AIBU to think this is absolutely disgusting and unecessary.

[Gettingbysomehow]

So this happened a few miles away from where I live.
Call me old fashioned but I think this is totally inappropriate and somebody should have called the police.
I have been a naturist for 40 years but the old fashioned kind who doesn't think dangling your genitals in front of families and young children who have gone for a meal is at all appropriate.
I would question why they found the need to do this. There are plenty of naturist clubs in the area.
People go to naturist clubs to get an all over tan and be a member of an organisation that usually has a pool and cheap membership.
My non naturist friends think I'm being stuffy and ridiculous am I?
Diners shocked as naked pair enjoy meal in Burnham-On-Sea pub

Yes, the number of naturists has increased, but the nudity taboo has been gaining influence, particularly where children are concerned.

Ignore this.

I read your post wrong.

I don't know what the point of the post is though.

I@MalcolmBoura

Yes, the number of naturists has increased, but the nudity taboo has been gaining influence, particularly where children are concerned.

How so? What is your evidence of this?

Why do you think it inapropriate? Dogs can be a health hazard. Respect is a two way street. Mutual tolerance is a much more positive concept.

@MalcolmBoura

the nudity taboo has been gaining influence, particularly where children are concerned.

The president of British Naturism disagrees.

“It turns out that there’s a huge, hidden enthusiasm for nude recreation,” said Dr Mark Bass, the president of British Naturism. “Attitudes to nudity are changing with taboos and stigma being eroded.”

The survey also found that while naturism was “often perceived to be something that old retirees do”, it was in fact the younger generation who were far more likely to identify as naturists or nudists, with almost half of respondents aged 16 to 24 doing so, compared with just 6% of those aged 45 to 75.

“Younger people really are diving into it far more than their elders have done,” he added. “That gives us a lot of confidence in the future. This is a newer, modern way of living that younger people are engaging with rather than just maintaining the status quo.”

I read an article a while ago about someone’s naturist holiday. It was not like the days of blue mottled skin and playing tennis a la the tv documentary many years ago. The journalist said a lot of people had sexualised tattoos/piercings and were exhibitionists/swingers rather than people wanting to feel fresh air on skin.

The bottom (!) line is that I do not wish to see naked people when I’m eating. I do not want to sit on a chair they’ve been on. I certainly do not wish to accidentally brush up against them. The same applies to any shirtless man or barefoot person.

If you engage in naturist activities then you are a naturist. What is wrong with that statement? I know that the polling company went to a lot of trouble arriving at some words that would result in a valid question.

What harms? There has been vague allegations of harm, without any objective evidence to back them up, and without any attempt to compare harms and benefits.

So which do you think it more reliable, academic research or your personal likes and dislikes?

You have sex with your genitals. Sex is not for children to see. Genitals can get aroused. Surely it is better for MOST people that these are not on show. Also, why are the naturists rights more important that others.

If you don't want to wear many clothes - fine! Why can't you just wear pants if you are not at a naturist place.

What harms? There has been vague allegations of harm, without any objective evidence to back them up, and without any attempt to compare harms and benefits.

People have directly explained the harm to women who have been victims of sexual violence. You ignoring those harms or dismissing them doesn't make them any less real or valid.

To sensibly discuss this you must acknowledge people's real concerns about issues raised by nudity. You're so blinkered that you are unable to see anything but your own view, unlike a sensible naturist upthread who explained they completely understand that it's fair and respectful of everyone's rights and desires to have established places where nudity is welcome but not demand inclusion elsewhere.

"...without any attempt to compare harms and benefits."

The hypocrisy of this part of your statement is staggering considering you've dismissed the harm to the mental wellbeing of sexual violence survivors of unexpectedly seeing an exposed penis where societal norms mean they could reasonably have expected not to be exposed to a penis.

Seems like a lot of people agree with me.

As for 1 in 7 people wanting to be naturists. There is a difference with my DH wanting me to walk around naked when the kids aren't in and him wanting us to meet up with family & friends all stark bollock naked in the local pub.

This is all getting rather tangled so I will not be responding to continuations of earlier threads unless exceptional. Instead let us follow a logical progression.

1. Basic principles
2. The evidence
3. Conclusions

So to start with basic principles I will make some assertions.

1. The only justification for restricting freedom is that it will prevent more harm than it causes;
2. Objective evidence is much more likely to result in good outcomes than likes, dislikes, hunch, myth, and prejudice;
3. Harm due to a prejudice is a reason to do away with the prejudice. It is not justification for that prejudice.

Would anybody like to comment on or dispute any of those as a starting point?

OMG! Professor Boura

Hi i'd like to interject, to ask if you could clarify something for me. Are you a man?

The first penis I ever saw was in public when I was flashed on my way to school. I was six.

We can do all the mental gymnastics we like on this but the fact remains that most people don't want to see your dick.

@MalcolmBoura

This is all getting rather tangled so I will not be responding to continuations of earlier threads unless exceptional. Instead let us follow a logical progression.

Nah, you're alright mate.

I don't like condescending, pompous men coming into a predominantly female space and dictating to women.

With or without their nob out tbh.

It's interesting @MalcolmBoura chose not to reply to these direct quotes from the president of British Naturism, which conflicts with his own assertions.

I'd like to comment on point 2.
While it's obviously correct, I disagree it can be applied here. The evidence you have for the benefits can be no more objective than the evidence for its harm. Both by their nature will involve human beings voicing their opinions, likes and dislikes ('I like my body more now I've seen other people naked' versus 'I feel uncomfortable or distressed when forced against my will to see a penis') why is the former more a more valid contribution to the body of research?

All I want to know is has a wasp ever stung the little fella?

Harm due to a prejudice is a reason to do away with the prejudice. It is not justification for that prejudice.

But the 'prejudice' you're referring to here is the reaction of women who find an unexpected, exposed penis to be traumatic.

Funnily enough, us gals have been trying to 'do away with' the cause of that prejudice aka men sexually assaulting and raping women, for quite some time now.

Wouldn't it be lovely if men would stop sexually assaulting and raping us?

In the meantime, the 'prejudice' that is a direct consequence of male violence is unavoidable and reasonable.

If you want women to stop being fearful of unexpectedly naked men, fight for women's safety first THEN for the rights of men to be naked in situations where it is unexpected for bystanders.

I think I would just laugh if someone showed up to a restaurant naked, especially if it was a naked guy.

@MalcolmBoura is your basic platform here the defence of naturism, or a deeper defence of greater freedom of behaviour/individualism generally?

I am finding your overall stance a bit hard to fathom. I am in agreement with you on some of this, being myself a long-term naturist and believing strongly in the benefits of it. I am also however a long-term socialist and anti-individualist who believes in the importance of the good of the many and therefore would seek to avoid selfish/individualistic behaviours, which I happen to believe this couple to have been indulging in.

Malcolm**

As a survivor of a number of sexual assaults I don't need to read up so called academic research that other peoples unexpected nakedness in public is good for us all

I'm not a prude at all but I know damn well nakedness in public away from a naturist area is for the gratification of the sicko doing it. To say they are doing it for my health and wellbeing is a load of bollocks

To be honest this statement is one of the biggest red flags I've ever seen
For an adult to be as enthusiastic about nakedness to apparently help kids is very concerning