Baring All
Some of you may have read about our naked plinther Simon, either in The Times, The Guardian or on the BBC's website. For those of you who haven't, Simon chose to bare all for his hour, but was asked by the police to put some clothes back on again.
We have been working with the Metropolitan Police for several months on every detail of One & Other - including many days of thinking up possible scenarios, which included people stripping off. The police, in principle, agree that there is nothing illegal in nudity on the plinth per se, provided there is no obscene conduct on the part of any plinther. On this occasion, however, complaints were received by the police and therefore the police asked him to get dressed, which he immediately agreed to do. Simon then continued his hour unimpeded.
It's a tricky situation: nudity isn't illegal, however if complaints are received then the police may decide to act. The police have been very supportive of the project and all that it entails; however on this occassion the individual officer seemed to feel that the complaints warranted attention.
There's been a fair amount of discussion on this topic in the comments and on twitter: what's your view? Why do people find nudity offensive from a live person on a plinth as opposed to from a bronze statue? Are you planning on baring all during your hour (I'm hoping to hear from a Lady Godiva here!) and will you still, post-Simon?
I would also love to hear from some naturists - have you ever been asked by the police to cover up, and did you comply?
But before you go and comment, don't think I've forgotten about the photo of the day. Oh no - here's one by Where the Art Is of a plinther expressing what I think we've all been feeling recently:
Right, let the discussions begin!
Update:
Here's a letter sent to us from the police, along with some 'official' bumph on the legality of nudity:
"4Th Plinth - Public Nudity - Incident 12 August 2009
I have seen your report concerning the above incident and am concerned that there continues to be confusion about the legal position concerning public nudity.
I have prepared a separate document highlighting the legal position specifically looking at two pieces of current legislation:
• Common Law - Outraging Public Decency
• Section 66 Sexual Offences Act 2003
Any offence under Common Law must be of a lewd, obscene or disgusting nature. It has been held (by the courts) that the nakedness usually must be accompanied by either masturbation or sexual intercourse.
Section 66 replaces 'Indecent Exposure with Intent to Insult a Female' under the Vagrancy Act 1824. To commit an offence under S66 then two elements need to be present - the exposure of sexual organs and, the Intent to cause alarm or distress.
Unless your plinthers intend to cause alarm or distress or their behaviour is accompanied by other overt sexual actions, then they do not commit an offence.
This is a live Art exhibition and you cover this in your briefings with the plinthers. Without some sexual content attached to the nakedness then it is unlikely that any offences are committed. You only need to visit many of London's art galleries to see numerous examples of the naked body.
However, it has to be judged on a case-by-case basis and my expectation is the officers use the law guide as a starting point rather than an assumption that the activity is unlawful and must be curtailed at the outset.
There have been other incidents of public nakedness within London - naked bike rides and a naked model in Selfridge's window. The same issues were considered and we took the same view. The challenge is how best to deal with the person making the complaint and managing their expectations.
I have raised the issue internally to hopefully best inform our staff."
'Outraging public decency' is one of very few common law offences remaining in the criminal justice system:
It is an offence to commit an act of a lewd, obscene and disgusting nature, which is capable of outraging public decency, in a public place where at least two members of the public could have witnessed it.
The different elements of the offence can be summarised as:
(a) The act committed must be of a lewd, obscene and disgusting nature (the meanings of these terms overlap); "Lewd" means 'lustful or indecent'; "Obscene" - means 'morally repugnant or depraved' and "Disgusting" - means 'repugnant or loathsome'.
(b) The act must be capable of outraging public decency.
(c) More than one person must have been able to witness the act.
(d) Reasonable people must be able to venture out without the risk of outrage to minimum standards of decency, therefore the act must be in a place where there is a real possibility that members of the general public might witness it.
It has been held that, in order to outrage, exposure of the naked body (male or female) must grossly transgress accepted limits of decency and be likely to gravely offend a reasonable person, thus this offence will usually only be suitable if masturbation or sexual intercourse also occurs.
The following act is now obsolete:
Indecent exposure with intent to insult a female - Vagrancy Act 1824
This offence is now OBSOLETE as a consequence of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 now see section 66 of that Act.
Section 66 makes it an offence for a person intentionally to expose his genitals where he intends that someone will see them and be caused alarm or distress. It is not necessary for the defendant's genitals to have been seen by anyone or for anyone to have been alarmed or distressed. For example, if a person exposes his genitals to some passers-by, he may (depending on his state of mind) commit the offence regardless of whether they actually see his genitals or whether they have been alarmed or distressed by seeing them.
"Genitals" refers to male or female sexual organs.
Note
The offence would not apply to a naturist who intentionally exposes his genitals in the knowledge that they may be seen by others but without the intention to cause alarm or distress. Similarly, it would exclude an exhibitionist streaker at a sports occasion.
This offence can be committed by a male or female against a male or female.
We have been working with the Metropolitan Police for several months on every detail of One & Other - including many days of thinking up possible scenarios, which included people stripping off. The police, in principle, agree that there is nothing illegal in nudity on the plinth per se, provided there is no obscene conduct on the part of any plinther. On this occasion, however, complaints were received by the police and therefore the police asked him to get dressed, which he immediately agreed to do. Simon then continued his hour unimpeded.
It's a tricky situation: nudity isn't illegal, however if complaints are received then the police may decide to act. The police have been very supportive of the project and all that it entails; however on this occassion the individual officer seemed to feel that the complaints warranted attention.
There's been a fair amount of discussion on this topic in the comments and on twitter: what's your view? Why do people find nudity offensive from a live person on a plinth as opposed to from a bronze statue? Are you planning on baring all during your hour (I'm hoping to hear from a Lady Godiva here!) and will you still, post-Simon?
I would also love to hear from some naturists - have you ever been asked by the police to cover up, and did you comply?
But before you go and comment, don't think I've forgotten about the photo of the day. Oh no - here's one by Where the Art Is of a plinther expressing what I think we've all been feeling recently:
Right, let the discussions begin!
Update:
Here's a letter sent to us from the police, along with some 'official' bumph on the legality of nudity:
"4Th Plinth - Public Nudity - Incident 12 August 2009
I have seen your report concerning the above incident and am concerned that there continues to be confusion about the legal position concerning public nudity.
I have prepared a separate document highlighting the legal position specifically looking at two pieces of current legislation:
• Common Law - Outraging Public Decency
• Section 66 Sexual Offences Act 2003
Any offence under Common Law must be of a lewd, obscene or disgusting nature. It has been held (by the courts) that the nakedness usually must be accompanied by either masturbation or sexual intercourse.
