nudist cant have textile friends because they lie to them...
Zee
all textiles and the media and government call em kooks that lie..what
a shame that these folks live a life of shame because of their
lying.....oh i suppose that one other nudist besides jonZeee has
admitted there is a sexual element to it but the scared sheepish
bastard has not come to rec nude that i know of and admitted it...Anna
has admitted that it has a sexual element to it but it does not have to
be that way...and there is crime on the planet earth but it does not
have to be that way.......jonZeee
septithol
a *sexual* component to nudity at all.
You are defining *sexuality* as automatically being immoral and
undesirable, in and of itself, without justifying that position. As a
matter of fact, it's a position which CAN'T be justified, since all
such arguments eventually ultimately rely on a diety which you can not
only not PROVE has claimed sexuality is immoral, but which you cannot
even prove EXISTS at all.
Absent that, you cannot make a plausible claim that sexuality is
undesirable or immoral. FORCED sexuality, such as rape, is immoral. But
if a person cannot be trusted to experience sexual feelings without
resorting to rape while nude, I would say that same person can't be
trusted to experience sexual feelings without resorting to rape while
clothed. In fact, that person can't be trusted, period. Their state of
dress or undress is irrelevent to their inherent moral corruption and
lack of self control.
I also note that you still have not learned to use punctuation in the
proper manner. I would suggest that you would do well to spend less
time worrying about what the nudists do, and more time working on
improving your literacy skills.
Zee
septithol wrote: an unbelievable rant about how jonZeee is declaring
the immorality of sex in nudism and jonZeee has never in the pages of
history on planet earth ever ever took that position....hell he
believes that there is only one true nudism and that is the one that is
chock full of sex.....but do fill up the pages with plenty of yapping
about the writing style of jonZeee because in the end at least we can
all have something to remember you by.......and then on top of that you
lie some more about the deity or religious offerings by jonZeee and
could you bring us up to date of my referring to religion....i gotta
tell ya septithol you really are off the deep end......now take exactly
what i wrote about the textiles and their relation to nudist and make
your comments and stop the lying and i will go easy on
you......waiting...jonZeee
Stuffed Tiger
wrote:
>...
>if a person cannot be trusted to experience sexual feelings without
>resorting to rape while nude, I would say that same person can't be
>trusted to experience sexual feelings without resorting to rape while
>clothed. In fact, that person can't be trusted, period. Their state of
>dress or undress is irrelevent to their inherent moral corruption and
>lack of self control.
I am presuming you are replying to Zee or Anna. I don't see their
posts, and I thank you for not reposting Zee's junk if it was Zee. It
would also help if you did not repost his subject line. You can change
that, and the system still knows the post is threaded, as with this
one. As you may well know, that keeps Zee's negative propaganda from
taking over the Google message list, which is all some people see.
Zee
identity......and someone even said it was a she ...i guess they know
her.....well it seems that stuffed tiger is the one with the propaganda
and not jonZeee as jonZeee has never been proven to lie about
anything....and that is the part that these low life s like stuffed
tiger cannot handle....but rec nude is the grown up world of reality
and nudism cannot be the perfect fantasy trip here as nudist in general
are sooo used to....so where is the posters that are ready to address
the content of this thread as it was originally posted.....hell if this
ng is nothing but a phony lie about everything what is the purpose in
having an ng of this kind....is the internet purpose of existing not to
bring the truth to the readers in the unmoderated ngs.....there are
moderated ngs...for the fantasy lovers ....jonZeee
-T.
>and tell em their nudism is all non sexual....
Well, since I don't have sex with my non-nudist friends, even the ones
with whom I skinny dip or hot tub, they don't have any trouble with
the "non-sexual aspects of being naked.
>all textiles and the media and government call em kooks that lie..
That's why we're getting positive articles in the main stream press.
Yep. You got us there.
>..Anna
>has admitted that it has a sexual element to it but it does not have to
>be that way...
Anna speaks in theoretical terms because of an extreme lack of real
world experience
> and there is crime on the planet earth
And, God willing, someday they'll catch up with you.
-T.
(cue music:..another one bites the dust, another one bites the
dust...)
