Decent Exposure — General Discussion on True Nudists

MemberOriginal Poster

Aug 26, 2010

There comes a time when circumstances call out for one to stand up for what one believes in. How far one is willing to go to support one’s beliefs then becomes the question. I believe that our bodies are beautiful blessings, gifts which should be celebrated, not hidden under compulsory coverings. Society’s conceptions of our human bodies as indecent objects which must be kept from public view is one of the most extreme forms of self-hatred I can imagine. This belief that our bodies are indecent has allowed us to be controlled and manipulated by those very societal institutions which impose it, the church and the state. It has served not only to separate us from nature but to elevate us over nature, thereby giving us the seemingly unlimited ability to control, modify, and destroy nature for our own ends. This insistence on our indecency keeps our true selves diverted into production, consumption, and conformity. Mandatory clothing forces us into social stratification, becoming a symbol for our power or the lack thereof. We become naked heads talking above hidden bodies, having the effect of enlarging in our imaginations that which is hidden. We then have sold back to us an airbrushed, gym-toned,
surgically enhanced view of our bodies which for most of us is unattainable, all because
we are forbidden to see the natural beauty inherent in each and everyone of us. In challenging and rejecting these beliefs we challenge and threaten those very institutions which imprison us, just as our clothing imprisons our bodies
Freedom of expression and freedom from censorship are intimately entwined with that freedom that we who call ourselves Americans seem to cherish most, freedom of speech. George Davis, who stood for San Francisco mayor against incumbent Gavin Newsom in 2007 is now running for the district six supervisor position in San Francisco with a platform which includes freedom of expression and freedom from censorship. George Davis has a history of nudist activism dating back to 2004 when he began practicing naked yoga at San Francisco’s Fisherman’s Wharf. Now George is incorporating public nudity into his political campaigning to demonstrate those freedoms which he is campaigning for. I was privileged to be able to accompany George Davis on one of his campaign walks through San Francisco’s premier shopping district, Union Square on Wednesday, August 18. After an hour of campaigning, we were approached by a San Francisco police officer who told us to cover up, as there were “women and children” who could see us. He suggested that we should go do this “somewhere else.” When we refused to cover ourselves, as there is no law banning nudity in San Francisco, we were not being lewd, and George was campaigning for political office, the officer decided to have us cited and charged with indecent exposure. At that time, I and two others decided to cover, but George remained adamant. “I do not get dressed,” was all he said. So off George went, naked and in handcuffs, to jail. I and my two fellow campaigners were left behind with orders to appear in criminal court Monday, August 23 at 1:00 PM on charges of indecent exposure.
The day of our court appearance I admit feeling a little apprehensive, even though I knew what I was doing was not indecent. I also knew that of the many citations issued in the past for indecent exposure regarding simple public nudity in San Francisco none have ever been prosecuted, but this was my first time. Arriving at the court we found the doors still locked for lunch. At 1:00 a sheriff appeared to inform us that even though our citations said to appear at 1:00, the court did not actually open until 1:30 and we were to form a line along the side of the building. About five minutes later the same sheriff re-appeared, called my name and the names of my nudist companions, and said the judge asked him to tell us the district attorney was not prosecuting our cases, all charges were dropped, and we were free to go
George Davis and I proceeded back to the Castro Commons area at Castro, 17th, and Market streets were we removed our clothing, found some chairs to sit on, and George proceeded to place some phone calls to police officials to try to gain assurances that this sort of harassment would not happen again. George discovered a new police directive had been issued the Friday before our court appearance directing officers that when they are issuing citations for indecent exposure there must be lewd conduct involved. The California courts have ruled that simple public nudity does not constitute lewd behavior. It would seem we have made some progress.
Many nudists or naturists feel that by being confrontational we do more harm then good to the nudist cause. They would encourage us to work for areas set aside for nude recreation, such as free beaches. That is all well and good, and I certainly support that. I believe, however, that nudist space must be made accessible to everyone. If we as nudists and naturists truly believe that our bodies are not immoral or indecent, then what could be more right than having nudist space everywhere? Only then will we be able to confront and challenge those beliefs that imprison us and by doing so openly and publicly, we can challenge our fellow citizens to question their own assumptions, beliefs, and prisons

ReactReplySubscribe

Replies

OL
OliverTan
Aug 26, 2010
Me too! Great post.
ReactReply
LI
LifeHappens
Aug 26, 2010
Woody: You are an awesome gentleman. Thanks for the update.
ReactReply
DE
DesertRat
Aug 26, 2010
I applaud your actions. Even though the Officer was in error in this case, he should never be confrounted. He has a sworn duty to enforce the laws and ensure public safety. If there is a difference of opinion, it is for the courts to decide. When the courts decided not to prosecute, you won a tremendous victory. The prosecution decided that they were on shaky legal ground. This will affect untold number of cases in the future. Congratulations on your Victory!
ReactReply
CO
Curt, or Cowboy
Aug 26, 2010
[quote]Question: Is it really confrontational if it isn't against the law? If you are eating an ice cream cone and an officer comes up to you and tells you to throw it away because it is against the law, would you? I am solely trying to get a fuller idea of what you are saying.[/quote] I might, depending on context. If you were carrying an open can of peanuts onto an airplane, and an officer ( or other authority ) asked you not to, because peanut allergy can be fatal to some of the passengers, would it be NOT confrontational to refuse ? It's perfectly legal ( encouraged, in fact ) to carry on your own snacks ! Failure to do so, and one becomes ( questionably ) guilty of disorderly conduct at least. Would you NOT consider that example confrontational ? There are times when the law, or the way it's carried out, is just plain wrong, but for this we are after the court of public opinion, not the letter, jot, and tittle of the way the law was transformed into ink stains on some line. If I can win public opinion, then the law is easily changed. Lose public opinion, and the law is easily changed, but not in a good way ! It's the perception of the public at large, not your perception, nor mine, that is important.
ReactReply
GE
Gerry-4
Aug 26, 2010
There are two main positions. One is that activism of this type can be risky for all nude activity as it can cause a backlash and a flurry of anti-nudity measures. The other is that without activism, nothing will change.

It's a matter of properly choosing which type of activities are appropriate. For example, a march for topfree rights in front of a courthouse, a church and businesses during regular school hours might be better received than if it were to be in front of a school or a playground. Not because children shouldn't see nudity, but because so many textiles BELIEVE children shouldn't see nudity.

I don't know this Davis person, so I liked him right off when I read the original post. Curt's concerns, though, are still valid.
ReactReply
IN
intune
Aug 26, 2010
r the pendulum begins 2 swing well done
ReactReply
LI
LifeHappens
Aug 26, 2010
[quote][quote][/quote] I might, depending on context. If you were carrying an open can of peanuts onto an airplane, and an officer ( or other authority ) asked you not to, because peanut allergy can be fatal to some of the passengers, would it be NOT confrontational to refuse ? It's perfectly legal ( encouraged, in fact ) to carry on your own snacks ! Failure to do so, and one becomes ( questionably ) guilty of disorderly conduct at least. Would you NOT consider that example confrontational ? There are times when the law, or the way it's carried out, is just plain wrong, but for this we are after the court of public opinion, not the letter, jot, and tittle of the way the law was transformed into ink stains on some line. If I can win public opinion, then the law is easily changed. Lose public opinion, and the law is easily changed, but not in a good way ! It's the perception of the public at large, not your perception, nor mine, that is important.[/quote] I see where you are coming from; but, as stated above, there has to be some modicum of pushing at some point to make certain that there is progress in the direction that is favorable to us. The converse to the situation that occurred is that Davis promptly responds and clothes himself. Wouldn't him listening give credence to those that say he is in the wrong? Wouldn't him listening send the message he thought he was in the wrong? It's amazing how such a situation is wrought with so many variables and just one slight change in the entire situation could set back nudism or propel it forward.
ReactReply
BL
blueiron35
Aug 26, 2010
Gerry, you always find a way to state what I was thinking much better than I ever could. There are always two or more ways to approach a situation and just as many reactions to the ways it was approached.
ReactReply
BU
Bud
Aug 26, 2010
I have been trying to tell people for years that simple nudity is NOT illegal in california.
I get out and get naked every chance I get, I DO get looks but that is to be expected.
Im not ballsy enough to do it on the downtown streets of my small town,
but at the river the lakes the trails the campgrounds and at home, we represent for the naked truth!
ReactReply
BL
blueiron35
Aug 26, 2010
Budgreen, my biggest fear is always that one person who claims you were indecent towards them and then all hell breaks loose. Just hiking down a trail in the nude is offensive to someone, i hate to run into that someone.
ReactReply
GE
George_in_WV
Aug 26, 2010
I have a difficult time believing that the nude human body is indecent.

A few years ago some friends and I were canuding in a park in Florida. During the trip while we were stopped for lunch we were approached by a Park Ranger. He told us to stay where we were while he contacted his supervisor. Another ranger showed up and most of us were given written warning because being nude in the park was a violation of park regulations. Three of my friends were actually cited but when they went to make their court appearance they were told that the citations against them were not on file with the court so that ended that.

Just last February some friends of mine and I were nude on a public beach. The police came and took our names and addresses. One of the members of our group was subsequently arrested but the DA finally dropped the charges against him.

In many states nudity without lewd and lascivious behavior is not illegal.

