Nakedness and the Law

Orcish-Horde said:
No are you thinking that? I would question those that insist on public exposure in areas other than areas in which the public mainstream would not object. ie known nudist areas.
Click to expand...

So if you are nude somewhere which isn't a 'known nudist area' then you are a paedo or you are deliberately being offensive? Rubbish. And the law (at least in England and Wales) agrees with me.
 
Orcish-Horde said:
I have never though of nudity as being dirty, my issue with it in public is that I don't want my children subjected to it. I want them to remain children until they are ready to become adults, if people want to prance around in the nude. Take it to a nudist area away from children.
Click to expand...

How is exposing children to nudity forcing them to grow up any quicker? Do you ensure that you always fully clothed in your own home to ensure that your children do not catch a glance of a naked man?
 
dirtydog said:
EVERYONE= paedophiles yes?
Click to expand...

Fixed. ;):p

Orcish-Horde said:
I want them to remain children until they are ready to become adults.
Click to expand...

Will you decide when this is, or will they?


Exposing children to nudity does not make them more adult. As said there are many cultures in which nudity is the norm and those kids turn out perfectly fine.

Our society only thinks of nudity as "bad" because of our various religious (OMG EVERYTHING = SIN) roots.
 
AcidHell2 said:
swearing, shouting etc can lead to imprisonment and does.
Nakedness is just like anti social behaviour. Neither are strictly against the law. However doing it in certain ways or places, mos certainly is against the law and will land you in trouble. These. Laws have to be vague, a one law does not fit all. It's ok to hour, but continually. Shouting abuse at 2am is not. Just like being naked in a place you are unlikely to be seen or socially acceptable (like certain beaches) is fine, but stripping of and walking through town is likely to land you in trouble.

Perhaps the total sentence is so long as he has been arrested 14+ times for the same offence showing no rehabilitation and forcing judges to hand out ever harsher sentences. The only funny thing in this thread is people trying to make out the sentence is harsh, that no laws where broken and seem to think it was a one of court appearance. Not a massive string of offences.
Click to expand...
But is it really fair that a law is based on what other people find acceptable, even when what they find acceptable is not harmful in any real sense? Seems reminiscent of when gay sex was illegal in a supposedly much less enlightened era - this seems just as bad to me. Nudity also seems far less intrusive and anti social than shouting abuse at 2AM though - shouting abuse is clearly meant to be targeted at someone, and designed to hurt them. It also stops people getting to sleep etc. I haven't heard any evidence in this mans case that he was being nude just to offend other people - he was just trying to live his life how he wanted, and thus not really committing anti social behaviour in the same sense. I can see that nudity in public is not 'socially acceptable', but I can not see why it should be a criminal offence. Breaking the law should be something to be avoided, and held in contempt by society (or else everyone would be worse off), but when the law seems pointless, I find it hard not to hold the law in contempt instead of the law breaker.

I can see why repeat offending with no rehabilitation might usually require longer sentences, but in this case, where no damage was being done, and 'rehabilitation' (i.e. oppression) clearly is not working, the legal system is just trying to bully him into doing what they want him to with no clear reason. Rehabilitation should not be about forcing a man to give up his ideals, especially in a country which seems to hold itself up as a beacon of liberty, and is currently heavily involved in the overthrow of an oppressive dictator. What is this if it is not malignantly oppressive?
AcidHell2 said:
Why should they allow someone to undermine the law. ...
Click to expand...
Because the law is oppressive and pointless. World leaders were only recently praising people in Arab countries for undermining the law. It should be there to protect us, not to oppress us, seeing as we supposedly live in a free democracy with a government that purports to serve the people.

Orcish-Horde said:
I have never though of nudity as being dirty, my issue with it in public is that I don't want my children subjected to it. I want them to remain children until they are ready to become adults, if people want to prance around in the nude. Take it to a nudist area away from children.
Click to expand...
Children themselves don't mind prancing round in the nude. Seeing naked adults won't stop them being children. Forcing them into your own ideas of what is socially acceptable and how they should behave in public, however, will do.
 
GreatAuk said:
Children themselves don't mind prancing round in the nude. Seeing naked adults won't stop them being children. Forcing them into your own ideas of what is socially acceptable and how they should behave in public, however, will do.
Click to expand...

How is one forcing them into what is socially acceptable by not wanting them to be subjected to full nudity? If anything they remain totally unaware of the issue, which is what I want for my children.
 
Orcish-Horde said:
Sexualisation of children.
Click to expand...

But showing a naked body does not in of itself have any sexual connotations. A child seeing a naked person isn't suddenly going to make them want to have sex. If anything treating nakedness as a taboo is more likely to lead to children considering nakedness as something naughty. Not to mention the self image issue they may have later when the only naked bodies they do see are thin attractive people.

Orcish-Horde said:
Its not difficult.
Click to expand...

No, but it seems a bit of a faff to do it when there is no real need.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom