HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Fascinating Breasts (was Re: BRA SURVEY)
Date: 8 Sep 92 13:52:42 GMT
Reply-To: wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie)
Organization: UniSQL, Inc., Austin, Texas, USA

In article <1992Sep5.054303.23913@unixg.ubc.ca> arnett@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Arnett) writes:
>>Be forwarned; if women begin going topless in public, I will enjoy it and
>There is no law against being rude

	Great Ghu, there's no reason to equate "enjoyment" with "rude".
Don't *you* look at other people?  Aren't they beautiful and interesting?
From: middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu (Tom Middleton ; System Manager)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Nudist documentary proposed for local access cable channel
Date: 9 Sep 92 00:39:01 GMT
Organization: Institute for NonLinear Science, UCSD
NNTP-Posting-Host: poincare.ucsd.edu

In article <> beigel-richard@CS.YALE.EDU (Richard Beigel) writes:
>group has proposed showing a documentary on nudism on the local access
>cable TV channel.  ...
>documentary in question features four American nudist camps and
>includes frontal nudity.  
>	...
>Any speculation whether this will do more harm or more good for the
>nudist cause?

I would speculate more good than harm.  Although some claim that the
biggest problem we have is sex on nude beaches (oh no, I shouldn't have
said that! :-)) it is my contention that the biggest problem we have
to overcome is ignorance.  The population in general is unaware of
just what nude recreation means.  They think it is an excuse for an
orgy or bizarre sun worshipers who sacrifice virgins to Sol.  People
tend to think nude areas and families don't mix.  Someone sees us hiking
nude down a trail and they hide their eyes or are afraid we will attack
them.

I think such a documentary can go a long way towards educating and removing
some of the fears based on having no knowledge of what nudity is about.

-- 
===============================================================================
Thomas Earl Middleton		| Camping Bares:  "An Anarchist Disorganization
aka Happy Bare			| Dedicated to the Destruction of the Fabric of
middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu	| Our Society"
From: lebrun@ll.mit.edu (Steven F. LeBrun)
Subject: Re: coed bathrooms
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory, Lexington, MA
Distribution: rec
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 07:32:06 -0400
Expires: 5 Oct 1992

In article <1992Sep10.174444.11518@unislc.uucp>, Karen Biesel wrote
about urinals:

> As men say, we find them quite useful.  My point exactly.  They are only
> useful to men.  Why are you spending money and using up room putting
> a fixture in a coed facility that only 50% of the people can use?

It appears that you think that urinals are a waste of money and space
in a co-ed bathroom since onlyh half the people can use them.  I would
like to point out that money and space are not the only considerations.
Urinals are far more conservative in their use of water than toilets.  
Water is a resource that we tend to overlook in the USA but even here 
it is becoming increasingly important to conserve our reserves of clean 
water.  It is a dwindling resource with an increasing demand.  So,
even though urinals can only be used by half of the population, everyone
benefits from their use.

On a recent trip to Germany, I saw a urinal in the home of one of my 
hosts.  This was the first time I had seen one for domestic use.
Water conservation has a strong influence in the European life style.
I notice that the design of many of the household appliances were more
conservation oriented without decreasing efficiency or adding much to
the price.  And since the appliances used less water, power, etc. they
were cheaper to run thus making up for any additional purchase price.
We, in the USA, could learn alot from this attitude.

--

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Steven F. LeBrun             |      MIT Lincoln Laboratory, Group 91     |
|                              |        244 Wood Street, Room LI-136       |
| lebrun@ll.mit.edu (Internet) |          Lexington, MA 02173-9108         |
| lebruns@merlin    (internal) |  Phone:(617)-981-5742, FAX:(617)-981-0991 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|"Hard as lightning, soft as candlelight;                                  |
|                    Dare you trust the Music of the Night?" - The Phantom |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: jlysagh@hubcap.clemson.edu (james joseph lysaght)
Subject: how about CO in a computer lab??
Organization: Clemson University
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 15:15:11 GMT

I have been following the thread on bare breasts and why we are so
fascinated by breasts and such.  At one point someone said something to
the effect that if we saw them everyday we would not find them so
intrigueing.  I thought this to be pretty silly as I see my wofes every
day and I never am any less attracted to them.  Today, however, I
learned the validity of such statments.  I was in a computer lab on
the campus and there was a reasonably attracitve blond there who was   
wearing a sleeveless shirt and had said shirt unbuttoned to the third
button.  She had no bra on underneeth and as she moved her arms around
to type on the keyboard and work the mouse her breasts would come
dangling out of her shirt.  She obviously had no concern for this and
was just letting them hang out.  And by hang out I mean the wear
completely, one hundred per cent bare.  Several of the male students in
the lab could not keep there eyes off of her.  I noticed that i,
personally, found them not the least bit attractive and did not spend
much time looking at her.  i was, on the other hand, very interestyed in
the bahvior of the students around her.  The females seemed not to even
notice.  The males were obviously getting an eyefull and glancing
sideways at each other while trying there damndest not to be noticed by
the others in the lab.

So, I offer a different few of the effects of toplessness.  I would not
say that if women go topless we would be desensitzed to this because as
I stated I am in no way desensitized to my wifes chest.  I suggest that
if women go topless we will only care about those that we are already
attracted to.  You might notice that this sounds just like what happens
when women are topped, we stare at the ones we like and ignore the ones
we don't.  I think it would be the smae of they were topless.

jim
From: middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu (Tom Middleton ; System Manager)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Someone else will be offended
Date: 8 Sep 92 23:53:23 GMT
Organization: Institute for NonLinear Science, UCSD
NNTP-Posting-Host: poincare.ucsd.edu

In article <> brahm@cco.caltech.edu (David E. Brahm) writes:
>I'm currently petitioning the Caltech administration to set aside some
>swimsuit-optional hours at the pool.  

Good idea and good luck.

>- The VP for Student Affairs, Gary Lorden, disapproved strongly.  Here's
>  Dan's description of Gary's response: "...a policy of this nature would
>  surely offend a very large portion of the Campus/JPL Community, including
>  Dr. and Mrs. Everhart and virtually all members of our Board of Trustees
>  ... If you feel like pursuing this issue further, I suggest that you take
>  it to Dr. Everhart directly." 

>Here's my working hypothesis: Nobody actually objects strongly, but
>everyone's afraid someone else will be offended -- Dan of Gary, Gary of
>Tom, Tom of the community.  


I think David has hit on an interesting point here.  It seems that a common
thread amongst objections is the concern that someone else will be offended.
It is my opinion that nude swimming, nude sunbathing and nude beaches are
NOT offending to the majority of people.  However, a small and very vocal
minority seem to have administrators and politicians scared.  That is coupled
with a small and quiet minority of nudists who lack good surveys of public
opinion and who are afraid to speak out for fear of repercussion from the
fanatical anti-nude minority.

Somehow, we in the nudist/naturist community need to be able to convince
politicians and judges and administrators that allowing nude use areas
will not result in a large public outcry for their removal.  (or will it?)

Any thoughts on this?


-- 
===============================================================================
Thomas Earl Middleton		| Camping Bares:  "An Anarchist Disorganization
aka Happy Bare			| Dedicated to the Destruction of the Fabric of
middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu	| Our Society"
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler)
Subject: Re: how about CO in a computer lab??
Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 21:50:23 GMT

jlysagh@hubcap.clemson.edu (james joseph lysaght) writes:
[ woman in computer lab with shirt buttoned low ]

Since most computer labs are air conditioned to keep the
equipment cool, I doubt she did it for purely comfort reasons.
I don't see this as a 'nude' issue, but it is interesting
in a way.

>I would not
>say that if women go topless we would be desensitzed to this because as
>I stated I am in no way desensitized to my wifes chest.

You're taking one woman with whom you have an intimate
relationship and deriving everyone's reaction to all women
everywhere refraining from wearing shirts. That's a little
too broad for my taste.

The operative notion here should be that our attention
to these matters is *normalized* by knowledge (exposure
to them). Instead of spending three hours typing one
sentence on the word processor in the computer lab
while staring at the loose-shirted woman, take notice
of it and go on about your business as usual. That's the ticket!

-- 

bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler)

Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic)
Subject: Topless Politicians
Keywords: sunshine
Organization: TFS
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 00:00:10 GMT

quirke_a@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz writes:
>"Amy Young Leith":
>> I must point out that there are many men in this society who have
>> BREASTS, and by that I mean fatty pendulous objects protuding from
>> their chests, the same as women do.  I have seen many a large man who
>> has these objects go topless.  
>> Why is this not "indecent?"
>
>   It is. It's just not *illegal*.
>   Should legislation be proposed restricting toplessness in public to those
>individuals in which display of their upper half would enhance the aesthetic
>atmosphere of the community, it would be voted down. Why ?
>   Take a look at your typical politician...
>
>Tony Q.
>no .sig, no .luck, no .nothing

Well, I have an interesting proposition. On top of having cameras in the
House, Senate and the committees, they should do their business in the nude.

(1) On the idea that women would watch in, the men might behave.
(2) On the idea that the current crop is - slightly anesthetic, shall
	we say, the voters might vote younger men and more women into office.
	Of course, after Bush is defeated, Danny will go back to Indiana and
	be a senator again. Question is whther we will see him in the buff.
(3) On the idea that it'd be more fun to watch, more people would
	participate.
(4) Follow your leaders! More nudity in general & a sociosexual revolution.
	You knew that was coming.

Let's be the first country to do this! We got the guts (-er, no pun
intended.)

Imagine Arlen Specter questioning Anita Hill. He'd be nude, but she as
a guest would have the option. I'd give him 5 seconds to break into a
cold sweat. If she did decide to go nude, the cameras get to watch
whether his gaze gets transfixed on her breasts. Somehow this idea
is too full of potential . . .

The Truth, The Whole Truth, and Nothing But The Truth.
Whee!
From: aminkoff@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Tony Minkoff)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Disc. against singles esp. men (was Re: FIRST TIMER REPORT. )
Date: 8 Sep 92 07:47:52 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego

I asked a lawyer (actually, third-year law student) friend of mine,
"How come insurance companies can change males more for automobile
insurance than they charge females?  It certainly would not be legal
to, say, charge blacks more than whites, would it?"

He explained to me that men are not a "protected, insular minority,"
which the 14th Amendment was designed to protect.  Neither are
whites, which is why public universities can have scholarships
specifically for minority students.

(Sounds like a crock to me, but we live in the age of political
correctness.)

Tony Minkoff
From: b4im2old@caravan.ksu.ksu.edu (Craig Eric Goodman)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: A strange dream...
Date: 7 Sep 92 13:06:55 GMT
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: caravan.ksu.ksu.edu


Keywords: 

You know you have an interesting life when... during a "basic" wearing 
your underwear to work dream, you look down, and realize you're overdressed.

(I work as a nude model for Figure Drawing classes here at Kansas State Univ.)

 -Craig Goodman  *8)

"How typical, a battle of wits and I've come half prepared..."
       -The Trash Can Sinatras
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: v024971@plato.lsvl8.stortek.com (Robert J. Waddell)
Subject: Re: test
Organization: StorageTek
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 19:48:11 GMT

In article <cm51qB1w165w@netlink.cts.com>, susan@netlink.cts.com (Susan Atrix) writes:
> Help! Every time I post to this group I never see the result...
> does anyone out there here me?
> 
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> | Gone surfing...                                                |
> |         Susan ...                    susan@netlink.cts.com     |
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello Susan,
I hear you load and clear. Although I haven't noticed your name up on the
pathnames section before, you are getting through at this time. Keep on
Posting! It took awhile before anyone responded to my posts when I first
started posting to this group, too. 

-- 


            ***   It's never to late to have a happy childhood!

********************************************************************************
V024971@PLATO.LSVL8.STORTEK.COM / Opinions expressed are usually my own but
Robert_Waddell@Stortek.com     / perhaps shared (though not by my employer).
********************************************************************************
From: kirkpatr@re.serum.kodak.com (Dan Kirkpatrick (x37370))
Subject: CO places around NY
Organization: New York
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 13:33:47 GMT


Could someone please tell me where there are some clothing optional places
around New York... preferrable Western New York or Sothern Ontario, Canada!?

I would be forever grateful!
From: malkor@IASTATE.EDU (Jason D Bowles)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: nude legislation
Date: 14 Sep 92 21:48:06 GMT
Reply-To: malkor@IASTATE.EDU (Jason D Bowles)
Organization: Iowa State University

In article <1992Sep13.193550@IASTATE.EDU>, I wrote: 

> re: kenny's reply to dav:
> I agree with both of you.  I'm usually very prudish(to use kenny's own words)
> but I do believe that if a half-crotchety, scagy-looking old highway worker
with
> more crack showing than a cocaine dealer can run about on a pulic highway,
that
> a beatiful female should be able to work(or whatever-- no wolf-whistles,
thank
> you)topless if she so desires and need not worry about some passing
> what's-his-name groping he simply because its out there.  I haven't been to a
> nude beach myself, but a couple of my friends have and they haven't heard of
> charges being pressed yet.
> 
> But this taboo-ism about the body mystifies me.  Is the human body really
that
> ugly?  I have little experience with other bodies, but I think that mine and
> those others that I have seen look fine.
> 
> And as for rapists...GET AN AFTERLIFE!!!  If "but she had TAIL to-die-for and
a
> mini-skirt" were really an excuse every 16 year-old male would have raped at
> least that many women.  Rape, I believe, is simply an immature ballance for
> self-respect.  A "man" with low self-esteem rapes a woman, or a man(don't
laugh
> guys, it happens) to feel more powerfull.  Unfortunately, it works.
> 
> This may sound militant(coming from a man), but I believe that if a person is
> charged with rape, they shouldn't be able to plea-bargain their way out of it
> and they should get at least 20 years(no parole).  E-mail me or post a reply
> here.  I'll be listening.
> 							malkor =|:)
 

This is just a clarifiction.

I DO believe that a person is innocent untill proven guilty, so prehaps I should
have said...

 "...but I believe that if a person is charged with rape, they shouldn't be able
to plea-bargain their way out of it and IF CONVICTED, should get at least 20
years(no parole)."

This may seem like nothing, but it seems to have stirred up a small hornets nest
for me.  Something that I have reconsidered leaving out is the fact that I
believe the practice of "plea-bargaining" IN GENERAL is a joke, not just in this
single situation.  I DO , however, stand behind my sentence recomendation.

I still welcome any comments, gripes(don't expect flowers), and/or
compliments(at least one...PLEASE!!!).  Therefore, if you want to butt heads or
even just bounce an idea off me(OUCH...not THAT hard!) I'll be happy to oblige.
Might even have and idea of my own that needs bouncing.
 							  
As always, E-mal me(malkor@iastate.edu) or post here.

Thanx.

