who DON'T look good, you don't cover-up damaged paintings do you?No, I'd throw those away, have them fixed, or put them away in the attic where I don't see them.
People aren't paintings; although some might look like they're created by Picasso.

I need to have clothes so that people won't be able to tell what I look like. If they could tell what I look like there's a chance that they might become attracted to me, and that would be a big problem. No one should be able to tell that I have breasts or anything like that. Even with clothes there's too great a risk for that for me to be safe; without clothes that would be obvious. Besides, it would be really immodest for people to go around naked. And I wouldn't want to see anyone naked. It's bad enough that I have to see myself naked occasionally; why would I want to see anyone else naked? That's gross...

I need to have clothes so that people won't be able to tell what I look like. If they could tell what I look like there's a chance that they might become attracted to me

Oh, sweetheart, do stop flirting.
Your obsession with NOT
Is so plainly, so coquettishly,
A need to be persuaded.
Do stop.

Lest we not.
And rot.

<snip>

Are we doing that "talking gibberish and pretending it's poetry" thing again?

Find me one good argument against nudsim!
I like snarky t-shirts. I'd prefer not to have to get my snarky designs tattooed directly on my chest.

Much as I love going barefoot, my urban lifestyle makes this dangerous and unhealthy. I also don't like to wear shoes without socks.

My boobies need support. My boyfriend has offered to follow me around all day holding them up for me, but this would result in him losing his job and I don't make enough money to pay all our bills.

I don't like the feel of sunscreen, yet I sunburn rather easily. I don't fancy the idea of having to slather my entire body in greasy lotion every morning, but I also don't fancy the type of all-body sunburn I would get if I didn't.

My boobies need support. My boyfriend has offered to follow me around all day holding them up for me, but this would result in him losing his job and I don't make enough money to pay all our bills.

I'm sure you could find lots of people willing to support your boobs for you. After all, they do say that good friends are like a good bra, they'll always support you.

Arguments against nudity generally revolve around "but God said so" or some other crap like that

Surely there are some people that you just wouldn't want to see naked.

Surely there are some people that you just wouldn't want to see naked.
There are people I don't want to see in spandex, either. And there is nobody on Earth I want to see in capri pants.

Are you?
It seemed to make sense to me.

Meh, I suck at poetry.

Are we doing that "talking gibberish and pretending it's poetry" thing again?

Perhaps if I add just one line it will make more sense to you:

"in jail."

EDIT: Simply: it makes no sense to you, because I didn't write it to you. Hard world, mate.

I think a photo of me, fully-clothed, will provide ample reasons as to why nudity is not the best option....:rolleyes:

Perhaps if I add just one line it will make more sense to you:

"in jail."

I'm not even gonna try and make sense of it. It'll kill my brain if I do. The leprechaun said so.

Spend a winter in Canada and tell me clothes aren't good.

Spend a winter in Canada and tell me clothes aren't good.
Clothes aren't good. :p

Surely there are some people that you just wouldn't want to see naked.

since when has my preference ever been the deciding factor in anyone's choice of anything? (other than my own)

Climate: Some parts of the earth are just too cold (unless you spend all day inside with a thermostate blaring heat into the athmosphere)

Hygiene: Believe it or not, but clothes actually are a barrier between your skin and what other people's skin might have left on a surface you both touch. (for instance: a bus seat).

Comfort: Some people just feel uncomfortable without clothes. Forcing nudity on them is just as bad as forcing veiles on women.

Social Cohesion: wearing particular items of clothing/ clothes in particular colours is a means of expressing social belonging. To forbid people to do so is to encourage social decomposition.

Protection: a lot of today's societies is edgy, pricky, sharp, etc. I would rather wear some clothing than scratch my skin (particularly the skin on my foot soles) every other minute.

1. People would have to spend an exorbitant amount on waxing/laser hair removal
why?
2. Scratching your crotch in public would be even more digusting
it's already pretty gross
3. Shrinkage
that's only a problem for superficial people
4. Sagging
again only a problem for superficial people
5. Men walking around with erections
they do that now.
6. Women walking around with their period
they do that now.

Yeah, nudity in a public context is a bad idea
still not seeing why.

if you want to know why people would not and should not make a practice of general nudism all you have to do is consider why we dont go naked on our FEET.

it is mostly perfectly legal to spend one's life shoeless and yet we spend billions every year on shoes.

why?

protection from the elements, the stray dog poo, germs, bugs, broken glass and other horrors of life that we would not want to expose our feet to

beautification and status by wearing classy shoes

foot support

for some people, being shy and not wanting to shoe their feet for whatever reason.

all of these reasons are also good reasons not to make a general practice of nudism.

for some people, being shy and not wanting to shoe their feet for whatever reason.

Amusingly appropriate typo :p

Remember those STD pictures from Bio Class?


ewwwwww....

Put some pants on!

:eek:Officially a BAD idea. Life would be one big god-awful perv-fest. The only good thing i can think that would come of this is that it would probably put the porn industry out of business.

:eek:Officially a BAD idea. Life would be one big god-awful perv-fest. The only good thing i can think that woudl come of this is that it would probably put the porn industry out of business.

why? being naked doesn't automatically mean sex.

why? being naked doesn't automatically mean sex.

Why buy playboy when you can look out the window?

why? being naked doesn't automatically mean sex.

Hmm...it just seems a little perverted to me. And well..you just wouldn't know where to look when walking down the street. Its all so very highly improper!:p *shudders*

why? being naked doesn't automatically mean sex.
Oh darn. ;)

why? being naked doesn't automatically mean sex.
Well of course not. Let's try to preserve some etiquette. It takes being naked and a beer to for sex to happen.

