Those of you who don't go naked

Funny how we all differ, i find bad language obscene.

 

You forgot: a wannabe video game player

 

I usually am nude around my house. It's more comfortable for me. However, I don't particularly like being nude in public for the arrest factor. People who aren't used to nudity are usually oversexual jerks when they see a nude woman; I'll agree with Astaroth there. That's why I broke up with my last boyfriend. In a puritannical world that associates nakedness with filthy, sinful, pig sex, I'll do better to keep my clothes on in front of others unless we're good friends.

 

Honestly if nudity wasnt illegal in public, I wouldnt care what anyone thinks. Its my body and if those people can wear the kind of filthy clothing they wear out in public then I should be able to go naked out in public.

 

I think men have it easier than women when it comes to that... Going topless is legal here, but as long as it's still so much associated with sex by so many people, I don't think it would be safe to do so for me (woman, and rather petite, too). We sometimes have to deal with unwanted attention even clothed, we have to be more careful where and when we go when we're alone, no matter what we're wearing; I'm sorry to say the law is the last thing I'd be worried about if I were to go naked in public!

 

Have you ever been to Europe ?

P.S. Your English grammar is very bad .
>and it will not become a moral cesspool like (what ?) Europe already is

 

They call that a hangup, dear, when you have an objection to something but no real reason for it. Taken far enough, and it can edge into "phobia" territory.

If you're always so randomly "discharging," doesn't it get on your slip? You say you wouldn't want it on a towel, so why is it okay on a slip? The slip stays next to your body...


Oh, and by the way, isn't it obvious how much of a troll astaroth is, when he comes in and says it's WRONG to be nude? Claiming that it's BAD somehow to be the way we were created... amazing.

-Jeffrey

 

Lol, it's not that bad it's a fobia... I just dislike it, no less but also not more than that. Maybe 'gross' sounds very strong but I use it a lot, I didn't mean it as such strong term as would be insinuated by 'hang-up', let alone fobia.

It doesn't get on my slip too much 'cause I use panty liners, but if it does I toss the slip in the laundry... I suppose a towel wouldn't be too bad 'cause I can toss that in the laundry too, but I can not do the same with a chair... The main problem with a towel would be that I don't want to drag a towel along just in case I wanna sit somewhere, that's inconvenient. I like to plop down anywhere, chairs, bed, floor, on the edge of the table or desk, without having to think about it. I also don't think it's gross when it's next to the part of my body it came from (after all, that *is* where it came from and it's natural there), I just dislike the feeling of it on my legs.

Isn't nudism/naturism about comfort? So why would I do something I find uncomfortable or inconvenient?

I don't support that definition of 'troll', no matter how strongly I disagree with anyone, as long as they seem to be serious about supporting that point of view I don't think they are a 'troll'. Trolls, in my definition -which I get from most of the forums/mailing lists I am on, btw, I didn't make it up myself- are those who ONLY argue to get a reaction and NOT because they truly believe what they are saying. So even that Phelps dude wouldn't be considered a troll if he were to post here... a complete fantatic crazy idiot yes, but troll no. Sorry but that's my definition.

 

.

 

Astaroth isn't trolling here, because his answer was directly relevant to my question. I said "Why don't you go naked", he said "Because it's wrong". If he turns up in every other thread, butting into conversations to say that people shouldn't go naked because it's wrong, that's trolling, for sure. This was an answer to my question, and I'd thank you all to let him make it.

 

I wouldn't call that trolling... I don't believe his intention is to annoy them, I believe somewhere in his misguided, twisted and quite scary mind he truly believes he can convince them, make them see the error of their ways, and 'save' them. The result is annoyance, but not the intend.

I suppose I agree with your other definitions, but not with the scary-but-sincere type... something in the word 'troll' suggest insincerity, and Phelps (and the lesser examples that roam here) are serious... however wrong they may be. The main reason that I think this distinction is important is that true trolls aren't likely to act on their 'beliefs' (since they aren't true beliefs -they just want to get a rise out of people) and serious fanatics are... a serious fanatic will actually support laws to ban nudity, homosexuality, and far more things... in extreme cases they may even physically attack people rather than just verbally. A troll won't -a troll may attack people verbally but may present a different point of view at another time or in another place if they believe that will get a rise out of people. Trolls are safe to ignore (although on public forums I often answer for sake of all the other people who are lurking and may be swayed by reasonable arguments), fanatics can be ignored some of the time but not always.

Oh, and one you forgot:the drive-by troll, who posts a few messages and never even returns (or perhaps only checks the responses in lurker mode).

 

.

 

I also am a "troller" someplaces. I work in trolling phone sex, which means I sit in a chatroom sometimes and snag men. However, I sit in a pay to play chatroom and don't invade chats of good citizens not looking for phone.

Here is how I define "troll": This is a person who is clearly not in chat/on a message board/wherever for the purpose it is intended. Chatrooms were not designed to find phone sex (and I'm there to catch them after the no-pay ladies reject them). Hippie message boards are not for conservative, non-hippies to tell us how certain hippie principals are morally wrong according to his beliefs. Look at his other posts; he's here to interlope and push his point of view.

That being said, I don't have a problem with it; that's the basis of free speech and he is hurting no one. Do I think what he is doing to be dumb and pointless? Yes. My advice to him: Check out conservative, white male forums where you feel good and welcomed. If you choose to stay, remember that we (or at least I) don't reject you because you're a conservative white cop. My brother is a conservative, white cop and I love him more than the moon and the stars; he's one of the best, most noble, kind characters you'll ever meet. My brother knows how to respectfully disagree, and this is something I find very admirable about him. It would do you well to learn how to do it, ESPECIALLY as someone who has such hardcore beliefs.

 

To jump back on the topic: I agree with Myranya. We just have to be more careful, and a lot of men read naked ladies as an opportunity to invade their personal space.

 

.

 

.

 

Bare feet doesn't really equal nudity or nakedness. My glaring white DD's bouncing along as I push my shopping cart... Well... LOL. I also can't drive a car in barefeet... Dunno why.