HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: darkmoor@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Darkmoore)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Nude photographer (was Re: Photos at nude beaches)
Date: 4 Oct 92 21:54:50 GMT
Organization: Purdue Computing Center

In article <1992Oct1.164706.8019@cc.tut.fi>, ta66863@cc.tut.fi (Ahlqvist Tero) writes:
> 
> If someone would take a photograph of me while I was nude, I surely
> wouldn't be offended if the photographer was also nude. 
> 
> Makes sense, doesn't it ? :-)

  Well, speaking from my point of view, it wouldn't bother me if the
  photographer is nude or not.  As long as he/she was not photographing
  people in a nasty sort of way.  Then again I love to have my picture
  taken

  Darkmoore
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: wix@eskimo.celestial.com (Dennis Wicks)
Subject: Re: Approaching a woman at a CO beach?
Organization: >>> Eskimo North (206)-FOR-EVER <<<
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 01:26:33 GMT

In article <1a5nr6INN1u1@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> philb@cats.ucsc.edu (Philip Brown) writes:
>
>elliot@ansoft.com (mike elliot/.nam) writes:
>
>>I always find it strange when people expect different behavior in a
>>CO setting than they would in a textile one. Take photographs for
>>example. On a textile beach, most people wouldn't think twice if they
>>saw someone with a camera taking pictures. But, put that some person
>>on a CO beach and alot of people think it is inappropriate. Surely,
>>if nudity is nothing to be ashamed of and isn't to be equated with
>>sex, then we should behave the same whether clothed or not.
>
>But it isn't alright to take picture of someone clothed< either. you need
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>their permission. except that people generaly don't get upset about it,
>cause the photographer is not likely to sell pictures of them to someone
>else for money. If you are naked,however, the probability of a financial
>transaction goes up dramatically.

Sorry Philip, that isn't true.  You can take pictures of anything and
anybody you want to.  But, if you are going to sell or use the picture
for commercial purposes, ie. advertising or book or article illustrations,
you must have a release from the subject or run the risk of being
sued.  If the pictures are used for news purposes a release is not required.
The people on rec.photo could probably expand on this quite a bit.
From: tjw@vms.cis.pitt.edu (TJ Wood)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Name change and Anonymous Postings
Date: 30 Sep 92 06:54:52 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1992Sep30.034814.26649@rtfm.mlb.fl.us>, steve@rtfm.mlb.fl.us (Steve Pierce) writes:

> 2)  It is evident from some of the posts on this topic that the poster has not
> read the FAQ.  What guarantees us that anyone else will?

Good point!  Maybe a short and simple "Rec.nude is not for the topics 
usually found in alt.sex -- you'll be much happier posting sexually oriented
questions to alt.sex in the long run" posting twice a month would help?

Terry
-- 
        INTERNET: tjw+@pitt.edu         BITNET: TJW@PITTVMS
"Laugh while you can, Monkey Boy!"                        - Lord "John" Warfin
"There can be only one!"                                  - The Highlander
"There should have been only one. I want my money back!"  - Terry
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: Michael_Pizolato@afs.com (Michael Pizolato)
Subject: Re: Protest! (sort of)
Reply-To: Michael_Pizolato@afs.com
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 15:43:10 GMT

In article <1abpilINNckm@agate.berkeley.edu> jbecker@ocf.berkeley.edu (Jane  
Becker) writes:
> My friend's (the one who is probably going to be seeking revenge!) reaction
> when forced to interact with this girl as a person rather than an object is
> also interesting.

Newsgroups: rec.nude,news.answers
From: mbb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (martin.brilliant)
Subject: Re: nudity in the dorms
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 15:51:29 GMT

From article <1992Oct5.222041.25912@octel.com>, by marc@octel.com (Marc Lewert):
> In article <1992Sep28.235133.477@ab.wvnet.edu> miller_dm@ab.wvnet.edu writes:
>>
>>..... I hate it when in the privacy
>>of my own dorm room someone just walks right in and acts as if the world has
>>ended when they find me studying, reading, or  watching t.v. nude....

> Our solution was a simple approach.
> 	Door wide open;  come on in and visit
> 	Door slightly agar (open only a crack); knock and wait for an answer
> 	Door Closed; Do not disturb.

I keep thinking that could be a solution to the wrong problem.

What is the problem, miller_dm@ab.wvnet.edu?

Do you hate it when people walk right in when you're nude?

Or do you hate it when they act as if the world has ended?

Test question: Would they be welcome to walk right in if they acted as
though you were wearing jeans and a T-shirt?

I think "yes" is the politically correct nudist/naturist answer to the
test question.  We like being nude, we like company, and we don't want
to give up either to get the other.

							Marty
marty@hoqaa.att.com		hoqaa!marty
Martin B. Brilliant		(Winnertech Corporation)
From: ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Women enjoying nature in natural state.
Date: 27 Sep 92 00:13:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: tfs.1992Sep27.001321.19059
Organization: TRW Financial Systems

wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie) writes:

>	5.  Move.  If I'm near some people who're loud and playing radios
>and smoking, I don't bother to ask them to turn it down.  I move to a different
>place, even if I was "there first".
>

I add 6. Find a place to that behavior to be acceptable, so people who want
peace and quiet can have it.

>	And to answer "Ooo, but you're a **man** and _I'm_ talking about
>helpless little soft females": the problem of women learning to be more
>assertive, defiant, and to protect themselves is a related topic but more
>suitable for say, rec.martial-arts.  I will say that it's perfectly possible
>for a woman to behave "more like a man" and "get away with it", especially 
>if there are other people around.  Say, at a public beach.

>	The problem I have with the "It's those evil men" approach to solving
>the world's problems in general and this problem in particular is that it
>inevitably leads to the simple solution "Let's just ban men".  Really, now,
>since it's the _men_ who cause _all_ the problems, wouldn't the best thing
>be to simply prevent men from using nude beaches until some kind of national
>authority determines that that gender has finally emerged from the stone age?
>
>	That's the problem with any "It's all their fault" approach, you see.
>You're left with the problem of trying to control another person.  The real 
>solution is to learn to handle yourself differently.  If she's afraid to
>go to nude beaches because men will approach her sexually then she needs to
>learn ways of dealing with such approaches.  Yes, the poor frustrated men
>need to learn things too, but *you* can't be responsible for their behavior.
>Just your own.  By subscribing to the view that "they" must be "changed" or
>"controlled" you are turning down a dead end.
>
>	Thus, I would make women more comfortable at nude beaches by helping
>them learn to assert their own right to peace and privacy, rather than 
>attempting to emulate Sisyphus and roll the rock of ill manners back up the
>hill.  

You're one of the few people to have the guts to say this.
Thank you. You'd think feminism had empowered women, but it's been invaded
by the Dworkin virus, just like the GOP was invaded by the Evangelists.
Now all it wants to do is make *everybody* dead to themselves.

Count me among the men who will step back and let the woman tell an insensitive
man to "Fuck Off". I'll only come to the rescue if the twit actually attacks,
and I may not need to - maybe she could bust his balls all on her very own.
Why should we steal that rush from her??

I am not in favor of a society which reinforces women's HELPLESSNESS.
Sometimes that means telling a *woman*, hey - stand up for yourself and
quit whining. You can't pass laws against everything that bothers you,
so you might as well adjust to being self-possessed and strong.

If I can be sweet and sensitive, then you can be tough and strong. So USE it.
-ecsd
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic)
Subject: Re: Erections?!
Organization: TRW Financial Systems
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 23:07:23 GMT

jlysagh@hubcap.clemson.edu (james joseph lysaght) writes:
>
>Continuing on the same thread, would any of you males be offended if a
>hot babe sat down next to you and you could smell the scents from her
>arousal? or of she chatted with you for a moment and when she got up
>there was wet spot on the chair where she was sitting, would you be
>offneded, embarassed, or even interested?
>
>Jim

'spose it depends - if you ARE interested.
The demure creatures seem to have those things a bit better in - hand -
than we do. I hope if she 'wetted' my towel, she'd have the courage to
follow it up 'offline'. Smiles and sparkling eyes work wonders for leading
conversations.
-ecsd
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler)
Subject: Re: Protest! (sort of)
Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 10:56:30 GMT

jbecker@ocf.berkeley.edu (Jane Becker) writes:
>	Martinez was joined on the steps of Sproul Plaza by members of
>	the X-Plicit Players, a group that supports public nudity, and
>	a scattered few independent nudists who simply took the occasion
>	to soak up as much sun as possible.

The X-Plicit Players are the group which held an activity
at the Western Naturist Gathering and which inspired a
similar one at the New York Regional Gathering in August.
Much of their readings and work is done in the nude, so
this is a natural extension.

"They don't take shit from no one."  Interesting, but
I can't imagine that it got a whole lot done; I guess
Berzerkely is the best place to gather sympathetic souls. :)


-- 

bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler)
From: tjw@vms.cis.pitt.edu (TJ Wood)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: NY TV Show airs nudity - E.T. Mentions Warning
Date: 2 Oct 92 04:34:10 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1992Oct2.000320.12527@netcom.com>, tcumming@netcom.com (Tom Cumming) writes:

> So... We know nude != sex, but maybe nude == ratings!

"Entertainment Tonight" reported tonight (of course!) that CIVIL WARS
effectively doubled their market share for the episode.  However, they still
came in second compared to a music awards program that was also on in their
time slot.  It was a novelty, so some people tuned in to watch the show.
If they did it each week, people would become bored with the show.

(Could you imagine that?  A "Baywatch" like show?  What would they call it?
"Nude Watch"? ;-)

Frankly, I don't see what the big deal was.  "ET" had some of the typical
far-right "boycottem' if they violate my traditional family values" groups
on the tube to comment on the harmful effects of nudity on children.  Even
those groups didn't think that there was anything really shocking about what
they had seen.  One even called it a gimmick to get ratings.

The only curiosity that I had, while watching Mariel on "ET" this evening
was that I remembered that she had breast implants `installed'.  If you've
ever seen her movie "Personal Best", you know that her original equipment
was much smaller.  I wonder what type of implants she now has?  Saline or
silicon?

Terry
-- 
        INTERNET: tjw+@pitt.edu         BITNET: TJW@PITTVMS
"Laugh while you can, Monkey Boy!"                        - Lord "John" Warfin
"There can be only one!"                                  - The Highlander
"There should have been only one. I want my money back!"  - Terry
From: ta66863@cc.tut.fi (Ahlqvist Tero)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Fiction  (was Re: Public nudity and the law.)
Date: 27 Sep 92 19:24:52 GMT
Organization: Tampere University of Technology, Finland


From article <01GP8RLZWZMA001VWH@udavxb.oca.udayton.edu>, by FORTMAPL@UDAVXB.OCA.UDAYTON.EDU (Pooh Bare):
> 
>      Newsgroups: alt.sex,rec.nude
>      From: ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic)
>      Subject: Public Nudity and the Law
>       
>      >>>>So also in a nudist society we will not compel nudity, nor prescribe
>      >>>>psychiatric sessions for those who wish to clothe.
> 
> This reminds me of a short story I wrote for a fiction writing course 
> in college.  It was a nude society where wearing clothing was a criminal 
> offense.  I got an A for the story and for the course.  Anyway...

You still got the story somewhere ??

Howabout posting it into rec.nude ??
It'd be very interesting to read it.

Tero.
-- 
        Tero Ahlqvist         
     Annalankatu 10 B 17         ta66863@cc.tut.fi
      SF-33710 Tampere
From: middleto@poincare.ucsd.edu (Tom Middleton ; System Manager)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Photos at nude beaches
Date: 28 Sep 1992 18:51:30 GMT
Organization: Institute for NonLinear Science, UCSD
NNTP-Posting-Host: poincare.ucsd.edu

In article <Bv9Io8.BKM@ansoft.com> elliot@ansoft.com (mike elliot/.nam) writes:
>I always find it strange when people expect different behavior in a
>CO setting than they would in a textile one. Take photographs for
>example. On a textile beach, most people wouldn't think twice if they
>saw someone with a camera taking pictures. But, put that some person
>on a CO beach and a lot of people think it is inappropriate. Surely,
>if nudity is nothing to be ashamed of and isn't to be equated with
>sex, then we should behave the same whether clothed or not.


If the behavior of the photographers was the same at a nude beach as at
a textile beach it would be reasonable for everyone else to behave the same.
Unfortunately, it is not the same.  At a textile beach you have tourists
taking pictures of their families and the scenery, you might have a few
news photographers who are easily identifiable, occasionally a photographer
will come by for landscapes or people-scapes and maybe from time to time
a professional with paid models will come by.

At a nude beach you have photographers who hide and use telephoto lenses.
At a nude beach many photographers concentrate on 'crotch' shots.  Sometimes
the photographers have a particular interest in children that they aren't
even related to.  Some nude beaches tend to draw many more photographers
than the same beach would if it was textile.  Many people still do equate
nudity with sex and some photographers prey on that.

Note: I am not arguing against nor for photography at nude beaches.  I am
merely arguing that it is not the same as at a non-nude beach.

-- 
"These are difficult times for our country, and in searching for the causes
of our social ills, we could chose to blame the media, or the congress, or
an administration that's been in power for 12 years, or we could blame me."
						Murphy Brown
From: s884764@otto (Grant Waldram [Atom Smash])
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Crude email
Date: 29 Sep 92 10:03:54 GMT
Organization: RMIT Computer Centre
NNTP-Posting-Host: otto.bf.rmit.oz.au

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

>As a system manager I'd like to know if someone who has an account on my
>system is sending out such messages.  Not that I would censor them, but
>so that I could give them a class in netiquette.

>Anyway, I would suggest posting the email address of people who are so crude
>and tacky so the rest of us can send them email letting them know something
>about netiquette.

>Unfortunately, Tero is correct in that women who are bothered this way are
>probably going to just unsubscribe.  Thus we lose valuable input into this
>group.  And that is the reason we should all let those responsible know it
>is inappropriate.

Very good point. Perhaps it is something that should be inserted into the
FAQ to let people know that we disapprove of that behavour as well, and to
encourage a... hmm... proactive response to it.

Grant
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A celibate clergy is an especially good idea, because it tends to suppress
any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism."  from 'Contact' by Carl Sagan
------   s884764@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au     Grant Waldram [Atom Smash]   ------
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: lib@cbnews.cb.att.com (Lib)
Subject: Re: Breasts
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 12:21:23 GMT

In article <is52513@pro-harold.cts.com> leed@pro-harold.cts.com (Lee Dronick) writes:
>In regards to frontal male nudity in the cinema.
>
>>These titles have to be the answer to some trivia question:
>
>Name five movies /c frontal male nudity that only ten people ever
>saw @ the theatre...<

Well one is Henry and June. When I saw it there were only 20 people
or so in the theatre and it only played a week. Actually it was pretty
short on nudity in fact several of the guys who came in alone expecting
to see a sex flick left after the first hour. Also I've never met a person
who admits they saw it (sort of like voting for Nixon).
From: tjw@vms.cis.pitt.edu (TJ Wood)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Sexuality and Social Attitudes (re: soc.nude)
Date: 29 Sep 92 18:14:19 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1992Sep29.093124.5056@tfs.com>, ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic) writes:

> Please let us agree: NO cross posting to alt.sex

This would certainly be a good first step.  Now if we could only convince
the people in alt.sex not to crosspost here!

Terry
From: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Arnett)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Nudist/Naturist population
Date: 1 Oct 92 01:10:20 GMT
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada

In article <laura.717843506@vipunen.hut.fi> laura@vipunen.hut.fi (Laura Tiilikainen) writes:
>In <BvDEB3.6to@xrtll.uucp> stephane@xrtll.uucp (Stephane Deschenes) writes:
>
>>I don't know if anyone keeps such statistics but are the number of
>>nudist/naturists growing or shrinking?  
>
>>I ask this because I observe that bathing suit fashions are getting
>>more conservative.  (Boxers instead of speedos and one-piece instead
>>of bikinies)
>
>I'm apt to believe it's only fashion that changes. We've been told so
>much about the risks of uncautious tanning that people don't want to
>tan themselves anymore. Consequently, beach clothing doesn't have to
>be as revealing as before. One could still think it's this attitude
>which affects the number of naturists, but I think it has more effect
>on sunscreen sales.
		  
I agree, I think it is more a matter of style and functionality than
modesty....at least in the case of women's swimsuits.  A one piece is
more practical for swimming but not as practical for tanning.  Our
society lately is encouraging an active lifestyle and discouraging
tanning.  So there is a correponding shift to one-piece styles.
But really it depends on the location.  At the beaches in Vancouver, 
one piece suits are not nearly as common as two-piece.  (Except maybe
on Wreck Beach where most of the one-piece suits don't go above the
waist level. :-) )  At the UBC pool, OTOH, bikinis are pretty rare
except in the suntanning area (which will be closing soon).

<<Side note: about a month ago I saw one woman suntanning at the pool
who was dressed in a black teddy rather than a bathing suit.  I covered
almost as much skin as a one piece suit would have, but it was quite
obviously an undergarment.  She was there for at least 20 minutes and
wasn't hassled by the life guards or anyone else.>>

Bill.

-- 
Bill Arnett                            Internet: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca
From: ta66863@cc.tut.fi (Ahlqvist Tero)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Re: Bashful Bladder Syndrome : (
Date: 27 Sep 92 19:17:36 GMT
Organization: Tampere University of Technology, Finland


From article <1992Sep24.150204.9955@gdr.bath.ac.uk>, by ccsmh@gdr.bath.ac.uk (Mark Harding):
> 
> Although this message is not an excuse for peeing over the seat there *is* a
> reason why many men will use the stalls rather than the urinal. It's known
> as BBS (Bashful Bladder Syndrome) and unless you're a sufferer you just don't 
...
> 
> Anyone else suffer from BBS, more importantly has anyone ever cured
> themselves of it.
> 

I have suffered of BBS and it's kinda odd: You can be nude among other
people and aren't ashamed at all. But when you grab your penis and try to
piss... If there's someone around who can see or hear you peeing,
nothing just happens. :-(

But although I haven't completely cured of it My situation is now much,
much better. I have a very understanding Girlfriend I live with. I told
her about the problem, and I started to pee in the evenings i.e. while
she were brushing her teeth at the toilet. At first it was hard. She could
brush her teeth while I stood beside her just holding my penis, and then it
just happened.   :-)

If you are worried what other people might think when you are holding your
foreskin in a bad position and piss is coming to at least three different
directions and you have to do everything to hit the sink with every stream.
To your SO you can say that "it's normal" or "it happens". To the guy standing
in front of the next urinal you can't.

Hope this helps someone. It helped Me.  :-o (phew)

Tero.
--
Piss outdoors, You don't have any sink to aim at...
Just remember not to pee against the wind :-)
-- 
        Tero Ahlqvist         
     Annalankatu 10 B 17         ta66863@cc.tut.fi
      SF-33710 Tampere
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: test
From: jkroger@onza.gac.edu (Jonathan F Kroger)
Date: 29 Sep 92 17:42:04 -0600
Distribution: test
Keywords: test

testing
Newsgroups: rec.nude
From: ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic)
Subject: Re: a silly question
Organization: TRW Financial Systems
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 12:14:44 GMT

bm127@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (T. David Gossett) writes:
>
>I am sure this question has been asked before and perhaps I should
>experience a CO beach before I ask it...but (to the males) does
>the time ever happen when you get aroused, and how do you deal with
>it when it does?
>Thanks
>---D
>---G

Well, I would tell you, (a) don't worry about it, it might just happen
without your conscious participation and you wouldn't want to go back to
your hotel room and spend the next several hours agonizing over any acute
social embarrassment would you, and besides you might just get a date;
(b) you can probably expect to get your ass flamed off because, although
people here know that 'greenies' always ask this question and despise it
because it's a rehash of the last thousand years of rec.nude discussions,
they still don't like it and expect you to have intuited their responses
despite your *being* a greenie.

Not quite up to Faulkner snuff yet. Sorry.
Maybe this question is addressed in the FAQ, but then nobody reads FAQs,
do they? Because they don't get a copy of it as their first post. Tsk.
-ecsd
Newsgroups: rec.sport.swimming
From: dennis@marie.physik.tu-berlin.de (Dennis Schulze)
Subject: Re: Water Polo for Amatuers (sp)
Organization: ZRZ/TU-Berlin
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 20:39:10 GMT

In <1992Sep26.183302.26831@cs.yale.edu> kaminsky-david@CS.YALE.EDU (David Kaminsky) writes:

>	I have very bad vision and wear my contacts (and good 
>goggles) when I lap swim.  What can a person with bad vision do 
>when playing water polo?  I would think that goggles can easily be 
>dislodged while playing.

I use soft contacts and it works very well. I wear them since almost
two years every time I have training or a match and I never lost them.

I can't imagine to play waterpolo with goggles because the danger
of injuries is quite high...

Dennis
---
Dennis Schulze                               Free University of Berlin
Johannisthaler Ch. 361                       Department of Meteorology
W - 1000 Berlin 47                       dennis@metw3.met.fu-berlin.de
Germany                               dennis@marie.physik.tu-berlin.de
Newsgroups: rec.sport.swimming