Well of course not. Let's try to preserve some etiquette. It takes being naked and a beer to for sex to happen.

Only one beer?

-I'm blond and burn in less then 10 min in the sun.

-Skin cancer

-Oh, and in Quebec we had some freakin snow yesterday!

Oh hey your from quebec to, lol I would not mind being nude in the summer and stuff but in winter espicely here we need clothing or we would freeze to death.

But this is another reason why they have nudiest camps.

The woman's already naked... Why would you need more?

To get her naked in the first place.

Only one beer?
The woman's already naked... Why would you need more?

To get her naked in the first place.

You guys need alcohol to do that?

Come on, you're not trying hard enough. :p

You guys need alcohol to do that?

In theory.

Find me one good argument against nudsim! Seriously. If you question decency how can you say humans are only decent when they have man-materials wrapped wrapped around them like cloth chains wherever they go! How can we say anything about women forced to cover their faces in other countries when we do this? It's forced by law and social protocol; forced to by law! Do you know Nudity is catagoried under sexual crimes?
If you say lust, I guarantee you if people walked around nude as much as possible for two weeks, the lust would be at normal levels.
If you say it's because of sanitation, then use a towel to sit down. At resturants they could just sterilize a both as-soon as someone left.
If you say for athestetic reasons, then get a life! First-off, anything beautiful looks better uncovered (sunset, hill, car, ect.), and if you are refering to people who DON'T look good, you don't cover-up damaged paintings do you? Don't be so shallow as to say if someone doesn't look good or isn't sexually appealing you want to force them to cover themselves-up!

Except for certain weather, or for protective reasons, people should go bare! It's more comfortable, it's more natural, it's MORE FUN! If you have a purse, you don't need pockets!
Cos I don't want to see your cock you flamin' exhibitionist!

In theory.

Fair enough. :D

"I want to move to Theory, everything works in Theory"

Fair enough. :D

"I want to move to Theory, everything works in Theory"

This quote wins the thread.

An ex british copper collegue of mine said that nudism is NOT illegal. The offence is "Offending public decency". Someone has to complain.

Only one beer?

Yep...

http://growabrain.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/keg_of_beer.jpg
one KEG of beer... :p

err... actually damaged paintings are painstakenly repaired and at great cost. if the damage is severe, then it's sealed away, only to be viewed at a distance... if at all. are you suggesting that ugly people be sealed away?


Yes, yes I am. Then again that would be expensive.....









:sniper:

I was very happy that I was wearing clothes as I walked to work today. It's chilly out.

This quote wins the thread.

*Sniff* I'd like to thank my father...this board...and everyone that helped make this possible...

Actually, I just thought of a great reason to wear clothing:

never, EVER, operate a fry-o-later without protective coverings

because its gross. plain and simple.

Find me one good argument against nudsim!

1) Cold weather = bad
2) Too much sun = bad
3) Some bodies are just plain ugly

Find me one good argument against nudsim! Seriously. If you question decency how can you say humans are only decent when they have man-made materials wrapped wrapped around them like cloth chains wherever they go! How can we say anything about women forced to cover their faces in other countries when we do this? It's forced by law and social protocol; forced to by law! Do you know Nudity is catagoried under sexual crimes?
If you say lust, I guarantee you if people walked around nude as much as possible for two weeks, the lust would be at normal levels.
If you say it's because of sanitation, then use a towel to sit down. At resturants they could just sterilize a both as-soon as someone left.
If you say for athestetic reasons, then get a life! First-off, anything beautiful looks better uncovered (sunset, hill, car, ect.), and if you are refering to people who DON'T look good, you don't cover-up damaged paintings do you? Don't be so shallow as to say if someone doesn't look good or isn't sexually appealing you want to force them to cover themselves-up!

Except for certain weather, or for protective reasons, people should go bare! It's more comfortable, it's more natural, it's MORE FUN! If you have a purse, you don't need pockets!

You know, if more beautiful people would go naked, I'd have no problem. But it seems the only ones to join a nudist colony are retired...and I have no desire to see an entire town like the nude beach in EuroTrip...

old fat people are people too you bigot.

Just because they're people doesn't mean they should go around wearing nothing.

believe it or not, some people do find fat and/or old people sexy and beautiful.

But when legalizing something, it's the MAJORITY's opinions on something that matters.

At least in this case it does, as they're no massive, rich, nudist lobbying groups. Except for certain elements within the NRA and Labor Unions.

I found you a good argument against nudism. It happens to be in your post - for protective reasons.

Do I win the internet?

no, just the thread

Could you imagine the lawsuits that would follow legalized nudity?

Insolent imbeciles would be suing one another left and right - while nudity itself may not be illegal, compensation-hungry lowlifes would find ways to milk it.

Imagine you're at work, and a nude person walking by your cubicle trips (much easier to do when not wearing shoes), falling directly into your lap, splaying their genitels all over your person.

Suddenly, lawyers would be wondering why the courts are flooded with sexual assualt cases.

Oh, sweetheart, do stop flirting.
Your obsession with NOT
Is so plainly, so coquettishly,
A need to be persuaded.
Do stop.

Lest we not.
And rot.

Huh?:confused:

1) Cold weather = bad
2) Too much sun = bad
3) Some bodies are just plain ugly

1) Bad enough with the fingers. I'd hate to imagine frozen... *shudder*
2) OW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11
3) True, true. Not a legally justifiable position, but true.