                                                                 malkor =:)
From: clj2@po.CWRU.Edu (Cynthia L. Jorden)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Fascinating Breasts Indeed
Date: 7 Sep 1992 19:11:05 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: clj2@po.CWRU.Edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic) says:

>cmbr01@vaxa.strath.ac.uk writes:
>> gude@uniwa.uwa.edu.au (David J W Emrich) writes:
>>> exukjb@exu.ericsson.se (ken bell) writes:
>>{lots of stuff on bare breasted women }
>>
>>Couldn't we have more women on this discussion?
>>Do you women really want to bare your breasts?
>>Here, in Scotland, it is generally too cold for most of the year
>>so going around, paps abounding, would generally be ill-advised;
>>but, IMO it is the men who have to do a lot of growing up and to
>>a similar extent, women will have to accept male frivolity!
>>Molestation will be covered by most laws already written.
>>
>>Adios, J.
>
>Norwegian women go bare-chested when the temperature is okay.
>They're sane.
>Their men are not dorks, either.
>Hooray for sane nudity . . . like we are any other way. In truth.
>-ecsd
>

	When it is really humid, I would like to be able to just go around
in my shorts like the guys do.  Too bad it's labled indecent exposure.
-- 
                        /^\     /^\
                     {  ()       ()  }
		             ^
		         \______/   "Have a nice day"
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: ray@pequod.bsd.uchicago.edu (& Uliassi)
Subject: Las Vegas
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 19:57:51 GMT

Any CO suggestions for a trip between LA and Las Vegas?  There won't be a  
resort in Vegas would there?  Thanks.
From: tmd@austin.lockheed.com (Tom Davis)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Coed Bathrooms
Date: 10 Sep 92 11:46:49 GMT
Organization: "Lockheed Austin Division, 6800 Burleson Rd, Austin, TX 78744

In article <3622@unisql.UUCP> wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie) writes:
>... usually by the second set there are as many women in 
>the men's room as men.  Certainly by the time the show is over.  No one
>seems to have a problem with the guys using the urinals; you don't really 
>expose yourself anyway.  

Try France sometime -- a common occurrence is to have the (only)
restroom door open onto a common lavatory room, and have two toilet
rooms, one per gender, off that. The interesting thing is the urinal
in the lavatory room.

-- 
   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: dcgreen@pro-harold.cts.com (David Green)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: fuck
Date: 9 Sep 92 08:21:58 GMT
Organization: The Harold Network -- An Alliance For Creative Communication

In <JMD.92Sep8155151@lion.bear.com> jmd@bear.com (Josh Diamond) writes:
>
>In article <65325@cup.portal.com> Jeff_R_Spangenberg@cup.portal.com writes:
>   You are all a bunch of nigger fuckheads
>
>Er, Jeff -- It looks like you forgot to log out before
>going home...

That's what I was wondering... Did Jeff really send that message, or did he
make the mistake of letting some lowlife use his computer? If so, can said
lowlife be found and dropped into a vat of molten lava, or something equally
pleasant?

dcg :>


===========================================
David Green      dcgreen@pro-harold.cts.com
-------------------------------------------
     System Operator of Pro-Harold BBS
   "Moral Support For Intelligent Sorts"
===========================================
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler)
Subject: Re: Ironic, isn't it?
Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 04:52:14 GMT

perlman@smtc00.engr.scarolina.edu writes:
>Thursday, the local pool had closed and I returned to the YMCA.
>
>I guess I'll get my speedo fixed, but, oh ... its going to be a long
>time till next spring when the local pool reopens.

Are you kiddin? The YMCA was the first institutionalized
nude swimming outfit in America!

Smack em around a bit!

-- 

bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler)
From: RR04@bunny.gte.com (Rob Robertson)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: San Antone bound
Date: 15 Sep 92 12:11:17 GMT

Organization: GTE Laboratories


  Howdy y'all,
      ...headin' down to San Antonio, TX at the end of October/ start of 
November and am curious about CO areas and weather. I'd greatly appreciate 
it if someone could email me with an update.

  Thanks,
          Rob


Rob Robertson
GTE Laboratories          (617)466-4144 vox
40 Sylvan Rd.                (617)890-9320 fax
Waltham, Mass. 02254
"There is nothing new under the sun..."
Newsgroups: rec.nude