View Full Version : Nude Hiking?
This German fellow may want to export his predilection
Article here (http://www.reuters.com/article/oddlyEnoughNews/idUSL343921120080903?feedType=RSS&feedName=oddlyEnoughNews&rpc=22&sp=true)
So, is there gonna be a WhiteBlaze nekkid hiker group? Perhaps we could team up with hammock folks to give new meaning to the term "hang". :banana
Pedaling Fool
09-05-2008, 09:30
From the article:
"...Grawert, a janitor, told a local German newspaper he planned to continue campaigning for the right to partake in organized all-natural hikes despite his troubles with the law.
Naked hiking has gained a following since the German Society of Nudists joined the German Sports Association.
Nude bathing is accepted and allowed in parts of Germany, especially on designated beaches on the Baltic Sea coast. But naked joggers have been fined in the past for running through forests wearing nothing but socks and shoes".
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's so easy to point out the contradictions and hypocrisy of these groups that claim to be "all-natural" or "one-with-nature". Complete BS.
dessertrat
09-05-2008, 09:39
These people are exhibitionists making excuses for themselves, pure and simple.
Monkeywrench
09-05-2008, 11:03
These people are exhibitionists making excuses for themselves, pure and simple.
Few things in life are "pure and simple".
dessertrat
09-05-2008, 11:37
Few things in life are "pure and simple".
You're right, and I stand corrected.
These people are just exhibitionists making excuses for themselves.
Is that a Leki or are you glad to see me?
1.) Do Icicles Count as pack weight, or "skin out" weight?
2.) Officer: What are you doing here Sir?
Nude Hiker: Just hanging out, officer.
3.) "I wish I were a Oscar Myer Winer, that is who I truly want to be"
"and if I were a Oscar Myer winer, everyone would be in love with me."
4.) Did you see a Nude hiker come by here?"
"Yes sir, officer ... he was HEADDED off that way". (groan)
5.) "You feeling ok?"
"Just dragging a_s, that's all".
Come on ... these were just BEGGING to be told
taildragger
09-05-2008, 13:40
gram weenies
SunnyWalker
09-05-2008, 23:02
You better be careful. You could get arrested as a Sex Offender and once you have that label, on your record, it will affect the rest of your life. I work at a prison and there are sex offenders there. I know of many who are released back into the free world and it is a very difficult row to hoe. So, if you wish to have some fun, have some fun but I would counsel you to not do this. Of course you did not ask for my advice.
There was nudity among the college set, guys and gals, two weekends ago in the whites. Gave new meaning to Liberty Springs campsite. :sun
Jim Adams
09-06-2008, 07:49
I don't understand why people get so upset about nudity.
geek
minnesotasmith
09-06-2008, 08:29
I don't understand why people get so upset about nudity.
geek
Because nudity is associated with sexuality in our species. Sexuality, like fear, hate, and greed, is an extremely powerful motivating force for good and ill among people. Powerful forces are best harnessed or at least not able to cause more than an acceptable amount of damage. Think of the aphorism about fire; 'it is a good servant but a terrible master'. When you see an an individual or a group of people (on up to national or civilizational scale) who seems to consistently make poor decisions (that lead to particularly poor outcomes), odds are that one of those motivations operates out of whack in them.
Because nudity is associated with sexuality in our species.
Actually, you left out the words "with some" between the words "sexuality" and "in". The blanket statement above is patently false.
minnesotasmith
09-06-2008, 08:49
Actually, you left out the words "with some" between the words "sexuality" and "in". The blanket statement above is patently false.
Even societies that have accepted substantial partial nudity (women and men wearing only loincloths in tropical hunter-gatherer groups) still attach major moment of a sexual nature to going that last bit further toward total nudity. Likewise, settings in which total nudity is allowed or even mandated (group bathing in Japan, or some nudist colonies, say), there are strictures in place to distinguish it from overlapping into the "other" nudity situation.
So, yeah, nudity always has association with sexuality in our species. It may be suppressed at a given level or setting, but the linkage never ceases to exist.
fiddlehead
09-06-2008, 08:53
Careful what you wish for.
I live near some of the world's best beaches. They are topless beaches.
For every eye-opener topless beauty we see here, we probably see 3 or 4 fat, old, ugly women. I wouldn't think i'd ever say this but: I'd rather they would not be topless beaches. Unless they limited to college age or something.
Anyway, my 2 cents on the subject.
