Very cool, if true

I don't think that's weird at all - that's more or less my attitude.

The naked form shouldn't be offensive - it's only conditioning that makes us think it is.

However, some clothing is overtly offensive, and unneccesary. Of course, as ever, offensiveness is subjective. I'd have preferred if the last one was "People should be discouraged from trying to deliberately offend people with their clothing", instead of "Offensive clothing shouldn't be allowed". I just don't think its necessary to antagonise people by wearing t-shirts that say "Fuck you", or whatever.

From:

I thought that fitted into the "something I put up with" category - i.e. something that you don't like, but don't want to explicitly ban.

From:

I'm falling on the fence between wanting to ban it, and not wanting to enforce my opinion on others. Maybe have designated offensive t-shirt zones? ;+)

It's like, when we were in the gardens and those neds walked by with their ghetto-blaster, offending everyone around. I don't think you *should* be able to do that, but I don't want to enforce that. I just wish I could rely on everyone to have more respect for others.

From:

I tend to agree. I mean, neds walking past with quiet music would probably be ok (up to a point), but loud music is a real pain.

Slightly offensive t-shirts are ok with most people, very offensive t-shirts aren't.

And deciding who gets to define 'offensive' is also a tricky question.

From:

I don't know - I'm all for a cross-section of say, 1000 people, having to veto any t-shirt that has a picture and-or slogan on it. Deciding by committee seems fair.

You can organise it, of course....

From:

And deciding who gets to define 'offensive' is also a tricky question.

I was thinking that, too. I mean, what's offensive clothing? Is it only t-shirts with offensive phrases and/or pictures? Is it a leather tanktop with holes cut in it so nipples peak out? Is it tight miniskirts?

If offensive = overtly revealing, is that better or worse than just running around naked?

From:

wordofblake.livejournal.com

I was going to ask about the "offensive clothing", I mean it could mean insulting t-shirts, which I have no problem with at all, but then that isnt offensive, at least not to me. Clothes that I do find offensive, such as bum bags, shellsuits, etc by default offend me as I find them offensive.

From:

It seems to depend on whether you see nakedness as overtly sexual.

If nakedness isn't sexual, then it's not offensive (well, generally) and therefore easier to put up with than offensive t-shirts.

I ought to say that I have numerous offensive t-shirts. But I tend to wear them to places where they'll be appreciated (not that there are many places where "Zen as Fuck" t-shirts are appreciated).

From:

birdofparadox.livejournal.com

see, that's not offensive to me in the least.

i don't have a problem with someone being naked as long as they're not waggling at me or anything. unfortunately, i think that society (at least here) isn't well-equipped to handle nudity, because of the way we treat sex. it's sensational and shocking, but everywhere. it colors our view on everything. it seems like nudists are labelled deviants, hedonists, attention-seeking, promiscuous, etc.

From:

I was going to write more to wolflady, but it fits here better.

I totally agree - it's society that is the problem. People are conditioned now to think that the naked human form, by and of itself, is sexual. Which, of course, it can be - but not when a bunch of people are frying themselves on a nudist-beach!

I like clothing - it's protective, it keeps us warm, and frankly, it is our own personal 'plumage' - it's (part of) how we show off to those we're attracted to. But I still think it's a shame that people can't divest themselves of it if they want to. If I'm chilling at my PC in the nudie, I'm not trying to be overt, or sexual, or even offensive. I'm not seeking attention. I'm merely being comfortable.

We are, after all, the only 'animal' that feels ashamed of our nudity.

From:

birdofparadox.livejournal.com

i like accessorizing.

i love clothes and making my hair do extraordinary things, using a bit of color to make my face look sultry, otherworldly natural...... i like to paint my toenails, lift and separate, highlight, contour and exfoliate.

i've dyed everything, tattooed, had holes punched in my ears.......

it's great amounts of fun. but there are days i just want to walk around nakee.

From:

It's not only the association with sexuality, though, it's a lot of things. Like hygiene. Do you really want to sit on a non-airconditioned bus seat in the middle of the summer naked, where 20 other naked people have sat that day? Eww! I mean, pure sweat is bad enough (though if you're clothed, you have another layer of protection against it), but if everyone is naked, there's a higher chance of being more than just sweat on that chair.

Not to mention that it is a lot easier to look attractive with clothing than without. It's a lot easier to overlook a lot of flaws with clothing than without. Not that everyone has to look perfect, of course, but with clothing I can make the choice of whether I want people to see the birthmark on my thigh or not. With clothing, you have a lot more privacy.

