HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: v076rtlz@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Howard M. Green)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re" nudity & sex
Date: 14 Dec 92 17:49:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41


 stephane@xrtll.uucp (Stephane Deschenes) writes:


>In article <Bz25xH.F0E@acsu.buffalo.edu> v076rtlz@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Howard M. Green) writes:
>>Bullshit.  Everything equals sex.  It's time you old farts admitted it.
>>
>I'm shure I won't be the only one to respond to this but I will anyways.
> 
>When you eat, does it equal sex?
>When you go to work, does it equal sex?
>When you visit you parents, does it equal sex?
>When you talk to young children, does it equal sex?
>When you go out with your male friends, does it equal sex?
> 
Actually "equals" is a bad chioce of words.  But I wasn't the one who said
it first! :-)
>etc....
> 
>I could go on forever.  If the answer to all of these is really yes, then
>you are obsessed.

No, I'm no more obsessed than anyone else.  The problen, is that most people 
seemed to be ashamed of their sexuality, and percieve it to be a bad thing
that they have to keep hidden.  Just like most people are ashamed of their 
bodies, so that they have to keep those hidden.  A group that is allegedly(sp?)
liberated, one that claims to oppose hiding oneself, shouldn't get so up in
arms w en someone admits to having the same sexual feelings in the nude as they
do when they are clothed.

Howard "The Fifth Beatle reincarnated" Green

-- 
========================================================
Stephane Deschenes     stephane@xrtll.uucp
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
========================================================
From: steve@rtfm.mlb.fl.us (Steve Pierce)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Playalinda update
Date: 16 Dec 92 04:19:36 GMT
Organization: We don't need no stinkin' batches!

In rec.nude you write:
>In article <1992Dec9.041314.13426@rtfm.mlb.fl.us> steve@rtfm.mlb.fl.us (Steve Pierce) writes:
>>   For general information -- Florida has very, very few hassle-free beaches.
>>Playalinda still maintains that status for the time being and Haulover is
>>generally hassle-free (both suffer from ONE "lone ranger" who sees it as his
>>personal duty to clean up the world :-).

>Just what is the status at Playalinda these days. I stopped by
>to see the boiling grinders driven in by the high winds
>right after the TANR convention in November and Ranger Friendly
>was writing up a parking citation to someone in lot 13. Is
>this the new tactic? I also understand that Wendell Simpson
>is under pressure, so he is applying pressure.

  This is the tatic of at least one ranger :-).  Granted all tickets to date
have been for valid reasons -- illegal parking, glass on the beach -- there
have been more of them.  Space Coast Naturists is trying to document these
incidents but so far all I have is a bunch of second and third hand stories
and almost no one has lodged a complaint with the NPS at Canaveral.

>>BTW, Playalinda is closed until mid-January. Shuttle is sitting on the pad :-(

>I drove back on the new road and was hoping that all it needed
>was a stripe down the middle to make it bidirectional and
>solve this problem. I was surprised it was already paved;
>I thought it had to go through umteen-thousand committees
>first.

  Current expected finish date for the road is February.  So this closing of
Playalinda SHOULD be the last long term closing (the beach will always close
one day either side of and including shuttle launch day).  Some people think
Wendell is paying the road crew to go slowly :-)

Yours naturally,
   Steve
-- 
======================================================================
Steve Pierce             Palm Bay
steve@rtfm.mlb.fl.us     Florida
      Space Coast Naturists, PO Box 560086, Rockledge, FL 32956-0086
From: bthoms@waikato.ac.nz
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Nudity and nakedness (was Re: nudity & sex)
Date: 21 Dec 92 00:17:46 GMT
Organization: University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

In article <1992Dec20.175109.29473@infodev.cam.ac.uk>, gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry) writes:
> 
> This is a good excuse to raise one of my favourite questions.  Do
> people here draw a distinction between nudity and nakedness?  It seems
> to me that nakedness is the simple state of not wearing clothes, which
> all people find themselves in from time to time, whereas nudity is
> actually a positive choice about how to dress.  So you're naked in the
> shower, but nude on the beach.  Comments anyone?

I think I agree: I was going to say things about "nude" referring to something
aesthetically pleasing, etc, but I think it boils down to the same thing. The
only difference, in a biblical sense, is that nakedness is a lack, rather than
an absence: you clothe the naked, because they *want* clothes but don't have
them. You don't clothe the nude, because they don't *lack* clothes - they have
all the covering that they want.

These sort of debates always lead back to arguing nudist vs clothes optional vs
clothes free vs naturist - we're too busy trying to define freedom from/of
dress in textile terms!

Brent Thomson, Waikato, NZ
From: v076rtlz@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Howard M. Green)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re:nudity, sex and old farts
Date: 12 Dec 92 22:37:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

Yeah, I too think how wonderful to be 17 again.  I'm now a grand old man of
20.

Lighten Up, people.  You may not live longer, but you'll have a bit more fun?


               /      \

           \              /
            \____________/

Big, Silly looking smiley.

Howard "Fully dressed, as I am most of the time during the winter, in Buffalo"
Green
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: nigel@kathunk.phaedrav.on.ca (Nigel M Burnett)
Subject: Re: Nudist TV segment
Organization: as little as possible
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 22:16:26 GMT

Lee Dronick (leed@pro-harold.cts.com) wrote:
: Inside San Diego, local TV talk show here, did a segment on the Nudist
: lifestyle today.

: naturist movies, but the with genital areas and female breasts blurred,
: there was no censorship of male or female buttocks.

Is this a requirment of US television?  Do they do this for National
Geographix stuff too?  Is the state really that repressive or is
this self-censorship on part of the station/network/studio to avoid
litigation?

Nigel

-- 
The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of
a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.  His own
good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant.   John Stuart Mill

Nigel Burnett: 78 Normandy Blvd, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M4L 3K3, 416-690-1834
Send e-mail to nigel@kathunk.phaedrav.on.ca or try uunet.ca!kink!kathunk!nigel
From: adculha@afterlife.ncsc.mil (Andrew Culhane)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: nudity & sex
Date: 16 Dec 92 14:22:04 GMT
Organization: The Great Beyond

In article <1992Dec14.223803.26257@cbfsb.cb.att.com> mbb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (martin.brilliant) writes:

[... LOTS of stuff deleted ...]
>
>
>When you eat, you are preparing for sex.  At my age, I'm preparing for
>my children to have sex.  When I go to work, I'm making it possible
>for me to eat, etc. as above, and also earning what it costs to get my
>children married.  Parents and children are certainly part of the sex
>package, since without sex there would be neither parents nor
>children.  And male friends, even if you're male, or female friends if
>you're female, are part of the social structure in which you have sex
>and perpetuate the species.
>
>WITHOUT SEX YOU WOULD NOT EXIST!!!!
>
>Get the above through your head.  Along with food, clothing, and
>shelter, sex is the most important thing in the world.
>

Nope.  Right logic, wrong conclusion.  The real equation is:

   Everything == eating

When you work, you're earning money to buy food.  When you maintain
your house/apartment/whatever, you're really just providing yourself
with a dining room.  When you exercise, it's just to burn off enough
calories to make yourself eager to eat again.

You can live for a longer time without sex than without food.  Is
that a good thing?  I dunno.

Work, recreation, sex, etc. etc. etc. are all merely vehicles that
the meta-being "EATING" uses to maintain itself.

This was a silly thread to begin with ...
From: gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Nudity and nakedness (was Re: nudity & sex)
Date: 20 Dec 92 17:51:09 GMT
Reply-To: gdb15@cl.cam.ac.uk
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK

In article <1h1ki7INNl8f@iskut.ucs.ubc.ca> arnett@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Arnett) writes:

>...which proves that nudity is merely *one* choice of how to dress, no
>different (essentially) than any other choice of how to dress.

This is a good excuse to raise one of my favourite questions.  Do
people here draw a distinction between nudity and nakedness?  It seems
to me that nakedness is the simple state of not wearing clothes, which
all people find themselves in from time to time, whereas nudity is
actually a positive choice about how to dress.  So you're naked in the
shower, but nude on the beach.  Comments anyone?

--
Guy Barry, University of Cambridge | Phone: +44 (0)223 334757 
Computer Laboratory                | Fax: +44 (0)223 334678
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street  | JANET: Guy.Barry@uk.ac.cam.cl 
Cambridge CB2 3QG, England, UK     | Internet: Guy.Barry@cl.cam.ac.uk
From: steve@rtfm.mlb.fl.us (Steve Pierce)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Regularly Posted Items In REC.NUDE - REPOST
Summary: Summary of postings and schedule of FAQ postings
Date: 16 Dec 92 04:04:40 GMT
Organization: We don't need no stinkin' batches!

These are the regular postings for REC.NUDE.  All are set to expire one month
after posting.  If your system expires them before that date, please contact
me and I will gladly e-mail any of these postings:

	REC.NUDE Frequently Asked Questions, Part I of II
		posted on the 1st of each month.
		Contains questions (and answers) to REC.NUDE's FAQ.
		Please read BEFORE posting to REC.NUDE for the first time!

	REC.NUDE Frequently Asked Questions, Part II of II
		posted on the 1st of each month.
		Contains information on how to find about about
		clothing-optional (CO) beaches, hot springs, and resort.
		Also includes information on organizations, publications,
		videos, and electronic media.

	Florida CO Areas
		posted on the 15th of each month.
		Contains map and listing of Florida CO areas and groups.

	Free Beach Etiquette
		posted on the 15th of each month.
		Contains "rules" of etiquette for CO beach and park users.

I also have information on naturist/nudist Special Interest Groups, clubs, 
and resorts that can be sent on request.  

Richard Mathews (richard.mathews@west.sun.com) does the Nude Beaches, Etc.
FAQs.

Yours, naturally
  Steve Pierce (steve@rtfm.mlb.fl.us)
-- 
======================================================================
Steve Pierce             Palm Bay
steve@rtfm.mlb.fl.us     Florida
      Space Coast Naturists, PO Box 560086, Rockledge, FL 32956-0086
From: middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu (Tom Middleton ; System Manager)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: nudity & sex
Date: 18 Dec 92 03:57:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: network.1gri7iINNgod
Organization: Institute for NonLinear Science, UCSD
NNTP-Posting-Host: poincare.ucsd.edu

In article <> williamt@athena.Eng.sun.com (Dances with Drums) writes:
-	As for nudity and its relation to sex -- well, men are visually
-stimulated.  If men see someone attractive it can cause arousal and 
-desire for sex.  However, a well selected bathing suit can be more erotic
-for many than no clothes at all -- also some women look better in clothing
-than nude.  But for some women, nudity is far more arousing than being
-clothed.  In that regard, nudity is related to sex and can stimuluate
-sexual arousal.  But it is not a 100% positive correlation.

Of course it can be shown that certain clothes derive a sexual response.
Therefore clothes = sex and since we already know nudity = sex we see
clearly that clothes = nudity.

-- 
===============================================================================
Thomas Earl Middleton
middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu			computers = sex
aka Happy Bare
From: bpwing@phoenix.princeton.edu (Ben Wing)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Date: 17 Dec 92 09:10:50 GMT
Subject: Re: X-Plicit Demonstration
Organization: Princeton University
X-Subliminal-Message: You can quit reading news anytime you want.

In article <1goa74INN9b3@network.ucsd.edu> middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu (Tom Middleton ; System Manager) writes:
|In article <> bpwing@phoenix.princeton.edu (Ben Wing) writes:
|-Coming X-Plicit Events:
|-
|-Tues, Dec. 8, 2PM -- the Players get their day in court.  This is when the
|-    arraignment for their Sproul Plaza arrests is scheduled, and since only
|-    the lawyers need to appear in court, we will be protesting nude outside
|-    the courthouse (Center and M.L.K. streets in Berkeley, I think the
|-    address is 2150 Martin Luther King).  Everyone is welcome to come along.
|
|So, how'd it go?
|

It was ... er ... cold and rainy, to say the least.  The weather gods were
not being kind to us that day.  (in fact it rained much of the rest of the
week, but this week's been totally gorgeous so far.)  But we were determined
and did it anyway.  There were six of us naked, walking up and down a bunch
of times in front of the courthouse.  There were a few people congregated
there, and we go lots of thumbs-up and startled stares and the like from
passers-by in their cars (MLK is a major thoroughfare).  The kids at the
school next to the courthouse got a kick out of us.  Meanwhile KPFA
(the local we-pretend-to-be-a-boring-old-classical-music-and-current-affairs-
station-but-we're-far-leftist-and-often-play-strange-music-especially-late-
at-night radio station) hung around trying to interview us.  J'Ann spoke
a bit with them beforehand and after the jaunt in the rain they did indeed get
some words from the rest -- Deb and Nina read a prepared speech of theirs
and Marty was belligerent, not answering any questions and instead asking
the reporter what his personal feelings about intimacy and nudism and such
were.  Apparently they did a blurb on it in their evening news and mentioned
at the end about the performances this past weekend, and a couple of people
showed up as a result of this.

No policemen bothered us, just as on the demonstration a couple of days
earlier in the city.  When the Players' lawyer emerged, he reported that
this was in fact just a "pre-trial" or something of the sort -- stage 2
is coming up sometime soon, and this one is where the judge will actually
look at the evidence provided by both sides and decide whether there's a
reasonable case.

ben
--

"Can't we all just get along?"
From: leed@pro-harold.cts.com (Lee Dronick)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Nudity and nakedness (was Re: nudity & sex)
Date: 21 Dec 92 03:20:43 GMT
Organization: The Harold Network -- An Alliance For Creative Communication

>This is a good excuse to raise one of my favourite questions.  Do
people here draw a distinction between nudity and nakedness?  It seems
to me that nakedness is the simple state of not wearing clothes, which
all people find themselves in from time to time, whereas nudity is
actually a positive choice about how to dress.  So you're naked in the
shower, but nude on the beach.  Comments anyone?<

I once read somewhere that a writer recomended these definitions:

Nude - Used when bathing or changing clothes

Naked - Used when engaging in sex or performing (such as stripper)

Bare - As when being examined by a doctor.

Not that I necessarily agree the person. To me "Nude" is softer sounding
while "Naked" is more harsh.
-----
Lee Dronick
ProLine: leed@pro-harold
Internet: leed@pro-harold.cts.com
UUCP: crash!pro-harold!leed
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: isc40041@nusunix1.nus.sg (LOO KOK HOE)
Subject: Visiting UK .... Info needed ( repost )
Organization: National University of Singapore
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 02:21:31 GMT

Hi 

My friends are going to UK in May 1993 ....
any people out there can provide info on
good beaches ?



george

internet:     isc40041@nusunix1.nus.sg
              lookokho@iscs.nus.sg

Bitnet:       lookokho@nusdiscs
From: CA.DSC@forsythe.stanford.edu (David Conrod)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Joyce Brothers
Date: 14 Dec 1992 09:36:10 -0800
Organization: Stanford University
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: morrow.stanford.edu

In article <1992Dec6.013807.4791@lucid.com>,
lola@lucid.com (Lola McCrary) writes:

I absolutly second this view and go furthar to state that not to
consider the needs of kids in various states of development is child
abuse.  I have seen more abuse and neglect than I like here,
Remember take care of the kids first!
>
>A couple different points of view from a nudist.
>
>I have heard a definition of family that says that a good family is one where
>everyone's feelings are valid, and everyone's needs are taken into
>consideration.
>
>Leaving aside the issue of whether a teenager who has been raised with nudity
>suddenly sees nudity as eqated with sex or not, if *ANYONE* in the family,
>regardless of age, can't have feelings and requests taken seriously, then the
>whole family has a problem.
>
>I have a friend who really likes nudity, but whose pre-teen son requested that
>she not be nude in his presence.  Whatever the feelings behind that request,
>she has a favorite loose dress that she wears with no underwear when he is
>around.  When he is not, she does as *she* wishes.
>
>If the child were agree to go up to the local CO resort (and he would have a
>choice), then he would be expected to accept the norm there.  In his own home,
>he is part of the decision and his needs and wishes are taken into account,
>even if they don't seem to be rational.
>
>Otherwise all you would end up with is the old "your hair is too long! You
>look like a bum!  I don't want bums in my house."  "Oh, get a life, Dad!"
>arguments.  Did you like it when your parents tried to inflict their values and
>decisions on you?  Probably not.
>
>And, on the other side, becoming sexually mature is emotionally and physically
>difficult.  No nudity in their presence feels like a reasonable request to me.
>Having this request understood and honored may help prevent the teenage "I hate
>my parents!" syndrome, as well as enable the person (not child, not kid,
>*person*) to let you know when they have reached a point where they are
>comfortable again.
>
>Yeah, you can refuse to have friends to your house who aren't comfortable with
>nudity, and they have a choice.  Your kids don't.  I would *hate* to face the
>prospect of living for x years in a place I wasn't comfortable before I could
>get out on my own and become a fundementalist Christian (joke!!) in opposition
>to my parent's values.
>
>Lola
From: williamt@athena.Eng.Sun.COM (Dances with Drums)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: nudity & sex
Date: 18 Dec 1992 00:18:26 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc., Mountain View, CA
Reply-To: williamt@athena.Eng.sun.com (Dances with Drums)
NNTP-Posting-Host: athena

In article <BzEstq.E2J.1@cs.cmu.edu> hcs+@cs.cmu.edu (Henry C Schmitt) writes:
>	If you take the included paragraph and replace sex with
>reproduction (and make a few other grammatical changes) you get the
>generally accepted view of survival of the species.  Everyone knows
>the phrase "Survival of the Fittest," but usually mistake fittest to
>mean physically.  This is almost right, fitness is measured by
>reproduction in which physical fitness plays an important part.
---
	Actually the genes that survive are the ones that get propagated the
most.  What that usually would equate to is he who has sex the most
with fertile females.  As a result, genetically speaking, having men put
their seed in as many places as possible has been genetically selected
over time.

	I was listening to some talk show on the radio, where they were saying
that humans' bodies were designed to last over the span of years of
sexual activity.  

	I've also seen scattered evidence of life span being tied to
sex -> no sex, less life span.  A prime example of a body lessing
its chances for survival is in post-menopausal women.  The risks of
many diseases (many fatal) go up after menopause -- faking the body
out by giving replacement estrogen seems to be a way of protecting against
alot of these diseases.

	Basically, on the average -- sex is necessary for life.

	As for nudity and its relation to sex -- well, men are visually
stimulated.  If men see someone attractive it can cause arousal and 
desire for sex.  However, a well selected bathing suit can be more erotic
for many than no clothes at all -- also some women look better in clothing
than nude.  But for some women, nudity is far more arousing than being
clothed.  In that regard, nudity is related to sex and can stimuluate
sexual arousal.  But it is not a 100% positive correlation.

>	Now, get back to the matter at hand: Nude != Sex.
---
	True.  But if one were to assert that they are unrelated, one would
be rather naive.

-wat-
--
1935 will go down in history.  For the first time, a civilized nation has
full gun registration.  Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient,
and the world will follow our lead into the future.
                         --Adolf Hitler
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: stephane@xrtll.uucp (Stephane Deschenes)
Subject: Re: nudity & sex
Organization: WCOM Public Access Unix - Toronto
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 22:18:41 GMT

In article <Bz25xH.F0E@acsu.buffalo.edu> v076rtlz@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Howard M. Green) writes:
>Bullshit.  Everything equals sex.  It's time you old farts admitted it.
>
I'm shure I won't be the only one to respond to this but I will anyways.

When you eat, does it equal sex?
When you go to work, does it equal sex?
When you visit you parents, does it equal sex?
When you talk to young children, does it equal sex?
When you go out with your male friends, does it equal sex?

etc....

I could go on forever.  If the answer to all of these is really yes, then
you are obsessed.



-- 
========================================================
Stephane Deschenes     stephane@xrtll.uucp
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
========================================================
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: leed@pro-harold.cts.com (Lee Dronick)
Subject: Nudist TV segment
Organization: The Harold Network -- An Alliance For Creative Communication
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 23:11:18 PST

Inside San Diego, local TV talk show here, did a segment on the Nudist
lifestyle today. Unlike the usual smirk attitude of tabloid TV this show
presented nudism in a very professional way. The hosts interviewed Gigi and
Larry Waughtel who are full time residents at Camp McConnville, a nudist
resort north of San Diego. Gigi and Larry, who were not nude for the show,
answered the customary questions about the nudist lifestyle and I get
impression the hosts were favorably impressed. There was some footage from
naturist movies, but the with genital areas and female breasts blurred,
there was no censorship of male or female buttocks.

Overall I was pleased to see nudism portrayed in such a positive manner.
With such exposure we could make great gains in getting accepted by the
mainstream.
-----
Lee Dronick
ProLine: leed@pro-harold
Internet: leed@pro-harold.cts.com
UUCP: crash!pro-harold!leed
Newsgroups: rec.nude