Naturism should be legal. Period

[Lucky Bicycle Works]

Hence, clothes are not natural whichever way you look at them.

What about mud?

Its quite possible to be doused in mud, by no human process or intention. For instance, while doing natural things with livestock.

Wot? Mud isn't clothing?

*hides in shame*

[Chimaea]

Oh, I never said I was using any standard dictionary definition when I say 'natural', except "existing in nature" or "existing in my own particular argument". Heh.

Although I do say this: people occur in nature. Why can't their creations be considered natural? They are merely extensions of us, after all. Why are you using such a limited, human-defined version of the word?

Take a step outside definitions. We're talking about whether it's a natural state for people to be nude or clothes. I posit to you that it's subjective, but from my own particular perspective naturism shouldn't be called naturism because it's not solely natural.

[Ifreann]

Surely it doesn't matter to anyone whether its natural or not. Right?

Not in the least. Natural doesn't equal good, and good doesn't equal natural.
But it has been claimed that naming the movement "naturism" was a misnomer, since so many humans tend to clothe themselves, thereby associating wearing clothes with human instinct.

Well, unless there's more to the movement than not wearing clothes then they're a bit narrow in their focus, but it hardly seems to matter now. The term has been around for long enough to become well established.

[Chimaea]

Surely it doesn't matter to anyone whether its natural or not. Right?

Not in the least. Natural doesn't equal good, and good doesn't equal natural.
But it has been claimed that naming the movement "naturism" was a misnomer, since so many humans tend to clothe themselves, thereby associating wearing clothes with human instinct.

Didn't see this--I made no such claim about 'instinct'--and if I did, then I certainly didn't mean it!

I did say instincts were natural, as well as social conditioning and so on. But for the entire clothes argument, I wasn't saying so much as instinct as usefulness, need and so on. Which has evolved into the bikini we all know and love today.

[Lucky Bicycle Works]

Although I do say this: people occur in nature. Why can't their creations be considered natural? They are merely extensions of us, after all. Why are you using such a limited, human-defined version of the word?

How about: because the word would have even less meaning, if it meant "natural or artificial."

We humans are artificers. We make stuff. At some point (and I suggest that point is at the level of deliberate human intention) stuff stops being "natural" and becomes "artificial."

[Barringtonia]

Natural..

11 And he said, Who told thee that you were naked? Have you eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that you should not eat?
12 And the man said, The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.
13 And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that you have done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.

So Adam & Eve are chucked out of the garden, separated from God, the women go through painful childbirth and etc., [etc., meaning subordination for millennia]

The snake?

14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because you have done this, you are cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon your belly shall you go

Like, a snake has no legs, it crawls on its belly, that's what it does, hardly a punishment.

Human have to invent fashion, and all the cultural indicators loaded into what clothes one wears,

[EvilDarkMagicians]

Oh? Source?

Can't remember...
Do you not beleive me?

People make all kinds of claims that are flat-out not true, or that they've heard from less than truthful sources. I find it hard to believe that there was a billboard that caused people to crash. Surely if it's true it shouldn't be hard to back up?

I think it's from a book I read. I haven't got the patience to find it, then copy it down...not worth my time..just to make someone beleive me.

[Chimaea]

But this is what I mean--how can it become unnatural? It exists in nature, therefore it is natural. Even plastic is natural. Even Michael Jackson is natural!!!

I disagree with you on the word having less meaning--I'd say it has more meaning and opens up whole new worlds of useless but interesting mental masturbation. By narrowing this definition to such a human-contrived concept, then it starts to lose meaning.

[Cabra West]

Oh, I never said I was using any standard dictionary definition when I say 'natural', except "existing in nature" or "existing in my own particular argument". Heh.

Although I do say this: people occur in nature. Why can't their creations be considered natural? They are merely extensions of us, after all. Why are you using such a limited, human-defined version of the word?

Take a step outside definitions. We're talking about whether it's a natural state for people to be nude or clothes. I posit to you that it's subjective, but from my own particular perspective naturism shouldn't be called naturism because it's not solely natural.

People are animals. So why do we insist on calling ourselves "human" rather than "animal"? Because at one point we've decided to call hairless apes walking on two legs human, and the hairy variety animal. Words are conventions, nothing more. And the word natural is being used in oppositions to man-made, another convention. And calling nudism naturism is perfectly in line with this convention.

And yes, it is a natural state for people to be naked. Unless forced by circumstances such as climate, people are naked. They might be wearing paint, or jewelery, or other ornaments. Even some ornaments that can be regarded as pieces of clothing. But would they be ashamed to appear in public without them? Would others stare at them for not wearing them? Hardly.
But we do. We are ashamed to be seen without clothes, and we regard it as offensive when we see someone without. For no apparent reason. I'm sorry, but I don't think that's natural at all.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Hence, clothes are not natural whichever way you look at them.

What about mud?

Its quite possible to be doused in mud, by no human process or intention. For instance, while doing natural things with livestock.

Wot? Mud isn't clothing?

*hides in shame*

Mud is great clothing.

[Cabra West]

But this is what I mean--how can it become unnatural? It exists in nature, therefore it is natural. Even plastic is natural. Even Michael Jackson is natural!!!

I disagree with you on the word having less meaning--I'd say it has more meaning and opens up whole new worlds of useless but interesting mental masturbation. By narrowing this definition to such a human-contrived concept, then it starts to lose meaning.

Because this is what the word means.
If absolutely everything were natural, why would we need a word? We invented the word to be able to distinguish between things that occur in nature without human influence, and things that humans made. This is the whole purpose of the word.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Keep in mind that just because something is legal doesn't mean it's mandatory. Or even polite.

[Barringtonia]

*snip*

A picture tells a thousand words.

That, everyone, is your 'naked' society.

[Chimaea]

People are animals. So why do we insist on calling ourselves "human" rather than "animal"? Because at one point we've decided to call hairless apes walking on two legs human, and the hairy variety animal. Words are conventions, nothing more. And the word natural is being used in oppositions to man-made, another convention. And calling nudism naturism is perfectly in line with this convention.

And yes, it is a natural state for people to be naked. Unless forced by circumstances such as climate, people are naked. They might be wearing paint, or jewelery, or other ornaments. Even some ornaments that can be regarded as pieces of clothing. But would they be ashamed to appear in public without them? Would others stare at them for not wearing them? Hardly.
But we do. We are ashamed to be seen without clothes, and we regard it as offensive when we see someone without. For no apparent reason. I'm sorry, but I don't think that's natural at all.

I don't get it. You criticise me for calling human animals 'humans', yet you use the very human-subjective definition of 'natural' to criticise me for saying nudism shouldn't be called naturism?

And we call ourselves 'human' because it's the name for our species o.O Well, homo sapiens, but that's such a dry term.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a convention something people agree as normal? If that's all it is, it is virtually useless, isn't it? I mean, I'm not disputing the application of your definition--I totally agree, under what Mr. Oxford says, nudism is indeed natural. I'm saying that definition itself is too narrow, too subjective, all too human. I'm cool with that, don't get me wrong.

But my argument is that the world is a hugely subjective place, and it's usually us humans doing the subjecting. How can you call nuclear weapons and pizza, that most amazing of foods, unnatural and yet say that being nude is natural? It's neither here nor there, as I said.

If it exists in nature, I say it's natural! This makes both clothing and nudism natural! edit: so calling one or the other naturism is incorrect because it applies to both.

However I'm in the oppressive clothing-driven majority, so from a personal, subjective perspective I don't want nudism to be everywhere.

[Treznor]

Clothing should be worn for warmth and protection, not modesty. The social taboo surrounding nudity is archaic and unnecessary. Clothing doesn't stop us from being aroused by an attractive individual; we can and do restrain ourselves all the time.

[Chimaea]

Because this is what the word means.
If absolutely everything were natural, why would we need a word? We invented the word to be able to distinguish between things that occur in nature without human influence, and things that humans made. This is the whole purpose of the word.

Heh, good grief, yes I know. Stop it, you're starting to make me giggle again >.<

If absolutely everything were natural, why would we need a word? I dunno. I suppose we could call it "human-made" and "non-human made". Or "altered" and "non-altered"?

It's beyond my point is what I'm saying. We're arguying on two different wavelengths here. I totally understand your position, I just don't think it's good enough for this particular verbal BSing.

[Uri Land]

to many people these days are self concious about how they look not alot of people would do it it takes a brave man to run around naked and a hot chick to get me to support it

[Razakel]

It should be allowed, but not for fat people.

[Chimaea]

All right, Razakel, we won't allow you to get naked.

[Cabra West]

I don't get it. You criticise me for calling human animals 'humans', yet you use the very human-subjective definition of 'natural' to criticise me for saying nudism shouldn't be called naturism?

And we call ourselves 'human' because it's the name for our species o.O Well, homo sapiens, but that's such a dry term.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a convention something people agree as normal? If that's all it is, it is virtually useless, isn't it? I mean, I'm not disputing the application of your definition--I totally agree, under what Mr. Oxford says, nudism is indeed natural. I'm saying that definition itself is too narrow, too subjective, all too human. I'm cool with that, don't get me wrong.

