HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu (Tom Middleton ; System Manager)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Erection???
Date: 25 Aug 92 18:27:24 GMT
Organization: Institute for NonLinear Science, UCSD
NNTP-Posting-Host: poincare.ucsd.edu

In article <> jhsegal@wiscon.weizmann.ac.il (Livy) writes:
>  Going to nude beaches and seeing nude sexy girls don't lead to a fast
>  erection?	Isn't that embarrasing a bit?

First off, I recommend you visit a nude beach or some sort of resort.
That is the only way you will really understand/believe my answer.

Going to a beach where women wear sexy bathing suits rates much higher
with regards to leading towards the dreaded erection.  Yes, you may happen
to get one at a nude beach but all those sexy women are less sexy when 
completely naked.  ("You" by the way is the generic you referring to any
male but not any one in particular.)

Defense: Ha, you say, this guy is full of crap.  Well, I have two reasons
for saying what I did.   1) Bathing suits are designed to draw your attention
to certain parts of the body that are considered sexy.  Bathing suits (and
clothing in general) will emphasize (or de-emphasize) parts that the wearer
wants to emphasize (or de-emphasize).  Full nudity does not emphasize any
particular part and you see the whole person.  [Although the novice nudist
may concentrate on certain parts, the experienced nudist does look at the
person as a complete being.]   2) By covering up certain parts it gives your
imagination something to work on.  You fill in the picture with your own
mind and your mind is likely to put in its own very favorable, erotic
picture.  On a nude beach with everything uncovered you do not have the
mental stimulation associated with filling in the missing parts and seeing
the real thing is almost always less erotic than the picture in your mind.

A third point to make is that there is a larger number of women at textile
beaches and they tend to be skewed towards the body beautiful spectrum.
Women at nude beaches are fewer and have a wider range of bodies, they are
more representive of real life.

O.K., so you are less likely to get an erection at a nude beach, but it still
can happen.  "Isn't that embarrasing a bit?" you ask.  Please keep in mind
that you are the one that controls your embarassment.  You also control your
actions and your erection.  If you chose to be embarassed about it you will
be, if you chose not to be embarassed you won't be.

Nude beach etiquette does ask that you not flaunt your erection and you
certainly should avoid playing with it.  If you happen to be talking to
someone and think you are going to be embarassed you can hold your towel in
front of yourself for a while, or you can excuse yourself with a comment
like "excuse me, I want to go cool off" and then run jump in the water.  If
you are laying down sunning yourself then you can just turn over.


However, the bottom line is it is just not an issue.  Go find a nude beach,
relax, enjoy yourself and find out for yourself.

-- 
Thomas Earl Middleton			|	Camping Bares
middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu		|	P.O. Box 81589
aka Happy Bare				|	San Diego, CA 92138-1589
From: khockenbury@vaxc.stevens-tech.edu (Kurt M. Hockenbury)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: An option to the s** word
Date: 26 Aug 92 01:16:09 GMT
Organization: Stevens Institute of Technology

In article <714694743snx@home.demon.co.uk>, cms@home.demon.co.uk (Cliff Stanford) writes:
> In article <9208250019.AA16159@nettlerash.berkeley.edu> HENDRY@ETSUADMN.BITNET writes:
>>                                            and delete any garbage that
>>has been on this list lately.
>>     If you want information, or to subscribe, e-mail me at:
>>
>>     HENDRY@ETSUADMN.ETSU.EDU
> 
> 	Yes!  Let's hear it for censorship!  One man's garbage.........

Is another's reading material.  I enjoy the mailing list, but it doesn't stop 
me from reading rec.nude.

If you don't like it, don't subscribe, or even start your own list.

	Let's hear it for free enterprise.
-kmh
From: middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu (Tom Middleton ; System Manager)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Young People - Body Acceptance
Date: 31 Aug 1992 21:25:05 GMT
Organization: Institute for NonLinear Science, UCSD
NNTP-Posting-Host: poincare.ucsd.edu

In article <> ash@sumex-aim.stanford.edu (David Ash) writes:
>Another related point:  you folks say there are fewer young people on nude
>beaches because young people are less comfortable with their bodies.  Maybe
>so, but in catering to couples, one needs to realize that young people are
>more likely to be single, and older people are more likely to be married or
>in long-term relationships, so again there's a selection process involved.