Not to mention, it's easier for most men and women to move faster with clothing.

There are a heck of a lot of reasons that go far beyond the (slightly dismissive) one of "Oh, people don't like nudity because society has made them so frightened of sex."

From:

Hey - I'm a bit behind, 'cos I didn't get near my PC last night.

I'm not sure the argument is for clothes/against clothes - it's for choice. Even if we allow that there would be times when clothes are necessary for protection (I did mention that elsewhere), there are still plenty of times when people could remove them without any adverse effects. Say, in Princes St gardens in Edinburgh, at lunchtime when Andy and I go. Or, for a better example, in your own back garden. Fact of the matter is, people can't - and for no logical reason.

I did think of the "clothing makes you attractive" argument last night. That's a fact. I find it far, far sexier when a woman is wearing clothing that shows glimpses of what's underneath, than I would if she was nekkid. Clothes just seem to keep getting sexier, which is fine by me!

So, you have a birthmark on your thigh? Is it in a funky shape? ;+)

From:

I think it's also a matter of choice - my choice to have other people's nekkidness displayed to me or not! Right now, if I want to see someone naked and vice versa, I can propose that in a mutually acceptable fashion, without forcing that upon the other person. Otherwise, the other person's choice - to dangle their naked genetalia in my face if I'm sitting on a bus and they're standing, for instance - is forced upon me.

On the other hand, I'm not at all opposed to something like a nude beach, where if I go there, I do it in full acceptance that I can be nude, and other people will be. That's a different situation from walking through a city park, though.

And yes, I have a birthmark on my thigh, and I'm actually not at all worried about people seeing it. But it was just an example of something non-sexual and non-fat related that theoretically, someone might want to hide. ;) It's kind of oval, and looks like I missed a spot with suntan lotion, except that I never tan that deeply.

From:

I just like it better when people's dangly bits are tucked away when they are in public. I mean, if Joe Schmoe has a hard-on, or Jeanie Weenie shaved her crotch, I don't mind. But I don't really need to know about it, either.

From:

But if Joe Schmoe has muscley arms, or Jeanie Weenie has her head shaved, there would be no objection there?

Why object to naked people? Unless, as Andy says above, they are being overtly sexual?

From:

I don't object to naked people. I object to naked people making me watch them.

If you're naked right at this very moment, go you. Maybe I am, too. I have to objection at all to that. But I don't want to be forced to see naked people without consenting to it. And I don't want other people to see me naked without my consenting to it.

There's such a thing as too much information.

From:

fire-sermon.livejournal.com

For the offensive clothing - i'd have had another catagory. Offensive clothing is fantastic, but not at a funeral or maybe a primary school. I'm not a big fan of people who wear offensive clothing just to piss people off.

I'd say I think it's great, as long as it's not worn in an appropriate place.

From:

fire-sermon.livejournal.com

er, inappropriate places even.

Sorry Friday fingers.

From:

Offensive clothing is fantastic - surely that means you don't find it offensive?

From:

fire-sermon.livejournal.com

I'd find it offensive if it was used in the wrong context. What i'd find amusing and ironic, or just down right funny at a club, or in the pub, I might find offensive in an office situation or a funeral or something.

From:

redshira.livejournal.com

I went for the covering genitals option because, though there are many of us who share the view that nakedness should not be automatically equated with sex, most people don't hold that view.
Offensive t-shirts...they're ok for the most part. Some of them are 'orrible, but it's all highly subjective, and my view on it is that if you don't like it, look away.
Breast-feeding...well, it's not always possible to find a discreet place. I personally have no problem with it. I'm not about to get into a debate over it as I am aware that I'm omitting (because I haven't the patience to list them all) many points for and against. It does, IMO, come back to the "people equating nudity with sex" thing. Unfortunately it's too ingrained to overcome easily.

From:

I am boggled that some restaurants suggest that you use the toilets as a breastfeeding place - would you want to eat your dinner in a toilet?

My attitude was always that if the baby was hungry then the baby got fed, wherever I was, and if other people didn't like it that was their problem, not mine or the baby's.
Mostly people didn't even notice - after the first couple of days you and the baby get into a routine and all the potentially alarming bits of flesh are covered up in about a second.

From:

yonmei.livejournal.com

Breasts are not genitalia.

From:

josephgrossberg.livejournal.com

You're splitting hairs (no pun intended).