Section 66 replaces 'Indecent Exposure with Intent to Insult a Female' under the Vagrancy Act 1824. To commit an offence under S66 then two elements need to be present - the exposure of sexual organs and, the Intent to cause alarm or distress.
Unless your plinthers intend to cause alarm or distress or their behaviour is accompanied by other overt sexual actions, then they do not commit an offence.
This is a live Art exhibition and you cover this in your briefings with the plinthers. Without some sexual content attached to the nakedness then it is unlikely that any offences are committed. You only need to visit many of London's art galleries to see numerous examples of the naked body.
However, it has to be judged on a case-by-case basis and my expectation is the officers use the law guide as a starting point rather than an assumption that the activity is unlawful and must be curtailed at the outset.
There have been other incidents of public nakedness within London - naked bike rides and a naked model in Selfridge's window. The same issues were considered and we took the same view. The challenge is how best to deal with the person making the complaint and managing their expectations.
I have raised the issue internally to hopefully best inform our staff."
'Outraging public decency' is one of very few common law offences remaining in the criminal justice system:
It is an offence to commit an act of a lewd, obscene and disgusting nature, which is capable of outraging public decency, in a public place where at least two members of the public could have witnessed it.
The different elements of the offence can be summarised as:
(a) The act committed must be of a lewd, obscene and disgusting nature (the meanings of these terms overlap); "Lewd" means 'lustful or indecent'; "Obscene" - means 'morally repugnant or depraved' and "Disgusting" - means 'repugnant or loathsome'.
(b) The act must be capable of outraging public decency.
(c) More than one person must have been able to witness the act.
(d) Reasonable people must be able to venture out without the risk of outrage to minimum standards of decency, therefore the act must be in a place where there is a real possibility that members of the general public might witness it.
It has been held that, in order to outrage, exposure of the naked body (male or female) must grossly transgress accepted limits of decency and be likely to gravely offend a reasonable person, thus this offence will usually only be suitable if masturbation or sexual intercourse also occurs.
The following act is now obsolete:
Indecent exposure with intent to insult a female - Vagrancy Act 1824
This offence is now OBSOLETE as a consequence of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 now see section 66 of that Act.
Section 66 makes it an offence for a person intentionally to expose his genitals where he intends that someone will see them and be caused alarm or distress. It is not necessary for the defendant's genitals to have been seen by anyone or for anyone to have been alarmed or distressed. For example, if a person exposes his genitals to some passers-by, he may (depending on his state of mind) commit the offence regardless of whether they actually see his genitals or whether they have been alarmed or distressed by seeing them.
"Genitals" refers to male or female sexual organs.
Note
The offence would not apply to a naturist who intentionally exposes his genitals in the knowledge that they may be seen by others but without the intention to cause alarm or distress. Similarly, it would exclude an exhibitionist streaker at a sports occasion.
This offence can be committed by a male or female against a male or female.
96 Responses
leave a responseI think it is such a pity that someone could find a man standing naked could be offensive. It really is a pecular trait to certain societies.
Should he have been made to cover up because one person in the square had an issue about nudity? What if someone in the square had a issue with bad singing, balloons, swearing or people doing nothing? The whole thing would grind to a halt! It is called freedom of expression...
And you can't say it is a sexual thing - that he was corrupting young minds or some other nonsense. He was just standing there. So many more people have been much more sexual explicit up there.
My advice to future naked plinthers? go on with no clothes on, if you don't have any up there with you, what are they gonna do?
That said and to prempt certain people on twitter, there is no way on god's given earth I would do it! ;)
People that find the Human body offensive will always do so.
It is a sorry thing that this is the way of the world, after all, we all have a body, and it should not really be considered a "rude" or "leud" thing, but the society we live in has created a moral framework that makes it thus.
However, Art is Art. I'd be interested to know who complained... and if they would have complained if Simon had been a Simone. After all, as we have female nudity thrust upon us far more regularly than male nudity in the media, would the "titilation factor" of a female nude have meant that the complaint was taken less seriously by the Police?
Me, I have no issue with my or anyone elses body. I find them beautiful and natural. Get it out I say! Confront the people that say it is wrong. It's very liberating to be able to do so!
This isn't the first time a plinther has stood there naked - the previous time was in broad daylight, another man who was apparently told to cover up as well. I didn't see the woman who went topless and painted her breasts but I don't believe there were any complaints there. The strange thing - in my point of view - was that Simon was up there in the early hours of the morning. But there is always going to be somebody around ready to p$ss on your parade.
As someone who frequently goes to a mixed nude spa I don't think that there is anything wrong at all with baring all. I have always found it to be a rather 'British thing' - almost like 'no sex please, we're British'.
When somebody strips off people see the truth, and it's a well-known fact that the truth hurts.
Btw, if I stripped off on the Plinth I'd probably break the cameras so you're lucky that I'm over here.
Even though a complaint had been made Simon was not acting in anyway that would upset a reasonable person and that is normally the test in court. I would have liked to have seen him continue and then have his day in court. Certainly he would have had the support of many in the naturist community.
I made the point about nakedness in art is perfectly acceptable when making a programme for the BBC a fair few years back - Open Space series - Full Frontal which as it name states showed full Frontal nudity and went out before the watershed (at 7.30 on BBC2). In one segment we visited the Tate fully clothed to discuss this issue in a gallery full of nude painting and sculpture. Look around London - there are nude statues everywhere and nobody turns a hair.
The action by the police was inappropriate given there was no disturbance and just because they may have received a complaint it would not be justified to follow that through apart from investigating. A reasonable person would not have been offended so we must make the conclusion that some unreasonable people complained.
I didn't get chosen again this month but if I do I will be nude on the plinth and am prepared to have my day in court. I am also thinking of being in the square when lady Godiva and if it's not too cold will certainly join her (have to be careful when you are over retirement age)
I think it is unreasonable that Simon was asked to change. He looked pretty inoffensive from the video, so what was the complaint about (the police never say in these sort of cases)?
Were I to be selected next month, I would prefer to get some sort of assurance that this wouldn't happen again. That and weather permitting.
I think it's sad especially given Gormley's use of the human form in his work.
I have been following with great interest the subject of nudity within this project, with it being a live art project, and available to be viewed by anybody, anywhere.
I am the crazyartlady, who went topless, painted myself and created further art, using my body.
