HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tjw@vms.cis.pitt.edu (TJ Wood)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Sex on the beach
Date: 13 Aug 92 17:15:06 GMT
Distribution: world,local
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <JEW.92Aug12161658@venus.Sunquest.COM>, jew@Sunquest.COM (Ward... James Ward) writes:

> Well, I guess it's time I told about the nude beach I've frequented.
> It's in remote NW Arkansas if anyone cares.

> I've seen lots of sex there, and been seen having sex there myself.  I
> don't guess I see the problem.  Maybe the only reason to get naked in
> NW Arkansas is to be an exhibitionist?  I don't think so.  I think sex
> is just as natural as nudity and what's natural happens, you know?

I wasn't going to post this, but since we're talking about "what's natural"
in rec.nude now, I thought I'd bring up another bodily function that's 100%
natural.  I want to do it, in full public view, at a "nude" beach just
because it's natural.  After all, they will not let me do it at the
textile beach 'cause they say it's offensive to them there, so I'm going to
inflict it on the "nude" beach.

But nobody seems to have any toilet paper at the "nude" beach.  :-P


The "problem" that nobody can see is that these 100% natural activities that
they now want to do among the naturists endanger the status of the beach.
Why aren't these 100% natural activites explored in a setting other than
that of the "nude" beach?  Why not at a State and or Federal Park?  Why not
under Macy's Clock at High Noon?  Why must they be done at the "nude" beach?

Or is it that the "nudists" are going "nude" at the "sex" beach? ;-)

Yea, that's it.  Y'all are inflicting us "100% natural bodily functioners"
with your nudity at our "100% natural bodily function" beach.  But we are
more tolerant than you are! ;-)

In any case, I'm going to insist that the "nude" beach people accept my 100%
natural activity without getting upset or citing behavoir standards.  They
are breaking the norms with their "nudity", therefore they must now accept
my 100% natural activity in full public view.

I'm also going to push for a new newsgroup so I can expound my 100% natural
activity and stop annoying the readers of rec.nude.  I invite other 100%
natural causes to do the same.

And I wish you people weren't so 100% natural bodily function NEGATIVE!

Sheesh!

Terry ":-P for the humor impaired" Wood
-- 
        INTERNET: tjw+@pitt.edu         BITNET: TJW@PITTVMS
"Laugh while you can, Monkey Boy!"                        - Lord "John" Warfin
"There can be only one!"                                  - The Highlander
"There should have been only one. I want my money back!"  - Terry
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: beigel-richard@CS.YALE.EDU (Richard Beigel)
Subject: sex on the beach
Organization: Yale University, Department of Computer Science
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 20:18:21 GMT


Bill Arnett writes:
> Go away.  We only *talk* about sex on the beach...

Thanks goodness.  Someone might have got the impression that we
actually *do* it.  :-)

-- 
Richard Beigel			telephone:  (203)432-1268
Dept. of Computer Science	email:  beigel-richard@cs.yale.edu
P.O. Box 2158, Yale Station	campus mail:  A. K. Watson Hall
New Haven, CT  06520-2158		      51 Prospect Street
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: ah157@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Rob Henry)
Subject: Re: x rated gifs
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 04:24:45 GMT


While the discussion here may be about nude people this is not a place to pick
up material to exercise your wrist with.Please go to the alt.sex.yourself base 
and look.
Not a flame,just a constructive criticism.
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: kurt@eskimo.celestial.com (Kurt Cockrum)
Subject: Re: All the people (was Re: Embarrassed
Organization: >>> Eskimo North (206)-FOR-EVER <<<
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 20:16:25 GMT

In article <1457200025@igc.apc.org> Pat O'Brien <naturist@igc.apc.org> writes:
>
>Kurt:
>	I think you have Naturism mixed up with anarchism. It's not relevant
>what you think of The Naturist Society or the Naturist Action Committee.

Anarchists are interested in the freedom to doff our clothes when we feel
like it without getting dumped on by anybody, or having to explain or account
to anybody for so doing.  To some extent, then, our interests intersect.

>	What is germaine to this discussion is whether something at the 
>edge of the social envelope is worth pursuing and whether it can be attained.

Each individual must judge that for themselves.

>	Opening the doors to public nudity on beaches, rivers, hot springs,
>in forests, deserts what have you is hard work. Keeping them open is an 
>equally onerous challenge, what with the level of right-wing fanatical 
>fundamentalist crapola out there.