Just pretend he used the words "sexual organs" or "privates" or "bikini area" or "parts of the body almost all Westerners keep under clothing, while in public".

From:

yonmei.livejournal.com

Just pretend he used the words "sexual organs" or "privates" or "bikini area" or "parts of the body almost all Westerners keep under clothing, while in public".

If that's what Andrew meant, that's what he should have said.

Breasts are not genitalia. Neither are they sexual organs. "Privates", I suppose, in the sense of "parts of the body almost all Westerners keep under clothing, while in public".

"Bikini area" is a moveable feast.

From:

Good point. I originally meant to type "sexual characteristics" but my brain must have exploded at the time.

From:

yonmei.livejournal.com

Fair enough.

From:

dapperscavenger.livejournal.com

People shoud cover their groins because groins leak... ewww :p

From:

josephgrossberg.livejournal.com

Well, in any case, it'd have to be gradual. I'm not used to public nakedness, and I can guarantee you it's result in me crashing my car.

From:

I wonder if you get different answers from people who have kids? I certainly object more strongly to offensive language and images if they are somewhere my kids can see them.

From:

I suspect you're right

Most people can cope with being offended for their own sake, but get far more upset at the thought of people they love being upset.

From:

I also find that people who don't have kids tend to forget that "the general public" includes children.

I've had a couple of discussions with the Anti-vivisection people about their posters - yes, I agree that adults should be made aware of the suffering that their cosmetic choices cause, but I am NOT prepared for my seven year old to have nightmares about the Poor Bunnies when she won't even be able to vote on the issue for another eleven years.

On a less disturbing note, I don't mind seeing "Fuck Barbie" t-shirts in a nightclub, but I do mind out in town on a Saturday afternoon, especially because the kids recognise the Barbie logo and look more closely than they would at other random t-shirt messages.

From:

Yeah I have no objection to anti-vivisection people trying to persuade kids that chopping up bunnies is wrong, but it should be persuasion, not horrible images. The horrid truth can wait until they're teenagers, at which point the whole world is a fairly horrid place anyway...

From:

moniqueleigh

The only reason I don't want to see everybody running around naked is hygiene, as stated earlier. To me, clothing is best for keeping bits in place when one has to move quickly or for protection from the elements.

Discreet for breast-feeding doesn't necessarily mean hiding. In a clothed society (as our current western society is), this can be as simple as pushing aside the garment when necessary. In other words, I don't want to see Mom haul off her shirt & make a big production of "I'm going to do the MOST. NATURAL. Thing in the World & FEED. My. CHILD. Now." She should simply feed the child. No fanfare required. Nothing impressive here, just a hungry baby.

As for offensive clothing, I like what was stated earlier. It's more of an appropriateness thing. Don't wear the "masturbating nuns" T-shirt to the office or a funeral. And don't wear spike heels to the beach. *shrug*

From:

I found that very few people noticed when I was breastfeeding my kids, even if we were sat at the same table. The baby pretty much covers all the exposed bits.

From:

moniqueleigh

Exactly!! Most women who are "just feeding the kid" don't make a big production of it. As you noted earlier, it may take a few days to get the routine down, and then the baby most certainly does cover everything.

One of my friends spent the first few days at home getting into the routine for just that reason. (Of course, she also enjoyed having a few days of just mom, dad, & baby.) But she was determined not to feed her child in a public toilet (talk about unsanitary)!. She's rather modest herself, and if it had been feasible would have probably never fed the baby in public. But kiddo never took to formula, so there wasn't much choice. :) Can't say I blame him, that stuff smelled nasty!

From:

I initially thought that a shirt with buttons down the front would be easiest for breastfeeding, but that makes it way too obvious.
A loose t-shirt that can be pushed up and which flops back down to partially cover the baby was much more discrete. And I never bothered with maternity bras either as the fastennings can be terribly fiddly to do up, so people tend to notice more.

From:

moniqueleigh

I seem to recall that's what Jen did also - just T-shirts & regular bras. (Kiddo is 8 years old now, so I'm taxing the memory for specifics.) Errr...... Might've been those "sleep bra" thingies. Jen's not very large. ;)

From:

kpollock.livejournal.com

Get that spurious apostrophe out of answer one in the "offensive clothing" section right bloody now before I nail your genitals (clothed or unclothed) to the table!

You are too damn bright to be making that mistake, I hate it, it's wrong and illogical to boot and every bugger seems to do it these days.

From: