Naked

[EvilRedGuy]

This is a serious question. Will having cloths on ONLY be for the sake of not freezing, and not for something as silly as covering eachother's sexuel tissue? Im totally serious, peoples seem to worry alot about whether someone is naked or not, will something like this be eliminated in a future society? (communist, etc)

[ContrarianLemming]

and not for something as silly as covering eachother's sexuel tissue?
Im totally seriousI'm skeptical

edit: seriously: changing the mode of production and political nature of society will not bring about a garden of Eden or perpetual jungle orgy.

[EvilRedGuy]

Yeah, i know its not one of those regular questions... but still.

And cloth is for creating the right temperature not for covering anything, it just happens to do that aswell.

[ContrarianLemming]

Yeah, i know its not one of those regular questions... but still.

And cloth is for creating the right temperature not for covering anything, it just happens to do that aswell.

I disagree, I happen to be in a warm home at this very moment..and yet I am fully dressed with blue jeans, a red tee shirt and socks, why? Well because I have been socialised into modesty, and modesty is something that we all get at about the age of 4 and communism isn't going to stop that.
Communism wont, something else could, but not a political and economic idea.

[¿Que?]

This is a serious question. Will having cloths on ONLY be for the sake of not freezing, and not for something as silly as covering eachother's sexuel tissue? Im totally serious, peoples seem to worry alot about whether someone is naked or not, will something like this be eliminated in a future society? (communist, etc)
Clothes are not only for keeping warm. We wear shoes to protect out feet. Clothes also protect sensitive areas, like (don't laugh) genitalia (probably where the idea of modesty came from in the first place). So in a communist society, clothes will probably be different, since they won't be loaded with the bourgeoisie ideological baggage of fashion. Although there is a chance that clothes will take on expressive/artistic aspects as well, since nothing in communism suggests strict utilitarianism.

in short:
communism != utilitarianism

[Volcanicity]

And lets face it,it does'nt matter how broad minded a person is there's some things that are really better covered up.

[Diello]

And lets face it,it does'nt matter how broad minded a person is there's some things that are really better covered up.

I disagree. I wouldn't oppose a movement toward universal nudism.

(Of course, if someone had, say, a wound that needed to stay dressed, I'd agree that would be better covered up, but I doubt that's the kind of thing you had in mind.)

[ContrarianLemming]

in short:
communism != utilitarianism


I'm a utilitarian communist and I strongly disagree since you completely missused the term utiltiarian, meaning "sparten" while in actuality it means "greatest happiness for the most people".

all of you all seem to be somewhat avoiding another quote necessary thing: everytime you sit down your, shall I say anus, touchs the surface you sit on..for hygienes sake people...be rational or I'll never sit on a public chair again.

[Volcanicity]

I disagree. I wouldn't oppose a movement toward universal nudism.

(Of course, if someone had, say, a wound that needed to stay dressed, I'd agree that would be better covered up, but I doubt that's the kind of thing you had in mind.)
No thats definetly not what I had in mind.I had the misfortune to stumble upon a nudist beach a few years ago that seemed to be just for the very elderly,and that's something a guy does'nt forget about too quickly,it seems to have been burnt onto my retinas ever since.

[¿Que?]

I'm a utilitarian communist and I strongly disagree since you completely missused the term utiltiarian, meaning "sparten" while in actuality it means "greatest happiness for the most people".

all of you all seem to be somewhat avoiding another quote necessary thing: everytime you sit down your, shall I say anus, touchs the surface you sit on..for hygienes sake people...be rational or I'll never sit on a public chair again.
Point taken. I was using the word in a general sense, not in the philosophical way one might expect on revleft. But I think it's a valid distinction. Communist societies are not just organized around what is strictly necessary, practical or functional. Art does not serve any immediate function. There may be some latent effect, such as helping us understand the world, or making us feel good, but I don't think this is the function of art. Because to specify a specific function for art the concept itself becomes precarious.

I think there will be art in communism and to think otherwise is preposterous!

[ContrarianLemming]

Point taken. I was using the word in a general sense, not in the philosophical way one might expect on revleft.you give revleft far far to much credit.



I think there will be art in communism and to think otherwise is preposterous! "If I can't dance..." you know :)

[Monkey Riding Dragon]

I have no objection to public nudity. It happens to be legal where I live and I see no reason to be ashamed of taking advantage of that fact from time to time. Today you see feminists protesting that it's now once again become a social taboo to go bra-less at beaches. We've seen bra-less protests to that effect in multiple places in recent years, from France to Maine, USA. These protests are essentially against a form of inequality in that men can go around topless, but women can't. And yes, that is a form of oppression. There's nothing more sexual about the female breasts than there is about the male chest. People perceive that there is only because our media sensationalizes the former by always covering that area up. I'd argue that we shouldn't sensationalize any aspect of the human body in such a way. It can only lead to oppression.

What El Vagoneta pointed out really is correct, I think. A communist world won't take on the appearance of a global nude beach minus the beach. Clothing does still have a practical purpose that people will keep it around for. But public nudity will certainly be a socially acceptable option and there will be no censorship of nudity in media. Thus we'll learn to get the hell over our anatomical differences.

All this said, I'm not an advocate of sexual exploitation either. People often confuse a lack of prudishness with support for things like the prostitution industry. It's just as wrong to exploit people as it is to oppress them. Communist society will feature none of this. The point is that one's sexuality should be under their control, not under someone else's.

[ContrarianLemming]

And yes, that is a form of oppression. it would be oppression if men and women both had breasts.


There's nothing more sexual about the female breasts than there is about the male chest. People perceive that there is only because our media sensationalizes the former by always covering that area up. I'd argue that we shouldn't sensationalize any aspect of the human body in such a way. It can only lead to oppression.I call BS on that, we have ahd a thing for boobies for a lot longer since fox news.


and there will be no censorship of nudity in media.to be frank, i hope their is, it's not some evil capitalist conspiracy to protect us from knowing whats between a ladies legs, it's something we all realize without being thought: cover up, and it serves more then utilitarian (gerneral usage) purpose.
In fact, and I hate to say this, I think all this talk of us living in a world where suddenly - because workers now control production - we'll suddenly stop caring about our dicks hanging out..puleez!

we wore stuff to cover up in primitive communism..it's not capitalism that makes me wear my clothing in doors, I'm not brainwashed and you people are suggesting we are.

[Monkey Riding Dragon]

Incorrect. The female breasts objectively are not sexual body parts, contrary to common fetish promoted in our media.

[ContrarianLemming]

Incorrect. The female breasts objectively are not sexual body parts, contrary to common fetish promoted in our media.

get real, really, they get bigger when aroused, they cause orgasm (oh yes they do) and I think this is irrational.


objectively

none of this is, inherantly

[gorillafuck]

Incorrect. The female breasts objectively are not sexual body parts, contrary to common fetish promoted in our media.
I am skeptical that the perception of female breasts as sexual is due to the media.

[ContrarianLemming]

I am skeptical that the perception of female breasts as sexual is due to the media.

It something that has evolved seperately in various cultues - and not only western ones, and something that came before class society.

[EvilRedGuy]

I allways want to add this.

1: No censorship, peoples will have to get used to that people can decide whatever they intend on doing whith their OWN body, being naked, etc People will get used to it, or theres allso that if you dont like it THEN DONT WATCH.

2: There will be no form of oppression of any kind, so neither for nudism, people can be nudist/etc if they want to.

[Reznov]

The real question should is will people still buy 200$ Jordans shoes or expensive clothing like 20$ for one shirt at a mall, or over 50-60 dollars for one pair of jeans.

Is this really necessary? Will Communism be rid of wanting to look better and fresh then someone else still play a role in society? (Judged by how expensive your clothing is?)

[EvilRedGuy]

it would be oppression if men and women both had breasts.

I call BS on that, we have ahd a thing for boobies for a lot longer since fox news.

to be frank, i hope their is, it's not some evil capitalist conspiracy to protect us from knowing whats between a ladies legs, it's something we all realize without being thought: cover up, and it serves more then utilitarian (gerneral usage) purpose.
In fact, and I hate to say this, I think all this talk of us living in a world where suddenly - because workers now control production - we'll suddenly stop caring about our dicks hanging out..puleez!

we wore stuff to cover up in primitive communism..it's not capitalism that makes me wear my clothing in doors, I'm not brainwashed and you people are suggesting we are.

1: It is oppresion that men can do whithout cloth but woman have to have cloth. Both, not depending on what seuxel organs you have so be able to fully naked/half naked/non-naked if they choose to, even in public where they can wak free if they want.

2: You're thinking to deep into it. If you get an erection by watching another person it dosen't mean we should "help" YOU from watching, just learn to handle yourself or go somewhere else.

3: Censoring is a form of repressing nudists, NO CENSORSHIP TO NUDISM. Dont wanna watch? THEN don't watch. :thumbup1:

[Volcanicity]

The real question should is will people still buy 200$ Jordans shoes or expensive clothing like 20$ for one shirt at a mall, or over 50-60 dollars for one pair of jeans.

Is this really necessary? Will Communism be rid of wanting to look better and fresh then someone else still play a role in society? (Judged by how expensive your clothing is?)
Yeah but the difference between buying those things now and under Communism is that kids in a sweatshop in India or somewhere want be making them and being exploited.Plus people will only buy according to their needs.

[ContrarianLemming]

The real question should is will people still buy 200$ Jordans shoes or expensive clothing like 20$ for one shirt at a mall, or over 50-60 dollars for one pair of jeans.

Is this really necessary? Will Communism be rid of wanting to look better and fresh then someone else still play a role in society? (Judged by how expensive your clothing is?)

to be frank, I've never been judged or harrassed or thought to be less good looking because I wear cheap cloths.

"wll comumnism" do this and that and solve every problem is not something I think about, since it's just a mode of production whereby the workers control production for utility and the locals own it, nothing more, it's not eliminating annoying ads, it's not no more barbie dolls or no more racism.

We could have racism, sexism, religious fundamentalism, annoying infomercials, fashion based societies etc and still have a classless stateless society.

I know it all seems reasonable, but this is utopian

[ContrarianLemming]

eah but the difference between buying those things now and under Communism is that kids in a sweatshop in India or somewhere want be making them and being exploited.Plus people will only buy according to their needs.

again, this is BS, people will buy what they wanna buy, people wont suddenly be filled with community spirit and only take what they need and be super selfless and volunteer for childrens soccor coach.

[EvilRedGuy]

The real question should is will people still buy 200$ Jordans shoes or expensive clothing like 20$ for one shirt at a mall, or over 50-60 dollars for one pair of jeans.

Is this really necessary? Will Communism be rid of wanting to look better and fresh then someone else still play a role in society? (Judged by how expensive your clothing is?)

No, i know some peoples goes after "what is expense" but that is just for bragging rights and elitism. People can go for what cloth they like, not necessarily because its expensive, just because it looks cool.

Or maybe i misunderstod your question?

[EvilRedGuy]

to be frank, I've never been judged or harrassed or thought to be less good looking because I wear cheap cloths.

"wll comumnism" do this and that and solve every problem is not something I think about, since it's just a mode of production whereby the workers control production for utility and the locals own it, nothing more, it's not eliminating annoying ads, it's not no more barbie dolls or no more racism.

We could have racism, sexism, religious fundamentalism, annoying infomercials, fashion based societies etc and still have a classless stateless society.

I know it all seems reasonable, but this is utopian

Huh? How can there be racism, nationalism, sexism in a Communist society when Communism is a classless society? All that is classism, even fashion today is classism, and there will be no religious fundementalism because there'll be no organised religion allowed. And informercials are only there because of profit, you know that.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

The real question should is will people still buy 200$ Jordans shoes or expensive clothing like 20$ for one shirt at a mall, or over 50-60 dollars for one pair of jeans.

How are people going to buy anything when there is no money and nothing is for sale?


Is this really necessary? Will Communism be rid of wanting to look better and fresh then someone else still play a role in society? (Judged by how expensive your clothing is?)

Looking good doesn't have to be a zero-sum game.

[Volcanicity]

again, this is BS, people will buy what they wanna buy, people wont suddenly be filled with community spirit and only take what they need and be super selfless and volunteer for childrens soccor coach.
No this is BS,the people making the goods won't be being exploited.Why would society under Communism be selfish like you're making it out to be?

[ContrarianLemming]

Huh? How can there be racism, nationalism, sexism in a Communist society when Communism is a classless society?

I didn't say nationalism.
The kibbutz of Israel were regarded as communist societies by many, what else? they were crazy anti arab racists, but they were still classless commies.


All that is classism, even fashion today is classismno, racism and sexism exist without class, demonstratably. Sexism predates class.


and there will be no religious fundementalism because there'll be no organised religion allowed. ooooh really? So all them theistic leftists can just piss off? You know most of the Spanish anarchists of 36' were catholics, shame that.


And informercials are only there because of profit, you know that.actually, i find them rather informative

Why would society under Communism be selfish like you're making it out to be?

I don't think people would be selfish, I am challenging your presuposition that communism will mean less selfishness when this is harldy a characteristic of communism.

You all have an incorrect vision of communism, it's just classlessness, that's about it.

[ZeroNowhere]

it's not eliminating annoying adsTo be honest, I think that this would be a likely consequence of social control of production, and the elimination of the profit motive. Whether either labour credits or free access are being utilised, it doesn't seem that modern annoying ads would serve much purpose; on the other hand, it would still be fairly useful to have informative ads when new types of products are created, and so on. However, I agree with your general point. Will people still want to look better than others? I don't see why not. However, this kind of discussion is generally what a De Leonite over at the WSM forums called WAS- "wild-ass speculation."


Huh? How can there be racism, nationalism, sexism in a Communist society when Communism is a classless society?Because racism is not directly equivalent to classism. There are black capitalists and white workers, and workers racist against black workers but not against white workers. While it may originate from classism, the two are not equivalent, and racism may well exist when labour is directly social. There's no reason to suppose that racists will suddenly go, "Oh, hey, there's no more working or capitalist class, I think I'll stop hating blacks now."

[Vanguard1917]

and not for something as silly as covering eachother's sexuel tissue

What's silly about that?

[Obs]

It's funny because you all have a very detailed image of how communist society will be, and in fact we have no idea because we're not even remotely close to being able to build communism.

[Summerspeaker]

seriously: changing the mode of production and political nature of society will not bring about a garden of Eden or perpetual jungle orgy.

On the other hand, smashing the patriarchy and strengthening belief in bodily sovereignty should undermine the nudity taboo.

[Manic Impressive]

Everyone is taking a very western view on nudity where as in reality right now in many societies women going topless is an everyday normal thing. In fact in some cultures there are times when it is rude for women not to be topless (is that oppression too?). So I think in a stateless society it would depend on what conditions you are living under and what you need the clothes for.

As for wanting better clothes men and women often want better clothes in order to attract a partner, you could say they are the human equivalent of plumage. But in a society where production is run efficiently I would think clothes would be pretty much the same for all in a community and it may be up to the individual to customize it themselves. If my offspring take after me they will have to do a lot of customizing to get a date :laugh:

[ContrarianLemming]

Everyone is taking a very western view on nudity

we're western and the society we're going to live in will be western (most likely) so yes, we're going to be western about it, that's a given.

I mean, japanese women don't wear bra's but we don't need to bring this up anytime we talk about boobs, which is often enough.

[Manic Impressive]

The discussion is about human behaviour in regards to nudity and clothes, so I feel only looking at one section of the world is a fairly narrow perspective.

[Ocean Seal]

Somehow I'm not sure if this is my largest concern. Are people intimidated by each other's sexuality? Yes. In the event that there would be no law against nudism would nudists still be ostracized? Yes. I'm not sure that nudism even in the future would be completely acceptable. But then again I don't know. Everything is possible.

[Sugar Hill Kevis]

So in a communist society, clothes will probably be different, since they won't be loaded with the bourgeoisie ideological baggage of fashion.

I don't want to be part of your communism.

[bcbm]

edit: seriously: changing the mode of production and political nature of society will not bring about a garden of Eden or perpetual jungle orgy.

then why bother?


also there appear to be a lot of people with crystal balls in this thread. mind passing one along to me, i want some good stock tips

[ContrarianLemming]

then why bother?

Because changing the mode of production and bringing about classlessness is how "to solve the animal problem of man", so that we may focus on these human problems.



also there appear to be a lot of people with crystal balls in this thread. mind passing one along to me, i want some good stock tips

to be sure, I see nothing beyond the basics of communism, everything else is unknown.

[EvilRedGuy]

Ohh fuck this shit, averyone completely misunderstod AVERY-FUCKING-THING. Im too tired for this shit. ContrarianLemming and Vanguard1917 better be joking.

I certainly don't wanna live in a society where some dictator called ContrarianLemming forces me to wear cloth. I probably could explain this to averyone, but im just gonna let it fucking die because im too tired of this.

[ZeroNowhere]

I don't think that I'd like to live in a society where there were people named 'ContrarianLemming' either.

[ContrarianLemming]

Forgive me, but communism is not "Logans run".

edit: I think I've been fairly repesctful in presenting my argument that communism does not mean a lack of sexual inhibition, axiety, sexism or racism, presupposing that communism will naturally mean a society of people now free to cast off useless clothing is not reasonable, there is nothing characteristic in communism about nudism, or anything outside of classlessness
I'm not a dictator :p And thats the second time i've been called one this week

[EvilRedGuy]

I didn't say nationalism.
The kibbutz of Israel were regarded as communist societies by many, what else? they were crazy anti arab racists, but they were still classless commies.

no, racism and sexism exist without class, demonstratably. Sexism predates class.

ooooh really? So all them theistic leftists can just piss off? You know most of the Spanish anarchists of 36' were catholics, shame that.

actually, i find them rather informative


I don't think people would be selfish, I am challenging your presuposition that communism will mean less selfishness when this is harldy a characteristic of communism.

You all have an incorrect vision of communism, it's just classlessness, that's about it.

1: I added nationalism myself, so what? It was just an extra.
2 There has been NO Israelian communist society, and yes i know you can be more than a Commuinst WHERE DID I SAY THIS?
3: racism and sexism is a product of a classist society!
4: When did i say that? all religions, like monarchy WILL wither away, maybe by the digital age.
5: Okay i misread it, informacials should excist to INFORM the people not commercials, which are generated for profit.
6:When did i say peoples would be slefish? it would be the oppesite, reduced.
7: Wrong, classless and stateless, and racism, sexism, nationalism, etc is the product of classism, so they will wither away aswell.

[EvilRedGuy]

What's silly about that?

Just don't tell people what the fuck to wear.

[EvilRedGuy]

Forgive me, but communism is not "Logans run".

edit: I think I've been fairly repesctful in presenting my argument that communism does not mean a lack of sexual inhibition, axiety, sexism or racism, presupposing that communism will naturally mean a society of people now free to cast off useless clothing is not reasonable, there is nothing characteristic in communism about nudism, or anything outside of classlessness
I'm not a dictator :p And thats the second time i've been called one this week

So you think repressing nudists/nudism is good? No wonder you got called a dictator.

[Ele'ill]

It's so you don't go out and sit down at a pubic table at a restaurant or wherever and get butt herpes.

[ContrarianLemming]

So you think repressing nudists/nudism is good?

wrong, I support it fully, that you didn't notice this doesn't surprise me.


1: I added nationalism myself, so what? It was just an extra.

actually nationalism is unque in that it requires a nation state, racism and sexism predate class society, they are prehistoric.


2 There has been NO Israelian communist society, and yes i know you can be more than a Commuinst WHERE DID I SAY THIS?

I don't understand the second part of this sentence
the Kibbutz was an Israeli communist group of communes, rural.


3: raxism and sexism is a product of a classist society!



you know covering your ears wont make this true, they both predate class society, and they both have existed in classless societies.

you are being very narrow minded here, I am presenting what I see as pretty decent proof that neither are characteristics of a class society (they both predate it and exist outside of it) and yet you are just repeating nuh uh, wrong wrong


4: When did i say that? all religions, like monarchy WILL wither away, maybe by the digital age.

I can't read the future, neither can you.

I don't see how you..

[ContrarianLemming]

You knoew I don't think anyone here has been advocating forcing you to wear clothing, and you have been pretty outward in support of nudism, saying that it will come naturally, and you've been pretty agressive towards anyone that suggests that nudism will not be any easier socially in communism or capitalism, I think you have lost perspective.

[Vanguard1917]

Everyone is taking a very western view on nudity where as in reality right now in many societies women going topless is an everyday normal thing.

The implication here is that women outside the West do not cover their breasts in public, which obviously is not true for the vast majority of cases.



Ohh fuck this shit, averyone completely misunderstod AVERY-FUCKING-THING. Im too tired for this shit. ContrarianLemming and Vanguard1917 better be joking.

Joking about what? That i disgaree with your view that it's 'silly' for me to cover my 'sexual tissue'?

[EvilRedGuy]

You knoew I don't think anyone here has been advocating forcing you to wear clothing, and you have been pretty outward in support of nudism, saying that it will come naturally, and you've been pretty agressive towards anyone that suggests that nudism will not be any easier socially in communism or capitalism, I think you have lost perspective.

Who cares if it will not be socially easier, if peoples dont want to wear cloths then neither should they!

So you're not against nudism? Good. How about mastubation in public, i believe in that too.

Btw i think you're just jealous on El 'Vagoneta' and 'Monkey Riding Dragon' because they have a point(s).

[EvilRedGuy]

Joking about what? That i disgaree with your view that it's 'silly' for me to cover my 'sexual tissue'?


But it is silly to cover your sexuel tissue.

[Vanguard1917]

But it is silly to cover your sexuel tissue.

So you've claimed more than once.

[Vanguard1917]

So you're not against nudism? Good. How about mastubation in public, i believe in that too.

I believe this is referred to as 'trolling' in the parlance of internet forums.

[Ele'ill]

Would it (still) be considered shameful if you were standing in line at a cafe or wherever and got an errection? How would this be dealt with?

Would gutter-punks be cleaner without their clothes on?

What if your genitals were weeping because of infection- would you be allowed to walk around in public with pus dripping out onto the ground?

Would it then be illegal to run up to someone and put a trench coat on? - To suddenly walk into a church and put on a pair of pants and shirt?

[EvilRedGuy]

Would it (still) be considered shameful if you were standing in line at a cafe or wherever and got an errection? How would this be dealt with?

Would gutter-punks be cleaner without their clothes on?

What if your genitals were weeping because of infection- would you be allowed to walk around in public with pus dripping out onto the ground?

Would it then be illegal to run up to someone and put a trench coat on? - To suddenly walk into a church and put on a pair of pants and shirt?

1: Yes
2: Yes
3: Yes

[bcbm]

i don't see any reason why a massive shift in human existence will not result in a similarly massive change in attitudes towards just about everything; i'm not sure why there is any need to speculate much beyond that?

[Manic Impressive]

The implication here is that women outside the West do not cover their breasts in public, which obviously is not true for the vast majority of cases.


No it isn't. I said many, which there are but then that depends on your definition of many let me put it this way more than a couple (2) more than a few (3) so many OK so stop trying to pick holes. :rolleyes:

I also want to say I partly agree with ContrarianLemmin, communism is not about utopia. Things aren't going to magically get better straight away there will still be natural disasters, personal heartache, arguments and some social prejudices but over time social prejudices will fade away and there may be new ones that take their place. But I do not think that nudity will particularly be one of those that will last.
It is fun to imagine what a society would be like and as long as people know it is just fun stating your opinion about the future it's ok. For those that don't like it don't read/respond to threads like these and find something that suits your tastes.

However, I do want to say I completely disagree with your point about racism being an inbuilt human characteristic that dates back to pre-history. Firstly it's prehistory so how do you know? As far as I'm aware there were no cave paintings of people discriminating against other races if there is I want proofs. Racism is largely a concept enforced by the ruling class when it suits them usually in times of conquest or extreme hardship "don't blame the leadership blame the funny coloured chapies" A couple of examples from tapestries and historical records it has been found that one of Henry the 8ths favourite trumpeters was black. Also a skeleton recently discovered in York was one of a woman of African origin who was very wealthy and by her wealth would have had some degree of acceptance in "high" society (as much as a woman could have at that time). This was determined by the style of her burial.
Your opinion on racism is just bourgeois propaganda. Propaganda that has been going on for hundreds of years so you can't be blamed for believing it.

watch this Micheal Parenti Race, Gender and Class Struggle
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KAi7X4wOvo

[Obs]

1: Yes
2: Yes
3: Yes
Dude, why does this even matter to you??

[Peace on Earth]

If women want to uncover their breasts, so be it. Men and women should be equal in that respect. However, for the sake of hygeine, I'd ask, and be in favor for, people keep their genitals covered, especially when they sit down somewhere that I may want to sit at a later time.

[Magón]

I don't care if someone's a nudist or not. I just don't want to have to walk out of my house, and suddenly see some naked dude walking down my street, or jogging by. They can do whatever they want in their homes, or places of other nudist groups/things, but I don't want to have to see it on a daily basis. (Same thing goes for chick nudists, so don't think I'm just targeting men. I'm targeting all nudists. :P)

[Martin Blank]

I guess, with all the bullshit going on here recently, I can understand how this thread slipped under the radar. But now it goes home.

Moved to Chit Chat.

[Quail]

The only thing that bothers me is that it's no acceptable for women to take their tops off, but men can. It also seems somewhat socially unacceptable to not wear a bra, but I can usually get away with it.

[Palingenisis]

The only thing that bothers me is that it's no acceptable for women to take their tops off, but men can. It also seems somewhat socially unacceptable to not wear a bra, but I can usually get away with it.

Its much more acceptable for a guy to go shirtless in England than in Ireland or mainland western Europe...But the further east you go on the mainland the more acceptable it seems to become....Also it was much more acceptable generally in the 70s than it is now.

[Kuppo Shakur]

Hygiene. Style.
Clothes win.

[EvilRedGuy]

I don't care if someone's a nudist or not. I just don't want to have to walk out of my house, and suddenly see some naked dude walking down my street, or jogging by. They can do whatever they want in their homes, or places of other nudist groups/things, but I don't want to have to see it on a daily basis. (Same thing goes for chick nudists, so don't think I'm just targeting men. I'm targeting all nudists. :P)


Can't you just get used to peoples being different (african, chinese, greek, naked, etc.) Or are you against change? People shouldn't cover themself because they are told so, only IF they want to. And you don't agree.

[EvilRedGuy]

If women want to uncover their breasts, so be it. Men and women should be equal in that respect. However, for the sake of hygeine, I'd ask, and be in favor for, people keep their genitals covered, especially when they sit down somewhere that I may want to sit at a later time.