Well, we are gonna have to start debunking some of that crapola.
The net's a great tool for that.
The idea that sex is bad is some of that crapola; the idea that nudity ==
sex is more of the same.

>	All I'm saying is we can't succeed at any of this in the current
>American environment if there is public sex involved. It just will not work.
>Pat

No need to make great spectacles out of the act.  I have no interest in
exhibitionism.  But the idea of resisting the arrest of somebody for "lewd
behaviour", and succeeding, has great appeal, and I think that we give
undue respect for the societal infrastructure that allows such great
application of force for such small "transgressions".  Arresting people for
such things and bystanders *allowing* it to happen fosters undue respect for
the state, IMO, and that's part of the problem.  By exerting "control" over
essentially moral matters, the state consolidates its control over all aspects
of society, not just the moral, thus removing our freedom in all spheres
of action.

Another thing that needs debunking is the notion that issues can be dealt
with in isolation, without relation to anything else -- an apolitical approach
to nudism, for example.  Everything is intertwined, we are starting to find
out.  I won't go into this further, though -- just wanted to make the point.
-- 
kurt@grogatch.celestial.com (Kurt Cockrum)
 "People who sign their own .sig are just net.personality wanna-bees." --
 K. Cockrum
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: jlysagh@hubcap.clemson.edu (james joseph lysaght)
Subject: rec.nude or alt.sex ????
Organization: Clemson University
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 15:29:16 GMT

Alt.sex is no longer carried by our server and from talks with other
people round the world this is true at there sites as well.  This is
good in my view as alt.sex was the most depraved, silly, waste of
resources I have ever seen.  The sad point though, it seems that lately
some of the old alt.sex people are gravitating to rec.nude to continue
there inexperienced fantasizing.  If this keeps up, I think I will have
to stop reading this list. Have any of you other rec.nudists noticed
this trend of late?

Jim

Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Arnett)
Subject: Re: nudism to nudyism
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Distribution: rec
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 07:44:28 GMT

In article <5477@ucsbcsl.ucsb.edu> 6500hage@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (William F. Hagen) writes:
>i would like to suggest changing the word "nudism" to "nudyism", as it is more pleasant and easier to say.

"Pleasant" and "easier to say" are highly subjective.  I disagree with both.
My sister refers to nude sunbathers as "nudies" so she might like "nudyism",
but I think it's a silly idea.  And I think we already have more than enough
words to describe the same thing.  (i.e., "nudism" and "naturism")

<<Footnote: some people consider nudism and naturism to be different.  I don't,
but that's just my opinion (just as not liking "nudyism" is just my opionion)
so let's NOT get into the nudism vs. naturism discussion again.>>

Bill.
-- 
Bill Arnett                            Internet: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: zowie@daedalus.stanford.edu (Craig "Powderkeg" DeForest)
Subject: After Hours at Bonny Doon? (Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde of the Coast ?)
Organization: Stanford Center for Space Science and Astrophysics
Distribution: ba
Date: 16 Aug 92 10:39:08

I've been to Bonny Doon Beach (just north of Santa Cruz, opposite [surprise!]
Bonny Doon Road on Hwy 1) several times, always midweek and midday.

Today I was returning from a group ( textile :-P ) campout at Davenport
Landing, and noticed a *large* number of cars at Bonny Doon.  

Now I'm considering a campout at Bonny Doon -- but I've heard that the 
night scene there is pretty vicious:  lots of loud, alcoholic parties,
fights, and frequent visits by the Beach Patrol.  Apparently there've
even been stabbings and so forth.  Is this true?  Does Bonny Doon have
an uglier nighttime face?
 
--
Craig DeForest:  zowie@banneker.stanford.edu  *or*  craig@reed.bitnet

"So, if you guys make a living looking at the SUN, why do you spend so much
        time at the SYNCHROTRON, working UNDERGROUND at NIGHT?"
From: serafin@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Mike Serafin)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: drugstore photo processing
Date: 13 Aug 92 19:01:23 GMT
Organization: TI Semiconductor Process and Design Center