When the man said alcohol, tobacco, and firearms, I just naturally assumed he was making a delivery.
-T.
>ahh how about this stuffed tiger phony hiding behind his phony
>identity.....
Sweet Moses on a stick!!!!! That si rich, YOU of all people talking
about some one being a phony!!! YOU are the king of phony.
>and not jonZeee as jonZeee has never been proven to lie about
>anything....
No siree, Jon Zee has always been honest about his un-natural sexual
desire for female children, his disrespect for women, and his racism.
That's why he cannot be taken seriously by any decent human being on
the face of the planet. Ever.
-T.
Zee
with....i am talking about the barber or neighbor or co worker that ask
you about the element of sex ....if someone is skinny dipping with you
that is not a non nudist....but you knew that and you are eager to
continue your lies as in the past....give it up T...talk straight
...the lurkers are sick and tired of these low life lies about non
sexual nudism....jonZeee
-T. wrote:
> On 30 Nov 2006 15:41:17 -0800, "Zee" <jon...@webtv.net> wrote:
>
> >and tell em their nudism is all non sexual....
>
> Well, since I don't have sex with my non-nudist friends, even the ones
> with whom I skinny dip or hot tub, they don't have any trouble with
Zee
well al de la.....so you admit i tell the truth....so why can you not
take me serious if i do not lie......you are a real sick person....you
had rather be among liars than around truthful folks...and that is so
sad...because i think most of you nudist are of that ilk......explain
your sig statement about drugs....are you in prison for ilegal drug
operations....or should i contact ATF.....jonZeee
septithol
> >and not jonZeee as jonZeee has never been proven to lie about
> >anything....
JonZee has never been proven to make ANY coherent statement in the
English language, true or false.
septithol
people practice is sexual or non-sexual in nature. Why are you so
concerned over whether they tell others that it is sexual or nonsexual?
If the possibility of nudity being sexual in nature is frightening to
your immature psyche, then there is a simple solution. Simply don't
practice nudity yourself, and avoid those who do.
The fact that you fail to utilize this simple solution, frankly,
indicates to me, that it is YOU who are unhealthily obsessed with sex,
and are driven to seek out any activity by others which might be
remotely sexual in nature, so that you can project your own neuroses
onto them, and punish them for supposedly having the same 'moral
failings' that you, yourself, are guilty of.
This is the same profile displayed by a lot of serial killers, btw,
such as Jeffrey Dahmer. Do try to get help dealing with your
conflicting feelings about sexuality soon, before you end up like him.
Zee
now understand why you have not had time to watch tv or the news
...about what is your age range....teens twenties thirties etc.....well
let me hurriedly bring you up to speed on the sexuality issue.....over
the years during and sense the sexual revolution...sex has been quite
an interest to most textile folks....yeah we have about a dozen news
channels on the tv and gob of talk shows and all they talk about is
sex....and the Child protective services are very interested in the
subject of sex in relations to child rearing and so is the police
departments and justice system workers....so this sorta gets you up to
speed regarding the sex bit....it seems most all textiles want to know
all about erections and the sex that goes on in nudism......so you
could be of great interest to a lot of people here in rec nude if you
would speak of the subject if you know anything about sex.....and if
you are a teen ager rec nude would be a great place to ask the
questions that you were always afraid to ask....lets talk...you are an
interesting character.....jonZeee
Anlatt the Builder
romances have started there, believe me.) There's a sexual aspect to
the supermarket. (I've seen people flirt; food is very sensuous.)
There's a sexual aspect to getting dressed in the morning. (Often,
people dress to attract.)
I suspect that there is a sexual aspect to just about every human
activity, because humans are sexual creatures. And so I would have to
say that there's a sexual aspect to social nudism as well. But I have
never seen any evidence that the sexual aspect to social nudism is more
powerful, more overwhelming, or more "dangerous" than the sexual aspect
of walking down the street. (Some kids get grabbed by pedophiles while
walking down the street! Zee, get on the case!) Possibly less so.