What exackly is unhygeinic about being naked, its not that some are gonna leave their jizz/feces/urin on a chair in a public restaurant, you go to toilet when you need to/etc.

[EvilRedGuy]

Dude, why does this even matter to you??

Dude, thrust me it matters for me that people aren't repressed. Maybe you should care too, considering you're a communist.

[EvilRedGuy]

Hygiene. Style.
Clothes win.


Actually there is nothing "Hygienic" about cloths, its exackly the oppesite of that, cloths cant get dirty and needs washing, however if you are a nudist(for exampel) you only need to wash your human body, and thats all.

Clothes -1
Naked +1, Naked wins.

[EvilRedGuy]

I guess, with all the bullshit going on here recently, I can understand how this thread slipped under the radar. But now it goes home.

Moved to Chit Chat.


So that wasn't enough for you, huh? First you'll ban 3 good members of the forums (The Anarchist Tension, AK, this is an invasion) and now you're gonna force a thread and call it bullshit because it suits you.

You should learn some manners.

[EvilRedGuy]

The only thing that bothers me is that it's no acceptable for women to take their tops off, but men can. It also seems somewhat socially unacceptable to not wear a bra, but I can usually get away with it.


Exackly! Its repression against women!!!

[9]

Dude, thrust me it matters for me that people aren't repressed. Maybe you should care too, considering you're a communist.

:rolleyes: Freudian slip much?

[bcbm]

ahahaha nice one 9

[EvilRedGuy]

I don't get it even after i read this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freudian_slip

[Obs]

Dude, thrust me it matters for me that people aren't repressed. Maybe you should care too, considering you're a communist.
I don't feel represssed by clothes. I feel repressed by the exploitation of labour for the sake of amassing surplus labour.


So that wasn't enough for you, huh? First you'll ban 3 good members of the forums (The Anarchist Tension, AK, this is an invasion) and now you're gonna force a thread and call it bullshit because it suits you.

You should learn some manners.
Shut the fuck up.

[Quail]

Exackly! Its repression against women!!!
I don't think the sexism comes about because clothes are inherently bad though. It's more because we live in a sexist society where women aren't supposed to show their breasts.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I don't get it even after i read this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freudian_slip

You said, "dude, thrust (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/thrust#Verb) me".

[EvilRedGuy]

You said, "dude, thrust (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/thrust#Verb) me".

ohhh, i get it...

[EvilRedGuy]

I don't feel represssed by clothes. I feel repressed by the exploitation of labour for the sake of amassing surplus labour.


Shut the fuck up.

Who cares about you. Some (nudists) feel repressed by cloth.

And im happy to see you in such mood today. :) :( :cool:

[Obs]

Who cares about you. Some (nudists) feel repressed by cloth.

And im happy to see you in such mood today. :) :( :cool:
I'm sure a lot of people would feel repressed if they faced the danger of seeing your pasty, fat ass every time they went outside.

[Il Medico]

or perpetual jungle orgy.
WHAT?!?!? But if we don't have jungle orgies, how can we have psychedelic jungle orgies?? HOW!??!

[Nwoye]

I'm sure a lot of people would feel repressed if they faced the danger of seeing your pasty, fat ass every time they went outside.
Thank you for this useful post.

[Vanguard1917]

No it isn't. I said many, which there are but then that depends on your definition of many let me put it this way more than a couple (2) more than a few (3) so many OK so stop trying to pick holes.

Well you said it's a 'western view', when it's not. Wearing clothes in public is almost universal.

[Obs]

Thank you for this useful post.
I try.

[EvilRedGuy]

I'm sure a lot of people would feel repressed if they faced the danger of seeing your pasty, fat ass every time they went outside.

And what if im not fat? :)

[9]

man, somebody should really trash this shit.

[Quail]

man, somebody should really trash this shit.
Agreed.

[EvilRedGuy]

Agreed allso, i got my questions answered. ContrarianLemming is a Nudistophobe and he dosen't like public masturbation either! :cool:

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Locky locky.