HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ran@cbnews.cb.att.com (Robert A. Neinast)
Subject: Re: The Topfree States
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 12:45:53 GMT

In article <1992Jul25.044733.24338@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>, an725@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Paul L. Fortman, Jr.) writes:
> I'll be moving to Indiana (Purdue) in about 3 1/2 weeks to do 
> my Ph.D, so...

> What about Indiana?  Is it legal for women to be top-free in 
> Indiana?  Is it legal to be nude in Indiana?  Of course, 
> whether it's legal or not, I will do it anyway.

Paul,

The easiest way for you to find out is to just take a quick
drive over to Richmond (Indiana), go to their local public
library, and look at their Revised Statutes.  In the index,
try looking under "nudity", "indecency", or "indecent
exposure".  Sometimes, they will also give relevant court
rulings, or at least citations thereto.

Bob
-- 
                                                                  _
". . . and shun the frumious Bandersnatch."                 Nipetlahuini.
Robert Neinast (ran@cblpo.att.com)
AT&T-Bell Labs
From: tomrice@netcom.com (Tom R. Rice)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Top-Free vs. ClariNet
Date: 25 Jul 92 05:24:06 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

When ClariNet carried the news of the NY Top-Free court decision,
it was in the .sex group.  Perhaps it's time for some consciousness-
raising at C-Net; don't they have a .rec group?

Anyway, it sorta bothered me....

TRR   WB6BYH
From: bruce@supr.scm.liv.ac.uk (Bruce Stephens)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Sunburn
Date: 23 Jul 92 16:57:34 GMT
Organization: Centre for Mathematical Software Research, Univ. Liverpool, UK
Nntp-Posting-User: bruce

>>>>> On 18 Jul 92 06:50:28 GMT, middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu (Tom Middleton ; System Manager) said:
> "earl pottinger" <earl.pottinger@canrem.com> writes:
>>       Do you notice it to be easyer to get burned this year??  

> I have been burning more this summer than in the past.  This is NOT a
> scientific study and IS influenced by factors such as being in the sun
> a bit more and losing my main suntan lotion applicator (she went back to
> her previous main squeeze).  But I DO think that portion of the suns energy
> making it all the way to earth is harsher than in past years.

This is certainly true in Northern Europe.  I'm not sure of the
situation in the USA, but here we were warned in a minimal sort of way
about it.  For example, that children weren't to be allowed to frazzle
unattended in the sun.  It's due to a thinning of the ozone layer over
northern europe.

Your milage probably varies

Bruce
From: pdh@netcom.com (Phil Howard )
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: sex vs nudity
Date: 27 Jul 92 19:57:53 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

s_mesbah@engr writes:

>Just a question for the readers of this group.  Is there many occurrences of
>sexual behaviour on nude beaches.  The reason I ask is that I am 100%
>heterosexual to the core and if I went to a nudist beach I wouldn't be able to
>control my sexual drive.  Being just inches away from penetrating a female
>would drive me nuts!  Just curious

I don't think sexual orientation has anything to do with it, nor the degree
to which you are one way or the other.  As some others have suggested it is
an issue of self-control.

Perhaps you have the wrong perspective of what being "textile free" is all
about.  It is *not* for the purpose of showing bodies or exposing genitalia.
It is about "shrugging" off things that bother us (clothes can do that for
many of us, either really or just symbolically).  It also has the character
of making us feel no shame of our bodies, and helping is get rid of the
silly society-induced notions, and coming to understand that nakedness
does NOT equal sex.

I've only been in small groups in the nude (as opposed to a beach) but it
is basically the same thing I am sure.  I tend to be a "huggy/cuddly"
type of affectionate person, and my big fear was that this would cause
problems (more a fear that others would more likely interpret it as being
sexual).  While I reduced that some, it never caused any problems at all.