But my argument is that the world is a hugely subjective place, and it's usually us humans doing the subjecting. How can you call nuclear weapons and pizza, that most amazing of foods, unnatural and yet say that being nude is natural? It's neither here nor there, as I said.

If it exists in nature, I say it's natural! This makes both clothing and nudism natural!

However I'm in the oppressive clothing-driven majority, so from a personal, subjective perspective I don't want nudism to be everywhere.

I never criticised you for calling humans humans. All you would be doing is applying the correct word to ensure people understand who and what you are talking about.
If you use the word human, people know you are not talking about animals.
If you used the word natural, people will assume you are talking about things that aren't artificial and man-made.

And yes, pizza and nuclear weapons are unnatural, while being naked is naturals. Do keep in mind that natural doesn't mean either good or bad, it simply means unaltered by humans, nothing more and nothing less.

And constantly pointing out that you're the majority (which, at least according to this poll, you aren't actually) doesn't have relevance. Civil and human rights are not subject to majority vote.

[Razakel]

All right, Razakel, we won't allow you to get naked.

Be honest. That's probably the only thing stopping you from supporting it - disgustingly overweight people. Nobody wants to see them all flapping around.

[Saint Clair Island]

I'll agree (sort of) with Chimaea, although I'll disagree on the terminology: nudity is as "natural" a state as wearing clothes, so there's nothing wrong with calling it "naturism", even if that term is rather vague (akin to "organic" food, or "violent" imagery).

However, I'll agree that naturism, or public nudity, or whatever you want to call it, should not be permitted in public, except for in designated areas (i.e. nude beaches and the like). Why? Well, nudity might be natural, but it's not acceptable according to our society's unwritten rules. There's no reason to permit it simply because most people prefer to wear clothes, and prefer not to have to see other people not wearing clothes -- even taboos are decided by majority rule, after all -- and I see no reason this should change considering how impractical nudity is in most cases anyway.

[Cabra West]

Be honest. That's probably the only thing stopping you from supporting it - disgustingly overweight people. Nobody wants to see them all flapping around.

You poor, poor thing... is the only thing you've achieved in life not being overweight so you now have to funnel all your arrogance and loathing into internet rants about the only people on the planet you can justify feeling superior to?

I'm sure if you really applied yourself, you too could do something with your life.

[Chimaea]

I never criticised you for calling humans humans. All you would be doing is applying the correct word to ensure people understand who and what you are talking about.
If you use the word human, people know you are not talking about animals.
If you used the word natural, people will assume you are talking about things that aren't artificial and man-made.

And yes, pizza and nuclear weapons are unnatural, while being naked is naturals. Do keep in mind that natural doesn't mean either good or bad, it simply means unaltered by humans, nothing more and nothing less.

And constantly pointing out that you're the majority (which, at least according to this poll, you aren't actually) doesn't have relevance. Civil and human rights are not subject to majority vote.

Well no, it doesn't separate us from animals. Why would you say that? It's just the name of our species. We're the dominant species, but ultimately just a species. I'm saying human in the context of things homo sapiens do.

And strangely enough, that really is the way I think about it. Weird.

Dude... or Dudette, I have no idea what sex you are... I've gone out of my way to provide my own definition and explain it as clearly as I can, in my initial posts and in these ones. How can anyone possible think that I'm using your definition? o.o

So no, in the context of my argument, natural doesn't mean unaltered by humans. I have explained this... Hell I even agreed that under your definition, nudism can be called naturism.

Hehe, yeah I was baiting y'all by repeating the majority line... well ok, also demonstrating the ultimate significance of subjective arguments. But mainly baiting. Oh, also a commentary on what really counts in our societies... but mainly baiting.

[Chimaea]

Be honest. That's probably the only thing stopping you from supporting it - disgustingly overweight people. Nobody wants to see them all flapping around.

You poor, poor thing... is the only thing you've achieved in life not being overweight so you now have to funnel all your arrogance and loathing into internet rants about the only people on the planet you can justify feeling superior to?

I'm sure if you really applied yourself, you too could do something with your life.

...Wow. That's kind of scary. Wait, are you actually being serious about all of this?

.......Now that's unsettling.

Heh anyway, Razakel, it's certainly a consideration. That and even if everyone was hot... I still don't want to see them naked, you know? I like nakedness to be special, personally speaking, an intimate thing. That's just me, you don't have to agree!