Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Naturism and Irish beaches

124

Comments

  • #152
    Macha
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 6,376 Mod ✭✭✭✭Macha


    Hazlittle wrote: »
    Spot on. I dont know if there is a study but I would wager that kids brought up nudist friendly are less likely to have unplanned pregnancy or STDs.
    I haven't heard of any studies but I did read of a study showing that people who grow up in societies that have a lot of perfect bodies in the media but also also open to more public nudity are happier with their bodies than those who are also subjected to the perfect bodies in the media but don't experience as much public nudity.


  • #153
    Elle Collins
    Closed Accounts Posts: 681 ✭✭✭Elle Collins


    Hazlittle wrote: »
    In my view all beeches should be nude friendly and then have special beeches for the clothed.

    Well I'm relieved to know your view is not likely to be implemented any time soon.

    Maybe if the people who like to let it all hang out took better care of what they're letting hang they wouldn't be such an eyesore and I wouldn't have such a problem with them walking into my field of vision. I had to laugh at a comment earlier in the thread about 'naked bodies as God made them'. Naked bodies as Burger King made them more like it.


  • #154
    Macha
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 6,376 Mod ✭✭✭✭Macha


    Elle Collins wrote: »
    Maybe if the people who like to let it all hang out took better care of what they're letting hang they wouldn't be such an eyesore and I wouldn't have such a problem with them walking into my field of vision. I had to laugh at a comment earlier in the thread about 'naked bodies as God made them'. Naked bodies as Burger King made them more like it.
    So you object on the basis that these people are not sufficiently attractive in your opinion? It's exactly this sort of body policing that causes serious self-esteem issues for so many people!


  • #155
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 2,874 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Elle Collins wrote: »
    I had to laugh at a comment earlier in the thread about 'naked bodies as God made them'. Naked bodies as Burger King made them more like it.

    So if they were all chiseled abs and wash board stomachs with perky boobies and solid pecs you wouldn't mind? Bit harsh, especially since swimming togs are unlikely to mask much of what seems to bother you. After five minutes on a nudey beach you'd most likely get over it.


  • #156
    Elle Collins
    Closed Accounts Posts: 681 ✭✭✭Elle Collins


    It's not about people needing to be honed within an inch of their lives, although I certainly find nakedness in the morbidly obese an appalling sight. This is only a side issue though - if all people on this earth looked as though they'd stepped out of the pages of a magazine I still wouldn't appreciate their genitals in my face and I have to right not to have people expose themselves in front of me, whether the contributors to this thread are happy about it or not.


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    Stark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,034 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    If someone actually walked up to you and stood in front of you with their genitals waving in front your face, then you would have a right to complain. If the sight of someone a hundred metres away from you lying down without togs is offending you, then you're just being a prude.


  • #158
    Pace2008
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,587 ✭✭✭Pace2008


    Elle Collins wrote: »
    It's not about people needing to be honed within an inch of their lives, although I certainly find nakedness in the morbidly obese an appalling sight.
    This is normal. It's not simply a case of cultural conditioning; we are naturally, evolutionarily predisposed to being repelled by bodies that appear unhealthy or infertile.

    (By the way, could you please use normal-coloured font? Posters with dark backgrounds have to highlight your posts to read them).
    Stark wrote: »
    If someone actually walked up to you and stood in front of you with their genitals waving in front your face, then you would have a right to complain. If the sight of someone a hundred metres away from you lying down without togs is offending you, then you're just being a prude.
    No one in this thread has argued against the introduction of designated nudist areas.


  • #159
    Elle Collins
    Closed Accounts Posts: 681 ✭✭✭Elle Collins


    That's your opinion Stark and you're welcome to it, but the truth is I'm a very long way from a prude.

    If a saw a man lying 100 metres away from me on a nudist beach I'd have no right to complain about anything given it was his right and I knew what I was likely to see walking along a nudist beach. If a saw the same man lying 100 metres away from me on a regular beach I would assume he was an extremely self-centred person who had no consideration for the fact that we're not all interested in seeing him with his bollocks hanging out.


  • #160
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #161
    Macha
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 6,376 Mod ✭✭✭✭Macha


    donegalfella wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.
    I would wager that has a lot to do with the increasing obsession with bodily perfection, both on the part of the viewer and the viewee.

    You see older women power walking along Spanish beaches in the morning in bikinis without a care in the world.


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #163
    Valmont
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭Valmont


    Elle Collins wrote: »
    If a saw the same man lying 100 metres away from me on a regular beach I would assume he was an extremely self-centred person who had no consideration for the fact that we're not all interested in seeing him with his bollocks hanging out.
    You don't have to actually look at his bollocks you know and if you can't not look at them then I don't think he is the one with the problem.

    I only popped in here because I cycled down to my local beach a few hours ago for a swim. This beach is almost always empty but today there was a nude couple having a walk and a swim. My initial reaction was one of shock but then I figured, who cares, I'm having a swim, they're having a walk, big deal. Now if I started examining their genitalia, grumbling under my breath, I might have been less happy about the situation.

    Would you not just mind your own business?


  • #164
    Elle Collins
    Closed Accounts Posts: 681 ✭✭✭Elle Collins


    Valmont wrote: »
    You don't have to actually look at his bollocks you know and if you can't not look at them then I don't think he is the one with the problem.


    That's a pretty stupid thing to say really. I have eyes that function properly so I don't get a choice as to whether or not I see what comes into my field of vision.

    Valmont wrote: »
    Would you not just mind your own business?


    Thankfully the law of the land makes it the business of a passer-by if others expose themselves in public.


  • #165
    Elle Collins
    Closed Accounts Posts: 681 ✭✭✭Elle Collins


    Pace2008 wrote: »
    (By the way, could you please use normal-coloured font? Posters with dark backgrounds have to highlight your posts to read them).

    Pace you're not the first person to say that to me, but as far as I can see my font is exactly the same as everyone elses??? :confused: What colour does my font appear on your screen?


  • #166
    Stark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,034 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    Elle Collins wrote: »
    Thankfully the law of the land makes it the business of a passer-by if others expose themselves in public.

    If they're deliberately trying to offend you, it's illegal. If they're minding their own business and you happen to see their bits, it's not illegal.


  • #167
    Tzetze
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,143 ✭✭✭Tzetze


    Elle Collins wrote: »
    What colour does my font appear on your screen?

    snag0123.jpg


  • #168
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #169
    Elle Collins
    Closed Accounts Posts: 681 ✭✭✭Elle Collins


    Stark wrote: »
    If they're deliberately trying to offend you, it's illegal. If they're minding their own business and you happen to see their bits, it's not illegal.

    I'm sure that's the situation you'd like to see implemented Stark, but it's not the one we've got, otherwise the Guards would have no powers to remove nudists were they to stroll up O'Connell Street with their bollocks waving in the breeze and claiming to be minding their own business!


  • #170
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,635 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Elle Collins wrote: »
    As I've said, I wouldn't have a problem with designated beaches for nudists, live and let live and all that, but I wouldn't like it to be acceptable on beaches generally because I am one of those majority who is not going to enjoy the sight of tits, arses, fannies and bollockes in their face when they go to the beach.

    Grow up. Seriously.
    I've been on plenty of beaches on the continent by the way, and seen some horrific sights while I was there. I've no apologies to make for being repulsed by big fat hairy arses, miles of cellulite, rolls of flab, and breasts six inches wide but three foot long.

    Define "horrific". The whole point of the movement is NOT to titilate or give someone an eyeful. Likeise, to not be judgemental.
    Elle Collins wrote: »
    Maybe if the people who like to let it all hang out took better care of what they're letting hang they wouldn't be such an eyesore and I wouldn't have such a problem with them walking into my field of vision. I had to laugh at a comment earlier in the thread about 'naked bodies as God made them'. Naked bodies as Burger King made them more like it.

    Again. Grow up.
    Elle Collins wrote: »
    That's your opinion Stark and you're welcome to it, but the truth is I'm a very long way from a prude.

    Bull****. You are the very definition of a prude. "big fat hairy arses, miles of cellulite, rolls of flab, and breasts six inches wide but three foot long." "naked bodies as burger king made them" - you sound like a giggly teenager during a sex-ed class.
    If a saw a man lying 100 metres away from me on a nudist beach I'd have no right to complain about anything given it was his right and I knew what I was likely to see walking along a nudist beach. If a saw the same man lying 100 metres away from me on a regular beach I would assume he was an extremely self-centred person who had no consideration for the fact that we're not all interested in seeing him with his bollocks hanging out.

    That's got to be one of the worst most arrogant assumptions I've ever seen.
    Elle Collins wrote: »
    That's a pretty stupid thing to say really. I have eyes that function properly so I don't get a choice as to whether or not I see what comes into my field of vision.

    But you don't have a neck you can turn the other way?
    Thankfully the law of the land makes it the business of a passer-by if others expose themselves in public.

    Therein lies the probelm with Ireland: nosiness and a deep-seethed fear that your neighbour might actually be enjoying himself. Rabble rabble.
    Elle Collins wrote: »
    I'm sure that's the situation you'd like to see implemented Stark, but it's not the one we've got, otherwise the Guards would have no powers to remove nudists were they to stroll up O'Connell Street with their bollocks waving in the breeze and claiming to be minding their own business!

    What is it with you and swinging bollocks? Seriously? That's at least the third time you've used the phrase today.

    And naturists are looking for designated beaches. Not city centre streets. Please - do some research.

    Having been on naturist beaches and in the company of naturist families, I can honestly say their six-year olds were less prudish and more grown-up than you are. Oh and word of adivce: stay out of the National Art Gallery - you'll be horrifed.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • #171
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    Bottle_of_Smoke
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,770 ✭✭✭Bottle_of_Smoke


    Elle Collins wrote: »


    That's a pretty stupid thing to say really. I have eyes that function properly so I don't get a choice as to whether or not I see what comes into my field of vision.



    Thankfully the law of the land makes it the business of a passer-by if others expose themselves in public.

    I don't like seeing plenty of wrinkly overweight bodies on the beach in bikinis. I avert my gaze when I see them, why can't you do that? How are genitalia any worse than layers of flab?


  • #173
    AARRRGH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    It's quite sad our society has gotten so messed up that something as natural as nudity is somehow wrong.


  • #174
    Balmed Out
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,721 ✭✭✭Balmed Out


    I dont really have a problem with the idea of a naturist area on a (or even all) very large beach('s) but I would have a big problem of a whole beach being designated as a naturist beach.
    For whatever reason lots of people find it distasteful for someone to be nude in public and as we live in a society where the overwhelming norm is to be clothed the idea of a having a beach where most people would feel uncomfortable to frequent isnt acceptable to me.

    To close of a beach for mos people due to their sensibilities would be unfair. I think the way to go is to allow it on the more isolated end of larger beaches.

    The Irish naturism website says lots of the beaches within 10 minutes of me are naturist friendly which is completely misleading and untrue.
    A quote from it
    "Inchidonney is in Clonakilty Bay, off the N 71 road. The beach is near the Inchidonney Hotel. Heading east from the Hotel, you come to the estuary up to Clonakilty. The attractive sandy beach is virtually unfrequented except at weekends during the Summer"

    There isnt an hour during any day during the year where there isnt dog walkers, horse riders, walkers, joggers, lots of surfers etc using it. People and lots of them are walking its entire length at any give time and while there are quiter areas they are hardly very quite.
    The same is true for each of the beaches they list except the smaller ones which are always full at the slightest hint of sunshine.


  • #175
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,490 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Elle Collins wrote: »
    If a saw the same man lying 100 metres away from me on a regular beach I would assume he was an extremely self-centred person who had no consideration for the fact that we're not all interested in seeing him with his bollocks hanging out.
    Just how much can one see at 100m? Certainly nothing recognisable.


  • #176
    Fuinseog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,371 ✭✭✭Fuinseog


    remember when H and E was what we use as porn. no wonder we have such associations with mere nudity.


  • #177
    Hazlittle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 210 ✭✭Hazlittle


    I think society is crap, so I reject social norms. Dont want to see me nude then dont go to the beech. Stay at home and watch American Idol. This is my island and I'll do what I want.


  • #178
    Brit.Naturism
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8 ✭Brit.Naturism


    Just a selection of the many quotes I could have selected:
    Elle Collins wrote: »
    Well I'd be quite prepared to teach young kids to be disturbed by oul fellas exposing themselves Looksee, and I think it'd be a very irresponsible parent who wouldn't.
    In taking this attitude with children you are teaching them to be ashamed of their own bodies. This is a common practise in US and UK societies (inc. Ireland), but is no less harmful for being common. Such body-shame is likely to lead to eating disorders such as Anorexia. Not guaranteed, before you leap down my throat, but exposure to nudity has never been shown to carry such risks.
    taconnol wrote: »
    Indeed. Most beaches are topless for men and women on the continent anyway.

    It's actually much healthier for children to see what normal bodies look like to provide a contrast to the freakishly perfect bodies they see in the media.
    Absolutely. By allowing children to see normal people naked in all their variety, you give them confidence in their own body.
    Stark wrote: »
    In the pool where I go swimming, plenty of parents seem to be very happy to take their (sometimes 12 year old) girls into the men's changing room to see all the men getting naked. Whether the men there like it or not. This is in spite of family changing rooms being provided.

    The kids really don't seem to give a toss either. Granted, the men there were all reasonably young. Maybe it would be a different matter if there were a few over 65s there, what with elderly bodies being shameful and all that :rolleyes:
    It shouldn't matter how old anyone is. Age affects the face as much as the body, but we do not hide the faces of old people from children, so why should we hide their bodies? Children will accept nudity of all ages just as easily as they accept all the changes that age brings about.
    Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »
    Go to a beach on the continent and you'll see how silly you're being. If anything a bikini/mens togs will play on a child's natural curiosity. Bet you a tenner your kids will be looking at porn on the internet earlier than nudists kids
    I suspect you are right, but I have no proof of it. What you will find is that the children of naturist families will ask more questions of their parents instead of investigating online and listening to playground gossip. This is because it will be less embarrassing for them to talk about such issues. Who better than parents to guide the natural curiosity of their children? Parental embarrassment should never be an excuse for not answering their questions - that's just the parents prudish upbringing perpetuating the damage!
    Hazlittle wrote: »
    Spot on. I dont know if there is a study but I would wager that kids brought up nudist friendly are less likely to have unplanned pregnancy or STDs.

    In my view all beeches should be nude friendly and then have special beeches for the clothed.
    There have been studies and you are right. Go to Advocates for youth for one example. The studies have compared rates of teenage pregnancy, abortions and STI's in a selection of nations and correlated them to those nations' attitude to social nudity. The more open a nation's attitude the lower are their rates. Between the US and Denmark this has been as high as 10:1 for teenage pregnancies and 70:1 for gonorrhoea!

    For those who claim it is against Christian teaching, we have a society called Christian Naturists here in the UK and much has been spoken over the years about the bible teaching shame in nudity, but this has been disproved over and over. I will give the final word to Pope John Paul II:
    "The human body can remain nude and uncovered and preserve intact its splendour and its beauty... Nakedness as such is not to be equated with physical shamelessness... Immodesty is present only when nakedness plays a negative role with regard to the value of the person...The human body is not in itself shameful... Shamelessness (just like shame and modesty) is a function of the interior of a person."


  • #179
    Hazlittle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 210 ✭✭Hazlittle


    Brit.Naturism wrote: »
    Just a selection of the many quotes I could have selected:
    In taking this attitude with children you are teaching them to be ashamed of their own bodies. This is a common practise in US and UK societies (inc. Ireland), but is no less harmful for being common. Such body-shame is likely to lead to eating disorders such as Anorexia. Not guaranteed, before you leap down my throat, but exposure to nudity has never been shown to carry such risks.

    Absolutely. By allowing children to see normal people naked in all their variety, you give them confidence in their own body.

    It shouldn't matter how old anyone is. Age affects the face as much as the body, but we do not hide the faces of old people from children, so why should we hide their bodies? Children will accept nudity of all ages just as easily as they accept all the changes that age brings about.

    I suspect you are right, but I have no proof of it. What you will find is that the children of naturist families will ask more questions of their parents instead of investigating online and listening to playground gossip. This is because it will be less embarrassing for them to talk about such issues. Who better than parents to guide the natural curiosity of their children? Parental embarrassment should never be an excuse for not answering their questions - that's just the parents prudish upbringing perpetuating the damage!

    There have been studies and you are right. Go to Advocates for youth for one example. The studies have compared rates of teenage pregnancy, abortions and STI's in a selection of nations and correlated them to those nations' attitude to social nudity. The more open a nation's attitude the lower are their rates. Between the US and Denmark this has been as high as 10:1 for teenage pregnancies and 70:1 for gonorrhoea!

    For those who claim it is against Christian teaching, we have a society called Christian Naturists here in the UK and much has been spoken over the years about the bible teaching shame in nudity, but this has been disproved over and over. I will give the final word to Pope John Paul II:

    That settles it. We need a nude revolution.

    Who's with me?

    Could a mod confirm that I can start a naturist(oppose to nudist) group in the societies section?


  • #180
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Hazlittle wrote: »
    I think society is crap, so I reject social norms. Dont want to see me nude then dont go to the beech. Stay at home and watch American Idol. This is my island and I'll do what I want.

    As do I. Don't want me to kill you? Stay at home and watch American Idol :rolleyes:

    What a ridiculous statement.

    I wouldn't care about desginated beaches or areas but it should not be the norm or applicable everywhere, and no it has nothing to do with being ashamed or repressed or anything else. My wife comes from a country where naturism would be a lot more organised and accepted and one of the reasons she likes it here is because she can go to the sauna etc and not have to deal with it. She has gone to naturist sites and found them to be incredibly sleazy.


  • #182
    Hazlittle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 210 ✭✭Hazlittle


    donegalfella wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    Meant in the social section which I can just set up in a click on a button. Just dont to be banned if they think the idea is too obscene. This is conservative Ireland.
    prinz wrote: »
    As do I. Don't want me to kill you? Stay at home and watch American Idol :rolleyes:

    No its not the same. Being naked and murdering people isnt the samething. Me nude doesnt take from your personal freedom but murdering does.


  • #183
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Hazlittle wrote: »
    Me nude doesnt take from your personal freedom but murdering does.

    Not my life, just my personal freedom to venture outside my home is it? :rolleyes:


  • #184
    Stark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,034 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    Unless a group of people decide to all get naked one day and surround your home, I doubt that is going to happen. Some people are terrified of dogs. That doesn't mean they're not free to leave their homes in case they encounter a dog.


  • #185
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Stark wrote: »
    Some people are terrified of dogs. That doesn't mean they're not free to leave their homes in case they encounter a dog.

    I was referring specifically to the "this is my island I'll do what I want" aspect. Clearly this isn't the case.


  • #186
    Brit.Naturism
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8 ✭Brit.Naturism


    prinz wrote: »
    Not my life, just my personal freedom to venture outside my home is it? :rolleyes:
    I take it you are a naturist who would like to have the freedom to leave your home?

    You see, it cuts both ways.

    I do not restrict your freedom, please don't restrict mine.


  • Advertisement
  • #187
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Brit.Naturism wrote: »
    I take it you are a naturist who would like to have the freedom to leave your home? You see, it cuts both ways..

    There are lot's of things we can't do outside our own home. It has no bearing whatsoever on restricting freedoms.
    Brit.Naturism wrote: »
    I do not restrict your freedom, please don't restrict mine.

    If I had to come face to face with you then yeah you would be restricting my freedom not to see you naked. Like I said, I have no problem with naturist desginated spots, but to suggest you should be free to go where you like and do what you like is groundless.


  • #188
    Hazlittle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 210 ✭✭Hazlittle


    prinz wrote: »
    I was referring specifically to the "this is my island I'll do what I want" aspect. Clearly this isn't the case.

