HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pyron@skndiv.dseg.ti.com (Dillon Pyron)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Polk County, FL bans nudity
Date: 1 Oct 92 18:47:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: mksol.1992Oct1.184738.10888
Reply-To: pyron@skndiv.dseg.ti.com
Organization: TI/DSEG VAX Support


In article <BvEMvz.GoH@encore.com>, rlittell@wizard.Berkeley.EDU (Rich Littell) writes:
>> It seems that the commissioners of Polk County, FL voted 3-2 for an
>> ordinance banning everything from outright nude-going folk to T-back
>> swimsuits (e.g., the hotdog vendor issue).
>> 
>> Interestingly, the only female commissioner of the 5 was one of the 2
>> who voted against, and she had been sexually assaulted herself "many
>> years ago," in which her assailant's defense was based in part on the
>> idea that her dress had provoked the attack.  She (wisely) "could not
>> accept assumptions in the ordinance" that public nudity causes sex
>> crimes.
>I can not believe the folks that are running this country
>of ours.
>
>I am constantly assaulted by nasty pictures of Freddy Kruger
>both at work and at home on the TV and yet no one seems to be
>offended by these pictures/movies except me.
>
>Yet, people are constantly being harrassed at the beach because
>they choose to wear a T type bathing suit or better yet no suit
>at all.
>
>I would much rather see folks, at the beach, in their natural
>way then see one of those horrible pictures of a slasher.
>
>Where is this country of ours going?
More than a few years ago, the late Larry Flynt published a picture in that
paragon of taste, _Hustler_.  The photo was that of an Angolan rebel who had
had his brains blown out.  The picture was originally published in _Soldier of
Fortune_ with the author bragging of his "kill".  Anyways, Larry published it
with the caption "Now this is fucking obscene".  You may disagree with the
magazine's intent, but I agree with that particular editorial.
--
Dillon Pyron                      | The opinions expressed are those of the
TI/DSEG Lewisville VAX Support    | sender unless otherwise stated.
(214)462-3556 (when I'm here)     |
(214)492-4656 (when I'm home)     |"Repay kindness from a stranger by kindness 
pyron@skndiv.dseg.ti.com          | to another stranger."
PADI DM-54909
From: susan@netlink.cts.com (Susan Atrix)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: nude in maui
Date: 6 Oct 92 04:07:44 GMT
Organization: NetLink Online Communications, San Diego CA

I was over in Maui and visited Little Makena Beach. 
My tour book said that in the past that nudists had
been arrested there. 

I didn't see any police. Has anyone heard of any trouble there?

--
------------------------------------------------------------------
| Gone surfing...                                                |
|         Susan ...                    susan@netlink.cts.com     |
------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler)
Subject: Re: Tanning
Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 10:43:43 GMT

ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic) writes:
>arnett@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Arnett) writes:
>>		  
>>Our society lately is encouraging an active lifestyle and discouraging
>>tanning. ...
>
>Am I wrong, it seems to me that say, 20 years ago, people were not worried
>so much about ill effects of tanning. I know that tanning, or over-tanning,
>
>If a person builds up exposure gradually, wouldn't the melanin in the skin
>protect the skin? I thought that's what it was produced for.


I am inclined to think that some of this is part of the
"Crisis Crisis", where news dissemination organizations
feel that unless an issue is presented as a crisis,
no one will pay attention.

The statistics show increasing numbers of younger people
coming up with skin cancer, but the causes don't automatically
follow. Could be those damned tanning beds, could be something else?

I understand there is an article written by a doctor, soon
to be published in a national medical journal, espousing the
habit of sunning oneself until just enough Sun has been
absorbed without sunscreen, then eliminating or reducing
the exposure, either with clothing or moving to shadier
confines. I find this a more natural solution than slathering
some of these noxious sunscreens on my body; this last bottle
of stuff I bought has a pungent alcohol carrier base and
is almost unbearable while applying--it had better be
the best sunscreen ever made!

Being the Nature Boy that I am, I often refrained from
wearing sunscreen (or anything) at Assateague this past
Summer, and I came away with nary a red spot. I don't
want to ruin my skin, but I do want to enjoy Nature
at the same time. Maybe this is the answer?


