HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tucker@shiva.edsg.hac.com (George Tucker)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: World Guide Confusion
Date: 10 Sep 92 00:32:01 GMT
Reply-To: tucker@shiva.UUCP (George Tucker)
Organization: Hughes Aircraft Co., El Segundo, CA

In article <88317@netnews.upenn.edu> stein@grip.cis.upenn.edu (Matthew Stein) writes:
>Query to the Massed Minds of rec.nude:
>
>	On page 20 of the World Guide there is a picture of Deep Creek
>Hot Springs.  On page 21 is a picture of a woman jumping what looks
>like 10-15 feet into deep water.  The caption reads "How Deep is Deep
>Creek?".  Now this looks like a lot of fun, but ranging up and
>downstream hundreds of yards from the spring I could not find this
>location.  I asked Camping Bare Tom Middleton, and he claims to have
>searched for this spot too.  Can anyone provide a clue to would-be
>rock jumpers as to where this spot might be?  Or is this just trick
>photography?

Some years ago I read a pertinent article by a Green Tortoise driver.
Seems he saw a picture of a guy jumping from a high ledge at a place he
knew.  He had jumped from a lower ledge before and had not thought the
higher jump would be possible, but here it was!  So he went there and
finally got up the nerve to try it.  Several months later, after he was
released from the hospital, he met the guy in the original picture.
"Wasn't that a great shot.  It really looks like I jumped from the upper
ledge.  Of course I just jumped from the lower one.  There was a
concern that someone might be tempted to duplicate the high jump, 
but we decided not to say anything since obviously nobody could
be THAT stupid!" (Paraphrased)

	 George Tucker        tucker@tcville.hac.com
South Central LA - solidly Democratic - a few million.
Florida          - close race         - $7 billion.
Too many Quayludes.
From: speers@micro-c.mcds.com (Daniel E. Speers)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: rec.nude-ists in/around Morris Cty, NJ
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 92 22:57:43 EDT
Organization: Dan's Domain, Randolph, New Jersey


   It's warm now, but (oooohh, I feel a flame coming on....)
her in NJ, it's been feeling like cooler months coming on, in
fact, summer lasted all of two days....  (Ok, maybe three.. :->> )
 
    Anyway, I'd like to know if there are any rec.nud'ists/naturists
in the Northern NJ area.  I live in Morris cty with my wife & 18
month old daugher (who loves juice and thinks my computer does too...).

    We visit Sandy Hook now & then, but most friends I've met don't
live near us in the boonnies... [Yes, George, we actually have
trees out here...]

    So, I just wanted to know if there's anyone else out here, or
if it's just me & the crickets...

    Peace, quiet, & 10 million crickets...

OBnude:  The crickets were nude when I wrote this.


Dan Speers                                       (speers@micro-c.mcds.com)
Sysop & Dictater - err - Ruler - Hmm.. - How bout BOSS - no - King!
                no - Alright then, Super Genius! - TOO Much... What
                about, Dan The GREAT! - No huh? - ok, what about
                System Guru?  That's good.  Hey Sarah!  Don't touch
                that keyoluboaidkla;lkj,mn.,amnsdklga;lk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dan's Domain - THE Best BBS Period! (Ok, semicolon...)
(201) 366-5018 - We use a Telebit T3000 (among other things...)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: stephane@xrtll.uucp (Stephane Deschenes)
Subject: Re: Being Naked in Canada
Organization: WCOM Public Access Unix - Toronto
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 01:58:00 GMT
Keywords: laws, police harassment

In article <1992Sep01.160901.27004@bmerh85.bnr.ca> glenm@bnr.ca writes:
>|> There is/was a nude beach in Toronto, located somewhere in the Scarborough
>|> Bluffs, about a 30 minutes hard and treacherous hike from the nearest road.
>|> A month ago a sqad of armed cops arrived by boat, and had accomplices at the
>|> top of the bluffs to guided them to the people hidden in the more private
>|> areas.  Seems Toronto's (Im)Morality Squad really hates people having a good
>|> time without inviting them... :-/
>
>I've heard of this as well. I've also heard the the Scarborough Bluffs -
>or the beach under them, anyway - are *desperately* ugly ... more of
>a garbage dump than a beach.

I've been there to look.  It is quite ugly. Particularly now that they have
built a break water to slow down the erosion.  There really isn't
a beach anymore



-- 
========================================================
Stephane Deschenes     stephane@xrtll.uucp
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
========================================================
From: ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic)
Subject: Re: Over-exposure?
Organization: TFS
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 09:38:24 GMT

s7356911@deimos.ucc.umass.edu (DYLYN) writes:
...
>to relax and enjoy sex much more.  Less hang-ups about my body and,
>consequently, more able to get into the intimacy.  (yes, acceptance of
>who and what you are is a wonderful thing.)

Bravo. Coo-ell. Viva humankind . . .
From: tjw@vms.cis.pitt.edu (TJ Wood)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: English 101: How I Spent My Summer Vacation
Date: 15 Sep 92 21:12:00 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <3681@unisql.UUCP>, wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie) writes:

> In article <5814@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> tjw+@pitt.edu writes:
>>A number of people ask to have their picture taken with me.  

> 	Why you ?

I told them I was the Wharf Rat. ;-)

I dunno?  They asked and I said, "Why not?".

Terry
From: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Arnett)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Coed Bathrooms
Date: 10 Sep 92 10:01:36 GMT
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada

In article <1992Sep9.175536.10163@unislc.uucp> kbiesel@unislc.uucp (Karen Biesel) writes:
>You're right about urinals.  We can't have coed bathrooms without 
>coed fixtures.

Why not?  What's wrong with urinals?  For one thing, they are a *lot* more
convenient for men.  For another, they help to keep the toilets clean.
(As somebody else commented, some men don't have very good aim.  Yuck.)

However, I would figure that for coed bathrooms the urinals could be in
stalls, or in a somewhat isolated part of the washroom.  Though I don't
really see why this should be necessary. When I lived in the university
residence at UBC some years ago, many of the bathrooms were (unofficially)
coed.  On a women's floors, the urinals were not used (the buildings were
originally men-only), but on the men's floors they were used as usual
even though the urinals were in full view between the toilets and the
door, but after the first time or two that a woman walked by while a
guy was using a urinal the guy got used to it.  And so did the women.
No problem.  Some of the women would say "hi" as they went by.  The guys
would respond.  They showers were used by both genders.  They were stalls
with a door and a curtain.  

My SO of the time always wanted me to be sure the washroom was vacant 
before she would use it, but since I always abandoned her there anyway
she gave up pretty quickly and didn't worry about it.  :-)

>Of course, we could always design a stand-up contraption for women.  But
>then we'd have to put the fly between the legs, instead of in front of the 
>penis.  It could look something like a funnel, and fit between a female's
>legs.  8-)

I've been told that one UBC washroom has such a contraption, but the
two women hwho have mentioned it to me have been vague on the description
and neither one had attempted to figure out how to use them, nor had they
seen any other women using them.
	    
Bill.
-- 
Bill Arnett                            Internet: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: beigel-richard@CS.YALE.EDU (Richard Beigel)
Subject: Nudist documentary proposed for local access cable channel
Summary: first amendment battle
Organization: Yale University Computer Science Dept, New Haven CT  06520-2158
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 06:26:13 GMT


According to the Manchester, NH newspaper, {\it The Union Leader}, a
group has proposed showing a documentary on nudism on the local access
cable TV channel.  The article quotes the founders of Citizens Against
Censhorship and First Amendment Legal Defense Fund as saying "The
documentary in question features four American nudist camps and
includes frontal nudity.  No sexual activity is shown."  According to
the article "the two men want the same access to the airwaves as other
groups, such as a local anti-pornography group..." and they "will
fight any unreasonable restrictions such as a warning or a ban from
certain hours of the day."

Any speculation whether this will do more harm or more good for the
nudist cause?
-- 
Richard Beigel			telephone:  (203)432-1228
Dept. of Computer Science	email:  beigel-richard@cs.yale.edu
P.O. Box 2158, Yale Station	campus mail:  A. K. Watson Hall
New Haven, CT  06520-2158		      51 Prospect Street
From: middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu (Tom Middleton ; System Manager)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Urinals: A Joke
Keywords: urinals
Date: 10 Sep 92 21:38:50 GMT
Organization: Institute for NonLinear Science, UCSD
NNTP-Posting-Host: poincare.ucsd.edu


Following is a followup to all the talk of urinals here.  And if urinals
are a valid topic for rec.nude then so is a joke about them!


John Wayne and Tom Cruise were driving around one day when John stopped
at a gas station to use the restroom.  He went in and came right back out
telling Tom "This won't do, we have to find another one."  They soon stopped
at another place and again John Wayne refused to use the facilities.  Tom
asked why and John responded "They don't have those little walls between
the urinals".  They went to a third place which didn't have the walls and 
again John walked out.  Tom asked why the walls were so important and John
just said "You'll see."

This went on for quite a while and finally both John and Tom had to go real
bad so they went in to the next place they could find to relieve themselves.
Standing at a urinal in between John and Tom was another man relieving himself.
The man turned to his left and shouted "Your John Wayne" and then turned to
his right and said "Your Tom Cruise".  And that was when Tom Cruise learned
the importance of those little walls between urinals.


*************************************************************************

I'll be naked all weekend at DEEP CREEK HOT SPRINGS.

-- 
===============================================================================
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: brahm@cco.caltech.edu (David E. Brahm)
Subject: Isolated beaches in SF Bay Area
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Distribution: ca
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 21:02:47 GMT

crystal@sgi.com writes:
> anyone know of any co beaches up near the San Fransisco area, that dont
> have a bazillion people on it? Any tips would be greatly appreciated. 

Limantour Beach at Point Reyes; park in the usual place and walk south a
long long ways (45 min.?).  Especially if it's low tide, you can slip
around some rock outcroppings if you don't mind getting wet, and have an
entire beach to yourself (and maybe a few [nude] sea lions).  I don't know
what the "official" status is, but it doesn't really matter.

But now that I've told everybody...

--
Staccato signals of constant information,  |  -- David Brahm
A loose affiliation of millionaires and    |  (brahm@cco.caltech.edu)
  billionaires and Baby ...                |---------------------------
These are the days of miracle and wonder,  | Disclaimer:  I only speak
And don't cry, Baby, don't cry, don't cry. |   for the sensible folks.
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: s7356911@deimos.ucc.umass.edu (DYLYN)
Subject: Over-exposure?
Summary: ^^^^ ---Nope 
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 20:06:00 GMT

>In article <> exukjb@exu.ericsson.se (ken bell) writes:
>>Might it not be the case that overexposure or the wrong or inappropriate 
>>exposure to sexual material dulls our capacity for deep and fulfilling sex?  

	Sorry, Ken, I've heard this argument before and don't believe a
word of it, at least as it relates to nudity  (have my doubts about its
validity w.r.t. sex, as well).  From my own experience,  once I started
regularly skinny-dipping and otherwise being naked socially, I was able
to relax and enjoy sex much more.  Less hang-ups about my body and,
consequently, more able to get into the intimacy.  (yes, acceptance of
who and what you are is a wonderful thing.)
	I think if exposure to nudity and to humans as sexual beings led
to a lessened interest in sex, humans as a species would have died out
hundreds of thousands of years ago.   I think sexual attraction is one of
those things that is ``hard-wired'' in the old brain-stem.
Just my 2 bytes worth.

				Bare with me,
					dylyn

    `We are the mirror as well as the face in it.
	We are tasting this minute the taste 
     of eternity.  We are pain
	And what cures pain, both.  We are
     The sweet, cold water, and the jar that pours'
				---Jelaluddin Rumi (1207-1273),
_/\  /\ dylyn (aka, d prosser) == S7356911@UCSVAX.UCS.umass.edu  /\
   \/  \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/  \/~~~~~
From: rstevens@ncrcan.Canada.NCR.CA (Roger Stevens)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Keeping men out
Date: 8 Sep 92 18:42:29 GMT
Organization: NCR Canada Ltd. Mississauga, Ontario

In article <b9m-3H=@engin.umich.edu> zsalman@paronomasia.engin.umich.edu (Zaid Kadhim Salman) writes:
>
>I would be hesitant to assume that that is indeed the case. I remember I made 
>a phone to call to Whispering Oaks in Oxford, MI and asked if they had any policy against single males. She said exactly this: "We're a social nudist
>club, you either have a female partner or you don't get in." Now after 

I definitely do not agree, I have been there alone, but then the
ASA card was most valuable.

>
>
>
>					--Zaid


                       =====
Roger Stevens    | uucp        ...!uunet!attcan!ncrcan!roger
ncr canada       | internet     Roger.Stevens@Toronto.NCR.COM
(416) 819-4115   | 6865 Century Ave, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada L5N 2E2

REMEMBER:   IF ITS NICE OUT...............LEAVE IT OUT!
                       =====
From: v024971@plato.lsvl8.stortek.com (Robert J. Waddell)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: how about CO in a computer lab??
Date: 12 Sep 92 17:31:54 GMT
Organization: StorageTek

{In article <1992Sep11.151511.1059@hubcap.clemson.edu>, jlysagh@hubcap.clemson.edu (james joseph lysaght) writes:
> I have been following the thread on bare breasts and why we are so
> fascinated by breasts and such.  At one point someone said something to
> the effect that if we saw them everyday we would not find them so
> intrigueing.  I thought this to be pretty silly as I see my wofes every
> day and I never am any less attracted to them.  Today, however, I
> learned the validity of such statments.  I was in a computer lab on
> the campus and there was a reasonably attracitve blond there who was   
> wearing a sleeveless shirt and had said shirt unbuttoned to the third
> button.  She had no bra on underneeth and as she moved her arms around
> to type on the keyboard and work the mouse her breasts would come
> dangling out of her shirt.  She obviously had no concern for this and
> was just letting them hang out.  And by hang out I mean the wear
> completely, one hundred per cent bare.  Several of the male students in
> the lab could not keep there eyes off of her.  I noticed that i,
> personally, found them not the least bit attractive and did not spend
> much time looking at her.  i was, on the other hand, very interestyed in
> the bahvior of the students around her.  The females seemed not to even
> notice.  The males were obviously getting an eyefull and glancing
> sideways at each other while trying there damndest not to be noticed by
> the others in the lab.
> 
> So, I offer a different few of the effects of toplessness.  I would not
> say that if women go topless we would be desensitzed to this because as
> I stated I am in no way desensitized to my wifes chest.  I suggest that
> if women go topless we will only care about those that we are already
> attracted to.  You might notice that this sounds just like what happens
> when women are topped, we stare at the ones we like and ignore the ones
> we don't.  I think it would be the smae of they were topless.
> 
> jim
> 
-- 
 I feel that to see something beautiful and look the other way is commiting an
unnatural act. 





            ***   It's never to late to have a happy childhood!

********************************************************************************
V024971@PLATO.LSVL8.STORTEK.COM / Opinions expressed are usually my own but
Robert_Waddell@Stortek.com     / perhaps shared (though not by my employer).
********************************************************************************
From: wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: sexual stimulation
Date: 11 Sep 92 15:53:40 GMT
Reply-To: wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie)
Organization: UniSQL, Inc., Austin, Texas, USA

In article <10SEP199213575759@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov> scridd@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov writes:
>I feel a little sorry for anyone for whom sexual response is primarily
>dependent on sensual, particularly visual, stimulation.  [...]
>To me, the best sexual stimulation arises arises from a loving, intimate
>relationship with another person.  

	Frankly, I find that a skillfully used tongue is at least as 
stimulating as a "loving, intimate relationship".  I don't see why people
are so eager to divorce themselves from their bodies.  *I* feel sorry for
*those* people.  One side of this coin is "if we all go around naked we 
won't be sexy to each other any more" and the other is "naked people aren't
sexy because sex is all in your head".  Both ideas are...incorrect...

								W.rat
From: root@geophys.mcgill.ca (Steeve)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: hair in my soup
Date: 8 Sep 92 15:27:09 GMT
Organization: McGill University
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

Please post any resposes to root@pooh.geophys.mcgill.ca, NOT
root@cc.mcgill.ca.
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: v024971@plato.lsvl8.stortek.com (Robert J. Waddell)
Subject: Re: Body image
Organization: StorageTek
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 15:34:26 GMT

In article <qg5y-_d@rpi.edu>, dking@unix.cie.rpi.edu (Dave King) writes:
> 	I was looking at an issue of Parents magazine today, and saw
> an article on swimsuits designed to conceal the imperfections of new
> mothers' bodies.  Each woman was shown in a "before" picture, wearing
> an "unflattering" suit, and in an "after" picture with a "better"
> suit.  Two things struck me about the article:
> 
> 	1. Although the women all looked great in the "after"
> pictures, wearing expertly tailored swimsuits, makeup, and hairstyles,
> NONE OF THEM LOOKED LIKE THEY WERE READY TO GO SWIMMING.  Ready to
> pose for fashion ads, yes; ready to enjoy the beach, no.
> 
> 	2. I thought that the women looked fine in the "before"
> pictures.  One woman in particular was wearing a bikini despite an
> ample tummy, and I not only thought that she looked fine in it, I
> couldn't see any need for her to cover up even that much.
> 
> 	How sad that a magazine aimed at young mothers has to
> reinforce the message that you have to hide your body if it doesn't
> match someone's idea of perfection.  How much better it could have
> been to depict a new mother's body as naturally beautiful, even though
> it doesn't look like Barbie's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> David C. King - RPI Center for Integrated Electronics
> dking@unix.cie.rpi.edu
-- 
Yes, that is one of the pitfalls of Capitalism. If you don't have a market for
a product, use the media to create one. The Rolling Stones "Can't Get No
Satisfaction" says: "He can't be a man if he doesn't smoke the same cigarettes as
me". 
Even the bra thread touches on this. How long has it been since bras were
invented, and how did women ever get along without them until someone came up
with the idea that it wouldn't be "proper" to leave their homes without one on?






            ***   It's never to late to have a happy childhood!

********************************************************************************
V024971@PLATO.LSVL8.STORTEK.COM / Opinions expressed are usually my own but
Robert_Waddell@Stortek.com     / perhaps shared (though not by my employer).
********************************************************************************
From: ritter@claude.ma30.bull.com (Roger Ritter)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Topless in Safeway
Date: 10 Sep 92 17:43:11 GMT
Organization: Bull HN Informations Systems Inc.

phoogenboom@eagle.wesleyan.edu writes:
>Most health codes require shoes and shirts of all patrons of all restaurants
>and grocery stores, and any other place that sells food, for that matter.  Does
>anyone know why this is?

Yeah, I think it's to keep those disgusting long-haired hippies out of
them.  Can't say why, but I think most of those laws date from the
sixties, from the establishment's desire to control 'undesirables'.
Pure speculation on my part, admittedly.  

ObNude:  I'm occasionally tempted to try going in to such an establishment
with only shirt and shoes on, just to see what happens.  Haven't done
it yet, since I really don't want to be arrested. :-)
-- 
Roger Ritter N1FZZ (R.Ritter@ma30.bull.com) PP-ASEL, AGI
1946 Luscombe 8A N71983 "Rocky"
Sheep do not so much fly as plummet!        NH CAP: Profile 49
From: Jeff_R_Spangenberg@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: fuck
Date: Sat,  5 Sep 92 16:22:47 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: world

You are all a bunch of nigger fuckheads
From: feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Watch for "Feathered Arrow" on A&E
Date: 7 Sep 92 19:30:17 GMT
Organization: DAFCO: OS/2 Software Support & Consulting

A&E schedules a show called "Featured Arrow" every so often (Last
weekend, in fact). This documentary features a South American tribe
that goes completely naked and there is much full-frontal nudity. One
thing that surprised me was the lack of body hair on both males and
females. It made me wonder whether the natives pluck the hair or just
naturally have very little as a response to the climate.
-- 
Dave Feustel N9MYI <feustel@netcom.com>
 
RE Drug Warriors who enjoy making a "good" bust: I'm sure the Salem
Witch Hunters enjoyed their law enforcement achievements too.
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: kbiesel@unislc.uucp (Karen Biesel)
Subject: Re: Coed Bathrooms
Organization: Unisys Corporation SLC
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 17:55:36 GMT

wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie) writes:

>In article <chil.716031384@sfu.ca> chil@fraser.sfu.ca (Keith Lim) writes:
>>residence assistant makes a request to the men on the floor at the
>>beginning of the semester to not use the urinals, out of courtesy. The

You're right about urinals.  We can't have coed bathrooms without 
coed fixtures.  Currently our best design at it is a toilet.  Which means
we must first:

1.  Not build any new buildings with urinals.
2.  Not fix/replace any old urinals.
3.  Set aside X dollars to replace existing urinals with toilets.

Of course, we could always design a stand-up contraption for women.  But
then we'd have to put the fly between the legs, instead of in front of the 
penis.  It could look something like a funnel, and fit between a female's
legs.  8-)


Karen Biesel
From: tjgerman@53iss6.Waterloo.NCR.COM (Trevor German)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: BRA SURVEY RESULTS
Date: 4 Sep 92 18:47:29 GMT
Organization: Imaging Systems Division, NCR Corp, Waterloo, Ont., CANADA

========================================================================

	THE RESULTS HAVE BEEN TALLIED AND ARE POSTED IN ALT.SEX

========================================================================

	

--
       >| "Only average people           | Trevor J German BSc    |<
       >|       never make mistakes."    | NCR, Waterloo, Ontario |<
       >|	               	         | Canada.                |< 
Newsgroups: rec.nude