The body and figures have always interested me and my dissertation for university, was entitled 'Changing attitudes towards the male and female figure and the role of the life model in art'.
This was, however, written several years ago and attitudes and my own views are continuing to change. I have read and re-read my own work and that of others, and I am currently writing a revised version of this thesis.
I will be very interested to to see the opinions of others, who have already gone nude on the plinth, or may do so, or chose not to in response to the comments and criticisms recieved on the subject.
I have already spoken extensively to people about my own experiences on the plinth, but would also welcome anyone who feels it necessary to comment on my own hour, Simons hour and the hours of several other plinthers, who have already removed their clothing, during their hour, and lets not forget the man who bared all and decided to go skinny dipping in the fountains, when his friend decided to jump from the plinth.
I have personally found nothing offensive from any displays of nudity, so far, on the plinth and it was not my intention to cause offense, in my own decision to strip.
Looking forward to seeing this develop!
It is ironic that a previous occupant of the plinth was a statue of a naked Alison Lapper. Since the ;police, presumably, did not order the statue to get dressed or arrest it, one can only assume that seeing a real naked person is offensive but seeing a representation of a naked person is not. Although I have not been to London for a few years I seem to recall that there are a number of other statues depicting naked people.
If the police receive a complaint about nudity it is always assumed that the complainant is in the right and the nude person is wrong, this despite the fact that nothing illegal has taken place. I have always maintained that for police to issue such an order, the complainant should provide his/her details, and be prepared to attend a court of law if so required, this point being made clear to the complainant. In addition the police officer should inform the complainant that no law has been broken, because many people, including a lot of police officers, still think that nudity is illegal.
Is it a misconception that is the problem here, not a case of the complainant being offended, but simply thinking that they are reporting, what they believe to be, and offence.
To summerise, an officer should;
• Make the point of law clear.
• Confirm that the complainant is offended.
• Confirm the contact details of the complainant.
• Confirm that the complainant is prepared to attend court as a witness.
I feel that the last point is enough to make most people withdraw their complaint, the problem is that the old notion, that mere nudity is an offence, is deeply ingrained in the minds of the general public, and indeed in the minds of many police officers.
Nudity is everywhere in art. It is interesting to see how people were portrayed as time passes by. Centuries ago to show your opulence bodies would be larger than nowadays. Fashion magazines and digital retouching show bodies outstretch and cat walks think about size zero models as a bad example.
More public nudity helps to address many misconceptions of the body image and all naturists will confirm that they feel at ease when they can enjoy naturism.
I dont want to live in a society where people can ask a museum to hide a nude statue visible from the street.
It happened in the US, please let us follow a different route.
I have one thing to say to the person or people who found Simons nudity a problem.....DONT LOOK!
You lot disgust me. Nudity it the work of the devil.
The good lord will judge you all!
Paisley, do you mean
"If the Lord had wanted us to go around naked, we would have been born with no clothes on"?
No IP, if you want to see the Devil at work check out Morlester on Thurs 6 August
I find the whole thing quite depressing - that there was someone in Trafalgar Square at 1am who complained, that the police took the complaint seriously and that they actually asked him to cover up again. If no crime has been committed, what business is it of the police to intervene? Very disappointing.
I'm due up there on Tuesday lunchtime but mercifully for all involved I'm pleased to say no-one has yet submitted an experiment on my web site which involves me stripping off!
Maybe the team were getting a bit bored in the green hut PlinthiPaul
:)
The censorship was outrageous. There is no justification for it on moral, ethical, social, or legal grounds and we will be making a complaint. It was quite simply prejudice.
The police action encouraged body shame and the effects of that are widespread and serious. Attitudes have consequences and the differences between outcomes for prudish countries ashamed of the human body and those with a more grown up attitude are enormous. Teenagers several times more likely to have an abortion, about ten times more likely to become pregnant, about seventy times more likely to catch gonorrhea. Encouraging body-shame is just a less obvious form of child abuse.
It is long past time that the police stopped supporting and encouraging those who are so deeply and dangerously prejudiced.
Just because I am bored and evidently a bit mean! ;)
I blame the Victorians.
@thehumblepie
Good to see that this debate has taken off. I have tried a large post to this blog but it has not been published either because it didn't get through or because it is still being moderated. As a point of interest, should these blogs be moderated? how do we know what people are really saying if someone has the ability to block any post? Just a thought..
nudity is good
nudity is good
sorry I only meant to say it once
but it is.......In fact I'm naked now.
Sooo tempting to hit the 'spoke too soon' link
Will not be swayed by the little voice saying " go on, you know you want to"
Bored and mean - get back to whence you came....
I have pictures........anyone?
(sigh)
Yes Please Martin xxxx
@LadyGod1va
No censorship on this blog, oh no siree! Unless it is a personal and extremely offensive attack on someone (not happened yet). Occasionally we delete a duplicate post but generally we even leave those up. So... not sure what's happened to your post - maybe it was too long? Although I can't imagine it would have rivaled Martin's plinthiotic (patriotic? plinthiotic? does it work?) post a few days ago.
@LadyGod1va & Holly
In my experience if you 'refresh' the page too soon it often loses what you are trying to send - note to self ... be more patient!
had to get dressed - scared the pizza delivery man..
And before I get tagged as this blogs resident motormouth .....if you want a good ol' diatribe look at Tom's heartfelt oration on August 12th.....not to mention Kate's energetic diatribe a little bit before. Good for them.
And Lady G, if my nudey sequence just got posted you can probably assume that there isn't any oppressive moderation policy in place, try and post it again. Sometimes it takes a minute or two for the comments to show up.
On a personal note, I'm currently packing for the trip from the midlands down to the smoke tomorrow in readiness for the "plinthing" on Sunday. I shall be circling the plinth a few times before then, as well as going to the theatre, drinking too much wine at my bro's and generally fretting.
Your prayers and charitable thoughts are invited for the 12-1 slot on Sunday.
Keep it real, plinthers.
Martin x
It is completely unacceptable that a major art event like this should to be subject to the whims of one police officer. The Metropolitan Police need to issue clear instructions to their officers to stop such abuse of power.
Martin - good luck for Sunday, I will miss you in person as I don't arrive in the smoke until about midnight to support another plinther from the midlands - but I will support you via the web!!
Is there such a thing as too much wine...hick!
Just Me -
All the best to you and our fellow Midlander .
I'll probably be lurking around the square on Monday if you fancy a coffee and giving moral support to whoever's up on the plinth - I may have spent Sunday night celebrating triumph / survival/ escaping alive with too much wine (again!)
