San Francisco considers banning nudity over cock ring issue

Replies

• CO

  

  Curt, or Cowboy

  Sep 16, 2012

  [quote]One supervisor - by no means an anti-nudist, is proposing banning nudity because guys have taken to wearing cock rings on the street. Here's the story, in theBay Area Reporter.
  [/quote]I've long been, and remain, of the position that activist in-your-face militants do radically more damage by accident than they could ever hope to do on purpose.
  If this doesn't clarify the whole "cock ring" issue, then nothing will.

  ReactReply
• SO

  

  Soupie

  Sep 16, 2012

  I find that the right is always taking democracy downward by suppressing civil rights, forcing religion into politics, encouraging voter repression and keeping the underground market of drugs and prostitution thriving.  Also by profiteering on the lives and deaths of others.

  ReactReply
• SO

  

  Soupie

  Sep 16, 2012

  And of course, the bigoted assumption that only "megaqueers" wear cockrings.  A hell of a lot of straight men do as well.

  ReactReply
• SO

  

  Soupie

  Sep 16, 2012

  Well, an expressed hatred and contempt for an entire city like San Francisco is the trade mark of the exclusionary far right that doesn't really consider every U.S. citizen to be a "true patriot" or worthy of equal rights under the law.  It's the contradiction that defines them.

  ReactReply
• RA

  

  ravensflyinnow

  Sep 16, 2012

  [quote]Ravens even admitted so at one time.
  [/quote]NEVER...YOU ARE WRONG, WRONG WRONG!!!! quit putting words in my mouth Bruce!
  

  ReactReply
• ST

  

  SteveOriginal Poster

  Sep 16, 2012

  I have heard - and I have no real information, this is a sincere question - that the law and / or practice in Sweden and maybe a few other north European countries is to permit nudity where it isn't expected to offend - which I suppose mostly means parks and such.  The situation in San Francisco is clearly unstable and not well worked out. Are there examples in Europe of settled practice that they might follow as they develop their laws on the question, given that they are plainly trying to be as tolerant as they reasonably can (and maybe a little more than that.)
  

  ReactReply
• SO

  

  Soupie

  Sep 16, 2012

  That really makes no sense considering the figures provided.

  ReactReply
• BO

  

  Bob

  Sep 16, 2012

  We are free to behave we are not free to misbehave.
  
  Is it against the law to blow smoke in the face of a non-smoker? Would this not be considered misbehaving?
  
  Can you be an exhibitionist at a nudist venue? If the act is unacceptable and done as an "in your face" act, then yes.
  
  The San Francisco issue may end in a law that is extreme and will miss the target. There may be a law that hurts more than it helps. Let's punish everyone for the indiscretions of a few.
  
  Bob

  ReactReply
• CD

  

  Cheri Donna Dawson

  Sep 17, 2012

  Breasts aren't sex organs!!!!  They have been sexualized, but that doesn't make them genetalia.
  

  ReactReply
• SO

  

  Soupie

  Sep 17, 2012

  Please stop boasting and bragging Bruce.  It is so unchristian.  And so false.  Jesus wept.
  
  

  ReactReply
• RA

  

  ravensflyinnow

  Sep 17, 2012

  [quote][quote][quote]Ravens even admitted so at one time.
  [/quote]NEVER...YOU ARE WRONG, WRONG WRONG!!!! quit putting words in my mouth Bruce!
  [/quote]
  Well Ravens, if you didn't censor the entire thread out of existence, I would have been able to refer to it directly. In fact, those words were right at the end of the thread-you had hit your breaking point, exposed your true agenda-you stated that defeating the right was more important than reaching a reasonable solution on Gay "Marriage", I called you on it and the thread was gone shortly thereafter. I don't have to put words in your mouth-I have been able to get you to willingly expose your agenda by sheer force of my will and superior debate & writing skills.
  [/quote]Never said it...you are wrong..Ihave no agenda. Your arrogance is maddening. As Rene said awhile back...You do like to blow your own horn!
  
  

  ReactReply
• MI

  

  missannethroap1

  Sep 19, 2012

  Sorry, I didn't read every post after I saw it turned into a argument over things that weren't part of the topic, especially the wide generalizations and unfounded opinions. Also, there is no actual link to read the article in question.So, I will just say Nude is NOT Lewd: the wearing of cock rings (erections in general) is pretty obviously lewd as defined by most ordinances of most areas I've lived in and investigated nudist laws. So, the government of San Francisco should address the lewd issue and not the nude issue.

  ReactReply
• ST

  

  SteveOriginal Poster

  Sep 19, 2012

  Link to article is in post #1 - just checked it; it still works. It is kind of a drag to have the same few people carrying their ongoing brawl from one thread to another.
  
  I wonder how you'd define the sort if genital implement you meant to ban, if you were writing legislation to address the cockring concern without banning nudity outright. "Device encircling the genitals or intended to produce or imitate a state of arousal"? A "call attention to..." ban would end up arguably covering tattoos. A general "device" ban would end up covering piercings.
  
  No one really responded to my query about laws elsewhere. There probably aren't any, along these lines. I suppose the real situation is that the culture has to be relaxed enough about nudity and  sexuality that bad behavior is recognized as such, without running afoul of either censorious or transgressive attitudes on the way to a shared judgement. I don't suppose we're there yet.
  

  ReactReply
• CO

  

  Curt, or Cowboy

  Sep 20, 2012

  [quote]No one really responded to my query about laws elsewhere. There probably aren't any, along these lines.[/quote]And frankly, I'd be surprised if there were !
  We don't generally invent a law until there's a clear need.
  

  ReactReply
• BO

  

  Bob

  Sep 20, 2012

  I do not know many locations, but here in New Jersey, if you expose your private parts, you will pay a penalty. My parents live in Vermont. We have gone skinny dipping in the creek that goes through their 100 acre back yard. I do not know about the state as a whole or if each town has its own laws, but in Brattleboro, VT, you can be nude on the streets, but not lewd.
  
  Bob

  ReactReply
• PA

  

  Pasha71

  Oct 6, 2012

  I've never been to SF before, but when I found out several months ago that nudity is legal there, I was very pleasantly surprised. I was going to eventually visit and maybe get undressed somewhere were local nudists normally hang out. Too bad I probably won't be able to do so anymore. Then again, if Black Beach stays nude, I'll just go there.
  
  I am not a radical, I don't think every place should be clothing-optional. What I do want we should have is a clothing-optional zone is every town, be it a nude beach or some park.
  

  ReactReply