Better than wearin prison issue though. Next man's underpants? Nah.
The 'Naked Rambler' jailed for 22 months, following arrest within 60 seconds of his release!
- Thread starter claphamboy
- Start date
Better than wearin prison issue though. Next man's underpants? Nah.
I believe he does, and that it doesn't cause him much trouble.
As for Lengel's refuting the connection with dysmorphia, I think it's all connected and that Gough's treatment does little to cause dysmorphia directly, but the way he is treated is symptomatic of the way that we view the human body generally as a society, and that the way he is treated certainly goes no way in changing how we feel/ think about the body generally (as a society) - rather it probably reinforces it.
Eejit, maybe, but at least sticking to his principles. Fair play to him for that.
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
Sticking to most things in this weather, I reckon.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
I dunno, he might be allowed talc.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
You mean "if you go out in public, put some fucking clothes on"?
What's wrong with that?
Good. Lots of folk are perfectly happy with society's views on public nudity. Not every societal attitude needs changing, many are perfectly reasonable.
Nobody is being a prude here. If someone wants to get naked, fine. But do it somewhere with like minded people where others who don't want to see you naked can avoid you.
Your wish to walk the streets starkers doesn't override the wishes of those who don't want you to. What the fuck is so unreasonable about this?
I don't know what you're getting so het up about, Spymaster, it's not as though he's going around with an erection or caressing himself. He's in the nip and unless you really look you'll probably not even see his flaccidness. He'll pass you by in the street within seconds, and then he's gone (unless you turn around to gawp and lap up your moral outrage of course).
Something about the phrase, "no sex please, we're British" that rings true on this thread.
Something about the phrase, "no sex please, we're British" that rings true on this thread.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Read the last few pages. Anything I post will simply be repeating what some of us have already advanced. Nobody has come close to rebutting the arguments put forward by Red and Frances regarding this man's arrogance and twattishness. All that's come out is the usual shite about people having hang-ups about nudity which misses the point spectacularly.
Of a UK population of 60 million people there's just one cunt who feels the need to do this shit.
Citizen 66: So he's in an isolated part of the prison. I believe he is fine with this if that is what must be done to allow his nakedness in jail to continue. Therefore I don't believe it's any great trouble to him?
Spymaster: No I don't mean "if you go out in public, put some clothes on", what I mean is that it doesn't surprise me that one eccentric individual suffers persecution because of the way he chooses to live, particularly because he wants to be naked and we, as a society, have major issues with sexuality and the human body.
If the human body was not a commodity to be bought and sold, and if it was not a marketing tool used to sell products, then maybe there would be less extreme reactions to Gough's choices. I'm not saying that prostitution and the use of sex to sell things are causing the problems we have, again they are more symptomatic, and reinforce our current thinking about the body.
I'm rambling now so I'll stfu... But basically I'm not at ease with how Gough is treated. I can see that you wouldn't want him hanging around school gates when it's kick out time, but I also think that everyone has a right to do what they want if it isn't hurting anyone else. And I don't see any evidence that what he's doing is hurting anyone else.
Spymaster: No I don't mean "if you go out in public, put some clothes on", what I mean is that it doesn't surprise me that one eccentric individual suffers persecution because of the way he chooses to live, particularly because he wants to be naked and we, as a society, have major issues with sexuality and the human body.
If the human body was not a commodity to be bought and sold, and if it was not a marketing tool used to sell products, then maybe there would be less extreme reactions to Gough's choices. I'm not saying that prostitution and the use of sex to sell things are causing the problems we have, again they are more symptomatic, and reinforce our current thinking about the body.
I'm rambling now so I'll stfu... But basically I'm not at ease with how Gough is treated. I can see that you wouldn't want him hanging around school gates when it's kick out time, but I also think that everyone has a right to do what they want if it isn't hurting anyone else. And I don't see any evidence that what he's doing is hurting anyone else.
There's probably a lot more than one person who'd like to go about unclothed but don't because of fear of being called a nonce / pervert or whatever or worse, violence.
I see the British Naturist website is encouraging members to report hate crime:
http://www.bn.org.uk/articles.php/_/campaigning/current-issues/reporting-hate-crime-r220
I am sure you're capable of seeing the overlap between naturism and him.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Speak for yourself. What are these "major issues" and how would they be addressed by allowing people to walk around starkers?
This is an argument regarding the commodification of the human body. It has bollock all to do with allowing people to walk the streets naked.
No they fucking don't.
Do I have a right to have a wank off the side of Westminster Bridge during rush hour? It isn't hurting anyone else.
scifisam
deleted
If he were just wandering around naked in one small town, it'd be different. People would know he was harmless, know where to avoid him and be able to tell their kids "oh, that's just Naked Nobby" and maybe chat about it later, or maybe not, since he'd be just a local eccentric.
Though I'm not sure he could be persuaded from not wandering naked past the local primary school even then, since his last conviction was for doing just that after the cops offered to give him a lift - naked - past the school then let him out, still naked, and he refused.
It's wandering all over the country that makes it different. Most people seeing him wouldn't know why he's doing it. They'd likely assume he was either a danger to someone else - that if he could do that, what else could he do? - or think he was a danger to himself, either fucked up on drugs or mentally ill. So I bet lots and lots of people have actually called the police because of him.
I called the cops on a naked bloke once, when he was lying next to a kids' playpark, because I thought it likely that he was off his head to do something like that and also that he was very vulnerable to assault or theft (he had a bag and a phone in his hand).
I also wouldn't particularly want to see a naked stranger in an unexpected place shortly after I'd been sexually assaulted. He wouldn't be safe old Naked Nobby, he'd be a grown man whose history and intentions I don't know. I would be the one who had to leave because I felt very unsafe.
And I wouldn't want to be helping a kid recover from sexual abuse and then have it put back a step due to mixed messages about when it's ok for a grown man to let kids see his penis.
Though I'm not sure he could be persuaded from not wandering naked past the local primary school even then, since his last conviction was for doing just that after the cops offered to give him a lift - naked - past the school then let him out, still naked, and he refused.
It's wandering all over the country that makes it different. Most people seeing him wouldn't know why he's doing it. They'd likely assume he was either a danger to someone else - that if he could do that, what else could he do? - or think he was a danger to himself, either fucked up on drugs or mentally ill. So I bet lots and lots of people have actually called the police because of him.
I called the cops on a naked bloke once, when he was lying next to a kids' playpark, because I thought it likely that he was off his head to do something like that and also that he was very vulnerable to assault or theft (he had a bag and a phone in his hand).
I also wouldn't particularly want to see a naked stranger in an unexpected place shortly after I'd been sexually assaulted. He wouldn't be safe old Naked Nobby, he'd be a grown man whose history and intentions I don't know. I would be the one who had to leave because I felt very unsafe.
And I wouldn't want to be helping a kid recover from sexual abuse and then have it put back a step due to mixed messages about when it's ok for a grown man to let kids see his penis.
Wow you're really frothing aren't you, SM? 
Of course Firky shouldn't do that - it's a sexual act that could be seen by anyone. Being naked in itself is not a sexual act.
As for you stating that my argument is about the commodification of the human body and that that has nothing to do with public nakedness... Am I alone in thinking that your statement is rather self defeating, what with the whole 'human body' and 'being naked'? We are subjected to hundreds of images of practically naked women (and men) in an effort to sell us ... everything?! And you think that the commodification of the human body has nothing to do with how we perceive public nakedness?
Of course Firky shouldn't do that - it's a sexual act that could be seen by anyone. Being naked in itself is not a sexual act.As for you stating that my argument is about the commodification of the human body and that that has nothing to do with public nakedness... Am I alone in thinking that your statement is rather self defeating, what with the whole 'human body' and 'being naked'? We are subjected to hundreds of images of practically naked women (and men) in an effort to sell us ... everything?! And you think that the commodification of the human body has nothing to do with how we perceive public nakedness?
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
So what? Why shouldn't we be allowed to perform sexual acts in public? They don't hurt anyone else and that seemed to be your yardstick earlier.
Of course it has, but I've said nothing whatsoever to the contrary. I said your argument went nowhere as to explaining why public nudity of this sort should be allowed.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Good post.
Obviously if a child sees a sexual act then it could be disturbing for them.
And my argument implies that if we are subjected to tens or hundreds of images of nudity on a daily basis, then why are we so outraged when an actual real life person decides they do not wish to wear clothes, when we constantly have the arses, tits, legs and other bits of people who are deemed to be attractive enough to sell a product shoved in our faces?
And my argument implies that if we are subjected to tens or hundreds of images of nudity on a daily basis, then why are we so outraged when an actual real life person decides they do not wish to wear clothes, when we constantly have the arses, tits, legs and other bits of people who are deemed to be attractive enough to sell a product shoved in our faces?
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Why? Isn't sex as natural as nudity?
We're not.
When and where did you last see such an image?
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
That's got to be tempting fate, hasn't it?
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
Well it's tempting a link to the naked urbanites thread
I am a parent of a 7 year old boy. I don't mind being naked in front of him, but I wouldn't have sex in front of him. We're all born into this world naked. We're not all born into this world wanking.
Similar threads