-- 

bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler)

Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic)
Subject: Sexuality and Social Attitudes
Keywords: impossible for the self-unaware
Organization: TRW Financial Systems
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 06:54:45 GMT

wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie) writes:
>In article <1992Oct1.055945.19175@tfs.com> ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic) writes:
>>your attitudes help to perpetuate a society which chokes our very life force.
>> But NEVER, EVER bother to wonder if the extremity of your reaction
>>indicates unfinished psychological business, severe repression, or anything
>
>	Well, *my* desire not deal with people having sex on the beach
>comes from the fact that I go there for relaxation and peaceful times. 
>Thus, people screaming, groaning, and making squishy slappy noises
>prevent me from realizing my goals.  Sexual behavior in this context is
>like playing a large radio loudly, except that it also smells.

So people who might like to are SOL, because you acquiesce in the general
social attitude toward the thing . . . I'm glad that since you like Vanilla,
"Chocolate is not allowed" doesn't bother you. You also are a hunted
minority; try seeing it this way.

>	There's also the problem we face as nudists, which is that this
>kind of behavior is often used by the Establishment to close our facilities.
>For instance, I have nothing against people smoking pot, but I'd rather
>they didn't make a habit of doing it openly at the beach because I'd be
>worried that it might be used as a reason to close it.
>
>>the reason Polk County, FL outlawed most skin on beaches is because the
>>people there are HYSTERICALLY AFRAID of human sexuality? 
>
>	Perhaps.  But our position is that what you're wearing has nothing
>to do with your sexuality.  The two issues are more or less orthoganal.

Who you *are* does - I don't leave my sexuality at home because I can't
take it off, like you seem to suggest doing. Oh, sure, I can suppress
awareness of it, like the great white western christian father suggests,
but I don't see his children living a happy life either.

>>YOU don't seem to be able to face the collapse of some of your moral values.
>
>	Actually, we're more afraid of having our quiet afternoon's nap
>shattered by your girlfriend's orgasms and by the thought of having our
>favorite places closed down because some young couple couldn't be bothered
>to go off into the woods.

Yeah - freedom is okay as long as *we* don't have to know about it, so come
to Polk County to find a balance in the issue. Read my post: I suggested
making places for both behaviors to occur without interference from the other.

>>That is not MY problem. And I will NOT let it be. 
>
>	You don't have a choice.  If you impinge on my freedoms I'll
>make it your problem.

Hmm. Seems we're in agreement here.
But for one small point. If you don't like this thread, then quit coming into
my little nude beach with your cops and telling me to put my clothes on or go
to jail! So killfile it! MUST you read everything? Your laziness to kill this
thread is *your* problem, so just let it go, ignore me, and be happy. I don't
invite myself to Ms. Dworkin's house to abuse her for having her opinions.

Cheers.
-ecsd
From: Larry.Mc.Donald@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: name change for rec.
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Sep 21 1992
Date: 25 Sep 92  09:25:06

 bote@access.digex.com 
   (John Boteler) sez:

 > With the proliferation and interconnection of other networks, 
 > including Fido and their ilk, the ever-increasing volume of 
 > traffic on the net as a whole will ensure a higher level of
 > less constructive articles. 

   So, as I read your statement, where one gets one's access 
determines the quality of the post.

   Hmmmmm... A variation of "The clothes make the man?"



... Larry Mc Donald, N6ZMB, Fullerton, Calif. (cough, cough)
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.10

--- Maximus 2.00
From: philb@cats.ucsc.edu (Philip Brown)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Art Modeling
Date: 5 Oct 1992 23:00:28 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: si.ucsc.edu


middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu (Tom Middleton ; System Manager) writes:

>I also find it interesting that they seem to use men as subjects as well
>as women.  Would you say it is just about even or is there a preference?



a female friend of mine takes a lot of art classes. she says that there
are only a few males. HER preferences would rather it be the other way :)

(but I believe male models are rarer, and possibly paid more)

-- 
  --------------------------------------------------
"How do I love sea? Let me count the waves.." |philb@cats.ucsc.edu
P.Anthony, "The Colo(u)r of her panties"      |philb@soda.berkeley.edu
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson)
Subject: Re: NY TV Show airs nudity - E.T. Mentions Warning
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 13:56:39 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1992Oct2.000320.12527@netcom.com> tcumming@netcom.com (Tom Cumming) writes:
>In article <6655@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> tjw@vms.cis.pitt.edu (TJ Wood) writes:
>>In article <BvGJsp.ApH@apollo.hp.com>, nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:
>>
>>>    I mean, granted, her *character* may have been nude and through careful
>>>    editing and camera angles this may have been hinted at to the viewer.
>>
>>Star Trek: TNG had as much nudity in several recent episodes.  French Canadian
>
>So... We know nude != sex, but maybe nude == ratings!