In article <BsM74I.M6p@news.cso.uiuc.edu> schneid@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Mike Schneider) writes:
>Has anyone had problems with specific drugstores that are part
>of a national chain?  I'm wondering if explicit photos are
>safe at *any* drugstore.  We've all heard about receiving
>a package of pictures entirely overexposed, presumably because
>we had some nude shots in there.  What's the scoop?
>-- 
>!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>!! Mike Schneider schneid@jerry.stat.uiuc.edu !!
>!! University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign !!
>!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I really don't think your photos are safe at any lab unless you are
watching over the folks to make sure extra prints aren't being made.  Several
friends have worked at photo-labs and stories abound about the file of photos
that was posted on back walls.  Any work that I need done that requires
"special" handling I do myself.
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: elogan@dbaix.oc.com (Ernie Logan)
Subject: Re: Sex on the beach
Organization: OpenConnect Systems, Dallas, TX
Distribution: world,local
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 13:28:31 GMT

jew@Sunquest.COM (Ward... James Ward) writes:

>Well, I guess it's time I told about the nude beach I've frequented.
>It's in remote NW Arkansas if anyone cares.

>I've seen lots of sex there, and been seen having sex there myself.  I
>don't guess I see the problem.  Maybe the only reason to get naked in
>NW Arkansas is to be an exhibitionist?  I don't think so.  I think sex
>is just as natural as nudity and what's natural happens, you know?
>--

Is this a serious post? If so, I am definitely interested, since nudism
(naturism, public nudity) is illlegal in the state of Arkansas. As a matter
of fact, the law prohibits even discussing or advocating nudism within
the boundaries of the state of Arkansas. Now there's a first amendment
challenge case for NAC if ever I saw one.

So where is this nude beach in NW Arkansas. I get up to the "Natural State"
every so often. (Interesting choice of state motto, eh?) 
-- 
Ernie Logan, Jr.                                      |My opinions are mine
IBM Midrange TCP/IP Connectivity                      |alone. No one else
AS/400 Specialist                                     |would want them!!
elogan@oc.com    OpenConnect Systems    +1 214 308-0493  +1 214 490-4090
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Arnett)
Subject: directions to wreck beach
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 10:59:53 GMT

Sorry to interupt alt.sex.on.nude.beach with a rec.nude posting but
somebody in Washington emailed me for directions to Wreck Beach.  I'm
posting it here cuz my reply bounced.

> Could you provide me directions to wreck beach?

Sure.  It's easy to find.  Drive north on Hwy 99 (that's I-5 on your side
of the border).  After passing through a tunnel (George Massey tunnel)
continue on and pass over Oak Street Bridge.   As you near the end of the
bridge take the SECOND exit (Marine Drive West) which loops around** and
approach another bridge.  Stay in the right lane and pass along-side the
ramp (i.e, don't cross this bridge).  Merge with the traffic exitting this
bridge** (from another ramp) and move to left lane.  Three (?) blocks later
turn left onto 70th Avenue (the first major intersection) and follow this
road for a long time.  Pass through the park (lots of trees) and into
the UBC campus.  Just past "gate 6" is "trail 6 to Wreck Beach" (clearly
marked).  During office hours you'll probably have to pay for parking.
Other times staff lots are free.  Gate 6 and Gate 4 both lead to parking.

If your starting point is somewhere in Vancouver, then find your way
to UBC any way thats convenient.  Ask for directions if necessary.  And
locate gate 6 on any of the campus directories.  (They might even indicate
the wreck beach trail.)

** when you merge in these two spots, use caution---they are dangerous
spots.

> I saw the pictures of the beach in National Geographic; it looks like a nice
> location.

The picture of someone painting was actually taken at the foot of trail 4
(behind the museum of antropology, near gate 4).  This is a small and very
quiet beach.  Mostly couples.
			     
Enjoy the beach.
-- 
Bill Arnett                            Internet: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: ken@dakota (Kenny Chaffin)
Subject: Re: sex in CO beaches ... nonsense
Organization: U S WEST Advanced Technologies
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 19:15:15 GMT

In article <Bt4y09.466@news.cso.uiuc.edu> berger@atropa (Mike Berger) writes:
>
>Now, I am not advocating that everybody have sex in public to make
>the point.  I just want to clarify why it's "wrong".

	It's "wrong" because a majority of society say so. I would of thought
you knew that particularly with your sig
                      vvvvvvvvvv
>	Department of Statistics, University of Illinois

KAC


Kenny A. Chaffin                      {...boulder}!uswat!ken
U S WEST Advanced Technologies         ken@dakota.uswest.com
4001 Discovery Drive  Boulder, CO 80303	     (303) 541-6355
 

Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: cmgrawbu@eos.ncsu.edu (CHRISTOPHER M GRAWBURG)
Subject: Re: Campus Naturist Network forming (might have been Re: Michigan CO)
Originator: cmgrawbu@c00414-313mn.eos.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: cmgrawbu@eos.ncsu.edu (CHRISTOPHER M GRAWBURG)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 15:56:30 GMT




If ther was such a group, I would participate.

But since I am new at this I couldn't start one up, but yes I would join.



Magic
From: megs@atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU (Meg Sisson)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Exercise
Date: 14 Aug 92 16:35:46 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Outreach Services - Oregon State University

Subject: 
Summary: 
Expires: 
Followup-To: 
Distribution: Distribution: 
Organization: Computer Science Outreach Services - Oregon State University
Keywords: 

Hi all,

I am finally able to post properly to this group. And that leads to 
my questions for you all.

While I was trying to restart my morning yoga program, it occurred 
to me that I haven't seen anything about exercising while nude. I've 
taken a few yoga classes (clothed) and gone through a few books. 
One book did recommend practising nude in order to get more deeply 
into the postures and not be limited by binding clothing. 

I am guessing the CO resorts might offer some exercise programs 
beyond beach volleyball :-) Does any one know of such or had any other 
experience in nude exercises, not necessarily yoga? Does jogging 
really require support (both male/female) or is the clothing industry 
just trying to sell more apparel?

BTW, I recently got Colin Fletcher's "Complete Walker III" and some 
of the first sections I skimmed over were his writings on nakedness 
and walking.


** It's great to be back in temperate Oregon -- no tropics for me.
** megs@atlantis.cs.orst.edu
From: sday@fornax.unm.edu (Stephen F. Day   UNM CIRT)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Need TNS & ASA Info
Date: 21 Aug 92 23:03:15 GMT
Reply-To: sday@ariel.unm.edu
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque NM

In article <29658@ursa.UUCP>, millman@ursa.UUCP (Phillip Millman) writes:
> My wife and I are interested in joining the TNS and ASA.  If some one could
> send me their numbers, I would appreciate it.

The Naturist Society
P.O.Box 132
Oshkosh, Wisconsin  54902  USA
414/426-5009 - VISA/MC Credit Card Orders

American Sunbathing Association, Inc.
1703 North Main Street
Kissimmee, Florida  34744-3396  USA
407/933-2064

> Phillip Millman					millman@bear.com

-- 
    Stephen F. Day         (SFD7)  AT&TNET:      (505) 277-8499
    Systems Analyst/Programmer     BITNET/CREN:  SDAY@UNMB
    CIRT-APSYS                     INTERNET:     sday@ariel.UNM.EDU
    University of New Mexico       TECHNET:      UNMSDAY
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
#include <std.disclaimer.h>
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Arnett)
Subject: Re: sex in CO beaches ... nonsense
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 09:11:56 GMT

In article <Bt4y09.466@news.cso.uiuc.edu> berger@atropa (Mike Berger) writes:
>jathamez@wam.umd.edu (J A T) writes:
>>    All this discussion of  allowing sexual activity in CO beaches is nonsense,
>>  and it is only supported by those who are missing the point of public nudity
>>  in the first place.  It seems to me that those who support sex at the  beach
>>  do not have a full understanding of the purpose of going to a CO beach. They
>>  still have problems putting aside nudity/sex, and they will never understand
>>  a true nudist (because they probably have more of an exhibicionist than they
>*----
>It seems to me you're missing the point.  Nobody is arguing that it
>IS legal to have sex on a CO beach, and I certainly wouldn't want to
>claim that it's always appropriate.  I'd think a "true nudist" (your
>words) would not care whether or not people want to have sex in
>public.

No, you are missing the point---nudity and sex are not (repeat *NOT*)
equivalent.  They are two *seperate* issues.  Fighting for both causes at
the same time diminishes the chances of achieving either.  Most of us
DO NOT CARE whether sex is allowed in public, but we DO CARE if nudity
is allowed in public.  Supporting the public-sex cause diminishes our
chances of acquiring and retaining public CO sites.  We don't want that
cause piggy-backing on the nude recreation cause.

>I raised the question in the first place asking what is inherently
>wrong with sex in public when the subject came up recently.  The
>concensus that I've seen is that it's wrong because it might give
>prudes the wrong idea about CO beaches and activities, and because
>its illegal.
>
>Neither of those seem like compelling reasons.

How about this: *most* people do not WANT sex occuring beside them on the
beach. Whether that attitude is healthy or not is irrelevant because the
"majority" (usually) sets the rules.  The minority has to settle for
a *limited* exception to those rules. (And by "most people" I mean
"nudist or not"---attitudes about nudity are not a good predictor
of attitudes about sex.)

Bill.
-- 
Bill Arnett                            Internet: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca
From: rogers@isi.edu (Craig Milo Rogers)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: nudism to nudyism
Date: 21 Aug 92 02:04:05 GMT
Reply-To: rogers@blips.isi.edu (Craig Milo Rogers)
Distribution: rec
Organization: USC-Information Sciences Institute

In article <5477@ucsbcsl.ucsb.edu> 6500hage@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (William F. Hagen) writes:
>i would like to suggest changing the word "nudism" to "nudyism", as it is more pleasant and easier to say.

	I'm afraid that word's already taken.  It applies to the
practice of applying large amounts of sequins and rhinestones to
clothing, and attaching steer horns to automobile hoods.  :-)

					Craig Milo Rogers
From: JBWST1@vms.cis.pitt.edu
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Uptightness about sex & ...
Date: 12 Aug 92 18:45:00 GMT

*Well, maybe the new age (the Aquarian Age) which is astronomically
*replacing the age of the fish (Piscean or Xtian Age) somewhere between
*1960 and 2020, will spark a new consciousness.  We can always hope that
*instead of rule by domination, we will move to an era of partnership
*and tolerance.  Either that or maybe we'll head toward self destruction.
*Sorta difficult to predict, but it seems things are heading toward
*a breaking point.

Yea...

I'm sure that this is very interesting and all, but what does it have
to do with rec.NUDE?  Perhaps your "sex on the beach" discussion
(which seems to be all you talk about) would be better off in alt.sex
or rec.dance?

John
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: steve@rtfm.mlb.fl.us (Steve Pierce)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Free Beach Etiquette
Summary: Naturists "rules" of etiquette for CO Beach and park users
Date: 17 Aug 92 03:55:26 GMT
Expires: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 05:00:00 GMT
Followup-To: poster
Organization: We don't need no stinkin' batches!
Supersedes: <frbeeq_9209150000@rtfm.mlb.fl.us>


                          FREE BEACH ETIQUETTE
===============================================================================
Many people will insist that rules for proper behavior are not necessary since
any decent or intelligent person should know how to act.  On the other hand,
naturist organizations constantly contact unfamiliarized individuals.  We want
to leave no doubt as to what kind of people are advocates of clothes-optional
recreation!  Yes, naturists are nice people and we aim to keep it that way!

        + STAY OUT OF DUNES and other environmentally sensitive areas.

        + OBEY PARKING REGULATIONS and other posted rules.

        + HELP ELIMINATE LITTER by bringing along a trash bag.  Carry out more
                than you brought in.

        + DON'T GO OUT OF TRADITIONAL ESTABLISHED NUDE AREAS.  To wander nude
                into a clothed beach or parking area will offend many people
		who have equally viable options for beach recreation.  It
                undermines our objectives to cause an unnecessary confrontation.

        + NO OVERT SEXUAL ACTIVITY.  Leave this activity for the privacy of
                your home.  Nude is not lewd, but combined with sex, undermines
		our image.

        + RESPECT THE PROPERTY OF OTHERS.  And this includes Mother Nature's
		property, too!

        + ASK PRIOR CONSENT FOR PHOTOGRAPHY.  You cannot legally stop someone
                from taking pictures in public places.  However, asking per-
                mission is common courtesy.  Not everyone wants to end up in a
                stranger's photo album.  Parents should also be asked before
                children are photographed.

        + PRIVACY IS FUNDAMENTAL!  Many are at the beach for quiet time and
                don't want to be disturbed.  It is not wrong to go to the beach
                to make new friends -- but it is rude to monopolize a person's
                time when the welcome mat was never put out.

        + COME PREPARED.  Bring beach supplies -- beverage, food, chair,
                sunscreen, and towel.  Don't expect others to share these items.
                Mooching is offensive.

        + SPEAK UP FOR STANDARDS.  If a person seems unaware of beach etiquette,
                explain it, kindly and plainly.  Give them a copy of "FREE
                BEACH ETIQUETTE".  Don't let uncouth individuals ruin our
                fragile and beautiful place under the sun.
-- 
===========================================
Steve Pierce             Palm Bay
steve@rtfm.mlb.fl.us     Florida
===========================================
Newsgroups: rec.nude