Well, hold on a second.  All the nude beaches I am aware of are open to all
and have no restrictions based on marital status and no fees that reflect
a selection of any sort.  Your comment is right on when it comes to young
people joining resorts and clubs and there tend to be many other factors
which select against young people at these places.  However, viewing just
beaches does provide an interesting comparison.  Here in San Diego I would
say well over 60% of the people at textile beaches fit in the young people
category whereas probably around 30% of the nude beach users are young
people (and many of them are not nude).

I don't think we have any real good evidence one way or the other to support
the claim that young people are less comfortable with their bodies.   But
based on my own experiences I'd say it is an accurate statement.  I think
as we get older we tend to worry less about what others might think of our
bodies.  Thus we become more comfortable with what we have.

-- 
===============================================================================
Thomas Earl Middleton		| Camping Bares:  "An Anarchist Disorganization
aka Happy Bare			| Dedicated to the Destruction of the Fabric of
middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu	| Our Society"
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: picl27@fsphy1.physics.fsu.edu (Jeffrey Johnson)
Subject: Re: Vulnerablity
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
    a 
Reply-To: picl27@fsphy1.physics.fsu.edu
Organization: F.S.U. Dept of Physics
Date: 26 AUG 92 17:37:45    

In article <3539@unisql.UUCP>, wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie) writes...
>In article <1992Aug26.015637.28179@samba.oit.unc.edu> Mark.Cornick@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Mark Cornick) writes:
>>in our modern society where rape is prevalent, I'd suspect many women would 
>>have problems with vulnerability, with so many men around.
> 
>	As if 6 square inches of cloth on your crotch is going to make
>you any less "vulnerable to rape".  
> 
>	As if so many women get raped on nude beaches

no, a little bit of cloth doesn't make youless vulerable to rape, but it
sure does make you FEEL an aweful lot less vulnerable.  after having 
gone to nude beaches a couple of times i know i felt very safe and
secure, but imagine what it felt like the first time, when even though
you have been assured it's a totally non-sex thing you are standing
around with 5 or more men per woman.  you are smaller than them, you 
are weaker than them, you are out in the middle of nowhere, and you just
met these men not 15 minutes earlier.  at this point whether or not
anybody ever gets raped doesn't matter, because you still feel completely
vulnerable (and you really are if you think about it).

ande     ======>>>  kennedy@fsunuc.physics.fsu.edu
From: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Arnett)
Subject: Re: CO in Kona?
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 07:14:41 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.091853.1@plato.lsvl8.stortek.com> v024971@plato.lsvl8.stortek.com (Robert J. Waddell) writes:
>My mother was just visiting from Hawaii this week, and knowing my
>lifestyle, she brought me this clipping from the "West Hawaii Today" dated
>Monday, Aug. 19, 1991. If anyone from the "Big Island" is reading this how
>about posting an update regarding this situation. I'm sure that a lot of people

>Kailua_Kona, Hawaii -- A report that the National Park Service is considering a
>preliminary proposal to allow a nude beach at a yet-to-be developed new
>national park is causing hardly a ripple here.
>However, several people say they think a nude beach would be inappropriate for
>a national park.

>The half-mile-long beach separates part of the new Kaloko-Honokohau National
>Historical Park from the Pacific Ocean.  It is located about three miles north
>of this seaside village on Hawaii Island's Kona Coast.
>reported recently that the Park Service is seriously considering a draft
>proposal to allow the nude beach to continue.

>Kona to see his family. "It's the only nude beach on the island, and I hope that
>they don't take it away," said the former resident, who asked not to be
>identified.

Honokohau (sp?) is a really nice beach, but it's *not* the only CO beach
on the Big Island.  There are a few others.  Most notable is Kahena, near
Kalapana Beach on the east coast.  It is, IMHO, much more beatiful than
Honokohau.

I belie, from the last I heard, that Honokohau is now under the control
of the national park service and that (so far) they have not tried to 
stop the nudity.  (But don't quote me on it.  Someone else might be
ablew3 to confirm or refute my understanding.)

It would be a real shame to lose that beach because it really is quite nice.
It is easily found by parking in a lot on the north side o{f 
Honokohau Harbour and following the path into the trees to the north.

Hope this is of some help.  (I also hope it's readable!  There's a lot
of line noise appearing on my screen. I don't know how much of it is being
included in this post.)

Bill.
-- 
Bill Arnett                            Internet: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: cb@wixer.cactus.org (Cyberspace Buddha)
Subject: Re: Breasts (hers :-)
Organization: Real/Time Communications
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 92 03:52:01 GMT

In article <21381@optima.cs.arizona.edu> jiang@cs.arizona.edu (Howard) writes:
>In article <3564@unisql.UUCP>, wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie) writes:
>> 
>> have, and I still love to watch them change shape as she moves, and the 
>> way every woman's are different, and how the nipples go up and down... :-)
>
>Watch a couple of National Geographic native specials, and let me know how you
>feel.

ALready seen'em Howard.  They range in age from 0 to 100.  Some are 
exciting, some aren't.  <ponders flaming Howard>  nevermind...
From: wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Breasts (hers : -)
Date: 2 Sep 92 15:05:35 GMT
Reply-To: wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie)
Organization: UniSQL, Inc., Austin, Texas, USA

In article <1992Sep1.222611.15416@unislc.uucp> kbiesel@unislc.uucp (Karen Biesel) writes:
>I love to watch men wiggle those chest muscles, and watch them change 
>shape as men move.

	Good for you!  Isn't the human body a wonderful thing?
From: tesmer@pandora.bio.purdue.edu (John Tesmer)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Young People - Body Acceptance
Date: 1 Sep 92 15:05:15 GMT
Organization: Purdue University, Dept. of Biological Sciences

In article <17u2niINN249@network.ucsd.edu> middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu (Tom Middleton ; System Manager) writes:
>In article <> ash@sumex-aim.stanford.edu (David Ash) writes:
>>Another related point:  you folks say there are fewer young people on nude
>>beaches because young people are less comfortable with their bodies.  Maybe
>
>I don't think we have any real good evidence one way or the other to support
>the claim that young people are less comfortable with their bodies.   But
>based on my own experiences I'd say it is an accurate statement.  I think
>as we get older we tend to worry less about what others might think of our
>bodies.  Thus we become more comfortable with what we have.
>
>middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu	| Our Society"

From my experience at Hedonism II, the people on the "nude" side were primarily couples and older.  The
single folk that were there were usually much older.  Being a youngster myself (but married) we
initially felt out of place on that beach, but quickly got over it.

Most young, single men that I know of that would go to a resort or nude club probably wouldn't be too
shy of their bods...are there were plenty of them at Hedonism II.  However, all of the young single
women hung out on the textile side of the beach, and so naturally the young single men hung out over
there too.  So why do the young single women hang out on the textile side?  I think that it is
probably indeed the "vulnerability" issue;  I would wager that a lot of younger women might feel that
laying out naked on a beach (AND being single) would be an open invitation for young stud Joe to 
make advances.  I am sure "being shy of one's body" might figure into it, but I think it has more to
do with what one believes the effect of taking off his/her clothes will have on others.  

This sounds like I am trying all single male nudists as people merely scoping for babes; I know this
isn't true.  But I do know that a lot of the younger single people at Hedonism II weren't there with
the beach or water sports as a primarily objective.  Besides, these people aren't who I would consider
as "naturists" or "nudists" to begin with anyhow.  This is why I said in my report that Hedonism II\
isn't for the faint of heart, because it had its share of of people on the beach that I felt were there
for the wrong reason.  I mean "wrong" by treating it as a place were loose men and women would hang
out.  I think this is an attitude/mistake that many young folk would find easy to make.  

At HII, these folk weren't really a problem, as they usually quickly found like folk and hung out 
together.

jjgt


`
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: C511199@mizzou1.missouri.edu (Pat Flynn)
Subject: Any CO resorts/areas in Missouri???
Organization: Campus Crusade for Tir na nOg
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 16:04:14 GMT
X-Posted-From: mizzou1.missouri.edu
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

Does anybody out there know of any CO areas in Missouri??
Please e-mail responses.
 
Thanks in advance
 
Pat
c511199@MIZZOU1.MISSOURI.EDU
From: middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu (Tom Middleton ; System Manager)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Disc. against singles esp. men (was Re: FIRST TIMER REPORT. )
Date: 31 Aug 1992 20:39:51 GMT
Organization: Institute for NonLinear Science, UCSD
NNTP-Posting-Host: poincare.ucsd.edu

In article <1992Aug28.181340.2840@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> ash@sumex-aim.stanford.edu (David Ash) writes:
>In article <9868@ncrwat.Waterloo.NCR.COM> tjgerman@53iss6.Waterloo.NCR.COM (Trevor German) writes:
>>	for a deluxe (havn't seen in one of these). Daily visiting
>>	rates are $20-men $15-women $20-couple. Annual membership is
>                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Clearly this club discriminates against single people, especially single
>men, and having been a regular reader of this group for a little while,
>I don't think this club is by any means unique.  I have two comments on
>this:
>
>1. As a single man, I don't know that I feel such discrimination should be
>legal.

I'm opposed to discrimination based on marital status also but I am not
sure this is it.  Being a single male I don't like it but it seems to me
that if a club has a $20 entrance fee and gives single women a $5 discount
what they are doing is trying to encourage single women.  By charging couples
the same as a single they are encouraging couples.

Obviously this can be taken to an extreme (ex: Entrance fee, $100/day, but
we give women and couples a $90 discount).  I don't know what, if anything,
the law says about that.  Seems to me some guy sued a bar a number of years
ago because they gave women free drinks during happy hour, he claimed it
was discrimination against men.  Don't know the outcome, any law students
want to look it up?

-- 
===============================================================================
Thomas Earl Middleton		| Camping Bares:  "An Anarchist Disorganization
aka Happy Bare			| Dedicated to the Destruction of the Fabric of
middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu	| Our Society"
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: Michael_Pizolato@afs.com (Michael Pizolato)
Subject: Re: An option to the s** word
Reply-To: Michael_Pizolato@afs.com
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 13:41:53 GMT

In article <Btq0zt.43v@xrtll.uucp> stephane@xrtll.uucp (Stephane Deschenes)  
writes:
> In article <1992Aug26.134253.262@afs.com> Michael_Pizolato@afs.com writes:
> >When will people on this list realize that they do not live in a vacuum?  If  
> >you support a behavior that most people don't do (let alone believe is OK), 
> >you are going to find many who agree with you, but you are also going to be  
> >misunderstood and criticized.  There are as many ways to interpret any 
> >behavior you support as there are people who hear of it.  Why must
> >discussions only follow some kind of "politically correct" line?


> Why must every discussion be an argument?

I'm not arguing with anyone; I'm presenting a case for variety of opinion.

> Why must I always discuss things with people who disagree?

There's a lot more people on the planet who disagree with you than agree, on any  
opinion you choose, if you're willing to go deeper than the surface.  There's  
nothing to discuss if there's no disagreement.

> Why even bother responding to people who will never see my side?

So don't.  See what happens.

> Why can't I simply discuss issues which are important to me with others
>      who understand and agree?

Go ahead, line up like little matches in a matchbook with everyone who agrees  
with you.  Be sure to purge the group of all who disagree on anything.  That's  
certainly the way to gain adherents and strengthen your position.

> Why do I have to go through dozens of postings about subject matters which
>     are irrelevant?  (we are supposed to have specific interest groups)

Is it irrelevant to want respect for more than one way of looking at things  
within the context of the group?

> Why must I accept any stupid posting as worthy of a discussion????

Thank you very much.


This is exactly the kind of thinking I meant when I began discussing this  
newsgroup's "guardians of political correctness."  It's clear that these people  
want to have the group to themselves, so they can spend all their time telling  
each other how wonderful they and their points of view are.  If this is the kind  
of attitude that nudists/naturists have, then I'm something else.

All I tried to do was show that it's not the death of the movement to have  
differing opinions, and on topics that are mostly tangential, too.  What a bunch  
of closed minds!  In another of my posts, I said that if you require everyone to  
think the same way you'll soon be fighting your cause alone.  Well, I still  
believe in legal and accepted CO activities, but I'm outta here.

Michael

--
Michael_Pizolato@afs.com
~18 kyu
Q16
NeXTMail appreciated
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: stephane@xrtll.uucp (Stephane Deschenes)
Subject: Re: Concerns of a New Nudist
Organization: WCOM Public Access Unix - Toronto
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 23:32:13 GMT

In article <1992Aug24.200256.14156@ncsu.edu> cmgrawbu@eos.ncsu.edu (CHRISTOPHER M GRAWBURG) writes:
>I don't know if I could ever get myself to be nude in public. Something
>just wouldn't be right--- and I know what it is. The US culture is so
>focused into sex, and the fact that I'm not yet twenty increases this
>awareness of sex, sex, sex. Unfortunately, I have always equated nudity
>with sex. I would be afraid that I might get out there and be humiliated.

Unfortunately, most people seem to associate nudity with sex.  That's why
so many people have trouble accepting the existance of nude beaches.  If
you think about it, why should it mean sex?  From a logical standpoint,
when you are nude in a locker room, does it mean sex?  When children are
born nude, is it for sex?  When you take a shower or a bath, is that for
sex?  You see, there are already many reasons to be nude that don't mean
sex - as you obviously suspect.

>I mean this seriously. I might see someone near my age and feel inadequate.
>"Mine is not big enough, my body is not in as good as shape as these muscle
>guys." I know someone out there is laughing, but I really wonder about
>this.
>
>I can't be the only person who has thought about this--can I? 

No you are not.  It is a common concern among new nudists.  However, the
reason that I enjoy nude beaches (beyond the wonderful feeling of freedom)
is because I am accepted for what I am.  No one cares.  I'm not particularly
offensive to look at but I don't have the ideal body either.  I feel less
judged on a nude beach than on a regular textile beach.

Please try it. I'm fairly certain you will enjoy it.  It takes a certain 
amount of maturity to accept your body the way it is - flaws and all.  For
this reason you man not see many other people in their early 20's.  However,
there are some with the self confidence in themselves.

Let us know how it went.  We always like to hear about new people 
discovering the wonders of nude recreation.


-- 
========================================================
Stephane Deschenes     stephane@xrtll.uucp
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
========================================================
From: frampton@vicuna.ocunix.on.ca (Steve Frampton)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: COED WASHROOMS
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 19:03:45 EDT
Reply-To: frampton@vicuna.ocunix.on.ca
Distribution: world
Organization: Vicuna Systems, Kingston, ON (613) 547-5066

glenm@bnr.ca (Glen Martin) writes:

>    Still, at least one club I've visited (Glen Echo) had a nude cook.

Wow!  I'd sure hate to find a hair in my soup!  :-)

+-----------------------------------------------+--------------------+
| Steve Frampton - frampton@vicuna.ocunix.on.ca | Steve Frampton     |
| I collect postcards!  If you send me one from | 501-A Princess St. |
| your area, I'll send one in return.  Send to >| Kingston, Ontario  |
| (Don't forget both email and mailing address) | CANADA   K7L 1C3   |
+-----------------------------------------------+--------------------+
From: jsd@esl.com (Jeff Dalton)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Red,white,&blue info wanted.
Date: 1 Sep 92 03:21:29 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: Yet another 3 letter company

I'm looking for info about red write and blue just north of Santa Cruz.
I was wondering just how different (if at all) it is from the other
more-or-less CO beaches in the area.
  
Do you gain anything by paying a fee?  
Are there less gaukers?  
Is your car safer?  
What is the male/female ratio?
Does it get very crouded on weekends?  
Is it social or does everyone pretty much keep to themselves?
Do *you* like it there?