Rockhound
09-06-2008, 18:12
These people are exhibitionists making excuses for themselves, pure and simple.
exhibitionists perhaps. But what exactly are they making excuses for? seems more like they're exercizing freedoms and testing boundries.
Rockhound
09-06-2008, 18:44
we are way too repressed in our society. Ironicaly this may be part of the reason our country has so many sex offenders. I feel there is a large segment of the population that has been conditioned to associate nudity with sin. "For they saw they were naked and they were ashamed" What exactly were they ashamed of? Being naked? the way god made them? The human form is beautiful in all its shapes and sizes and can be admired without the act of intercourse becoming involved. Would'nt be nice to run through a field naked on a hot summer day or skinny dip underneath cascading mountain water or even summit in Maine in the nude without the threat of criminal prosecution? I say if you ever feel the urge to be naked outside then go for it.
Rockhound
09-06-2008, 18:45
see y'all next summer solstice
I don't understand why people get so upset about nudity.geek
exactly. thank you. the only thing to get upset about is one's own uncomfortableness with ones own body.....
Because nudity is associated with sexuality in our species. Sexuality, like fear, hate, and greed, is an extremely powerful motivating force for good and ill among people. Powerful forces are best harnessed or at least not able to cause more than an acceptable amount of damage. Think of the aphorism about fire; 'it is a good servant but a terrible master'. When you see an an individual or a group of people (on up to national or civilizational scale) who seems to consistently make poor decisions (that lead to particularly poor outcomes), odds are that one of those motivations operates out of whack in them.
so...nudity = anarchy. please, for the love of god, correct me.
Even societies that have accepted substantial partial nudity (women and men wearing only loincloths in tropical hunter-gatherer groups) still attach major moment of a sexual nature to going that last bit further toward total nudity. Likewise, settings in which total nudity is allowed or even mandated (group bathing in Japan, or some nudist colonies, say), there are strictures in place to distinguish it from overlapping into the "other" nudity situation.
So, yeah, nudity always has association with sexuality in our species. It may be suppressed at a given level or setting, but the linkage never ceases to exist.
i think the word here is suppression...
exhibitionists perhaps. But what exactly are they making excuses for? seems more like they're exercizing freedoms and testing boundries.
they're not. some people are just uncomfortable with nudity
bloodmountainman
09-06-2008, 19:13
we are way too repressed in our society. Ironicaly this may be part of the reason our country has so many sex offenders. I feel there is a large segment of the population that has been conditioned to associate nudity with sin. "For they saw they were naked and they were ashamed" What exactly were they ashamed of? Being naked? the way god made them? The human form is beautiful in all its shapes and sizes and can be admired without the act of intercourse becoming involved. Would'nt be nice to run through a field naked on a hot summer day or skinny dip underneath cascading mountain water or even summit in Maine in the nude without the threat of criminal prosecution? I say if you ever feel the urge to be naked outside then go for it.
The being ashamed part came from an knowledge of doing wrong.... not nudity! The world's oldest profession is clothes maker (not prositution) It's good old fashioned "ass covering".
minnesotasmith
09-06-2008, 19:27
so...nudity = anarchy. please, for the love of god, correct me.
Anarchy is a word you brought in. I'll stay with my original position and terminology of nudity (which is associated with sexuality, as I explained above) being part of a powerful force in human society, that can operate for good or bad. Sexuality is bad when it leads to infidelity that breaks up marriages, incest that produces damaged children and genetically defective progeny, perverse/promiscuous sex that spreads behaviorally-transmitted modern-day incurable plagues like herpes/HIV, etc. It's good when it encourages healthy ambition (in men and women AS men and women, respectively), when it leads to and helps maintain longterm faithful traditional marriages, especially those with children produced by the husband and wife in that marriage, giving the best chance to rear them to maturity as productive, healthy adults not below their parents in life class/attainments. The sexuality nudity is inevitably associated with can strengthen or corrode individuals, as it does families, and nations.
Interesting point here: nations and groups that are healthy and expanding are commonly a bit on the prudish side historically. The "anything-goes" ones are typically decaying and declining, apparently in no small part BC of their decadence. Nothing of "theirs" to defend for the men, nothing in personal life to have to strive to achieve in a productive way for anyone; is it any wonder such places go to rot? National corruption historically has a positive correlation with licentiousness.
Apt relevant observation from Rudyard Kipling's astute on-topic poem "The Gods of the Copybook Headings", is Stanza 6:
http://www.kipling.org.uk/poems_copybook.htm
Just as illegal recreational drugs have pernicious effects that operate with full effectiveness whether or not their users/advocates can understand or will admit to them, so does sexuality outside its proper channels.
----------------------------------------------------------------
That settled, back to our humor thread.
----------------------------------------------------------------
I'd like to know if any adherents to Nude Hiking Day have ever been the first to discover any of those massive yellow-jacket nests we've been hearing about. They'd probably be up for admission to the Guiness Book of Records for most venomous insect bites in a short period of time... :eek:;)
I'll bet the relative lack of shade is the #1 reason there's no equivalent day on the CDT/PCT. Imagine getting second-degree sunburn in locations normally covered by clothing... I think that's in the category of a "Just shoot me NOW!!" situation (or at least a "Better you than me!" one).:eek: ;)
So MS, if we are to believe your thesis on nudity is correct, at what age does nudity cross over into sexuality? At birth? At 2? 5? 10? Puberty? Do enlighten us, please.
Can't believe y'all don't have MS on your ignore list already.
Do yourselves a favor.... i did, lol.
minnesota smith,
thank you for your pertinent and asture observations that kipling had
given to us, but you make a lot of references as if you had
said them! you must give credit where credit is due, and not to your
credit as if you had said them. in other words if you quote someone
say its there words not your!
I don't want to get cropdusted by no nude hiker. Wouldn't all the "twigs and berrys'" get in the way of your "twig and berry's"
Pedaling Fool
09-06-2008, 22:14
From the article:
"...Grawert, a janitor, told a local German newspaper he planned to continue campaigning for the right to partake in organized all-natural hikes despite his troubles with the law.
Naked hiking has gained a following since the German Society of Nudists joined the German Sports Association.
Nude bathing is accepted and allowed in parts of Germany, especially on designated beaches on the Baltic Sea coast. But naked joggers have been fined in the past for running through forests wearing nothing but socks and shoes".
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's so easy to point out the contradictions and hypocrisy of these groups that claim to be "all-natural" or "one-with-nature". Complete BS.
After seeing the direction that this thread is going, I just wanted to clarify my stance on nudity. I don't care. I only want to see nude hot chicks, but if some guy enters my field of vision, I'll just look away, because to me it's disgusting, but I'll get over it.
NO, it won't destroy the psyche of children, yes it maybe embarrassing, but they'll get over it. Kids aren't as fragile as some will have you believe.
My only problem with them is their hypocrisy. They’re a bunch of stupid hippies that think walking nude will somehow get one closer to nature, yet many of them wear shoes, I guess they don’t want to be that close to nature.
No one really understands nature, they just throw around this word and try and feel at-one with it.
Stupid SOBs…And who the hell is Mother Nature?
Wise Old Owl
09-06-2008, 22:27
Careful what you wish for.
I live near some of the world's best beaches. They are topless beaches.
For every eye-opener topless beauty we see here, we probably see 3 or 4 fat, old, ugly women. I wouldn't think i'd ever say this but: I'd rather they would not be topless beaches. Unless they limited to college age or something.
Anyway, my 2 cents on the subject.
Oh you just didn't know ol' wrinkles could happen there...
Call now for this one time special offer:
Due to a manufacturing error, we have a limited supply of Speedo sized Depends available for sale to the general public.
Now enjoy your day at the beach without having to constantly run into the water.
Florida residents please add 7% sales tax.
Paul Bunyan
09-06-2008, 23:01
So, personally, i think nude hiking is just sick. The trail is a please to commune with nature, and to socialize, not to be some nudist idiot. Seriously, those kind of people need to grow up.
Odd Thomas
09-07-2008, 06:10
You're right, and I stand corrected.
These people are just exhibitionists making excuses for themselves.
Why does exhibitionism need an excuse? They want to expose themselves to themselves only, organized in the middle of the woods. Why should any harmless form of expression or communication be limited in any way, legally or morally?
Odd Thomas
09-07-2008, 06:33
In Rochester we had a group of women who called themselves the Topless 7. They protested, we watched, and they got the topless law changed! It was a story of courage, of democracy, of triumph! A glorious day for the Constitution!
Haven't seen boob 1 since then. Apparently wasn't much of a problem after all, and it was just stupid and unnecessary laws that were being rebelled against.
There is one advantage to more hiking nude...
...It would make it easier to check oneself (and others) for ticks...
...so, it would be done more often...
...In fact, it could even be done at every short rest break...:D
On the other hand, it would certainly make us all a little more particular towards gender of those with whom we hike with:D
mtnkngxt
09-07-2008, 08:10
Sorry but I think nudity in public is ridiculous. If you want to be nude in your home with your significant other or your friends do what you like. The trail is a place that sees children, teenagers, adults, and older folks. Not all of us want to see what your mothers and fathers gave you. Using the lack of sexual expression to explain sex crimes is also a crock. The problem we have with pedophiles and the bunch is merely that people want to assume they were hurt as a child and are just acting out against what happened to them as a child, which surely happens, but it isn't the golden standard.
Pedaling Fool
09-07-2008, 11:52
In Rochester we had a group of women who called themselves the Topless 7. They protested, we watched, and they got the topless law changed! It was a story of courage, of democracy, of triumph! A glorious day for the Constitution!
Haven't seen boob 1 since then. Apparently wasn't much of a problem after all, and it was just stupid and unnecessary laws that were being rebelled against.
Are you saying that your town passed an ordinance to allow women to be topless in town or in a particular park?
Odd Thomas
09-07-2008, 12:13
Are you saying that your town passed an ordinance to allow women to be topless in town or in a particular park?
Heck no, this was a State Constitution fight, The State of New York decriminalized it completely.
http://www.naturisteducation.org/Toni_Egbert_Library/State_Supreme_Courts/NY_v_Santorelli/ny_v_santorelli.html
Since 1992, it's only illegal to be topless in New York State if the breasts are displayed in a "commercial context"
I've seen more boobs in NY when it was illegal and people protested than I have since it's no longer illegal. If nudity were legal I imagine it would work out about the same.
Odd Thomas
09-07-2008, 12:47
Sorry but I think nudity in public is ridiculous. If you want to be nude in your home with your significant other or your friends do what you like. The trail is a place that sees children, teenagers, adults, and older folks. Not all of us want to see what your mothers and fathers gave you.
Of course nudity is ridiculous, what it isn't is dangerous and offensive, just possibly subjectively ugly. What else is ridiculous is that we should have laws making it illegal for people to expose you to a view that's ugly, and legally forcing them to hide their subjective ugliness from you.
Using the lack of sexual expression to explain sex crimes is also a crock. The problem we have with pedophiles and the bunch is merely that people want to assume they were hurt as a child and are just acting out against what happened to them as a child, which surely happens, but it isn't the golden standard.Rape is rape. Rapists are dangerous regardless and independent of their sexual preferences or motives.
Pedaling Fool
09-07-2008, 12:57
Heck no, this was a State Constitution fight, The State of New York decriminalized it completely.
http://www.naturisteducation.org/Toni_Egbert_Library/State_Supreme_Courts/NY_v_Santorelli/ny_v_santorelli.html
Since 1992, it's only illegal to be topless in New York State if the breasts are displayed in a "commercial context"
I've seen more boobs in NY when it was illegal and people protested than I have since it's no longer illegal. If nudity were legal I imagine it would work out about the same.
Well that is interesting, never heard of it and NY is not the only state, there are a few others. From what I found appearently none of the west coast states allows topless females to walk around, hmmmm, but Texas does. Very interesting.
Jim Adams
09-07-2008, 13:02
So, personally, i think nude hiking is just sick. The trail is a please to commune with nature, and to socialize, not to be some nudist idiot. Seriously, those kind of people need to grow up.
So what part of nature wears clothing other than humans?:-?
This tread has been interesting to say the least.
I am not a nudist but I have skinny dipped throughout my life under the right circumstances and yes, I have hiked nude on both nude hiker days during my thrus. I certainly do not express nudity in the presence of children, and I tend to be clothed most times that I am not inside my house.
Nudity has no more to do with "sex Crimes" than the idea that drinking milk as a child turns you into an alcoholic later in life.
Under MS's expressed thinking and ideals these theories would also stop most people from driving cars.:D
geek
Folks should really consider saying something funny about a post in the Hiking Humor forum. If people keep griping, I'll have to move this to a different forum. If they keep sniping, I'll just close the thread.
So in summary, no gripin' or snipin' folks. Please.
Now back to humor:
If somebody as chunky as I am goes swimming nekkid, is it still "skinny" dippin'? :banana
Folks should really consider saying something funny about a post in the Hiking Humor forum. If people keep griping, I'll have to move this to a different forum. If they keep sniping, I'll just close the thread.
So in summary, no gripin' or snipin' folks. Please.
Now back to humor:
If somebody as chunky as I am goes swimming nekkid, is it still "skinny" dippin'? :banana
I see nothing malicious in the above posts but others opinions about the topic, certainly nothing to warrant threats of censure from anyone. It is my opinion that, to do so, would sadly make one nothing more than just some self-imposed "thread Nazi" wielding power inappropriately.
Are you a prude?
Hiking nude
Is not rude!:D
Odd Thomas
09-07-2008, 17:00
Because nudity is associated with sexuality in our species.
Not any more or less than "the opposite sex" is, in our or any other species.
Sexuality, like fear, hate, and greed, is an extremely powerful motivating force for good and ill among people.So is everything you can and could have named. Candy. Sunlight. Laws. Everything is a motivating force for good and evil. So your point is it's like everything else, kind of morally indifferent, and dual use. If it can motivate good and evil, why does good benefit from it's prohibition?
Powerful forces are best harnessed or at least not able to cause more than an acceptable amount of damage. Laws are powerful forces too, but laws should never damage or irrationally punish, and most legal scholars use the benchmark of "not a single man should be unfairly punished", a much higher bar than one we impose on our own primal instincts. Primal instincts (and reactions to them) make lousy models for laws.
Think of the aphorism about fire; 'it is a good servant but a terrible master'. When we stopped fearing it, it brought us out of the stone age.
When you see an an individual or a group of people (on up to national or civilizational scale) who seems to consistently make poor decisions (that lead to particularly poor outcomes), odds are that one of those motivations operates out of whack in them.What's even more common and spectacularly damaging are the poor decisions made consistently with perfectly good intentions and well-balanced motivations. They paved a road somewhere evil with those. Good intentions motivated by primal instincts.
You follow this up in your next post mentioning class/achievements/expansion...
It's the poverty class that is expanding, not the first world.
The first world is in population decline, and is expanding mostly through the population growth of those in poverty and immigrants from the third world (here and in europe). The first world has fertility problems, and I mean that literally. Darwin is not selecting us, or puritanism for that matter. Darwin is selecting those who don't have this evolutionarily perverted fear of/and the expression of their own genes, and the aversion to the sight of others genes being expressed.
Your comment on puritanism... Isn't it possible that puritanism *evolved as a primal response to a common group threat, as generic and irrational fear of snakes and spiders is thought to be? Most puritanical civilizations had populations that butted heads with the available resources and persevered through social repression, and historically, this repression relaxed as the resources expanded. Puritanism has been a counter to poverty, which historically and to this day accelerates the population growth. If this is the case, puritanism itself should be added to your list containing dual use emotions like fear, greed, etc. and should probably be considered good only when it provides rational benefit, and be considered bad when we're just repressing ourselves with this primal emotion irrationally, just like greed, fear, etc.
I'm not equating puritanism here to religion itself
*Possibly expressed by the Vesicular Monoamine Transporter 2 gene.
That said, I'd rather not have to look at ugly naked people, but I value a rational legal system more than a guarantee I won't have to see a hairy butt. The boobs no longer considered offensive by the law in much of the US (without incident, and largely without notice) makes me think we can have it both ways.
If somebody as chunky as I am goes swimming nekkid, is it still "skinny" dippin'? :banana
Or is it "chunky dunkin'"?
....The boobs no longer considered offensive by the law in much of the US (without incident, and largely without notice) makes me think we can have it both ways.
Especially since most world societies throughout history have never considered boobs offensive.
Boobs = offensive has largely been a cultural artifact of muslim, evangelical, and puritan societies.
Since nobody here has a sense of humor, I'm moving this to the General forum. Debate away, but please try to keep things civil.
If somebody as chunky as I am goes swimming nekkid, is it still "skinny" dippin'? :banana
Taking a dip sounds like sliding in, so I guess cannonballs would be ruled out... unless you are into pain. :D
1/4 moon
09-08-2008, 02:20
[SIZE=2]Stupid SOBs…And who the hell is Mother Nature?
She's one heck of an older hiker, We hiked Katahdin in august and I had a heck of a time keepig up with her
Rain Man
09-08-2008, 09:00
Since nobody here has a sense of humor, I'm moving this to the General forum. Debate away, but please try to keep things civil.
Hard to have a sense of humor about hate speech and this thread is loaded with it.
Rain:sunMan
.
minnesotasmith
09-08-2008, 09:13
We're not significantly a puritanical society anymore; consider as evidence the universal access to pornography (including our advertising), acceptance of b*st*rdy, cohabitation, repeated divorce with no grounds, partial acceptance of open homosexuality, etc. Now, we're not coming close to replacing ourselves. Sweden, France, England, Japan, Italy, etc. are all in similiar boats, their native-borns declining at up to 25% a generation.
http://usgovinfo.about.com/cs/censusstatistic/a/aabirthrate.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_territories_by_fertility_rat e
Now, back in the 1950s and before, when we WERE much more restrictive WRT sexual expression, we DID have a native-born birth rate expectable of a people that intended to exist indefinitely. Look at the predominantly Muslim countries in the world now; puritanical as Hades, yet managing to replace themselves every generation and more. Association may not be causation in a single case, yet after a while, it stops being coincidence...
Anyway, the Sexual Revolution only really benefited childless attractive younger women (while in such status), young men not inclined to have families (again only while in such status), successful older men, and people with truly unusual (by definition perverse) sexual tastes. Everyone else aside from social workers, divorce lawyers, health care workers specializing in VD or abortion, etc. got shafted by it. Examples of the latter include 1) family-oriented men in their late twenties or older who look unsuccessfully for unattached & childless [thus available] women inclined to marry and form families while still young enough to do so, 2) women past their primes (reproductive- and looks-wise), who are left with children with no husband (he left for a younger woman, she kicked him out in an argument over nothing since the law no longer stops that, or he never existed), and 3) all the children growing up without fathers, in larger %s than even in the aftermath of total wars.
How wonderful the latter works out: http://www.childrensjustice.org/fatherlessness2.htm
"Fun" and "convenience" of a sexual nature may be pleasant for nonfamily-concerned/nonfuture-oriented people, but if it comes at the price of ending worthwhile nations, even a civilization, its price was too high to be accepted.
P.S. "Anything goes" sexuality is not "modern", but pre-modern, even pre-Stone Age. It's the sexuality of the barnyard...
dessertrat
09-08-2008, 09:32
Why does exhibitionism need an excuse? They want to expose themselves to themselves only, organized in the middle of the woods. Why should any harmless form of expression or communication be limited in any way, legally or morally?
The point is that they are not exposing themselves to themselves only. They cannot help but expose themselves to anyone else who happens by, some of whom don't want to look at them. They know that. The problem is not that they are naked, it's that they are inconsiderate of those who don't want to see it.
The point is that they are not exposing themselves to themselves only. They cannot help but expose themselves to anyone else who happens by, some of whom don't want to look at them. They know that. The problem is not that they are naked, it's that they are inconsiderate of those who don't want to see it.
i see fat nasty people in spandex everyday. i sure don't want to see that, but i do. they could help exposing themselves, but they don't.
naked is how we were made. being uncomfortable with nudity is unnatural, it's something that's trained into us as we grow. nobody's born being uncomfortable with their body or anybody else's.
When did nudity become taboo? Why is the sight of a human body either embarrassing or disturbing? Questions to ponder... but if everyone started walking around naked it would be no big deal. You'd get used to it.
Nicksaari
09-08-2008, 14:37
i was staying in a cabin in SNP 15 yards from the trail. i was naked half the time. cooling down after working up a sweat gathering and cutting firewood, i stood out upon the deck with a cold beer in hand, naked as the day i was born. impromptu shower in the spring, nude. walk around naked throughout the day...
the point is: neither some republican ******, nor a liberal will keep me from walking around naked on our trail, or the land that borders it. NO ONE.
call the cops, you miscreants.
minnesotasmith
09-08-2008, 15:20
When did nudity become taboo? Why is the sight of a human body either embarrassing or disturbing?
When some proto-humans started avoiding incest and forming organized groups above herd-levels of cohesion such as families and later tribes. The former costs an easy 20 IQ points, so is terribly disadvantageous in a setting with no welfare/disability system. The latter may well have come about due to the selective advantage that greater intelligence brings, but with the costs of longer childhood, more disabling pregnancy/birth/aftermath for women, etc., so there needed to be a support system (normally a husband/father at its core). To stick around and support a mother and her children, a father/husband needed reasonable assurance that the offspring were his, which meant that the mother needed to be faithful to him. Meanwhile, given the relative poverty that existed most of the time, the woman would want to only commit to a man that only slept with her, so that his resources weren't divided with other women. And so on.
max patch
09-08-2008, 15:23
the point is: neither some republican ******, nor a liberal will keep me from walking around naked on our trail, or the land that borders it. NO ONE.
Yeah, right. You got the balls :) to hike the SNP nekkid?
When did nudity become taboo? Why is the sight of a human body either embarrassing or disturbing? Questions to ponder... but if everyone started walking around naked it would be no big deal. You'd get used to it.
1) When religion told us so....
2) see #1.
3) There are cultures that prove your point to be true.
minnesotasmith
09-08-2008, 15:37
neither some republican ******, nor a liberal will keep me from walking around naked on our trail, or the land that borders it. NO ONE.
call the cops...
Someone will, eventually. If you won't follow some basic societal norms, there are groups of large men with guns whose job is to be more unpleasant to you than following those norms would be. The delay in acting on this premise just comes down to how slow a learner one is...
splash1986
09-08-2008, 20:38
It seems to me that hiking is an activity better done with some clothes on, to protect important assets. Personally, I would hate to wind up in a bunch of thorns naked. Just my personal opinion.
Odd Thomas
09-08-2008, 21:57
When some proto-humans started avoiding incest and forming organized groups above herd-levels of cohesion such as families and later tribes.
Incest avoidance evolved in primates long before we wore clothes. In fact, the people most of us see naked regularly when we are young, are our siblings!
The Westermark Effect can be observed happening where there is no nudity taboo. Incest avoidance (in most of us) does not require societal imposed taboos anyway, it's achieved through psychological imprinting- any children growing up in the same living area generally won't be sexually attracted to each other (naked or clothes, sibling or not)
As for infidelity, etc... human testicle size compared to other primates suggests that clothing hasn't helped. Many unclothed primates are more faithful than your clothed ancestors.
If clothing were related to fidelity and families, then (just like in the incest example) it would be the other way around. The best way to tell how faithfull a species is, is to examine their testicle size, not cover them up with clothes.
Odd Thomas
09-08-2008, 22:45
The point is that they are not exposing themselves to themselves only. They cannot help but expose themselves to anyone else who happens by, some of whom don't want to look at them. They know that. The problem is not that they are naked, it's that they are inconsiderate of those who don't want to see it.
Why should we have the right to not have to look at things in public places that we don't want to see? That's usually a right we grant to property owners.
What about gays kissing? Advertisements? Breastfeeding? Everyone's offended/doesn't want to look at something.
The inconsideration aspect can be dealt with using existing laws. Being bothered by a naked person who won't leave you alone ideally shouldn't be any different than dealing with a clothed solicitor that won't leave you alone. We already have laws for harassment and even sexual harassment to deal with the inconsiderates, and if they are bothering you they have already broken them.
(assuming that it is reasonable that their behavior should be seen as bothering, which a naked person who wants to make you look at them for more than 10 seconds is, as is a solicitor or union picketer who does the same for more than 10 seconds)
OldStormcrow
09-09-2008, 08:57
You better be careful. You could get arrested as a Sex Offender and once you have that label, on your record, it will affect the rest of your life. I work at a prison and there are sex offenders there. I know of many who are released back into the free world and it is a very difficult row to hoe. So, if you wish to have some fun, have some fun but I would counsel you to not do this. Of course you did not ask for my advice.
I see this same "sex offender" statement on here every year around the time of "Hike Nekid Day" and give the same response every time, so here I go again for those who either weren't here then or weren't paying attention.....nudity IS illegal in State Parks, National Parks, State Forests, National Monuments, etc. It is NOT illegal in the National Forests. Go look it up for yourselves. I grew up in Germany where people are mature enough not to snicker like grade-schoolers when encountering nudity. One common misconception that Americans have is the old nudity=sex idea. Remember......you can be nude without having sex, and you can have sex without being nude.
OldStormcrow
09-09-2008, 09:02
It seems to me that hiking is an activity better done with some clothes on, to protect important assets. Personally, I would hate to wind up in a bunch of thorns naked. Just my personal opinion.
I must admit, nettles will get your attention, too!
Alligator
09-09-2008, 10:56
This thread has degenerated into personal attacks and has been closed.