HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler)
Subject: Re: The Naked Guy featured in 11/5 SJ Merc
Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Distribution: ba
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 06:55:09 GMT

hermit@cats.UCSC.EDU (William R. Ward) writes:
>Berkeley's own "Naked Guy," Andrew Martinez.
>
>apparent airbrushing), and a picture of him nude in class.

So he really does go to class nude? That's pretty cool.
I wish I had done that.

-- 
bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler)
This week's usenet malapropism: lose, loose
lose(verb)=to misplace, to cease to have or retain
loose(adj)=unrestrained, not bound together or combined
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: kendal@umbc4.umbc.edu (Mr. Kendal Stephen; ACS (C))
Subject: Help kill our Thread!
Organization: Univ. of MD, Baltimore County
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 18:09:39 GMT


This is my first time posting to this newsgroup, and I have to admit,
I'm a little leery of the thread I may or may not be about to start.
But this sounded like a good idea at the time, so I'm going to ask a
question in a minute.  Just a little background at this time:

I read alt.binaries.pictures.erotica regularly, and lately there has
been a big topic which has been dominating both it and a.b.p.e.d.  It
seems that lately there have been some postings of pictures of nude
children (I think both boys and girls, but not together).  This has
since started a *huge* thread on Child Pornography, with arguments
covering everything from "arrest the perverts" to "down with the
establishment."  Two of the central issues are that (1) the pictures
are not sexually explicit (though it is possible to see how they may
arouse some people) and could be considered art (at least, IMHO, 
based on what I viewed in two of the files in question).  Now, for
the rebuttal: (2) If the pics were not meant for erotic use/intent, 
why put them on an erotica newsgroup?  Why not alt.high.moral.grounds, 
or the like?

I read a suggestion on a.b.p.e.d that maybe the pictures could be
posted on alt.tasteless, or rec.nude, were it at all feasible or
appropriate.  Looking at this group and the quality of the postings
made to it, I have to be honest and admit to having no idea as to
to the correctness of the proposed idea.

I confess, I'm a little tired of seeing the Child Pornography thread
on a.b.p.e., and I apologize for my hypocrisy in shoving it onto your
newsgroup.  But if *anyone* has any ideas on a newsgroup that exists
that postings of that type may be sent to without undue static, or if
in your opinion pics of that nature may be sent to this newsgroup with
impunity, PLEASE post the information on a.b.p.e.d as soon as is
convenient.


Thanks for listening.

kendal@umbc4.umbc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: mdl@oscar.bellcore.com (Mike Lynch)
Subject: Dangling Banjos
Reply-To: mdl@oscar.bellcore.com (Mike Lynch)
Organization: Bellcore
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 15:45:40 GMT

In article <1dclpcINN3pk@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>, gchatham@cats.ucsc.edu (Gregory Chatham) writes:
|> 
|> 
|> 
|> I'm just visiting here in rec.nude, but I'm curious to see the thread
|> on Christian nudes.  I can appreciate the feeling of freedom associated
|> with going nude.  As someone pointed out on this thread, God made us nude,
|> obviously intending for us to live that way.  Unfortunately, we tend
|> to hide things from each other and from God.  Hence the need for both 
|> clothes and also emotional barriers.  To those who keep quoting Genesis,
|> please remember that this story addresses a man and his wife, not the 
|> general public.
|> 
|> Addressing those who call themselves Christian,
|>    Consider the following from Jesus' famous Sermon on Mount
|> 
|>    "But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after
|>    her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."
|> 
|> please reply directly to gchatham@cats.ucsc.edu.


1.  This "quote" says nothing about nudity.  Are you reading nudity into
    it?  Are you equating nudity with sex?  If a woman is clothed, does
    that automatically make her less of an object of "lust"?  I guess I
    don't see the connection between this "quote" and nudity.

2.  I gather from this "quote" that only men can sin this way.

3.  I see absolutely no need to classify nudists (naturists?) as Christians
    or anything else.  Some people seem define their whole being in terms
    of their affiliations or beliefs, and these generally mean nothing to
    those who don't belong to the club.  Next we'll be hearing from the
    Trappist Nudes or the Right Wing Conservative Nudes.  Or maybe the
    Left-handed Nudes.  I play the banjo (badly).  Perhaps there are others
    out there who play nude, and we could get together for a few hot licks.