Anna
But nudity is such a sensitive thing that if there is a sexual element
it ruins the environment needed for nudism to work. If like you said
there is a sexual aspect to just about every human activity then that
really is a good reason why men and women should wear clothes in social
situations.
Nudists need to be able to look beyond the physical. If they think like
the textiles then it just won't work.
Anna
septithol wrote:
> Zee: Why are you so concerned over whether the nudity which other
> people practice is sexual or non-sexual in nature.
The definition of nudism is that the nudity must be nonsexual. If the
nudity becomes sexual it stops being nudism and becomes something else.
Now of course the question is can nudity be ever practiced among groups
without sexual connotations. If it can't then nudism is a myth.
Anna
-T. wrote:
> On 30 Nov 2006 15:41:17 -0800, "Zee" <jon...@webtv.net> wrote:
>
> >and tell em their nudism is all non sexual....
>
> Well, since I don't have sex with my non-nudist friends, even the ones
> with whom I skinny dip or hot tub, they don't have any trouble with
> the "non-sexual aspects of being naked.
>
> >all textiles and the media and government call em kooks that lie..
>
> That's why we're getting positive articles in the main stream press.
> Yep. You got us there.
>
> >..Anna
> >has admitted that it has a sexual element to it but it does not have to
> >be that way...
>
> Anna speaks in theoretical terms because of an extreme lack of real
> world experience
Nudity has a sexual element to it. Now I believe that nudity can be
practiced carefully eliminating this sexual element but everyone
involved would have to be like minded about this and always mindful
that only through conscious effort will "textile" thoughts and feelings
about nudity be avoided.
Zee
Anlatt ....welcome to rec nude....i get your drift....so what you are
saying is with all the sexuality associated with all the things we do
then you are saying that social nudism is sexual and it would be
impossible to have non sexual social nudism.....dario is a poster here
in rec nude and he states in a forum in natura that he observed a nine
year ol girl that spent the whole evening with a forty something guy
that had a continuous hard on.....so at least the kids are sexual ...he
did not say if the little girl jacked off but i think that would be ok
if the guy had a hard on.....and of course it would be ok for her to
touch it as nudist would not find that to be anything to worry about
especially if it was done out in the open where everyone could
see.....i remember a nudist lady that said .,.....we are all
nudist.....jonZeee
septithol
> I am presuming you are replying to Zee or Anna. I don't see their
> posts, and I thank you for not reposting Zee's junk if it was Zee. It
> would also help if you did not repost his subject line. You can change
> that, and the system still knows the post is threaded, as with this
> one. As you may well know, that keeps Zee's negative propaganda from
> taking over the Google message list, which is all some people see.
Zee and Anna are both guilty of the same moral error, namely presuming
that sexuality is inherently immoral.
septithol
> But nudity is such a sensitive thing that if there is a sexual element
> it ruins the environment needed for nudism to work. If like you said
> there is a sexual aspect to just about every human activity then that
> really is a good reason why men and women should wear clothes in social
> situations.
If a 'sexual element' ruins the 'environment' needed for something to
work, then you better go lock yourself up in the basement, because
human beings are the most sexualized creatures on the planet, and
therefore the 'environment' of everything they do, nude or non-nude, is
going to be quite thoroughtly 'ruined' by your standards.
Given that the environment of most activities does not seem to be
'ruined', obviously your premise that a 'sexual element' in and of
itself, can 'ruin' things, is mistaken.
If a particular human being lacks sufficient control over their
sexuality, that they will attempt to RAPE someone, because they are
nude, then that would most likely 'ruin the environment' of nudity.
However, it would ALSO 'ruin the environment' of any other activity.
And unless you propose that we all be padlocked into non-removable
metal clothes, if someone is lacking in control over their sexuality,
that person is going to be a serious problem, regardless of how they
and everyone around them happen to be dressed. Because most normal
clothes can be removed fairly easily.
If you claim that a person will lose control over themselves if others
around them are naked, but not if they are clothed, therefore we should
all be clothed, you are abrogating everyone else's freedom to cater to
a sociopath. The proper course of action is to restrict the freedom of
such sociopaths who cannot control themselves, not the freedom of
everyone else.
Mark
"Anna" <annal...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:1164962339.7...@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> The definition of nudism is that the nudity must be nonsexual. If the
> nudity becomes sexual it stops being nudism and becomes something else.
That's funny. It's also unenlightened and blatantly false. Please cite your
source for that definition......
>
> Now of course the question is can nudity be ever practiced among groups
> without sexual connotations. If it can't then nudism is a myth.
>
It is practiced daily without sexual "connotations"--if you'd ever had any
social nudist experience you wouldn't make such stupid statements.
Zee
septithol ......slow down just a little bit.....Anna nor i have
mentioned rape....there is no reason to take it to another level that
is not needed.....i can tell you that with my forty years of experience
in nudism i have seen alot of sex in nudist facilities but never never
never never anything even even even hinting hinting of rape rape
rape.....so you got a little excited on that one......and i can
understand that since you are textile and never been to nudist
places........septicthol men spend fortunes on naked pictures and live
performances of naked women and girls.....so jot this down....they are
turned on by the actual requirement of becoming a nudist....now you got
it.....you have to expose your crotch to become a nudist and that
turns most nudist on...ever heard of swingers ....those are folks that
love to be turned on by crotch exposers and they are the majority of
nudist.....so relax and forget about the rape bit....it is all
consensual ...of course there have been many cases of child
molestations in nudist camps as you might note in Nikki
Crafts....NUDIST HALL OF SHAME but again those were willing
participants at the time but whats a kid going to do that is raised by
swingers and is turned on by the nakedness and all those hard dicks and
then their parents like T and looser throw the poor little darlings out
there naked amongst all those horney pedophiles.........your getting
the hang of it now right.....jonZeee
Zee
yourself...there have been cases of nudist calling the press and saying
if you will write the story like we say we let you come out and do a
story for your paper and let you make a little extra money with a story
on naked people and their kids.....but wow i have know of terrible
blast by journalist about nudist.....for instance in houston tx a model
advertised in the local nudist news paper that she was a nudist mom of
three daughters and loved to pose naked and a journalist started a rift
about the nudist and forced that nudist news to shut down....and look
at all the govt agencies that blast the nudist in the usa.....T ..you
would be hard pressed to find ONE ONE ONE ONE ONE CPS worker to give
nudist a kind word and i know you know that so stop that
lying....jonZeee
-T.
>i am not talkin about your nudist friends or the folks you have sex
>with....i am talking about the barber or neighbor or co worker that ask
>you about the element of sex ....if someone is skinny dipping with you
>that is not a non nudist....but you knew that and you are eager to
>continue your lies as in the past....give it up T...talk straight
>...the lurkers are sick and tired of these low life lies about non
>sexual nudism....jonZeee
Bwahahaha! Talk straight?? This from someone who won't even take the
trouble to write using basic grammar and punctuation? That is rich.
The neighbors and the coworkers don't seem to agree with your
viewpoint. Is that clear enough for you?
As for low lifes, if you're that concerned, you can always leave.
-T.
-T.
>
>well al de la.....so you admit i tell the truth....so why can you not
>take me serious if i do not lie......you are a real sick person....you
>had rather be among liars than around truthful folks...
Nope. Most of the folks in this group are just as honest as you are,
they're just not perverts, like you. And, if it came right down to it,
I'd prefer the company of liars to some one who views women and
children as nothing more than sex objects.
>and that is so
>sad..
Yeah, I can just see you sitting around whatever hole you live in,
crying over poor ol' T.
>......explain
>your sig statement about drugs....are you in prison for ilegal drug
>operations....or should i contact ATF....
You contact anyone you desire little friend.
-T.
>take it easy now T....do not get so excited and trip over
>yourself...there have been cases of nudist calling the press and saying
>if you will write the story like we say we let you come out and do a
>story for your paper and let you make a little extra money with a story
>on naked people and their kids...
That's not what is hitting the mainstream press. But nice try.
>blast by journalist about nudist.....for instance in houston tx a model
>advertised in the local nudist news paper that she was a nudist mom of
>three daughters and loved to pose naked and a journalist started a rift
>about the nudist and forced that nudist news to shut down....