About the only thing I can suggest is trying it and see.  Hopefully you
will know whether or not it is right for you.
-- 
/***********************************************************************\
| Phil Howard  ---  KA9WGN  ---  pdh@netcom.com   |   "The problem with |
| depending on government is that you cannot depend on it" - Tony Brown |
\***********************************************************************/
From: stein@grip.cis.upenn.edu (Matthew Stein)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: sex vs nudity
Date: 27 Jul 92 13:38:24 GMT
Organization: GRASP Lab, University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Jul27.004258.5299@koko.csustan.edu> dsolis@koko.csustan.edu (Djelrik Solis) writes:
>In article <1992Jul26.212559.1@engr> s_mesbah@engr writes:
>>Just a question for the readers of this group.  Is there many occurrences of
>>sexual behaviour on nude beaches.  The reason I ask is that I am 100%
>heterosexual to the core and if I went to a nudist beach I wouldn't be able to
>>control my sexual drive.  Being just inches away from penetrating a female
>>would drive me nuts!  Just curious
>
>
>	Sexual behaviour where it offends the space of others is typically
>frowned-upon at CO beaches, as it is elsewhere.  And it's too bad about your
>lack of self-control;  perhaps you should avoid CO beaches.
>
>	How old are you???


Personally, I don't really think that Sam deserved this much abuse,
but I do think "How old are you???" is a pretty apt question.  I think
most of us would agree that this post shows Sam's lack of experience
in CO recreation.

My suggestion to Sam is to follow the discussions here or try out a CO
location for yourself.  I think you'll probably find a Nude Beach is
about one tenth as sexually exciting as a textile beach, and your
imagined problem never surfaces.  Of course if it does, please refer
to the Free Beach Etiquette posts.


Matthew R. Stein            | Fourth Law of Robotics:
GRASP Laboratory            | "A robot must keep it's capabilities secret
University of Pennsylvania  | from human beings.  This is especially true for
Philadelphia, P.A. 19104    | faculty advisors and heads of funding agencies"
From: dgilbert@aeshq.uucp (David Gilbert)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Nudity by Default
Date: 17 Jul 92 12:39:30 GMT
	<13g1hbINNqs4@network.ucsd.edu>
Organization: Environment Canada --- Atmostpheric Environment Service
In-reply-to: middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu's message of 9 Jul 92 00:33:47 GMT

>>>>> On 9 Jul 92 00:33:47 GMT, middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu (Tom Middleton ; System Manager) said:

Tom> In article <> dgilbert@aeshq.uucp (David Gilbert) writes:

>	My grandfather has a bit of wisdom that I'd like to share.  When I
>was little, I went on a canoe trip with him.  One day we wanted a
>swim, but only had the canoe with us (left everything else in camp).
>We stopped on a small deserted outcrop of rock (we were deep in the
>Canadian Shield), and he started to strip.  As a little boy I was very
>worried about being seen.  He said, "If you ain't seen it before, then
>you don't know what it is, an' if you see it before, then there's
>nothing new, so what's the problem?"

Tom> Well, it would be nice if everyone thought that way.
Tom> Unfortunately, that is not so, as illustrated by the post from
Tom> Sacramento about the person who was busted for indecent exposure
Tom> simply because he wanted to swim nude where a family was already.

It sounds like he's on shakey ground too.  I suppose we all have rights...
including the right to stop others from enjoying their rights.

>	From that time on, that has been my position too.  BTW, he's an
>Anglican Minister, too...

Tom> So does he tell that to his parishoners?

	I don't think he's done a sermon on it (ie confronted them
with it), but he wouldn't deny it.

Dave.

--
David C. L. Gilbert                        |  Something witty should be here. |
dgilbert@aeshq.uucp -> this term           |                                  |
dgilbert@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca -> next  |-->Only Amiga makes it possible   |
    Environment Canada               term  |                                  |
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: glenm@bnr.ca (Glen Martin)
Subject: Dress code on Queensland beaches
Reply-To: glenm@bnr.ca
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 16:44:30 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.034023.20994@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au>, s884764@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au (Grant Waldram [Atom Smash]) writes:
|> OK... There are none. At least, no legal ones.  To quote from "Bare Facts"
|> (The Australian one printed by Australian Sun & Health) ...
|> 
|> ---- begin quote ---
|> 
|> Queensland - The legal situation.
|> 
|> At present Queensland is the only mainland state without "legal" dress
|> optional beaches. 

Wow! And we thought we had it bad, having few legal nude beaches.
In Queensland, they have to wear *dresses* to go to the beach!
"Hell, no, we won't go!"

8-)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Glen Martin              Bell-Northern Research          Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Phone : (613) 763-7299   Fax: (613) 763-2626             Internet: glenm@bnr.ca
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: darkroom@stable.ecn.purdue.edu (Stephen G Bowman)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: I am wondering...
Date: 28 Jul 92 23:10:06 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network



  Hello out there in nude netland...

  I posted once before about CO places in Indiana, however, I now have
  some other questions for experienced nudists...

  I have never been to a CO facility before, but I do often go around my
  apartment in the nude infront of my room mates, I have been skinny dipping
  with friends in a creek in the woods and I have posed nude for art classes.
  My question is...are erections considered taboo at CO places?  I have never
  really thought about it until recently when I almost had one while skinny
  dipping with friends, and I began to wonder if people were offended by this
  or if it was considered to be human nature and ignored until the person
  relaxed...

  What is the official opinion?

  Just wondering

  Stephen.
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: stephane@xrtll.uucp (Stephane Deschenes)
Subject: Re: Looking for CO beaches in Toronto
Organization: WCOM Public Access Unix - Toronto
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 14:18:19 GMT

In article <92205.102312JW83HISW@MIAMIU.BITNET> JW83HISW@MIAMIU.BITNET writes:
>Greetings all!
>     Like the subject line says, I'm interested in any info on CO beaches
>in Toronto or Ontario in general.  My fiance' and I are taking our honey-
>moon to the Stratford Shakespeare Festival, and we're looking for other
>fun things to do during the week.  If you could post/Email any info, I'd
>really appreciate it.
>     BTW - we'll be there during the first week of June; how's the weather
>then?  Would it be too cold, or would it just depend?
Toronto has no generally accepted CO beaches.  The two that are sometimes
used never have more than a few people on it - generally all men.  You
also run the risk of problems with the police.  They don't look to arrest
anyone but will if they receive complaints.  In this repressed city, they
do get complaints at times.
There are three private CO clubs in the Toronto area.  Two of them are
not too far from Stratford.  Let me know if you are interested.

Stephane

 

Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: lib@cbnews.cb.att.com (Lib)
Subject: Beaches In New York, New Jersey, New England - Besides  Sandy Hook
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 19:35:06 GMT

   
Can anyone suggest some nice beaches in New York, New Jersey
or New England besides Sandy Hook? Thanks in advance.
   
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Arnett)
Subject: Re: Nudity Harmful? (was Re: Information on indecent exposure arrest)
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 01:09:41 GMT

>In article <> jrobie@netmbx.netmbx.de (Jonathan Robie) writes:
>>But someone will object that someone else's nudity is not directed at me.
>>True!  But like smoking, which is also not directed at me, it changes my
>>environment in ways that I may not like.

Okay.  But no more so than the colour I paint my house, the clothes I
wear (when I wear clothes), the length of my hair, the colour of my
skin, the dog I choose to have, whether she barks when you walk past
my house, etc., etc..

Like nudity, all of these affect only your mind.  None of them, including
my lack of clothes, is going to actually harm you or violate your rights.
So what is it that justifies my rights being restricted?	     

Tolerance is allowing other people the freedom to be who they want to be...
even if you don't like it.  But when they inflicting (physically) their
desires on other people then tolerance takes a back seat to personal rights.

Let me put it this way: if I choose to paint my house green, blue, red,
orange, yellow AND black, you have the right to be horified, digusted,
angry, etc., but you do NOT have the right to compell me to cover it
with brown paint!  Nor have you lost your right to paint your house
plain brown.

Likewise, if I take off my clothes in public, you have the right to be
horified, disgusted, offended, angry, etc., but you *should not have*
the right to compell me to cover my body with clothes.  Once again, you
have not lost your right to cover yourself with clothes.
	       
Because I'm tolerant, I won't worry about what you choose to wear or
not wear, but I expect an equal amount of tolerance in return.

To paraphrase an statement I've heard made many times by people wanting
to eliminate public CO beaches: "If someone wants to avoid seeing nudists,
that person can do so on private property."	 

BTW, the house I described actually exists a couple of blocks from mine.
It's truly hideous.  But it's their right to paint it that way (in my
city, at least).
	      
Cheers. Bill.

PS: Some places do have laws against some of the things I mentioned but most
    places allow freedom of choice in all those things except nudity.
    So I don't want to here that X county dictates a choice of house
    colours.  This does happen, but it is not the norm.
-- 
Bill Arnett                            Internet: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: pruss@helix.nih.gov (dmitry pruss)
Subject: Re: Nudity Harmful? (was Re: Information on indecent exposure arrest)
Organization: National Institutes of Health, Bethesda
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 00:09:27 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.010941.12712@unixg.ubc.ca> arnett@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Arnett) writes:
>>In article <> jrobie@netmbx.netmbx.de (Jonathan Robie) writes:
>>>But someone will object that someone else's nudity is not directed at me.
>>>True!  But like smoking, which is also not directed at me, it changes my
>>>environment in ways that I may not like.
>
>Okay.  But no more so than the colour I paint my house, the clothes I
>wear (when I wear clothes),
>etc., etc..
>Like nudity, all of these affect only your mind.  None of them, including
			  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>my lack of clothes, is going to actually harm you or violate your rights.

One shouln't be so plainly materialistic :)
A lot of things affecting *mind only* still can harm. This is especially
true for things influencing one's sexual perception. They may change
hormonal levels in a hardly controllable way and thus cause some
undesirable effects. You can object like "This is a damage inflicted more
by this mind itself than by anything external". True! But it doesn't make a
(mind-mediated) harm disappearing.
The effect doesn't last long, you would say... But a harm resulting from a
fist-hit-to-a-nose is for a short time, too. Besides these things, memory
lasts long and _is_ a physical process. 

Not surprisingly, this country is used to restricting *things that affect
one's mind only*, without paying too much attention to a medicinal side of
events (e.g., nature of a hypothetical harm) ;-)

>Let me put it this way: if I choose to paint my house green, blue, red,
>orange, yellow AND black, you have the right to be horified, digusted,
>angry, etc., but you do NOT have the right to compell me to cover it
>with brown paint!  Nor have you lost your right to paint your house
>plain brown.
>
A proper example! I know a place here in Wash DC area where one can't paint
one's house in a horryfying way. Neither can one do a lot of other
renovations. It's in the old part of Alexandria VA.

I'd be happy to see any intolerance restricted to small *Historical
reserves*, like that spot in Alexandria :) 
Xref: sparky rec.nude:3520 soc.singles:21008
From: tmd@austin.lockheed.com (Tom Davis)
Newsgroups: rec.nude,soc.singles
Subject: Re: topless
Date: 24 Jul 92 12:00:08 GMT
Followup-To: article in soc.singles

In article <1992Jul22.050622.135864@zeus.calpoly.edu>
   jemenake@zeus.calpoly.edu (Joe Emenaker) writes:

>I thought this was interesting. Although it is appropriate in a nudist camp
>(where most of the folks are comfortable with nudity... I'd expect)...
   You ought to try it some time -- folks at nudist "camps" are FAR more
   comfortable with themselves, and each other, than you seem to be.

>it seems to me that women would want to cover up to avoid the constant lusty
>looks from the common 'man on the street'. In fact, I think it would have
>been interesting if a bunch of men showed up at the march and started
>playing pocket pool as they walked along.... eyeing their tits. I think it
>would have made the women have second thoughts about whether they really
>wanted to be topless after all. :-)
   Back in the middle ages, the "good" churchmen who found themselves
   aroused by women blamed the women, not themselves, for their lack
   of self-control. From that, we got not only perversions such as
   Augustine's _Confessions_ but also several thousand fairly horrible
   murders of those innocent (meaning non-guilty) women.

>Personally, I'd love women to walk around topless. How about totally nude
>even? In fact...   damn! Where'd I put those stirrups? :-)
   Just how old are you, anyway?

-- 
   Tom Davis                    Internet address: tmd@austin.lockheed.com
	"Imagine there's no countries; it isn't hard to do;
	 Nothing to kill or die for, and no religion, too."
   [Disclaimer: I speak for nobody but me - and sometimes not even that.]
From: Richard.Mathews@West.Sun.COM (Richard M. Mathews)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: 'Selling' nudism
Date: 22 Jul 92 23:59:50 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: astro
Originator: richard@astro.West.Sun.COM

middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu (Tom Middleton ; System Manager) writes:
>In article <y_dm_fb.pdh@netcom.com> pdh@netcom.com (Phil Howard ) writes:
>>Don't count on it.  The TV stations and networks can and *DO* refuse
>>advertising they don't like.  

>True but there is one way around this.  Run for political office on the
>nudist ticket.  In the U.S. political ads can not be censored and candidates
>do have the right for equal time. Some anti-abortionist took advantage of this
>by running for office and showing fetuses in his ads.

>Perhaps some day I will run for Mayor and have a series of ads done at Blacks
>Beach!! :-)   :-)

Damn!  I just had the same idea, came over here to post it, and found that
you beat me to it.

There is one correction, however, that I must make.  Federal law provides
that stations accept without editing any political spot offered by a
candidate for *federal* office.  The Feds have nothing to say about
advertising for local office, and local laws have no authority over
the FCC and thus can't impose similar requirements for local offices.
Thus you better run for Congress.  And you still have to have enough
money to be able to afford the ads.

     Richard M. Mathews			F oster 
					 E stonian-Latvian-Lithuanian
Richard.Mathews@West.Sun.COM		  I ndependence and
					   F reedom!
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: elogan@dbaix.oc.com (Ernie Logan)
Subject: Re: Age: The Naked Truth
Keywords: none
Organization: OpenConnect Systems, Dallas, TX
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 13:27:45 GMT


In rec.nude you write:
>I'm 49 years old.  I read this newsgroup because, although I've
>never even been to a CO beach, I'm interested in the subject and
>am slowly but surely working myself up to visiting one.  A far
>more difficult hurdle will be talking my wife into joining me.

>Admittedly, I haven't been lurking here very long, so age is a
>subject that may already have been discussed.  Most posters are
>probably younger than I am, and I wonder:  What is the age
>spread at CO beaches and clubs?  Are we old-timers represented
>in any numbers?

>Mike Lynch

Mike:

My club (indeed the ASA in general) is very widespread in age
group. We have people from infant to age 90. Better late than
never. Join the fun. We would certainly welcome you and your
wife at our club, and you would be welcomed pretty much anywhere,
I assure you.

OBTW, I have also found this to be true in my limited experience at CO
beaches.
---
Ernie Logan
(Age 34)
SWSA (ASA Regional) Vice President
Proud Member of Vista Grande Naturist Resort
Weatherford, Texas
elogan@oc.com
elogan@oc.com

-- 
---
Ernie Logan, Jr.
IBM AS/400 TCP/IP Connectivity
elogan@oc.com
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Arnett)
Subject: Re: my first experience on CO beach
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 08:52:21 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.214015.1450@cc.tut.fi> ta66863@cc.tut.fi (Ahlqvist Tero) writes:
>
>HI All !!!!!
>
>(before you read this I'll tell you I'm male :) )
>
>Now I've done it. About a week ago I visited one official CO beach of 

Thanks for posting this description of your experiences.  It was a nice
change from some of the other stuff that's appeared here lately.

>I didn't have difficulties with erection, because the feeling was so
>natural and wonderful. After few minutes I forgot that I and the people
>I had chat with, were naked. It all was like God had meant it to be.
>So why you all advice newcomers to take history book or War and Peace along
>if afraid of erection. Why to lie on your stomach when youre finally got
>to the place your willie can legally enjoy the wind, the water and the sun.

If I understand you correctly, you want to know why we advise men who are
worried about having an erection to read a history book (to take their
minds off their surroundings) or to lay on their stomach for a while (to
hide it).

Most people give this advice will wholeheartedly agree with you that the
feeling is "so natural and wonderful" that an erections is unlikely, but
the guys who are worried about having an erection aren't going to believe
this UNTIL THEY GET TO THE BEACH.  So suggesting things to do should the
situation arise (ignore the pun) may givethem enough confidence to get to
the beach so they can find out for themselves that it isn't likely to 
happen.  And if it does happen, they have some ideas on what to do so they
don't have to feel embarrassed.

Cheers. Bill.    

-- 
Bill Arnett                            Internet: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca