HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: maverick@topgun.b29.ingr.com (Mike Sorrelle)
Subject: Re: Photos at nude beaches
Reply-To: maverick@topgun.b29.ingr.com
Organization: Intergraph Corp., Dullsville (as in Huntsville), AL
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 17:03:12 GMT

In article <1a7k7iINNaa0@network.ucsd.edu>, middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu (Tom Middleton ; System Manager) writes:
|> In article <Bv9Io8.BKM@ansoft.com> elliot@ansoft.com (mike elliot/.nam) writes:
|> >I always find it strange when people expect different behavior in a
|> >CO setting than they would in a textile one. Take photographs for
|> >example. On a textile beach, most people wouldn't think twice if they
|> >saw someone with a camera taking pictures. But, put that some person
|> >on a CO beach and a lot of people think it is inappropriate. Surely,
|> >if nudity is nothing to be ashamed of and isn't to be equated with
|> >sex, then we should behave the same whether clothed or not.
|> 
|> 
|> If the behavior of the photographers was the same at a nude beach as at
|> a textile beach it would be reasonable for everyone else to behave the same.
|> Unfortunately, it is not the same.  At a textile beach you have tourists
|> taking pictures of their families and the scenery, you might have a few
|> news photographers who are easily identifiable, occasionally a photographer
|> will come by for landscapes or people-scapes and maybe from time to time
|> a professional with paid models will come by.
|> 
|> At a nude beach you have photographers who hide and use telephoto lenses.
|> At a nude beach many photographers concentrate on 'crotch' shots.  Sometimes
|> the photographers have a particular interest in children that they aren't
|> even related to.  Some nude beaches tend to draw many more photographers
|> than the same beach would if it was textile.  Many people still do equate
|> nudity with sex and some photographers prey on that.
|> 
|> Note: I am not arguing against nor for photography at nude beaches.  I am
|> merely arguing that it is not the same as at a non-nude beach.

Also, since being nude is not the 'norm' in our society (yet?), some of
the people on a CO beach may be in a position (in their everyday life)
that would be compromised by nude photos of themselves.  Whereas photos
of that same person on a textile beach would draw no more than a casual
glance.  Also, even if the person is not in some public position yet,
he/she may be later in life, and they wouldn't want some photos showing
up to be paraded around the tabloids.

So, until nudity becomes the 'norm', or at least accepted by the majority
of the general populace, then the usage of cameras at CO beaches/facilities
MUST be handled differently than at the textile counterparts.
-- 
                 _   |  Mike Sorrelle, Intergraph Corp., Huntsville, AL 
  /| /| |     / / \  |  Opinions expressed here are a daemon's, not mine.
 / |/ | | /| /   \   |  Internet:  maverick@topgun.b29.ingr.com
/     | |/ |/  \_/   |  UUCP:      ...uunet!ingr!b29!topgun!maverick
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Arnett)
Subject: Re: Would anonymous access here be desirable?
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 10:33:56 GMT

In article <is68748@pro-amber.cts.com> rsopicki@pro-amber.cts.com (Randy Sopicki) writes:
>In <1992Sep27.161607.634@eskimo.celestial.com>
>wix@eskimo.celestial.com (Dennis Wicks) writes:
>>One thing to consider is that anonymous posting does not allow
>>cross-posting!  That would have to be a definite advantage!
>
>I still don't think its worth it. Anon posts do attract wackos. I ran one
>anon section on my bbs and it was shortlived. Folks just tend to get very
>brave when they don't have to sign their name.

I agree.  If anonymous postings are allowed, they should be moderated.
Otherwise the noise level is going to increase.

Really, I don't think any change is necessary except maybe to add something
to the FAQ listing the email addresses of people who are willing to post
on behalf of those wishing to remain anonymous.  Several names should be
listed so a person can pick someone whose views they think are supportive.

I Will volunteer (as a couple of others already have).  I've relayed
queries to r.n several times in the past and I have no problem with this.
I've also had lots of email conversations with people who were unwilling
to talk in the open.  Several of them now contribute to rec.nude, if
anonymous posting was available automatically they might still be posting
anonymously.

The list, I think, should contain at *least* 3 names so that people have a
choice of who to trust with their identities.  If possible, one of the
volunteers should be a woman.

Bill.
-- 
Bill Arnett                            Internet: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: jlong@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (John Long)
Subject: Re: Approaching a woman at a CO beach?
Organization: Purgatory Embassy
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 02:48:33 GMT

In article <OLEG.92Oct3152250@sblapis1.cs.sunysb.edu> oleg@cs.sunysb.edu (Oleg Sokolsky) writes:
>mrk@gvgspd.GVG.TEK.COM (Michael R. Kesti) writes:
>
>> >                                In the midst of a purely computer-related
>> >discussion, a man aproached us and quietly and politely asked us to leave...
>>
>> I was hoping someone else would ask, but after a couple of days nobody has,
>> so I get to be the net.dunce:  On what grounds did this individual feel he
>> was justified in asking you to leave?
>
>Several of the beaches I've been to were self-regulated in some way or other.
>Sometimes there are specially appointed people (I think, Sandy Hook has this
>now, but I might be wrong). Mostly, self-regulation is done by the most
>respected members; you don't HAVE to comply, but they are people you'll have
>around if you choose to stay. Thus, I think the guy was justified to do it. He
>might be wrong (I hope he was, whatever he had in mind) in my particular case,
>but in general I guess he was doing a useful job.
>
>Oleg

OK, *my* turn..... Oleg, WHY did he ask you to leave? Do you know?
Do you care?

(.... "he asked us to leave because he was the guy who asks people to...")

OLEG!  WHAT were you two DOING?????

Was he big? Did he wear a hat? How will I know this man when he comes to
a beach near me? Does he only ask, or does he tell? OLEG!  WHAT were you 
two DOING?????

Did you ask to see a badge? And last but not least, what good did it do,
your leaving? Did things get better? Are you still doing whatever it
was that made him ask you to leave, or did he just ask you because that
is his job? 

Why did he ask you to leave? OLEG!  WHAT were you two DOING?????

God, I am dying to know! DON'T KEEP US ALL IN SUSPENSE!

HEY! What is this.... some kind of a wierd joke? OLEG!  WHAT were you 
two DOING?????  *Both* of you??????

or kill me.
-longjohn
From: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Arnett)
Subject: CO Digest
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 10:11:36 GMT

In article <1992Sep28.224048.2670@eskimo.celestial.com> witters@eskimo.celestial.com (John Witters) writes:
>By the way, what happened to the mailing list that was described here a few
>months ago?  I tried sending a query about it to the address listed in the
>article, but I got no reply.

Send a message to John Hendry (hendry@ETSUADMN.ETSU.EDU) asking to be
added to the list.  The original address posted is no longer valid.
Topics are similar to here with an overlapping group of people and
a *much* lower volume.

Bill.
-- 
Bill Arnett                            Internet: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca
From: rfrwatson@peg.pegasus.oz.au
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Hello form OZ
Date: 3 Oct 92 02:47:00 GMT
Nf-ID: #N:peg:295000032:000:555
Nf-From: peg.UUCP!rfrwatson    Oct  2 21:47:00 1992


We would like to here from our European brothers & sisters. My
wife and I will be in Germany,UK and Scandinavian countries in
Dec-Jan93 , any places wotrth visiting? Any one interested in
talking to OZ travellers?
******************************************************************
APC:     peg:rfrwatson               Bob Watson
AARNET:  rfrwatson@peg.pegasus.oz.au PO Box 7271
Internet:rfrwatson@peg.apc.org	     LISMORE HEIGHTS NSW 2480
                                     AUSTRALIA
******************************************************************
From: galster@plains.NoDak.edu (Dwight Galster)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: name change and unwanted posts
Date: 5 Oct 92 14:30:03 GMT
Article-I.D.: plains.20947
Distribution: usa
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network

You know, about a month ago I got so disgusted with all the sex postings
that I unsubscribed from the group.  I just came back today, in time to
read of Tom Middleton's "killing" of ecsd.  I recall that at the time I
unsubscribed there seemed to be about 50-60 new postings a day, with a
large, large chunk of them from ecsd.  Today there were 60 postings 
current.  I read about 20 of them, and 5(!) were from ecsd, mostly making
defensive and angry statements toward other posters about subjects that
I am barely interested in (which is the reason I don't read alt.sex).
Now I have been guilty of posting articles that were only of marginal
interest to the group too, but in my own defense I will say that I did
not go on and on and on and on about it.  I believe I posted three times
(on the creation-evolution subject) then carried on the remainder of the
discussion in email.

To ecsd, I will say that I respect your right to voice your opinions in
any forum including this one, But as in all social situations, one needs
to consider not only what one wants to say but also just how much of it
others want to hear!  Most of us can tell, in any conversation, when 
others are getting tired of our tirades, then we start to think about 
wrapping it up and moving on to some other topic.  I suggest that this
may be what you need to do.  Carry on the discussion in email with those
more interested in your specific topic.  Also I get a little irritated
when I see three or four postings from the same person in a row.  With
a group of this size, I would think limiting yourself to one posting a
day would be reasonable.

To Tom Middleton or anyone else... I have not felt the need to use a
kill file up to this point.  Care to instruct me so I too can add a
kill for unwanted postings?

obnude:  Are you kidding?  This is North Dakota! (actually we've has some
of the warmest weather of the summer-fall the last few days--it's been in
the mid to upper seventies.  Even got over eighty one day.)

Dwight
galster@plains.nodak.edu
North Dakota State University
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic)
Subject: Re: Approaching a woman at a CO beach?
Organization: TRW Financial Systems
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 08:37:38 GMT

philb@cats.ucsc.edu (Philip Brown) writes:
>If you are naked,however, the probability of a financial
>transaction goes up dramatically.

Madonna seems to have figured this out.
$49.95, coming soon. No pun not intended.
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: mdl@phelixsalt (Michael Lynch)
Subject: Re: Hiking nude
Reply-To: mdl@phelixsalt (Michael Lynch)
Organization: Bellcore
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 14:53:36 GMT

I live in New Jersey, and in this part of the world poison ivy grows as
large as trees.  It's all over the place.  There are entire fields of it.
Every morning on Old York Road I drive past The Mother Of All Poison Ivy
Plants.  Not only do I *get* poison ivy, I'm allergic to it.  I found that
out a few years ago when I went to the doctor for desensitizing shots,
and a few hours after the first one I was a walking poison ivy bump.

I guess my point is that there are some practical considerations when dealing
with Mother Nature skin first.  Hiking nude sounds great as long as the
trail is wide.

And in New Jersey, it had better be *very* wide.


Mike Lynch
mdl@oscar.bellcore.com
From: middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu (Tom Middleton ; System Manager)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Sexual behavior
Date: 30 Sep 1992 20:41:57 GMT
Organization: Institute for NonLinear Science, UCSD
NNTP-Posting-Host: poincare.ucsd.edu
Keywords: inappropriate

In article <1992Sep26.233328.18024@tfs.com> ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic) writes:
>Scenario:
>
>Man walks up to woman at nude beach.
>"Hello, my name is ____. I enjoy sex. Would you like to participate in
>a sexual act with me?"
>
>Get this straight: there is nothing wrong with sexual behavior.
>All we're arguing is where is it appropriate to express it?

The default rec.nude answer to this is: If you really think this is 
appropriate in your classrooms, at the grocery store, or at a textile
beach then by all means it is appropriate at a nude beach.  If you do
not think this is appropriate behavior in the rest of society then there
is NO reason to think it is appropriate behavior at a nude beach.

It is inappropriate and incorrect to assume that people attending a nude
beach and enjoying nature in a natural state should be subject to sexual
behavior which they would not be subject to if they were visiting a
non-nude beach and enjoying nature while wearing a bathing suit.

The rest of my answer is personal and being sent via email.  I'll send
copies to other interested parties upon request.

And I will be adding /ecsd@tfs.com/h:j  to my kill file.  The problem
with people who repeatedly ignore a groups charter is eventually no one
hears.

-- 
===============================================================================
	Thomas Earl Middleton		
	aka Happy Bare		
	middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu	
Newsgroups: rec.nude
id <m0mZ2OE-0000P7C@crash.cts.com>; Sun, 27 Sep 92 10: 26 PDT
	id <ir36847@pro-amber.cts.com>; Sun, 27 Sep 92 10: 14 PDT
From: rsopicki@pro-amber.cts.com (Randy Sopicki)
Subject: Re: Name change for rec.nude? Is it time? No!
Organization: ProLine [pro-amber] -- Spring Valley, Ca
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 92 10:09:18 PDT

I must agree. I don't think it will help one bit in the long run to change
the name of the group. The long term fix is patience and education. The
education can be conducted via e-mail vice net flame wars when an off the
wall post hits the group. I will have to say no to any name change.
From: dking@unix.cie.rpi.edu (Dave King)
Subject: Lighten up, gang
Organization: CIE, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 15:14:47 GMT


	Post a trip report!  PLEASE!  Somebody, anybody!!

	I'm taking a collection so that whoever it was that recently
wrote that great posting about his trip to Jamaica (the one with the
unsuspecting clothed bar patrons at the CO beach) can keep traveling
and providing entertaining reading.  (Note that I didn't selfishly
suggest that you send *me*, although I do have quite a bit of vacation
time coming.  :-)

	This concept could really be a convenience, you know.  With
one designated person taking care of having all the fun, the rest of
us would have more time to continue our important discussions.  We
might even squeeze in a seminar on creative kill file construction!
Isn't that worth at least $20 to you?  Make your contribution today!



--
David C. King - RPI Center for Integrated Electronics
dking@unix.cie.rpi.edu
From: wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: sex
Keywords: ignore what you fear and it will have undoubtedly gone away
Date: 2 Oct 92 16:23:36 GMT
Reply-To: wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie)
Organization: UniSQL, Inc., Austin, Texas, USA

In article <1992Oct2.063705.5889@tfs.com> ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic) writes:
>Since even *clothed* people evoke a sexual response, all *nudity* does is 
>raise the stakes

	Most (all?) nudists are of the opinion that clothing is sexier
than nudity, since clothing highlights and emphasizes sexual characteristics.


Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: mbb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (martin.brilliant)
Subject: Re: End of my thread Open Sexuality in rec.nude
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 15:35:43 GMT

From article <1992Oct6.083629.18604@tfs.com>, by ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic):
> I am going to drop the pursuit of my theory here ....
> .... a quick synopsis of the arguments, as relates to nudity:

I think a lot of people, Eric included, do not fully appreciate the
reality of political constraints.  They assume that if we won't
support their calls to action, we don't understand their philosophy.

> Some in the Nudist community hold the opinion that
> "the opinion that nudity == sex has damaged the Nudist cause"
> and the response is to assure the public at large that nudity != sex.
> I claim that this attitude is incorrect....
> 
> I claim that in fact nudity == sex, in that you cannot look at a naked body
> and not know that it is a sexual body....

False and true: basically, confused.  Humanity implies sex, but nudity
doesn't.  You don't engage in sex just because you are with a naked
person.  Nudity has sexual implications, but it is in no sense equal
to sex.  This distinction is not only a philosophical truth, but a
potent political lever.

> ..... for the benefit of society, those
> of use who wish to explore nudism should be allowed to do so *anywhere* where
> clothes are not needed .... The anger and fear that meets
> this suggestion comes from the negative aspects of our social conditioning...

I think that's all true.  There is no need to argue it on
philosophical grounds.  I know it, and I think any nudist/naturist who
has thought about this knows it.

We need to address the political truths, not the philosophical ones.
We all have social conditioning; it's an expression of human nature.
Textile people fear us.  These facts impose real constraints on our
behavior.  We have to find practical ways to relax those constraints
when we can, and operate within them when we must.

Long discussions of the sexual nature of humans have nothing to do
with that need.

							Marty
marty@hoqaa.att.com		hoqaa!marty
Martin B. Brilliant		(Winnertech Corporation)	
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Arnett)
Subject: Re: Protest! (sort of)
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 01:32:40 GMT

In article <1abpilINNckm@agate.berkeley.edu> jbecker@ocf.berkeley.edu (Jane Becker) writes:
>...nothing at all.  Well, I was walking through campus this lunchtime
>and discovered in Sproul Plaza what could be considered a protest
>against clothing!  There were a dozen or so naked people parading
>around, making speeches, etc.  Most of them were male, but there
...
>binoculars!  The police didn't seem to mind, they were hanging 
>around the fringes of the crowd (actually, if they tried to
>arrest someone, it probably would cause a riot :)).
...
>My friend (male) gawked; clearly he hadn't believed me when I
>told him about it.  I noticed he was staring at one woman in
>particular, so on an impulse, I grabbed his hand and dragged him
>over to meet her.

Good move!!  I like it. :-)

>I do have a question for the readers though:  what do you think
>of this kind of event?  Do you think it serves some useful
>purpose as far as promoting (raising awareness/acceptance of)
>a clothing-optional lifestyle?  (I don't think that came out 
>right, but I think you know what I'm trying to say.)  Or is it
>just some kind of circus act that at best provides a little
>amusement for the viewers, and at worst represents nudists as
>a bunch of weirdos?
  
That depends on how the whole thing was handled---by the group
themselves, and by the media.  Of course the media will portray
whatever they want but can be influenced by how the organizers
deal with them. 

Personally, I think this sort of thing is important to do, but if
done badly could certainly be a step backward.  You were a little
vague on what the demonstrators' message was.  That, combined wiht
how the media portrays the event, influences whether the result
would be positive or negative.  But from your description (specific-
ally the facts that they were still there in the nude an hour later,
and that they were chatting with anyone who wanted to talk) I would
think that there might be some positive effects.

This sort of thing can be effective.  For a recent example, look
at the Rochester top-free protests, held in a public park, which
have resulted in the New York supreme court ruling that top-free
is not illegal.  Also, the Gwen Jacobs case in Guelph, Ontario,
which has generated a lot of discussion across Canada about
top-freedom.
		      
Thanks for posting this.  Please post more information on what
the protest was about and how the media reacted.
			  
Bill.
-- 
Bill Arnett                            Internet: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca
From: karlton@fudge.asd.sgi.com (Phil Karlton)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Protest! (sort of)
Date: 2 Oct 92 20:16:50 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: fudge.asd.sgi.com

Here is what the San Jose Mercury News had to say

In a box on page 3B of the Wednesday, September 30, 1992 edition:

Headline at top:	'Nude-in' at UC-Berkely

			unrevaling photo of people with
			indeterminant gender

Caption under photo:	A group of students disrobed Tuesday
			at UC-Berkeley and urged others to
			strip away their pretensions.

Headline:		Students strip in campus plaza

Tag line:		'When it's hot, clothes are just
			uncomfortable and useless.'
				-- Andrew Martinez,
				also known as "naked guy"

Berkeley (AP) -- A university sophomore whose breezy attire
has won him the nickname of the "naked guy" led about two
dozen students in casting off their repressions -- and
clothes -- at a campus "nude-in" Tuesday.

Andrew Martinez, formerly of Cupertino, explained "the most
underlying and simple reason behind it all is that when
it's hot, clothes are just uncomfortable and useless."

To begin the midday event in Sproul Plaza, Martinez, 19,
shucked his shorts as he sang, "Break on through to the
side," backed by a tape of the Doors song.

Hundreds of clothed students crowded around the plaza known
for it's political protests, as the naked students hugged,
held hands, and decorated body parts with paint. About
two-thirds of the strippers were men.

Two men yelled "shame": and "iniquity," but most students
seemed amused.

Campus police had a relaxed attitude about the goings-on.

While county law prohibits anyone from "willfully and
lewdly" exposing himself, campus police Lt. Bill Foley said
the protesters weren't necessarily lewd.

Martinez first took a stroll in the buff about a year ago
in Cupertino.  He was arrested and sentenced to 10 hours of
community service.

Going nude the first time was tough, Martinez recalled.
"All of a sudden, I was there. That was like  a lot of
mental work," he said.

But Martinez, who hopes to major in rhetoric, says even he
has his limits.

"I'm not into nudity when it's really cold," he said.
From: jp@moscom.com (Jim Palmeri)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Sexuality and Social Attitudes
Date: 2 Oct 92 17:08:15 GMT
Organization: Moscom Corp., Pittsford NY

Marty Brilliant had this to say, among many other things:

>................................................... I have the
>greatest respect for Tom.  He has posted all kinds of information
>about social nudity here, and he can always be a calm voice in any
>discussion.  Tom: above all people here, you don't deserve such
>disrespect.

I myself recently said similar things about Tom's postings, comparing
his clear and well thought out postings with those of Marty's and wat's.
I stand behind what I said earlier.

I find that relative newcomer to this group, Eric Dynamic, also a very
clear thinker on some important issues, and feel bad that he and Tom
are at such odds with each other.  They both in their own way contribute
greatly to the group.

It appears that perhaps Eric somewhat over-reacted to what Tom was trying 
to say, and then Tom may have over-reacted to Eric's over-reaction, and
back and forth.

I hope both can get beyond this stuff, and get on with posting more good
thoughts.  We can't do without Tom's level headed approach to a wide
variety of issues, and Eric is one of the most dynamic new thinkers
that we have had for a long time. (Despite the pun).

There are many who post here who could take a lesson from both these
guys on how to organize and logically present your thoughts so as 
not to look stupid.  Some more than others, myself included.

Jim P.
-- 
Jim P.   (jp@moscom.com)