Ok i am not that mean, was just in reply to plinthipaul saying no one has suggested he strips on the plinth!
but he has vetoed my suggestion!
Martin - would love to meet up for coffee - I'm there until 11am ish on Monday morning if you are around just let me know what time and where - Midlanders unite!
Personally I'm quite old fashioned when it comes to 'the naked body' but for goodness sake Simon was on in the middle of the night - what harm was there (althought I was a little shocked when I first logged on) - if it had of been in the middle of the day (which has happened) with children present then maybe there is a question to be raised but no kids should be on any street in the early hours!
Plinthers do as you feel appropirate but rest assured - I WILL be fully clothed - this Jabba the Hut don't Look Good Naked (with or without Gok's help!!!)
Happy Plinthing!
Nudity on the Plinth seems to me very natural and certainly less distressing than TV Shows like "embarrassing bodies". Anyway these shows are a statement about the British uncomfortable way to deal with nudity so its not a surprise that it raises eyebrows in a project that stands for "a picture of Britain".
Nudity is everywhere in arts galleries and colleges. In the Sistine Chapel nudity was the Christian traditional way to show souls before God.
Outlaw nudity and you can forget The Renaissance
@LadyGod1va : you should place an ad in websites like Gumtree, artmod, meetup art groups, colleges and inform and encourage people to come for your hour and have a life drawing session on an unprecedented scale. There could be a Guinness record to beat for that.
@Holly I have tried posting again and I still get this response from the site.
Thank you for commenting.
Your comment has been received and held for approval by the blog owner.
Can you please advise, otherwise I will start another Blog elsewhere and link to this one.
@museum rat Thank you for the suggestion, I have had some offers of support already but if WE were able to pull off a MASS NUDE Parade to celebrate nudity, life and generate a discussion, it would have been worthwhile. Until we ALL who favour this point of view come together and show that there is a movement of NORMAL people who support the freedom to be nude, the media/authorities are going to continue to make nudity a thing of the WACKY people!!
There IS a huge number of people celebrating body freedom every year for the WNBR. A vast majority regret that this is a once a year only event. London is one of the most popular ride in the world.
Trafalgar Square transformed in an open air life drawing class would be a true celebration.
Further info about WNBR on:
http://www.worldnakedbikeride.org/uk/
This shows that you can have no doubts that you have a reservoir of followers.
@ Museum Rat & Lady God1va
Am I correct in understanding that if a 'nude' event is pre-arranged then it won't get stopped by the authorities even if there were complaints?
If that is so then surely Lady G has given advance notice so there shouldn't be a problem - or is it only an issue if it's a naked man? (think this question came up before)
I wanted this idea to develop, the only thing I was not sure of what to market it as and HOW to go about it. I have a very full life already and need help to promote this. As this would be at almost at the end of the project, it would be excellent time. Also the 5AM slot could work in our favour, in that there are unlikly to be any children in the square. I would like to see this idea develop as a OneAndOther sub project OneForAll. Inviting all the applicants who didn't make it, I have some ideas that I need to publish. Need more comments on this and my post that doesn't seem to want to be published!!
@ Lady G
Have you tried emailing your post to someone else who can then try to put it on for you? I don't think censorship has been an issue, judging by some of the previous posts!
@Just Me Thanks, but as posted earlier the web site confirmation page actually says..
Your comment has been received and held for approval by the blog owner."
This I suspect means that it is waiting for OneAndOther to publish it.
@ Lady G - well if nothing else I'm intrigued as to the content - I've never had that comment sent to me but I wonder if anyone else has received it?
As I said before maybe try sending your post to someone else to resend it on your behalf, just to see if you get the same reply ... it might just be a gremlin. As long as it wasn't suggesting anything illegal I can't see what the problem is. Good Luck with it!
Lady God1va
I'm going through all the comments and pledges now in case something by you has somehow got into there, although I'm not sure how it can have done.
For those of you waiting on comments to be posted - we get about 100 new comments/pledges every hour which all have to be manually approved or rejected by me - I spend about 2 hours every morning doing this and then try to finish them off at the weekend, so bear with me - I only have one of me and my our internet connection can only go so fast :)
@Holly Thank you very much for your support. I have an IT company so I know the feeling! Could I please ask that if you do find my posts, that you only publish the last one submitted this morning. I have tried about 3 or 4 times yesterday and publishing all of them will make it unreadable.
@LadyGod1va
Have just been through all the comments (help! my eyes are square!) and nothing from you I'm afraid - I'm not sure why it's disappearing as we've never had any problems like this before - what did you WRITE?!
@Holly Thanks for your help. I have been advised by one of my tech sp to split the contents, it is not going to look pretty.. but it should load! All those reading the next few posts, please don't think I have too much to say, this has taken me a while to put together.
Some of the notes, comments might now be little late as other things have been said.
I may not be hitting the right notes yet but I hope that this can develop further..
First of all I can confirm that I fully intend to be naked like the namesake for my 5AM stint on 30 Sep.
The reason why I applied for this was to generate a discussion, unlike Joanna Lumley I am unlikely to be able to change the law on my own. I have a day job and bags of washing to do! But I do want to use my hour to provoke this discussion as far as it can be taken.
I have some very strong reasons for taking this approach. I had intended to write a blog with my ranting and then invite interested parties to the discussion, however as this has now started, I will do my best to try and explain my point of views, but not at this time because it will take a while and I have work to do still.
I would like to say though that having read about Simon’s incident. We had a long debate at home leaving no time for cooking and decided to go out to eat. My normal dress code is not too wild but normally I would leave the exciting type clothes for the weekend, but last night I thought I needed to prove a point to myself and wore a very nice but very see through long white Indian skirt and even more see through black top. Anyone looking at me in detail would have been able to see MOST of me, more or less like some celebrities’ when they want to get media attention!! We went to a Thai restaurant and all I received were nice smiles... no complaints, in fact I asked the manager if the steak I had eaten was fresh meat or frozen,(because it didn’t taste quite right!) he said frozen and promptly removed it off the bill because I commented that I prefer fresh meat. No offence was taken by the management or the customers or the workers as to the way I was dressed, at least no one complained to me. So where does that leave us. I suspect that if Simon had gone out wearing similar clothing (man type of course! But see through) Similar to Right said Fred standards! He might have had a different reception. This is obviously not right.
The point I make here is that nudity as a fashion seems to be far more acceptable than being naturally nude. It is possible to be in public with nothing but a see through piece of clothing that hides nothing but remove that artificial of protection and you get treated as a criminal.
@Lady God1va
First things first. You need to anchor your project where people can debate,participate and contact you via email. The O&O site have limited capabilities via blogging.
- you need an email (not personal, a new specific one dedicated to your project). If you need a new email, Ive just created a yahoo email for you. Send me an email to plinthundraped@yahoo.co.uk and Ill give you this yahoo account.
- a Group: such as yahoo Groups.
- a few plinthers have demonstrated knowledge about IT issues. Try to get them on board to help sort out the communication.
@JustMe: the authorities and members of the public read the laws and then try to interpret the purpose of the law. The only way to make sure that an event can be successful is to get a well defined project and contact the authorities beforehand.
My main wish is not to walk around naked wherever I want, but simply to have a choice, a place to be naked or not. For example if I go to Hyde Park, I would like to be able to go to a specific area and sunbathe in the nude without the threat of being arrested or spoken to. Much like a nudist beach, If I want to go out for the evening in the nude, I should have the right and place to do so. I can do that in other European countries so why not in the UK? It is not about the market forces either, look at the Gay movement, it did not flourish until the rules were changed!!
If I go to the theatre, whether I know there would be nudes or not, I cannot stand up and demand the actors cover themselves. The Police would not react to my complaint. The Fourth Plinth is an organised international SHOW, everyone involved knows that the Plinthers are the stars for an hour. The public is non paying audience, so are the internet viewers, where the project hopes to reach millions. SO IF anyone is offended by what they see on the plinth, they can walk out of the theatre that is the Trafalgar Sq. Same as they would do from any theatre if they didn’t approve of the show.
You don’t need to have the brains of Stephen Hawking to understand that what has been going on so far is WRONG. Our attitude towards nudity as a nation is WRONG. We need to grow up and enjoy what we have. I am still a child in mind but my body is growing old.
I would like to invite ALL social groups to come and join me in Trafalgar Sq on 30 Sep at 5 AM to celebrate nudity and create a work of ART by filling the square with like minded people. It would be a fantastic point in this project before the Oct winds force us to cover up again!
I would really appreciate further comments and offers of HELP.
@Holly The problem with posts has been debugged by someone here and it seems that your system doesn't like urls in the text. Removing them allowed the above to be posted. Hope that helps!.
@ Lady G - wow that took some reading..glad you got it sorted. As I said before, with a figure like jabba the hut, I don't do naked but have no objection to others being free to do so (as long as it is not provocative or in the presence of children - sorry old fashioned) - having said that I wish you and anyone else who joins you all the very best with your venture and hope all goes well and you acheive your goal!!
I will still look in on your hour for support, I hope others do too. Remember we all have a choice and if I am offended in anyway I will just turn off for a while - so can you!
Good Luck!!
If nudity is to be viewed as being natural - what are your thoughts if you are viewed , leered at , by some who will find this arousing ?
Bloody blimey, this has become a lively debate, ain't it darlin'.
Re children and nudity, they are unfazed by nudity and take to it naturally, they pick up their aversion to from their parents as they grow. Many children pass through nudist beaches without being truamatised, why would anyone think that they would be affected?
Ladygod1va, I like your thinking, this is the very type of direct action I favour, yet the priggish management at British Naturist shy away from this type of thing, preferring, as they do, to hide behind high fences as though naturism is something to be ashamed of.
I fully agree that every park should have an area set aside for clothing optional sunbathing, indeed it should be mandatory for every district council to provide somewhere for naturists.
Because nudity is confined to high fenced clubs and out of the way beaches the leering aspect will happen, and the sad gits who leer and get aroused are the ones who are starved of sex and buy skin mags for titillation. Well adjusted people are able to see naked people without, either sniggering, becoming aroused, or annoyed.
Once nudity is more common and widely accepted the novelty aspect will fade and die, and then we'll have a nation of well adjusted people who can take the sight of a naked body in their stride, rather like our continental cousins in fact.
I shall be making an extreme effort to attend on 30th Sept, and I'll make it known throughout the naturist community that support is needed.
Hi Peter,
Its not the sex starved that maybe an issue but the 'sex manic' who cannot turn off.
I do think the 'leering' will take place fence or no fence if nudity becomes more public.
Naturism is a lot more widespread than many people think - for example a leisure centre in a town near me regularly has nudists groups in for swimming galas etc. Perhaps if they didn't shy away it would be more acceptable?
@ Peter - As for children I agree they take most things in their stride but there is the potential they may be led into a false sense of security and as Diss-cuss mentioned it's 'manics' that are the problem!
I find the behaviour of the police offensive. They should be asked to leave the Square.
@diss-cuss@hotmail.co.uk Your views and concerns are fine and probably shared by majority of the people. This is the reason we are having this debate. My comment would be that I get leered at or admired or whatever you wish to call it when I am dressed for work or evening out than when I have been in the nude amoungst nudists. On that basis the only way we can deprive the " sex maniacs" is to cover ourselves from head to foot, even then there will be some body part showing that the "sex maniac" finds attractive. Do you not think that it is easier for a "sex maniac" to go to the local shopping centre or the swimming pool to find attractive people to leer at?? In 10 years of visiting naturist beaches, I can quite confidently tell you that I have never seen a man or woman! visibily aroused in public place. Having said all that, please don't think that I am stating that naturists are saints! They have to have sex like everyone else and their group has to contain all elements of the society in general. We are all the same! Honest.
@Just Me
There have always been maniacs, and there will always be maniacs, no matter how you're dressed, and hiding away won't change that. The difference between now and the past is that now we don't believe that children 'Should be seen and not heard' and a half decent parent or teacher will listen to a child when they say a priest has been touching them. This proves that attitudes can change, so why shouldn't we set about changing the attitudes towards nudity.
As for nude swimming, there are dozens of nude swimming sessions all over the country, check out the CCBN web site for more info. I'd post a URL, but apparently it buggers up the post.
@Diss-cuss
The sex maniac is easily told to sod off, even if you have to do so more than once to get through their thick skin, and as LG says, leering happenes clothed or unclothed.
@Pete: yes, plenty of nude swimming all over the country but nothing in London. Not a swim, not a Park for sunbathing. A concrete floor in a small enclosure at Hamsptead Men's Pond that's all.
L.A Fitness opened 2 of their Clubs in other parts of the country where people can join any nude swim. Im looking forward for one of their London Club to offer the same.
A naturist without freedom is like a fish without water.
@ Peter - of course you are right the maniacs and paedophiles are and will always be there but in my mind it's better to try to promote safety in some way (I've no idea how) rather than letting them have easy access.
Some people do find and probably always will find nudity an uncomfortable subject but as long as they still have the option to walk away then I feel the choice should be down to the individual.
One thing to consider my friend's son (17 yrs old) is a lifeguard - he is not comfortable with the idea of seeing people in the nude, especially you children - he was told he must be on duty at a nudist session, he was threatened with the sack if he didn't go! I would be interested in your comments on this and if anyone books such a session if they ask that people are given the option to be on duty?
As I've said before it's not for me to join in (being naked that is), I don't knock it either and let's face it, you do kind of expect it in art. I think it's great that people are trying to change things - you never know it could create a few new jobs in the process!
amendment to above;
'especially you children' should read 'young'
Please note the update from police that has made this post stupidly long...
There is absolutely no evidence that children are any more at risk at a naturist swimming session than at any others. (Chairman Cambs Area Child Protection Committee.)
There is no evidence that children are any more at risk at any nude activity than at equivalent clothed activities.
There is strong evidence that prudery does widespread and in many cases serious harm to children and young people.
There is a strong suspicion that many of the prejudices surrounding body shame add to the problems of child abuse.
Acting on prejudice, often claimed to be common sense, instead of evidence can cause enormous harm. A classic example is the common sense advice to lay babies on their tummies. That killed several babies a week (NHS figures). What chance have we got with complex social and criminal issues if the evidence is ignored in favour of prejudice?
Its true the naked body appears throughout the arts and perhaps ..... therfore should not questionned for inclusion in an art project!!!
However majority of these images are in 'still' forms .... paintings, sculptures, photographs etc found in books, galleries and museums and interaction is one sided .... that of the viewer only.
There are of course modern exceptions .... where contemporary artists use their naked bodies as part of 'live performance art'.
Such events... are more often than not performed in accepted art venues such as galleries or theatres where audiences are 'informed' and there either because they were invited or of their own choosing .....knowing what to expect. .....UNLIKE the random audiences and passer by's of Trefalgar Square.
SO .. What is the objection to seeing nudity on the Plinth?
* 'is it the art of taking clothes off in full view of the public' ......... which can be interpreted as an interaction between the Plinther and the audience .
viewed as 'stripping' which has links with the more intimate side of the human psyche ...viewing the moving naked body... and associated with strip tease and soft porn.
Therefore .... would it be more acceptable AS ART if the plinther undressed and dressed inside a tent and then appeared naked and performed in STATUESQUE MODE? ........
Without movement there would not be any intentional interaction between plinther and viewer .... but that of the viewer only.
OR
* is it because its happening in an 'outside public gallery' versus an inside private one? where random audiences may be there to see random plinthers or there by accident ... passers by OR just unaware of the true essence of the project?
Should the actions of the plinther painting with her naked body be viewed differently to those who may just wish to take their clothes off as an act of exhibitionism or rebellion?
OK, now I'm really puzzled. The big issue of the week has been nudity vs police censorship. So I watch the Sky Arts weekly summary - and how much do we hear about it - no, it never happened - not a mention. Huh????????????????? What's that all about??? Who's spinning the plates round here?
I've not seen it, but it sounds like they made a conscious decision not to include it, like I imagine they have with other plinthers who could be perceived as news worthy, but for whatever reason(s), they don't want to give them airtime.
Maybe they were trying to protect the people in some way?
Who knows. They have their own agenda and plinthers have no control of what gets picked to be on it's weekly show.
I wouldn't be too upset about it to be honest.
@ Malcolm B - my apologies if I was not clear in what I was trying to say regarding swimming but there was certainly no suggestion that anyone thought anyone else was at greater risk at this type of event. My concern was that the young lifeguard was given an option of do something he felt uncomfortable with, or potentially face losing his job. (No prior warning was given about the event when he was interviewed for the job)
"There is strong evidence that prudery does widespread and in many cases serious harm to children and young people." - I'm not sure I fully understand what is being said here but if it's what I think then maybe this is a way forward - produce the evidence in a way that everyone can understand and highlight where people can get more information from. Obviously make clear the difference between actual 'evidence' and 'suspicion/ignorance' - in my opinion this could be a good starting point (but you've probably already done it ?)
Simon - gutted for you! I would have thought it would made more of an impact!
@Just Me
Re the lifeguard, I agree that is entirely wrong, the lifeguards at all the swims I've attended have volunteered for the additional work, forcing someone to do something that causes them discomfort isn't the done thing.,
RE Easy access, I can assure you that nudism doesn't give anyone easy access, the children are looked after a lot better in a nudist environment I can assure you.
RE The lack of nudist swim in London, why not get together with others and approach LA Fitness to arrange use of the pool. The three LAF swims I know of are arranged by clubs or an individual, you'll be a long time waiting if you're expecting your local LAF to arrange it.
"The offence would not apply to a naturist who intentionally exposes his genitals in the knowledge that they may be seen by others but without the intention to cause alarm or distress. Similarly, it would exclude an exhibitionist streaker at a sports occasion.
This offence can be committed by a male or female against a male or female."
The above is a little too simplistic, even a supposed naturist can fall foul of the law if they draw attention to their genitals. Several people have had their membership to British Naturism withdrawn because of inappropriate behaviour.
Hi Lady G - although you may get leered at fully clothed at times - if you had an identical twin who was fully clothed while you were naked ...i just know who would get the attention.
Can anyone put the police letter and official bumph into a short summary in simple English for me?
Had the plinther refused to cover up on the grounds, rightly, that he was not committing an offence (there was no intention to alarm or offend) what, I wonder, would Dibble have done. Or have we reached the point where Plod can expect an innocent member of the public to accede to his wishes as occurs in other totalitarian states.
I'm glad nudity is not illegal in the UK, I will travel light when over there and go au natural.
@erindoors
If you refuse a police instruction you'll get charged with a public order offence, so it's heads they win, tails you lose.
The simple answer is to cover up when instructed, then live to strip another day.
@Lily
Nudity isn't illegal in the UK, but it isn't quite as simple as that, you still can't get away with stripping off just anywhere, a little caution and discretion will be needed. Freehiking is very popular, and growing in popularity, it's possible to nude hike almost anywhere in the UK. But there are also many freehikers in the US and Australia too.
Pete
@WHAT???????
Click on the link in my name, to be whisked by the magic of the electric interweb, to the Naturist UK Fact File, or NUFF for short, this will provide you with the info you require, and more.
Thank you Pete. Interesting website.
Yes, I think your comment of '.....heads they win, tails you lose' sums it up.
Yes the Public Order Act is a very useful tool for Mr Plod, he can instruct you to stop doing something that is quite legal, and arrest you if you don't, isn't democracy wonderful!!
I see Ladygod1va is twittering up some support for a mass nude in on the 30th Sept, all we need now is some half decent weather, can we tweet for that?
It seems very clear to me that Simon was not commiting any offence. Any member of the public is entitled to complain to the police, and the police can do one of tthree things.
Monitor the situation complained of.
Agree with the complaint and act
Not agree with the complaint and not act.
Simon was doing nothing obscene, with regard to the advice, and legal opinion the Metropolitain Police apparently gave, so I am at a loss to know why he should have been asked to cover up, just because one, of a varying range of opinions was apparently given to them formally.
Perhaps in future, if someone wants to try again, a whole bunch of people should immediately call, to explain that they do not find it oscene, and are concerned that vexatious complaints are being made about an act that they understand from Police advise is perfectly legal.
It is rather sad that the police would advise one thing, but then do another. I would welcome their explaination.
Just received my instructions for the Plinth.. its begining to get exiciting!! Been getting some help in understanding the legal stuff and Trafalgar Sq details. As far as I can understand, my hour on the Plinth is organised by oneandother but anything to do with on the ground activity has to be organised with the sq authorities. Need 5 day notice etc and will cost something. So IF I set up a web site and invite people to join in a celebration of nudity, I am inviting them to an event so I have to pay, but if people decide to come to the Trafalgar Sq because of these blogs or they heard about my hour and they decide to do this as a protest against the Police action with Simon for example.... I don't need to pay as I won't be organising it. Am I right? @Holly any comments please? if it has to be organised and paid for, which I suspect is the safer route, I will need HELP.. any offers please contact ladygod1va@hotmail.co.uk . I need to think a little more on this..
@Ladygod1va - yep, hiring the square costs you £1000 per hour and there are about 20 pages of do's and dont's - including, from memory, no riding a horse or appearing nude.
They've gotcha!
@futureplinther Thank you for the comment, if you have already done some ground work on this, would you please be kind enough to share it with me at ladygod1va@hotmail.co.uk . I have only seen the details available on the web from london.gov.uk/trafalgarsquare so far. I am not sure being nude is an issue as explained in the Police letter above.
@ LadyGod1va: Not only have I done groundwork, but I (and my chosen charity) are hiring the square for my plinth hour - 9-10 Tuesday 25th August: be there for a spectacular Christmas party!
I've just waded thru' the small print and although 'Acts within the Squares for which written permission is required (12)' says: No person shall ride any animal on a Square, (which you had probably not thought of doing) - interestingly, I can find no reference to nudity.
Plinth rules are different from Square rules. I suggest you download and print off all the bumf you find on the 'Hiring the Square' section of the Greater London Authority site. When you speak to them, they are really quite helpful.
It's laborious, believe me, but if you are committed (as I am) you will find a way. Good luck!
@futureplinther Thank you.
For all others who have commented above, In summary, as far as this blog is concerned, am I right in understanding the nudity situation as follows;
- OneandOther project have no rules that ban nudity on the plinth
- The Trafalgar Square authorities have no rules that ban nudity in the sqauare.
- London and the nation law does not ban nudity as such.
If all above is true then I can lookforward to my hour on the Plinth without any risk of being told to cover up because I will not be performing any act of sexual nature. I will explain my reasons for selecting the theme of LadyGod1va when I have managed to set up a website soon. If others who may wish to support my hour on the Plinth wish to come along and join in this exibition of living art then they too have nothing to fear.. Is this a reasonable assessment of the situation? please comment.
The assesment sounds correct though the Police can always decide to stop you if there are complaints or risks of troubles. They are the only judges in that matter and if they have to act on the spot they may not take the time to hear your views. The best way to deal with the matter is to contact them asap and expose your project to make sure that the policemen around the Square on this specific hour will know what has been agreed.
Im suspicious that people can complain just to ruin your project and/or O&O installation but not because they are really distressed.
Interesting quote from Borris here
"he said he felt “generally tolerant of nudity, provided it’s tastefully done.”
src=http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601088&sid=amJIVRs5Nc7I
I wonder what brought about this video in the Observer today...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/video/2009/aug/15/naturism-corton-beach
Good article, I thought - short, but good.
Go for it madam, i was nude myself, sans cloths but not without dignity. It was daytime and no one seemed anything other than delighted and bemused by my removing my previous outfit.
Nudity in art is usual, and usually women, you can cross the square and see many examples of nudity in art in the galleries that surround it. All in celebration of the human body. There have been a few nude and semi naked statues on this plinth already, "Alison" & "ecce homo" and we are all the same underneath our various outfits, cloths or costumes. Let's celebrate that.
i did get a stern look from a police women who was loitering at the bottom of the plinth, but as i have a good understanding of the law ( and particularly the sexual offenses law form my work) i knew that there was little that could be done unless there was a compliant. ( apart from which what could she do?) no one complained about my time on the plinth, naked or not. I was nude not being sexual.
the police women did come up to me afterwards to congratulate me on my plinth time and also to ensure that i understood that she was 'only doing her job'. i challenged her on this and suggested that she might have been more effective at doing her job had she not been staring at me for the previous hour. She was sweet though.
I had intended to feed the pigeons when i was on the plinth, as this IS illegal and i thought it a small act of transgression. Unfortunately there was hawk in the square being used to scare away the pigeons ( not kill them, just put the holy-fear into them) so i didn't get to break the law. I felt a great loss at not being able to feed the birds, they were (in my plans) supposed to surround me and my outfits so i be an a cloud of fluttering pidgins. Alas, the best laid plans of mice, men and pidgions!
My nudity was clearly stated on my profile and i had asked the 'plinth helpers' who i spoke to about what would happen when i removed my cloths. They seemed more concerned about naked flames on the plinth than naked a naked Welsh man.
it was a natural end to putting on so many outfits for me to end up nude. I wasn't making a point, other than the one i made earlier, and dipping a small bow to Mr Gormley who has routinely used his own naked body for the purposed of art and has let me do the same for a short while.
We are all the same underneath our cloths. No amount of laws, prudery, self loathing, prurience, false concern or hypocrisy can be hidden in nakedness.
I am no adonis, but am content with my flesh. I wish more folk were happy with their bodies. It upsets me to speak to folk who loath themselves or who seek a 'perfect from' that is pushed by advertisers with an eye on profit rather than good mental health. A moments normal nudity is a slight antidote to the endless digitally altered so called 'perfect' bodies we are all supposed to crave and are rammed at us from adverts and the media. I say damn them and their lies, love yourself for how you are and celebrate your self, warts, extra pounds, bingo wings and all.
There is no shame in being naked, and people who are easily shocked should be shocked more often.
on a lighter note, some friends of mine who were in the crowd at the bottom of the plinth overheard a mother of some young children who were laughing , pointing and acting shocked at what i was (un)doing. She said ' stop being silly, it's only a naked man, you'd better get used to it as your going to see a lot worse in life when you get older, he's just the same as you, just older and plumper.
sigh........
I managed to wave my appendage around and then rip it off without threat of sanction - mind you it was at 01:50 yesterday morning, Sunday 16th. Oh, and it was only a costume. I wonder how I'd have got on if it had been the middle of the day? Would I have fallen foul of some archaic bit of law?
Like Lilac, I'm content in my own skin. But I'm too much of a prude to "gift" it to the rest of the world. Mind you I was a bit miffed when my sister suggested I should have worn a corset!
If complaints about public nudity on the plinth is received by the police then the common-sense reaction should be for them to ascertain approximately how many people are in Trafalgar Square at the time plus how many people may be watching in the internet. If the number of complaints received exceeds 50% of the potential witnesses of the nudity, then they should take action as public decency would appear to indeed have been outraged. If the complainants are in the minority they should politely be told to 'get lost' i.e not watch! But then out dear old police are not noted for their commonsense so they rush to the rule book and take inappropriate non-democratic action the moment the vociferous minority complain.
Not sure if there is any point in updating an archived blog, but here goes...
Yesterday I returned from my holidays in The Gambia, as this blog is about Baring all, I shall keep to the topic rather than bore you with my adventures!
In the morning, my routine was to go for an early morning nude walk along the beach followed by a swim at the end. One morning I was stopped by a 26 year old wood carver who objected to me being in the nude during the month of Ramadan. He asked me to cover up else he would get the Soldiers and then I would be subjected to the Islamic law.
It was not possible to ignore him or walk away as he insisted on forcing his point of view, even though he and another hotel worker, who had no interest in the subject were the only other people on the beach. The discussion got bit heated and we were able to explain to this chap that all known historic evidence point to the fact that AFRICA was the home of the first nude human which was long before Islam or any other religion came to being. Therefore being nude in Africa was our ancestral right in celebration of our being. We asked him to consider the fact that there are still plenty of tribes in AFRICA and around the world and other groups in the civilised world where people choose to be in the nude and it is not a sin. The Gambia does not practice true Islamic values because it suits Gambia to pick and choose. They cannot invite foreign visitors and expect them to obey the rules of Islam during Ramadan without any prior notice or warning. This went on for about half an hour and eventually the Angry Man turned into a smiling local and invited us to visit his wood carving place for souvenirs. He admitted that he had a lot to learn, even about Islam and that it was good to talk!
The point of this entry being that dislike of nudity is mostly due to lack of understanding, with a little bit of education and realisation that the reason why people don’t get sexually turned on by naked refugees and yet get aroused and in some cases angry by seeing one breast exposed like in the example of Janet Jackson is all down to what is in the individual’s mind. It is not about NUDITY it is about the individual’s likes and imagination. Do we really want to stop imagining and enjoying the experience of what we see? Even the bible is not very supportive.. “If your eye causes you sin, gouge it out etc...” I have been brought up to believe that rules and religion are manmade, nudity is made by nature, I want to be nude because I feel good when I am in the nude. If my body (naked or otherwise) excites someone, I feel good because I have made someone happy by just being me. We admire the nature all around us every day, whether it’s the Sun, flowers or big waves!! I just hope that my excited friends are not deep followers of any religion or rules and avoid gouging out their eyes or making me the target of their anger and abuse when I go onto the Plinth with full nudity (weather permitting!!). PS anyone reading this at this stage, please show your support or disapproval on my profile or email to Ladygod1va@hotmail.co.uk.
Hi I have read these blogs with interest after accidentially tripping over Ladygod1va's web site while looking to see if there would be any precedent to a naked coffee morning in support of Macmillans Worlds Biggest Coffee Morning. I have several points which i place as bullets - I would be happy to discuss each at length; is this the correct place is there a better place?
a) Interesting the only person so far asked to cover up is male
b)The met appear as sexist in the cover up as they are racist
c)It is reported that a retired male detective complained. Simon was covered up in 11 minutes, was the complaint and request to cover up pre planned?
d) What was a retired detective doing viewing the plinth at 1 am?
e) Is this symptomatic of the british approach to naturism i.e. that it must equal sex. On UK nude beaches there is a marked tendancy to overt male sexual expression; on european nude beaches there is a preponderance of women children and families enjoying swimming and playing naked. Why?
Close (for now)
Having seen your hour, Lady G, I do wonder at the wisdom of wearing stripper's boots and riding a rocking horse. If your objective is to neutralise eroticism in nudity, you didn't seem wholly committed.
Points to ponder:
1) Too often the complainers cite that the "majority rules" in forcing the unclothed to get dressed. Here was one man unclothed (Simon) with hundreds observing, smiling, laughing, taking photos--and only ONE complainer. Why didn't the majority rule in this instance overrule the minority of one?
2) Art is supposed to shake us and wake us up. If we are forced by law to make only weak pablum for art to avoid any discomfort whatsoever, then I'm afraid we are in a very sad state indeed.
3) I'm afraid that if the naturists continue to spout the same party line that falls directly at odds with the vast majority of Human experience, then they will continue to find themselves with little popular support. The vast majority of people find nothing wrong with sensuality or eroticism, even if this is not revealed in our daily dialogue. Telling them that there is essentially something wrong with sensuality or sexuality puts the naturists in the same quagmire with the authorities who seek to stop it. The rest of us know better based on our own experience which is why Lady Godiva received so much static from the drunk chavs. It is also why there is not more popular support of naturism in general. People inherently know that the current politically correct message of naturism is bogus.
Tell them that naturism is fun and feels good, then you'll have more supporters.
Cheers!
Leave a response