to be.......or not to be....... NAKED

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Sara on October 10, 2009 at 12:26am

Nudity is fine, but its just so final..I like the mystery of wondering what someone looks like under their clothes, the act of taking eachothers clothes off, etc..
The sex appeal of nudity would be completely lost if we walked around naked all the time, and that saddens me a bit.
How free would nudity feel if we had nothing to compare it to anymore?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Vampirella on October 10, 2009 at 1:11am

Men cannot control themselves I do not think they would make us wear veils all over again cause the would be too weak to resist

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Sara on October 10, 2009 at 2:51am

Hmm, I think clothing may be considered sexy the way nudity is now. Maybe.
Men too weak to resist but not women? I think some gals may beg to differ!
I think it would be a challenge in the beginning, but over time we would all get used to seeing swingin tits and dicks everywhere. That isnt sexy to me at all.
I dont like the idea of ending the association of sex with nudity, call me old fashioned.
I am all for ending the shame associated with sex and nudity however.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by John Coleman on October 10, 2009 at 4:18am

Hey, maybe SOME men can't "control themselves", but we are not all like wild animals, that's a stereotype.

I think widespread nudity would make it clear what terrible damage people are doing to themselves, the truth would literally be uncovered.

I also think that the "mystery" that clothing creates is unhealthy, it's essentially a tease.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Sara on October 10, 2009 at 5:00am

True, people would certainly pay a lot more attention to what they are putting in their bodies if they were on full display to eachother.
What is so unhealthy about wondering what someone looks like under their clothes? If someone is so negatively affected by this "tease", then what does this say about the individual who is so bothered by it?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by foxy man on October 10, 2009 at 6:04pm

....to quote-men cannot control themselfs-thundera.....- not all men are equal........jt m.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Angus on October 10, 2009 at 5:58am

i was born naked.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Uti on October 10, 2009 at 9:29am

After reading these renewed posts I am reminded of how few people have experienced being nude around people other than their partners. No wonder so many associate nudity with sexual behavior. They aren't the same thing and we certainly have examples in history to prove that like women's clothing worn in Victorian times that had "convenient" openings to allow sexual penetration while covering all the other goodies.

If you happen to find yourself in Northern California and want to experience a place where you can go and feel the freedom of being without clothing around the pool area check out Harbin Hot Springs. I recently met my new raw friend there for out first date and we had a great time. She had never experienced nudity in a group setting and was a little nervous at the prospect so I told her to bring her bathing suit and do whatever she was most comfortable with. Her fears soon evaporated after she arrived and we walked to the pools just like every one else with maybe a sarong or kimono or towel and were soon cuddled up in the warm pools like she had been doing it forever . This woman is 44 years old and certianly has nothing to be ashamed of. After she got back home she told me she started sunbathing nude by her own pool when it was warm enough.

Or if you want to be outdoors in the wild there are usually guides to local spots if you search. I usually just find my own spots and have never been "busted" by law enforcement.

My favorite wild hot spring near Mammoth Lakes, California in the eastern Sierra Nevada Mountains:

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Vampirella on October 10, 2009 at 10:08am

Victorian women had convenient openings in their garments? ?Explain??

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Uti on October 10, 2009 at 10:21am

Some Victorian nightgowns for men and women had crotch slits and flaps sewn in for sexual intercourse without exposing unnecessary skin. Sex was for procreation only, not enjoying each others bodies. Obviously this movement was not too popular, it went against our true nature.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Vampirella on October 10, 2009 at 10:22am

Wasnt that to go to the LOO or LATRINE?

How do you know sex was for procreation only? Were you there? You must have been. How exciting a TIME TRAVELER

Were you a good boy back then>?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Makaranda...=) on October 10, 2009 at 10:45am

we do know they had much shorter beds than we do because they thought if you lay down you would catch certain bugs like influenza. uti must have the secret history book about sex that us women are never allowed to see..

▶ Reply to This

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last