Offensives in Public Places quiz

[andrewducker]

[Poll #160754]

Comments

[allorin.livejournal.com]

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? ;+)

[wolflady26.livejournal.com]

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.