"OMG! PUT SOME CLOTHES ON!" -- What's Wrong with Being Naked?

Discussion in 'Politics & Law' started by Icyblackflame, Apr 6, 2007.

  1. Icyblackflame

    Icyblackflame Registered Member


    This is very interesting.

    *I have permission from the original poster (Deathscyth Hell) to use this thread. The OP can be located at the link at the top of this post. The OPer's profile can be viewed here if there are any questions, comments, or concerns.

    Note: If you’re not going to read the first post, don't reply at all!

    Note 2: This is a discussion about why it is wrong to be nude from a moral point of view, excluding the obvious practical advantages that can sometimes apply.

    Greetings all.

    This is something that I have always wondered about. Time and time again, when people think about nudity they almost always go "OMG! COVER UP UR INDECENT!1!11!” And my question is; why? Why does society feel the need to always keep ourselves covered in cloths all the time? I will tackle in this post some common misconceptions about nudity;

    It's dirty and indecent!

    How? If it's not displayed sexually then what exactly is the problem with the human body on its own? Picture this; 2 people are standing in front of you. They are the same gender, the same approximate height and weight. They are both totally nude. One starts thrusting their hips as you and tries to use "dirty talk", while the other just talks normally. Why are they both in the wrong? From my point of view at least, the one who is being dirty and in-decent is the one thrusting.

    But what if little kids see this?

    Um, so what if they do? Kids know what body parts are there. When you were a very small child, did you ever take a bath with your sister (if you have one obviously)? Then you see the genitals and nipples. Both of which the media censor out (I'll say more on that later). Kids will learn what body parts they have sooner or later so why bother shielding it from them? Sure, little kids don't see breasts uncovered all the time. But they will get them eventually and they do learn about it. You only have to look at your own body and see what is covered up.

    But being naked will lead to more rapes!

    Um..No it won't. There is no such thing as "Sexual provocation". Rape is all down to the sick people who decide to do it in the first place. It has nothing to do with how much, or little, you are wearing. Plus 77% of rape victems were attacked by somome they KNEW.

    If it's not wrong why do the media censor so much?

    That's because people are too paranoid about the human body and so the media would get massive complaints if they did. But the thing is, it's really stupid how the censor things and what they do. The media censors out only the n****e of a breast and badly pixelate genital areas. WTH? Did people forget what they look like? Honestly if there is a good reason for nudity why still censor it out? I can't possible fathom why on earth, all these shower gel adverts are allowed to have the actresses whine and moan like they are having sex, and yet they still will not show their breasts or v****a, constantly avoiding them. I've even seen one advert which has them ware tops or bras while showering! Who on earth wares a top while they are in the shower?

    Now, I'm sure all of us at some point in our lives have seen Mr. Bean. I personally loved Mr. Bean as a kid and still do. So does my younger brother who recently turned 13. Now recently they have started showing these episodes on Nickelodeon. 1 episode has Mr. Bean losing his swimming trunks in the pool, then attempts to get to the changing rooms without being seen (and fails XD). Now Nickelodeon cut that whole part out simply because it showed Mr. Bean's bottom. WTH? Even little kids know what a bottom is! What on earth is the problem with showing a bottom briefly on T.V? Bottoms and breasts are not sexual objects and are not used in reproduction. Yet we are still paranoid about it!

    I can remember 2 incidents where there has been a huge uproar about brief flashes of nudity. The first was in a big superbowl, being shown to possibly millions of viewers. Janet Jackson who was performing on stage had a wardrobe malfunction and briefly flashed her breast. Now you most likely wouldn't have seen the n****e and the breast it's self was probably only shown for 3 seconds if that. Yet there were a ton of complaints and the T.V company lost hundreds if not thousands of dollars because of 1 small breast flash.

    Also, a well known baby magazine about baby's health and such aimed at mothers, once showed a baby being breast fed. It didn't show the n****e, but could be correctly identified as a breast. Complaints came flooding in, in one case a mother turned over the magazine to prevent her 13-year-old son seeing it. 1/4 of all comments about the cover were against the nudity flash.

    Now to me, this is totally stupid! Why? Because in neither of these incidents were the human body parts displayed for sexual intentions.

    Now keep in mind; I am neither a nudist nor a pervert myself. I myself like wearing cloths at times. I like the feel and style of the cloths. There are times like when we need to protect ourselves from the elements or possible skin damage that we need to ware cloths. Also, I am not interested in sex until I find the one person who is right for me. I won't do it until at least engagement.

    But even so, I am not disgusted by the site of other human bodies. I don't care who goes around naked in front of me, I don't care. As long as they aren’t being displayed sexually there isn't a problem.

    I personally only ware cloths when;

    1: I need to protect myself from the elements (E.G too cold)
    2: There are other people around and so I avoid being shouted at.
    3: I feel like it.

    If none of those apply, I will go around naked. Simple as that.

    Now think about this; Roman and Greek art. Do we consider them to be dirty or disgusting or indecent? NO! Nor do we complain about other artwork being nude.

    In ancient Greece and Rome, it was rare to see a healthy human body. And so people saw the human body as a beautiful thing; which it is. People even shared public baths!

    Also, social standards used to say that if a woman showed her ankles, it was sexually provoking. No longer, right?

    So this is my question to you all;

    If we don't need to ware cloths, why should we be forced to? What is wrong with being naked? Discuss.

  2. Gavik

    Gavik Registered Member

    I'm not sure reason ever entered into the formation of social standards.

    The whole 'protect the children' thing is bullshit because they'll find out anyways and in some cases it's better for them to know how things work. But wearing clothes is a form of self expression, similar to art. It says a lot about character.
  3. Icyblackflame

    Icyblackflame Registered Member

    It does, but it has nothing to do with this. This is asking why people here HAVE to wear clothes, which means that people will be able to if they so please.

    Anyway, I agree with you, however. What is the point of "shielding" children? Especially from the tv when people have better access to the internet anyway? I can understand not putting straight up sex on there for kids to see, but censoring is crazy. What age do kids know what body parts look like? Before kindergarten? Who are we fooling?

    As the OPer said, the law should allow being naked, but no "public indecencies." It doesn't mean that you go out and have sex on a park bench. You still have to act civil, but you don't have to wear clothes.

    The only thing that I would have is ..."heavier" people. Like....jelly rollers who love their bodies and don't mind showing them off. Them loving themselves is fine, but...they aren't the ones who have to look at them >.>

    I know that that was rude, but that's my only problem.
  4. Gavik

    Gavik Registered Member

    Clothes were/are a sign of social status in many cultures.

    Personally, I don't want to live in a nudist society. No particular reason, that's just how I feel. If people want to live in a nudist colony, then let them.
  5. ChinUp

    ChinUp ¤ Breathe

    I have lived nude .. its very liberating .. people hide more than their bodies with clothes .. when your nude you have to be up front & honest .. it takes real sexual & psychological contentment & peace to be able to hang with others nude without it being an issue or of any consequence @ all ... you have to be comfortable with your own body & comfortable with other peoples .. be they male or female, young or old ..

    Didn't Canada just decriminalize women going topless ?

    For the most part clothes are for warmth & hygiene .. IMo .. plus they are fun
  6. wyldesykosis

    wyldesykosis Feral

    I had my pants pulled down in a mall once....I was going commando that day! I just pulled them back up, and asked one of the girls that was staring, "So....didja like it?". She blushed and walked off.

    I'd rather be clothed in public, but I don't see a problem against people being clothed or not.

    When I lived in Germany there were a lot of kids running around naked in their frontyards. Sex and nudity isn't as frowned upon there as it is here.
  7. Kazmarov

    Kazmarov For a Free Scotland

    It's called "topfree equality" and I think it's provincial. Quebec's legalized it, that's all I know.


    I have no problem about public land having naked people on it. However, I have, and retain the right to refuse service to them in my place of business. Some things would have to be worked out (regarding storefronts and such), but I don't have any fundamental issues with it.
  8. Gavik

    Gavik Registered Member

    Yea, business owner's descression would have to be maintained. Also, there's a hygiene/health risks in some cases, but these are rare.
  9. pikatore

    pikatore Registered Member

    This is the problem, especially for the males.

    Put an average naked woman in front of you, and pretend you have to sit next to her for like, 10 minutes.

    If you don't automatically get an erection, then you are a born nudist. If you do, then my point is made.
  10. oxyMORON

    oxyMORON A Darker Knight

    What's wrong with being naked? I guess nothing's WRONG with it. It's just not really sanitary to go around places naked. Think about it. Public areas aren't exactly the cleanest places on Earth. You get all grossed out when you accidentally sit on gum. What'd happen if your bare ass sat on someone else's gum?

    Many forms of public transportation such as buses and trains usually have mediocre to poor sanitary conditions that many would feel uncomfortable about sitting in. So it's not totally about social issues. It's probably better for your own health and hygiene to wear clothes, just so your body doesn't come in contact with all the chemicals and whatnot that's everywhere today.

Share This Page