4.  I personally find this sort of use of "Christian" offensive.  It's
    self-righteous and exclusionary.  I changed the subject line because I
    hope this thread dies and is not resurrected.  Pun intented.

Please direct all flames to dev/hell.

Mike Lynch
mdl@oscar.bellcore.com
Newsgroups: rec.nude
id <m0mpEaK-0000GzC@crash.cts.com>; Wed, 11 Nov 92 01: 42 PST
	id <ka83192@pro-harold.cts.com>; Tue, 10 Nov 92 23: 06 PST
From: leed@pro-harold.cts.com (Lee Dronick)
Subject: Re: Chrisitan nudes
Organization: The Harold Network -- An Alliance For Creative Communication
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 22:52:17 PST

>To those who keep quoting Genesis,
please remember that this story addresses a man and his wife, not the
general public<

How do we know Adam and Eve were married. I can't find my bible so can't
check out the text. Or course it's all open to interpetation.
-----
Lee Dronick
ProLine: leed@pro-harold
Internet: leed@pro-harold.cts.com
UUCP: crash!pro-harold!leed
From: Karl_Kleinpaste@cs.cmu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Chrisitan nudes
Date: 6 Nov 92 14:27:35 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon Univ, Nectar Project

gchatham@cats.ucsc.edu writes:
   To those who keep quoting Genesis, please remember that this story
   addresses a man and his wife, not the general public.

I find it obligatory to observe that, at the time, they _were_ the
general public.  Other relevant observations could be made as well.

   Addressing those who call themselves Christian, Consider the
   following from Jesus' famous Sermon on Mount
      "But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust
      after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."

It is ill-advised to use KJV.  Better translations into modern English
are available in (at least) the NASB and NIV, a choice depending on
whether one is looking for a precise "word" translation or a more
"phrase sense" translation.  You will reach nearly no one if you say
"looketh" and "hath."  Since the intended purpose of quoting scripture
is to reach people, you fail in this regard with KJV.

Aside from that detail, the clothed-or-not state of the member of the
opposite sex in question has little bearing on whether the individual
sins in this manner.  In society as a whole, one finds nude people
really quite rarely, but the problem of sex-objectification of this
sort is severe nonetheless.

--karl,
very Christian,
wearing nothing but a
ponytail holder
From: brash@ocf.berkeley.edu (Aaron Brashears)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Berkeley's Naked Guy
Date: 12 Nov 1992 01:02:11 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
NNTP-Posting-Host: maelstrom.berkeley.edu


Good news. Andrew was back on campus today, and he was not kicked out.
I understand that Tien stands alone on this one, and Andrew will continue
his schooling at Cal.
From: rfrwatson@peg.pegasus.oz.au
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Date: 13 Nov 92 00:08 EST
Subject: Re: Australian CO beaches?
Nf-ID: #R:1992Nov5.052433.18497@sfu.ca:1251502694:peg:295000033:000:607
Nf-From: peg.pegasus.oz.au!rfrwatson    Nov 13 00:08:00 1992


You will be able to pick up "Bare Facts" when you get here.  It is
a small booklet published by the local Nudist quarterly.  Just be
careful in Queensland. It is the last state to haveANY CO beaches.
THe only thing going for you is the size of the state.  The cannot
possibly police it all!
******************************************************************
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: ben@val.com (Ben Thornton)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re:  Christian nudes
Date: 9 Nov 92 17:46:55 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Video Associates Labs - Austin, TX

In article <1der1lINNmgv@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> gchatham@cats.ucsc.edu (Gregory Chatham) writes:
>
>
>What I STILL DON'T MEAN:
>    That one should lock themselves in a closet, so as to keep everyone's
>    heart pure.  But I am saying that the concerns of those who havn't yet
>    reached your stage of "elightenment" concerning
>    the proper view of the body, need to be addressed.
>
>The final word:
>    IMO: It would be better if nudists didn't reveal themselves
>    quite so fully to those who may sin because of it.
>    

????

Is it not much more difficult to acheive "enlightenment" if you prevent
those to be enlightend from being exposed (pun intended :-) to that which 
would enlighten them?  

Since we are trying to communicate to the world that nudity is not a 
"sin" in the eyes of God, but is, rather, a very good way to show ones
praise for God's creations and that it is a positive family experience, 
it's better to show "those that would sin" what the proper view of the
body *is*.

  -- ben

-- 
Ben Thornton                packet:  wd5hls@wd5hls.ampr.org
Video Associates Labs     Internet:  ben@val.com
Austin, TX                    uucp:  ...!cs.utexas.edu!val!ben
From: larry@bradley.bradley.edu (L. D. Stratton)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Agreements when modeling for photos
Date: 5 Nov 92 16:13:07 GMT
Article-I.D.: bradley.1992Nov5.161307.22222
Distribution: usa
Organization: Bradley University

In <1992Nov5.151246.18176@cis.ohio-state.edu> fontana@celery.cis.ohio-state.edu (Mark Fontana) writes:
>In our campus newspaper, there are often "wanted" ads from art students
>seeking models for nude photo studies.  I haven't done something like 
>this before, but I don't really have any qualms about it, as long as
>there is an understanding with the photographer on appropriate use
>of the images.

>Not long ago, there was a thread here about modeling for life drawing
>classes.  Photos are a bit different, though, as there is the potential
>for unlimited reproduction and misuse of the pictures.  I was wondering
>if any of you could outline the usual measures taken to protect one's self
>from inappropriate use of such pictures.  (ie. wording of agreement)
>I would not consider doing such work for anyone other than close friends
>without a legal contract to fall back on, just in case.
>Any advice would be appreciated.
>Mark

   Mark,
   Check with your Art Dept.  This would be nothing new to them and, to
   protect the University, there is usually a contract for services.

   Modeling privately for an individual is different and you would want
   either an agency handling you or some legal contract.  Otherwise,
   your being could be splashed around at the discretion of the photographer.
From: jpb@calmasd.Prime.COM (Jan Bielawski)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Nude in Santa Barbara, anyone?
Date: 12 Nov 92 20:20:39 GMT
Article-I.D.: calmasd.5239
Organization: Computervision, San Diego, CA

In article <uwanless.721521443@mcl> uwanless@mcl.ucsb.edu (Selective) writes:
<I'm a UCSB student and I just wanted to recommend a beach to anyone who
<lives in the santa barbara area. It's called More Mesa beach, and although
<you have to do some walking to get there, it is MUCH nicer than many of the
<other beaches in Santa Barbara. It is cleaner, wind-sheltered, the water
<is clearer, and you don't get tar on your feet from walking on the sand.

	Ah, good old days...  Yes, it's a great beach.  I used to go out
to the campus beach (by the lagoon) and by the wooden steps (sort of under
the physics department) with a friend of mine in the nude.  People (other
students) were sometimes kind of giggling at us but we never had any
trouble.  I stopped doing that soon not because of any hassle but because
of this major nuisance you mentioned, the tar.  For some reason campus
beaches are the worst.  Walking south for few minutes to the Goleta
Beach is a big improvement and More Mesa -- which is even further south --
-- is completely clean.  When the tide is low you can start walking south
from Goleta State Beach, past the parking lot and past a slew (sp?) leading
to a wildlife reserve.  I don't know the situation now but in mid-eighties
once past that slew you could walk entire distance to More Mesa with
no clothes on.  Warning: this can be done *only* during a low tide.

	Sorry for the ramblings.

	Jan Bielawski
	Computervision, San Diego
	jpb@calmasd.prime.com
From: middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu (Tom Middleton ; System Manager)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Help Preserve Civil Rights in Colorado
Date: 13 Nov 92 00:41:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: network.1dutk8INNn8a
Organization: Institute for NonLinear Science, UCSD
NNTP-Posting-Host: poincare.ucsd.edu


In article <1992Nov12.093708.1@vax.sonoma.edu> abel@vax.sonoma.edu writes:
>                    Could someone familiar with the Colorado 
>amendment (like maybe Gina) explain to us what's up?

There is probably a lot of good, interesting and useful information
and discussion about this topic (which seems to be getting away from
nudity) in an appropriate newsgroup.  Maybe someone can point people
to the appropriate groups?
From: uwanless@mcl.ucsb.edu (Selective)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Nude in Santa Barbara, anyone?
Date: 11 Nov 92 22:37:23 GMT
Article-I.D.: mcl.uwanless.721521443

I'm a UCSB student and I just wanted to recommend a beach to anyone who
lives in the santa barbara area. It's called More Mesa beach, and although
you have to do some walking to get there, it is MUCH nicer than many of the
other beaches in Santa Barbara. It is cleaner, wind-sheltered, the water
is clearer, and you don't get tar on your feet from walking on the sand.
Yes, it is a CO beach, but it is usually not crowded at all, and VERY
scenic. (even on the walk over there, the view of the mountains is
gorgeous!). I will give exact directions to anyone who is interested in
visiting this nice place. E-mail me at uwanless@mcl.mcl.ucsb.edu

--
************Paul Wanless "vangy"******************

"That's what I thought. The only process you've mastered is the process of
  elimination, and the only reason you've mastered that is because you can
Xref: sparky rec.nude:5505 alt.folklore.urban:28047
Newsgroups: rec.nude,alt.folklore.urban
Subject: Going Topless/Nude in a Convertable
From: tjw@vms.cis.pitt.edu (TJ Wood)
Date: 10 Nov 92 20:42:11 GMT
Reply-To: tjw+@pitt.edu
Followup-To: rec.nude
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Summary: In memory of Craig Shergold

In article <1992Nov10.141422.18182@cbnews.cb.att.com>, tel@cbnews.cb.att.com (thomas.e.lester) writes:

>     I have been told that in Pennsylvania it is illegal to drive without
>     shoes!

>     No other article of clothing was specificly required.  Shoes were
>     required supposedly because of the higher force you could exert for
>     braking.

>     With todays power assist, it may not make sense any more, but it
>     may still be the law.

This is an urban legend.  It is not required to wear shoes.  I've met members
of the State Police who laugh really hard when they stop someone and find them
struggling to get their shoes on.

Terry "who knows the REAL middle name of Captain Kirk" 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
From: brash@ocf.berkeley.edu (Aaron Brashears)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Berkeley's Naked Guy
Date: 10 Nov 1992 22:59:10 GMT
Organization: U. C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
NNTP-Posting-Host: bigbang.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Nov10.113741.1@skcla.monsanto.com> petersonk@skcla.monsanto.com writes:
>I just talked with a friend in California... It seems that "The Naked Guy" at
>Berkeley just got suspended from campus for two weeks.  There was some sort of
>ruling passed.  Does anyone have more information???
>
>Petersonk@skcla.monsanto.com

I personally know "The Naked Guy" or as I call him Andrew.  I live with him.
Andrew has been arrested 3 times for nudity.  Twice while around the campus
area, and once in court when he appeared to defend himself over the previous
arrests.  However, he was released from imprisonment (the only time he was
locked up) over the court issue and when he spoke with the DA, Andrew was
informed that the California DA's office would not prosicute any charges
because of the wording of the law, which includes the words "lewd."  Nudity
is not intrinsically considered lewd behavior and he is free from prosecution
in the state of California.

The campus is a different story that has different rules.  He appeared several
times on campus nude and when one of the many UC police saw him, the police
officer would politely ask him to wear something.  To this request he would
always comply, but most of the time an officer would not have the opportunity
to stop Andrew.  Then, Chancellor Tien, in his infinite wisdom (NOT!), has
banned all nudity on campus citing sexual harassment as the reason.  Andrew,
in a protest manouver (as he is wont to do), appeared nude on campus and has
been suspended.  I believe he is going to fight this ruling, but he still
has not gone to class since this (to the best of my knowledge).

He would seem to have a case, since the state of California says that it is
legal to appear naked in public; however, we will all have to wait to see
the final outcome.  If you remind me by posting in a couple of weeks, I can
give an update.
From: Mark.Cornick@launchpad.unc.edu (Mark Cornick)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: NEW: rec.nude FAQ
Date: 10 Nov 92 05:22:03 GMT
Article-I.D.: samba.1992Nov10.052203.26753
Distribution: na
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service


We've already got an FAQ, compiled by Steve Pierce... or did Steve pass it
off to you?

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: lola@lucid.com (Lola McCrary)
Subject: Re: Chrisitan nudes
Organization: Lucid, Inc.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 04:17:00 GMT

In article <BxK508.L6w.2@cs.cmu.edu> Karl_Kleinpaste@cs.cmu.edu writes:

   leed@pro-harold.cts.com writes:
	How do we know Adam and Eve were married. I can't find my bible so can't
	check out the text.

   Oh, ferpetesake kiddies, if you KNOW that you DON'T KNOW something,
   why inflict your self-acknowledged lack of information on the rest of
   us all?

   Gen 2:25, *poof*, done, question answered, problem solved.

	Or course it's all open to interpetation.

   No, it emphatically is not.  In any situation where the language
   before you is plain, it needs no interpretation.  Knock yourself out
   trying to interpret Daniel or Revelation, sure.  But when 2:25 says
   "the man and his wife," well, somehow it just smacks of a total lack
   of a need for "interpretation."

But what does it say in Greek?  Or Hebrew?  The words you are looking at are a
*translation*, and therefore an intrepretation.  Perhaps you should take a good
Biblical studies course at a non-fundamentalist school, or better yet, take
five years each and learn the languages before you bitch at someone else about
what they don't know.  

Boy, are we off topic.

Lola

Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: dza@unixland.natick.ma.us (David Archer)
Subject: Re: Berkeley's Naked Guy
Organization: Unixland Public Access Unix & Think_Tank BBS
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 03:32:01 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.113741.1@skcla.monsanto.com> petersonk@skcla.monsanto.com writes:
>I just talked with a friend in California... It seems that "The Naked Guy" at
>Berkeley just got suspended from campus for two weeks.  There was some sort of
>ruling passed.  Does anyone have more information???

There was something on the national news tonight ... they said he got
"kicked out of the school" when he showed up at his disciplinary hearing
naked.

-- 
----
\  /  David Archer
 \/         dza@unixland.natick.ma.us
From: tjw@vms.cis.pitt.edu (TJ Wood)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Newest Nudist ;-) ;-) :-P
Date: 11 Nov 92 19:12:08 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1dq7q0INN9h8@BEECH.THEORY.CS.YALE.EDU>, beigel-richard@cs.yale.edu (Richard Beigel) writes:

> It's just this sort of activity that gives nudism a bad name.  I think
> that giving birth on the beach is very irresponsible.  More offensive
> than conceiving on the beach.  How dare you!
> :-)

Yea, next they'll be using breasts to BREAST FEED!  Sheesh, how irresponsible!

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
From: 02maferguson@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Christian nudes
Date: 9 Nov 92 04:16:48 GMT
Organization: Ball State University, Muncie, In - Univ. Computing Svc's

Greg

   Just out of curiousity why are you adressing this matter between 
Christianity and nudism?
   Not to pry, and you don't have to tell us if you don't want to, but
did something happen to make you feel compelled or convicted to adress
this issue?

Mark
From: Richard.Mathews@West.Sun.COM (Richard M. Mathews)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Berkeley's Naked Guy
Date: 12 Nov 92 20:47:59 GMT
Organization: Sunsoft Inc., Los Angeles, CA.
NNTP-Posting-Host: astro
Originator: richard@astro.West.Sun.COM

The Naked Guy made page 3 of the L.A. Times today (Thursday).  The story
states that the suspension was reinstated yesterday.  The article does
point out that lewd is illegal but nude itself isn't, and it includes
some good quotes from the Naked Guy along the lines of nude!=sex.  It
also quotes school officials saying that they have to protect against
sexual harassment.  The article gives no hint that sexual harassment
occurred, but it is worded in a way which could lead the reader to
agree that the officials are right that such protection is necessary.
If I remember, I may bring the article with me tomorrow and type in a
few excerpts.

     Richard M. Mathews			F oster 
					 E stonian-Latvian-Lithuanian
Richard.Mathews@West.Sun.COM		  I ndependence and
					   F reedom!