The nice thing about the community I live in is that it is clothing optional so as long as the weather is good my neighbors and I can go around nude and enjoy feeling the warm sun and fresh air all over our bodies. Much better than wrapping ourselves in sweat soaked pieces of cloth.
ReactReply
CO
Curt, or Cowboy
Aug 26, 2010
[quote][quote][/quote]I see where you are coming from; but, as stated above, there has to be some modicum of pushing at some point to make certain that there is progress in the direction that is favorable to us. The converse to the situation that occurred is that Davis promptly responds and clothes himself. Wouldn't him listening give credence to those that say he is in the wrong? Wouldn't him listening send the message he thought he was in the wrong? [/quote] Not when he filed suit ( symbolically, I would hope ) about his constitutionally protected right to POLITICAL free speech and peaceful assembly ! Woody DID say they were campaigning for POLITICAL office, and liberal courts have interpreted free speech to mean free expression in any form. On THAT basis I would be technically forced to support George Davis *in this case.* I'd suspect that this might be the real reason the prosecutor declined to prosecute. However, it remains that while pushing limits is a viable means to an end, and I've penned some ideas on these very forums, direct assault on the morals of society, be they right, or wrong, will not win many friends, and especially none in the context we need, IMHO. As you say, "in the direction that is favorable to us." IMHO CheriDonna ( a member here ) has and does that publicly by accident more than I believe George Davis ever will on purpose, as long as he remains confrontational. Remember the mind set of those we wish to win over, not our own somewhat biased opinions. They are wrong, but coax, not cajole, nor force. Make them believe they came to our conclusions on their own, even though they did not. A technical victory may win the battle, at the sacrifice of the whole war. I'd rather sacrifice a battle, but win the war.
ReactReply
UK
UKrudegirl
Aug 26, 2010
I have no idea who G Davis is in this case either but - as one who has 'stood up and been counted' several times in the past I applaud your actions guys. As long as you know the law, remain within it and are polite, non-aggressive but stand firm upon the law you will always prevail.Love n stuffRudie x
ReactReply
PH
Philfreeeuk
Aug 27, 2010
[quote]I have no idea who G Davis is in this case either but - as one who has 'stood up and been counted' several times in the past I applaud your actions guys. As long as you know the law, remain within it and are polite, non-aggressive but stand firm upon the law you will always prevail.Love n stuffRudie x[/quote] Well said Rudie!
ReactReply
CD
Cheri Donna Dawson
Aug 27, 2010
[quote]I have been trying to tell people for years that simple nudity is NOT illegal in california. I get out and get naked every chance I get, I DO get looks but that is to be expected. Im not ballsy enough to do it on the downtown streets of my small town, but at the river the lakes the trails the campgrounds and at home, we represent for the naked truth![/quote] Berkeley, CA does have an anti-nudity law enacted after a student (Andrew Martinez is someone who was foul-mouthed and rude any way) wouldn't clothe himself. Sometimes this is what happens when you tri to push the envelope. Each situation is different
ReactReply
ME
MemberOriginal Poster
Aug 27, 2010
[quote][quote][/quote] (Andrew Martinez is someone who was foul-mouthed and rude any way)[/quote] Where ever did you get that information?
ReactReply
PV
Paul Vogler
Aug 27, 2010
[quote][quote][quote][/quote] I see where you are coming from; but, as stated above, there has to be some modicum of pushing at some point to make certain that there is progress in the direction that is favorable to us. The converse to the situation that occurred is that Davis promptly responds and clothes himself. Wouldn't him listening give credence to those that say he is in the wrong? Wouldn't him listening send the message he thought he was in the wrong? [/quote] Not when he filed suit ( symbolically, I would hope ) about his constitutionally protected right to POLITICAL free speech and peaceful assembly ! Woody DID say they were campaigning for POLITICAL office, and liberal courts have interpreted free speech to mean free expression in any form. On THAT basis I would be technically forced to support George Davis *in this case.* I'd suspect that this might be the real reason the prosecutor declined to prosecute. However, it remains that while pushing limits is a viable means to an end, and I've penned some ideas on these very forums, direct assault on the morals of society, be they right, or wrong, will not win many friends, and especially none in the context we need, IMHO. As you say, "in the direction that is favorable to us." IMHO CheriDonna ( a member here ) has and does that publicly by accident more than I believe George Davis ever will on purpose, as long as he remains confrontational. Remember the mind set of those we wish to win over, not our own somewhat biased opinions. They are wrong, but coax, not cajole, nor force. Make them believe they came to our conclusions on their own, even though they did not. A technical victory may win the battle, at the sacrifice of the whole war. I'd rather sacrifice a battle, but win the war.[/quote] And in a 100-150 years things might change. As long as people can stay in their own little comfort zones, they will. Only when people get used to seeing naked people, and realizing nothing terrible happens when you see naked people, will there be acceptance. The whole don't rock the boat mentality NEVER accomplishes anything.
ReactReply
CD
Cheri Donna Dawson
Aug 28, 2010
from an in-person meeting a couple of years before his death. He was invited to speak at a naturist meeting
ReactReply