    We use common law and as back up system we have Brehon law. So if we removed all the legislation tomorrow we would still have tort law. So people could still do what they but if you could prove that action damages you physically you can sue.
    prinz wrote: »
    Not my life, just my personal freedom to venture outside my home is it? :rolleyes:

    You can come outside, you just cant enforce a dress code on everyone else.
    prinz wrote: »
    There are lot's of things we can't do outside our own home. It has no bearing whatsoever on restricting freedoms.



    If I had to come face to face with you then yeah you would be restricting my freedom not to see you naked. Like I said, I have no problem with naturist desginated spots, but to suggest you should be free to go where you like and do what you like is groundless.


    For the same reason we shouldnt ban track suit bottoms or the veil, we should ban public nudity. Adults can do what they want. If you want to be conservative, be conservative on your own property.


  • #189
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Hazlittle wrote: »
    If you want to be conservative naked, be conservative naked on your own property.

    See how easy that is.


  • #190
    Hazlittle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 210 ✭✭Hazlittle


    prinz wrote: »
    See how easy that is.

    Its not ideological war. Your're the one commanding me to do something I dont want to. I'm not telling you to do anything. I was not born to be commanded by no man, organisation or state. It is my island and I shall do what I please.


  • #191
    Brit.Naturism
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8 ✭Brit.Naturism


    prinz wrote: »
    There are lot's of things we can't do outside our own home. It has no bearing whatsoever on restricting freedoms.


    If I had to come face to face with you then yeah you would be restricting my freedom not to see you naked. Like I said, I have no problem with naturist desginated spots, but to suggest you should be free to go where you like and do what you like is groundless.
    You want a freedom to not do something? That's different!

    Can I object to your style of dress and then expect the freedom to not see you wearing it? Of course not.

    It seems to me that unless someone exactly matches your idea of what is right, you want the right to ban them. That simply isn't how any civilised society works.
    prinz wrote: »
    If you want to be conservative naked, be conservative naked on your own property.
    See how easy that is.
    You have proved my point about how it cuts both ways, which is the point you had clearly missed when 'Hazlittle' made the original of this statement.


  • Advertisement
  • #192
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Brit.Naturism wrote: »
    You want a freedom to not do something? That's different!

    Er no. I want to maintain the rights I already have. You are looking for a freedom, I'm not. You want a freedom fine, like I said I have no problem with designated areas.
    Brit.Naturism wrote: »
    Can I object to your style of dress and then expect the freedom to not see you wearing it? Of course not.

    Be my guest, object away. You can expect the freedom if you can legislate for it.
    Brit.Naturism wrote: »
    It seems to me that unless someone exactly matches your idea of what is right, you want the right to ban them. That simply isn't how any civilised society works.

    I haven't sought the right to ban anything here. Ireland has no designated naturist zones, I would have no problem that being changed to make certain beaches naturist only/friendly etc. I am supporting your quest for that freedom. How does that equate to banning anything or infringing on a freedom?
    Brit.Naturism wrote: »
    You have proved my point about how it cuts both ways, which is the point you had clearly missed when 'Hazlittle' made the original of this statement.

    Hazlittle seems to have a very particular view of the world.


  • #193
    Brit.Naturism
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8 ✭Brit.Naturism


    Perhaps we are closer to agreement than it seems.

    It was your:
    prinz wrote: »
    As do I. Don't want me to kill you? Stay at home and watch American Idol :rolleyes:
    that took me by surprise. Who had said anything about killing anyone prior to this?

    So I felt I should support Hazlittle over the following exchange:
    Hazlittle wrote: »
    No its not the same. Being naked and murdering people isnt the samething. Me nude doesnt take from your personal freedom but murdering does.
    prinz wrote: »
    Not my life, just my personal freedom to venture outside my home is it? :rolleyes:
    You seemed to be claiming that some else's dress code (or in this case undress code) would limit your freedom to leave your own home, which is clearly ridiculous. The dogs analogy in another post is a good one.
    prinz wrote: »
    I wouldn't care about desginated beaches or areas but it should not be the norm or applicable everywhere, and no it has nothing to do with being ashamed or repressed or anything else. My wife comes from a country where naturism would be a lot more organised and accepted and one of the reasons she likes it here is because she can go to the sauna etc and not have to deal with it. She has gone to naturist sites and found them to be incredibly sleazy.
    This is where we seem to have some agreement, although I wonder where these naturist sites where that could put off someone willing to try them. They do not sound like any that I have been to and I would like to think that you, or she, were just unlucky.

    Countries like Germany have areas of city parks where naked sunbathing is allowed. They also have much lower rates of teenage pregnancy, etc. as I stated in my original post in this topic. I and most naturists believe that it would be a positive step for society if such freedoms were allowed.
    prinz wrote: »
    Be my guest, object away. You can expect the freedom if you can legislate for it.
    We have that freedom in the UK, but I wouldn't presume to abuse it by going to my local supermarket naked. So I guess we agree.
    prinz wrote: »
    I haven't sought the right to ban anything here. Ireland has no designated naturist zones, I would have no problem that being changed to make certain beaches naturist only/friendly etc. I am supporting your quest for that freedom. How does that equate to banning anything or infringing on a freedom?
    Ok, as I said, perhaps we are closer to agreement than it seemed.
    prinz wrote: »
    Hazlittle seems to have a very particular view of the world.
    Agreed. I take particular exception to the statement:

    "It is my island and I shall do what I please."

    I don't think anyone has that level of freedom!


  • #194
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Brit.Naturism wrote: »
    It was your:
    that took me by surprise. Who had said anything about killing anyone prior to this?

    It was more tongue in cheek than anything. Like if you don't like what I get up to stay at home. Our society just doesn't work that way.
    Brit.Naturism wrote: »
    This is where we seem to have some agreement, although I wonder where these naturist sites where that could put off someone willing to try them. They do not sound like any that I have been to and I would like to think that you, or she, were just unlucky.

    Germany, somewhere up the Baltic Sea coastline if I remember correctly. She's German and has been to a few FKK sites. She tried it, was made to feel deeply uncomfortable a number of times and swore off it. Over here she likes the fact that she can go to the sauna etc in the knowledge that people are going to be covered somewhat.
    Brit.Naturism wrote: »
    Ok, as I said, perhaps we are closer to agreement than it seemed.

    Yep.
    Brit.Naturism wrote: »
    Agreed. I take particular exception to the statement: "It is my island and I shall do what I please."
    I don't think anyone has that level of freedom!

    :pac:.


  • #195
    Elle Collins
    Closed Accounts Posts: 681 ✭✭✭Elle Collins


    Brit.Naturism wrote: »
    I do not restrict your freedom, please don't restrict mine.

    I have to disagree with this statement. Brit.Naturism, if you are suggesting that an aspect of your freedom includes walking/sitting/lying naked wheresoever you choose then yes, you are seeking to restrict the freedom of a lot of people. That would be the freedom to visit beaches, parks etc without having to put up with the offensive sight of people exposing themselves publicly.

    I have said several times on this thread that I feel if nudists want areas where they can expose themselves that's fine by me. As long as nudists do not restrict my right to peace of mind they can build themselves nudie carnivals and freeze their goolies off on the big wheel for all I care. Seriously though, they should be accomodated and the places where they are accomodated should be clearly marked for the benefit of those who want to avoid them.

    One question though: I seriously wonder why the term 'nudist' has been rejected by nudists themselves???


  • #196
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,635 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Elle Collins wrote: »
    I have to disagree with this statement. Brit.Naturism, if you are suggesting that an aspect of your freedom includes walking/sitting/lying naked wheresoever you choose then yes, you are seeking to restrict the freedom of a lot of people. That would be the freedom to visit beaches, parks etc without having to put up with the offensive sight of people exposing themselves publicly.

    I think you'll find that this is not what naturists want. I'd be curious to know what made you think it was?
    I have said several times on this thread that I feel if nudists want areas where they can expose themselves that's fine by me. As long as nudists do not restrict my right to peace of mind they can build themselves nudie carnivals and freeze their goolies off on the big wheel for all I care. Seriously though, they should be accomodated and the places where they are accomodated should be clearly marked for the benefit of those who want to avoid them.

    This is exactly what natursits want. That and a little bit less condescention and immaturity when discussing the topic.
    One question though: I seriously wonder why the term 'nudist' has been rejected by nudists themselves???

    Didn't know they did - would be interested to know why myself.

    My understanding was that "Nudist" is an American term, whereas "Naturist" is an English one.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • #197
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    I think you'll find that this is not what naturists want. I'd be curious to know what made you think it was?

    I'm going to guess it was comments like this...
    Hazlittle wrote: »
    I was not born to be commanded by no man, organisation or state. It is my island and I shall do what I please.
    Hazlittle wrote: »
    Adults can do what they want. If you want to be conservative, be conservative on your own property.
    Hazlittle wrote: »
    In my view all beeches should be nude friendly and then have special beeches for the clothed.

    You're right a bit of maturity wouldn't wouldn't go astray.;)


  • #198
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,635 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    prinz wrote: »
    You're right a bit of maturity wouldn't wouldn't go astray.;)

    Oh, absolutely - on both sides, don't get me wrong. I was thinking along the lines of those quoted here:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=66062115&postcount=170

    Admittedly, my responce was a bit strong, but you get the gist.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • #199
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    Oh, absolutely - on both sides, don't get me wrong. I was thinking along the lines of those quoted here:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=66062115&postcount=170

    :pac: It does have comedy value though.


  • #200
    Brit.Naturism
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8 ✭Brit.Naturism


    Elle Collins wrote: »
    I have to disagree with this statement. Brit.Naturism, if you are suggesting that an aspect of your freedom includes walking/sitting/lying naked wheresoever you choose then yes, you are seeking to restrict the freedom of a lot of people. That would be the freedom to visit beaches, parks etc without having to put up with the offensive sight of people exposing themselves publicly.
    I am sorry you find the sight of a human body offensive. Your parents clearly did a good job of teaching you to think this, which is a shame when you consider that you possess one yourself, just like everyone else in this world. To quote Michelangelo:
    Michelangelo
    "What spirit is so empty and blind, that it cannot recognise the fact that the foot is more noble than the shoe, and skin more beautiful than the garment with which it is clothed?"
    Another quote I have kept, but sadly failed to record the source is:
    "Nudity is neither immoral nor immodest. Morality and modesty are matters of behaviour and intention. Nudity is not harmful to life, limb, property or mental state. Nor does nudity infringe on anyone’s rights. If one finds nudity offensive then it is that person’s doing, not the one who is nude. There is no right to not be offended. To be offended is a personal choice. No one can offend you without your permission."
    Again the source is sadly unknown, but I quite like:
    "Clothing and even shoes convey messages that the body alone cannot. You can't be naked like a tart, you can't be naked to kill, you can't naked up posh and you can't look like mutton naked as lamb."
    This is a big part of what naturism is about - social levelling.

    Enough of my quotes (I have plenty!). To answer your question (as best I can):
    Elle Collins wrote: »
    One question though: I seriously wonder why the term 'nudist' has been rejected by nudists themselves???
    As stated by "Ikky Poo2", there is a tendency for Americans to use the term 'nudist' and the English to use 'naturist'. There is some debate amongst naturists here in the UK as to what the difference is, some say there isn't a difference, but some, like myself, believe that the term naturist carries with it an automatic assumption that the activity is non-sexual in nature. If I refer to nudity in the context of naturism I often feel I have to qualify it by referring to it as "non-sexual nudity". I also believe that naturism covers much more than just nudity; it includes mutual and self respect as well as a respect for nature. It is also a term that we have inherited from the past.

    What does annoy us is when 'naturist' is used by organisations to disguise their true intentions. We sometimes find swingers' clubs masquerading as naturist clubs, presumably because they are ashamed of what they truly are. Unfortunately there is nothing we can do about this, other than refuse such organisations membership of BN. They still damage the image of naturism though...


  • #201
    Stark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,034 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    you can't be naked to kill

    Oh I disagree

    155113__psycho_l.jpg


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement