Permalink
Dan,
Why not let them all go bottomless? I'm not sure that women having
pubic hair are more socially acceptable to the masses than those that
don't. (But it could be true.)
I don't know. Our culture teaches women to be self conscious about hair on
their underarms and on their legs, because our men don't like the feel of
bodyhair on women as a rule. But it's gotta work both ways. Why shouldn't
women be more demanding of guys shaving their legs and other parts of the
body too?
Finally, standards should be relaxed, and girls even _without_ pubic
hair should be allowed to go bottomless, and then to make things fair
it should be legal for guys to go bottomless as well.
Well, as an egalitarian, I think if one sex can go bottomless than the
other should have the same right. Although, I realize that in the minds
of many textiles naked women are *way more* acceptable than naked men.
Depends on how you look at a man's penis. It's the behaviour of women that
I look at more than if they are naked or not.
People shouldn't be ashamed to be naked. Having your tits or crotch
uncovered is no different than having your arms or legs uncovered.
People shouldn't be ashamed to be nude, that is true. Maybe in France
or Sweden a naked breast would be no different than a bare leg, but
many other people would disagree. As for crotches, even some nudists
seem to have a problem with them.
I don't see why any nudist would have problems with their crotches. I'm
quite happy with mine.
Everyone wants to look good, and be dressed (or undressed) in the way
that is most becoming.
I don't know about *everyone*.
those with better bodies shall be MORE likely to go
naked.
No, not really. Nudists come in all different shapes and sizes.
They why is it the majority of the ones you seen in magazines are either
overweight, or over 40? It doesn't do much to get younger people
interested.
Of course, just as you aren't forced to wear a bikini, you aren't
forced to go naked. You can still wear a swimsuit, or clothing. The
laws restricting nudism should be relaxed, and then removed, so
everyone can get a good tan and not think there is something hidden,
unknown, or restricted, which they are deprived of.
They should be removed altogether, but admittedly this isn't going to
happen in the near future.
Maybe 50 years in the future they will when there will be no more crimes or
the need for police to enforce the laws.
Surely I would rather be naked around hot women, and good
looking people.
So would I, and so would a lot of others. Some nudists won't admit
this, but we all have our preferences. We all have some people we would
rather see nude, or rather be nude with. Anyone who says it ain't is a
lousy liar.
Being nudists does not mean we don't have preferences. We are no different
from the textile world in our habits for selectivity - e.g. deciding whose
company we want based on religion, marital status, and age. There are
nudists out there that I am happy to have as company and others whom I just
don't want to know unless I'm armed with a baseball bat and a pair of
shears.
Being naked can be healthy sexually, by removing the
suspicion that there remains something to be hidden, and by making
'sex' less of a big deal!!! Without necessarily being actually or
overtly sexual.
This is very true.
That's the best thing about it. There is no more pretending to be what
you're not.
As far as learing goes, men presently lear at clothed women whom they
think are hot -- whether women are clothed or unclothed makes no
difference.
This is *somewhat* true. Some guys will lear less at naked women,
because there's "no mystery", whereas others would lear more, because
they get to see more. To me people shouldn't be uptight about being
looked at, as long as the looker isn't being obnoxious about it.
The problem is that there ARE some lookers who do get obnoxious!
No they might not be "okay". You're diffently broad minded about sex.
Have you ever considered going to a sex club or a swinger joint. I
think there's an "alternative lifestyle" place in Canada that allows a
certain amount of open sex.
The owner of the place sometimes posts to these groups. He's pretty much
'live and let live', but even he has to set boundaries as to what he will
allow at his place.
But as far as nudism goes, allowing openly
overt sexual displays is bad for nudism. It reinforces the idea that
some people have that nudists are just a bunch or pervs, and this can
cause nude beaches to be shut down.
Depending where and how you do. I don't agree that nudist club owners
should turf out some people for showing signs of affection towards each
other. Nude beaches have unfortunatley been shut down because of some goons
who mistake freedom for sexual anarchy.
Dario Western