  I don't think people here understood my question:

  My question is what was the big deal about this show?   (again
  I didn't see it)  As I understand it they didn't "show anything"
  so why does that make it any different than the hundreds of other
  network TV shows over the last 25 years where the character was
  "nude" but they don't "show anything"?   From the newspapers I 
  had the impression that this was a Big Deal.   How?  Why?


---peter
From: cs161feu@sdcc10.ucsd.edu (Anthony Minkoff)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: aceptable actions? (something worse than photographers
Date: 6 Oct 92 20:17:12 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego

ringo@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Ringo) writes:
>What's wrong with masturbation?
>Sounds VERY judgemental, coming from someone who DARES walk around
>wearing NOTHING at all. How dare someone behave in a way that might
>disturb you?
>
>-John Rescigno
>Dept. of Psychology
>Clarkson University
>Nowhere, NY



Well, there is a difference.  Nudists/naturists who participate in
CO activity in their own home, or on a CO beach, or in any
CO-designated area, really harm nobody at all, and the vehement
reaction against it by a puritanical society is wholly
inappropriate.

The masturbator, on the other hand, does harm others-- because he
fuels the perception that "CO beaches are a place where immoral,
disgusting people go," provoking a stronger reaction from society,
and therefore increasing the probability that the CO beach will be
shut down, thereby depriving other nudists/naturists of their CO
activities.

In a utopian society, I would say that what he wants to do with his
own body, even in public, is his own business.  However, we do have
political realities do deal with, and the masturbator creates problems.

Tony
From: FORTMAPL@UDAVXB.OCA.UDAYTON.EDU (Pooh Bare)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Public nudity and the law.
Date: 26 Sep 92 18:15:21 GMT


     Newsgroups: alt.sex,rec.nude
     From: ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic)
     Subject: Public Nudity and the Law
      
     >>>>So also in a nudist society we will not compel nudity, nor prescribe
     >>>>psychiatric sessions for those who wish to clothe.

This reminds me of a short story I wrote for a fiction writing course 
in college.  It was a nude society where wearing clothing was a criminal 
offense.  I got an A for the story and for the course.  Anyway...

     I can't see having my children grow up in a world where, although they
     know there is nothing shameful about the body, any *one* complaining
     person can invoke 'external authority' to compel them to clothe themselves.
     I must strongly apologize, but my philosophy requires that people must
     acknowledge *first* that their preferences are their own. Those who feel
     nudity to be offensive must acknowledge this *first*. They may not run for
     endorsement, to the Church, to the Police, or to a mob of similar-minded
     people.
     ...  The people who
     collectively contribute to the enforcement of the status quo must *still*
     take individual responsibility for their contribution *to* the status quo.

There is no need to apologize for your philosophy.  Too many people lack 
individual responsibility for their own actions, attitudes, etc.

     ...  I want a world which reflects *native* human
     values, not one which is imposed by some external, static philosophy, and
     *especially* not a philosophy which divorces human animal nature from human
     spiritual nature. 2,000 years of suffering shows us that such a philosophy
     is bankrupt and life-denying. I reject such notions.

So do I.  

     ...  I have no reason to cooperate with the denial
     of reality, enshrined as a "social virtue", "espoused by the church", and
     "enforced by government through the rule of law".
      
Nor do I.

     Freedom must prevail, and then humans can begin to grow *as they choose*.

YES.
      
Thank you Eric for your essay, I just love it when I find someone who thinks 
the way I do.  


*Pooh Bare

fortmapl@udavxb.oca.udayton.edu
fortmapl@udcps3.cps.udayton.edu
an725@cleveland.freenet.edu
paul.fortman@bbs.oit.unc.edu 
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: marc@octel.com (Marc Lewert)
Subject: Re: Name
Organization: Octel Communications Inc., Milpitas Ca.
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 22:41:17 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.015325.23119@eskimo.celestial.com> wix@eskimo.celestial.com (Dennis Wicks) writes:
>In article <ir75411@pro-amber.cts.com> morton@pro-amber.cts.com (Craig Morton) writes:
> [stuff deleted]
>> Secret posts...don't let it happen. If a man isn't man (or woman) enough
>>to sign his/her name then what they have to say can't be worth much. 
>
> I resent this statement, as I am sure many other people reading this
> group do.  If this were a perfect world, there might be _some_ 
> validity to your statement, but as it is ...
> Some people work for companies and people that are not as open minded
> and enlightened as we would like them to be, and posting to some
> news groups with their real name might be hazardous to their career.
> If you want some real serious reasons for anonymous posting and replies,
> start a correspondence with some of the women on the net.  I have 
> corresponded with a couple who would not post, even anonymously, because
> of the volume of crude and suggestive mail that they received!
> 
>

A company I worked for discovered one of the employees was posting to a
newsgroup they did not approve of and our access was severely limited
in scope.  Last time I talked with someone still at the company, they
indicated that I should not send them e-mail because it might focus
unwanted attention.  And this was regarding setting up a lunch date.

I, personally, would not want or use an anon poster in this newsgroup.  But,
I would not stop others from doing so.  There also seem to be enough people
that are willing to relay questions that it does not seem like it is needed.

	marc

-- 
[ Marc Lewert                      Phone: (408) 321-6626                 ]
[ Octel Communications Corp.       AspenNet(tm): (408) 321-6700 MB 6626  ]
[ 890 Tasman Dr.		   USENET: ...!uunet!octela!marc         ]
[ Milpitas, CA 95035               Smart Mailer: marc@octel.com          ]
[ Disclaimer:  The company knows what I think, I tell them often enough. ]
[ zen hugs - the hugs that you would get, if we were there,              ]
[            if we could hug you, but we aren't, and we can't            ]
[            - Anne McCaffrey, Mercedes Lackey, "The Ship Who Searched"  ]
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler)
Subject: Re: Polk County, FL bans nudity
Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 11:01:35 GMT

rlittell@1.com writes:
>In article <BvECH4.BIE.2@cs.cmu.edu>, Karl_Kleinpaste@cs.cmu.edu writes:
>> It seems that the commissioners of Polk County, FL voted 3-2 for an
>> ordinance banning everything from outright nude-going folk to T-back
>> swimsuits (e.g., the hotdog vendor issue).
>> 
>I can not believe the folks that are running this country
>of ours.

Nope, an extra 'r' in country.

We are being overtaken, county by county, by a well-organized
group of extremists. In fact, a recent article in The
Washington Post describes how Loudon County, Virginia
is being overtaken by the religious right.

It's not that religion itself is an evil, it is the
utter extremism which is so abhorrent; Zero Tolerance
and all that kind of compassionate stuff.

I am still amazed by the complacency of the majority
of naturists, though. Maybe when we're all behind bars
we can plan our strategy then?

-- 

bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler)
From: kaine@phylo.life.uiuc.edu (Brian Kaine)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Art Modeling
Date: 7 Oct 92 01:35:05 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

In response to a few more questions and comments...

People willing to model nude for art classes are usually in short
supply, so most schools will hire just about anyone, regardless of
body type or sex.  The schools for which I have worked all required
prospective models to audition nude before a committee of three or
more instructors.  The audition was to ensure that the applicant was
comfortable (or at least not overly nervous) being in the nude, and
was not a hunt for a particular body type.  Besides, in the real world
(i.e. outside of art class) people come in all shapes and sizes, so it's
better for the students if a similar variety is available in their
models.  There is a general exception, however.  Most schools offer
an advanced class called anatomical drawing.  In this class the
students learn why the body looks as it does, such as how specific
muscles and bones affect the body's appearance.  The students draw
from a nude model who poses together with a skeleton and/or an
ecorche.  An ecorche is a sculpture of the human body with the skin
removed so as to reveal the underlying musculature.  Models who are
athletic and exhibit a greater degree of muscle tone and definition
are often preferred for this class.

In private workshops, the participants have more influence on model
selection than students in a classroom setting do.  People seem to
prefer drawing models of the opposite sex (surprise!), so the
preference of the majority is often favored.

And it has been my experience that male and female models are paid
alike.  :)
                                                Brian


--
------------------------------------------
Brian P. Kaine
Department of Microbiology
University of Illinios at Urbana-Champaign
E-mail address: kaine@phylo.life.uiuc.edu
------------------------------------------
From: wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Sexuality and Social Attitudes (re: soc.nude)
Date: 1 Oct 92 15:48:02 GMT
Reply-To: wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie)
Organization: UniSQL, Inc., Austin, Texas, USA

In article <1992Oct1.063733.19890@tfs.com> ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic) writes:
>You want to suppress the thread altogether.

	We want to suppress this thread because it's not what the focus
of this group is about.  Listen, I once saw some naked people at a 
Grateful Dead show, but that doesn't mean that it's appropriate for me
to post setlists and argue about the best ever Sugar Magnolia here.  Like-
wise, just because people get naked during sexual encounters doesn't make
that topic appropriate for rec.nude.

>I think holistically. 

	Ummm, frankly, that's not the word I'd use.  A little less preachy
hysteria and a little more rational discussion, if you please.
From: c60c-3gs@web-3d.berkeley.edu (Doug Hogberg)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: The Naked Guy
Date: 6 Oct 92 01:05:08 GMT
Distribution: all
Organization: University of California, Berkeley

I'm a student here at the University of California at Berkeley (Cal)
and I was wondering if anyone was interested in the Naked Guy, as he 
emerged from the confines of victorian clothing.
He is a really cool guy who lives in the co-op in which I used to live.
No one seems to be annoyed by his presence, and the other day we had a 
"Nude-in."
If anyone is interested about him or his x-girlfriend (who is currently
my next door neighbor) please post or mail me at dough@ocf.berkeley.edu

thanks 
later
dough
From: tjw@vms.cis.pitt.edu (TJ Wood)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Approaching a woman at a CO beach?
Date: 28 Sep 92 21:34:14 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <38577@sdcc12.ucsd.edu>, aminkoff@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Tony Minkoff) writes:
> Suppose I (I am a 22 year old male) am at a CO beach, and see an
> unacompanied woman (clothed or not, as the case may be) of about my
> age.  Is it OK to approach her and attempt to converse?  

My rule of thumb is "If it's socially acceptable to do it with your clothes
on, it's OK to do it with your clothes off".  Of course, if you fry burgers
in the nude, you deserve what you get! ;-)

I found the people on the nude beach to be far more friendly than the folks
at the textile beach.  Just be aware that some sun-worshiper are there just
for then sun!  If somebody doesn't look agreeable when you say "Hi!", don't
take it as an insult, just move on!

Terry
-- 
        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
From: cc647@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Cornick)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Dorm nudity
Date: 5 Oct 1992 04:29:35 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: cc647@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Cornick)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, lsheehan@hamp.hampshire.edu () says:

>	I don't know if anyone's mentioned this, but at my school we have
>"clothing optional" halls.. the hallmates get together at the beginning of each
>semester and decide whether or not the floor is clothing optional.  I f it is,
>then members of that hall are welcome to walk around in any state of
>dress/undress that they choose.  My hall is clothing optional (8 females, 3
>males), and we're as comfy with each other as if we'd lived together all our
>lives (most of us just met this year).  So if you want to hang out if your room
>naked, that's fine.. if you want to hang out on your hall that way, it's fine
>too.  Neat deal, huh?  But then of course Hampshire is not known for its
>conventionalism, is it?  =)

Sounds cool to me... but it probably works better with a hall like yours,
with only 11 people, than in the halls I've lived in, with 40 people on a
floor. The more people you need to get to agree, the harder it is to
accomplish. Oh well. (I live off campus now, so I only have to deal with
two roommates. Much easier. :)
-- 
Mark Cornick <cc647@cleveland.freenet.edu>
*** Hey indie-rocker! Subscribe to the indie-list! Mail for info ***
I got a really good feeling running through my blood like hot strawberry
 Quik. -- Rose Melberg