Yeah. When was this? Let's have some verifiable details.
>at all the govt agencies that blast the nudist in the usa.....
Which agencies would those be, and what specific cases are you citing?
>would be hard pressed to find ONE ONE ONE ONE ONE CPS worker to give
>nudist a kind word
Except for nudist CPS workers, right Jon?
-T.
(what a maroon)
Zee
connotations....and here we sit daily watching the post in rec nude and
all the sex ads and depraved folks looking for sex partners and kooks
like jenn and cyndiann advertising for bdsm sex and constant talk of
sex and sex and sex ....yet goofus lies and so does just about everyone
else and the real truth is that rec nude nudist do not have textile
friends ....they have been rejected long ago and they only know crotch
exposers and nudist recluse kooks....gee how depressing...jonZeee
Zee
especially guys like looser and i that prostitute our naked kids out to
the pedos..for their lustful fun.....but a womanizer like jonZeee that
will tell you his intentions and when and where he may go and things he
may do even to the president of the US and local police as well as
nudist is worse than a liar......a perverted idiot and a liar is the
worst kind of person on the planet.....but you being a liar it is
understandable that you feel comfortable with that kind because your
mama and daddy were of the same ilk and now your kids will be of the
same ilk..and you will never be respected by the
textiles.....truthfulness is the key to respect....idiot..jonZeee
-T. wrote
Richard C.
news:1164941583....@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4868772822457488795&q=screaming
Richard C.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-708218345413567790
Richard C.
--
X-No-archive: yes
"Zee" <jon...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:1164987696.2...@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
Richard C.
Who are YOU to define ANYTHING about nudism?
Richard C.
> ..you
> would be hard pressed to find ONE ONE ONE ONE ONE CPS worker to give
> nudist a kind word and i know you know that so stop that
> lying....jonZeee
===========================
Is that why I know at least TWO CPS workers that are card-carrying nudists?
Jan Dijkman
following message across the Holy Marbles. Upon discovering this
gruesome sacrilege, the priests screeched, "We have lost our Marbles!"
<snippers>
> Nudity has a sexual element to it.
No more so than football, or tennis, or movies, or dinner, or (I could
go on until the Great Dragon wakes)... It's all in the eye, or the mind
if you will, of the beholder. Sadly, the US, on the whole, seems more
than a bit obsessed with sex...most of present company excepted, of
course.
> Now I believe that nudity can be
> practiced carefully eliminating this sexual element but everyone
> involved would have to be like minded about this and always mindful
> that only through conscious effort will "textile" thoughts and feelings
> about nudity be avoided.
Nonsense.
Jan Dijkman
Terry J. Wood
news:fOGdna8iDMiFwu3Y...@comcast.com:
> Who are YOU to define ANYTHING about nudism?
Maybe she has a Hall O' Shame?
Anna
septithol wrote:
> Anna wrote:
>
> > But nudity is such a sensitive thing that if there is a sexual element
> > it ruins the environment needed for nudism to work. If like you said
> > there is a sexual aspect to just about every human activity then that
> > really is a good reason why men and women should wear clothes in social
> > situations.
>
> If a 'sexual element' ruins the 'environment' needed for something to
> work, then you better go lock yourself up in the basement, because
> human beings are the most sexualized creatures on the planet,
There are many, many animals that are more sexualized than humans.
Monkeys for example.
> and
> therefore the 'environment' of everything they do, nude or non-nude, is
> going to be quite thoroughtly 'ruined' by your standards.
> Given that the environment of most activities does not seem to be
> 'ruined', obviously your premise that a 'sexual element' in and of
> itself, can 'ruin' things, is mistaken.
But nudity is different. When the element of an sexualized environment
is in play most people would not want to expose themselves which makes
sense. If everything is a sexual environment obviously you wouldn't
want children involved. And if it is a sexualzied environment it really
would be inapproprate to be naked among mixed sexes. Clothes in a
sexualized situation provides a little bit of protection that does
separate us from other animals.
So being nude is different than any other activity. It is really close
to the line of what is a appropriate or not due to how it can be used
in a sexual content. Now if someone wants sexualized nudity - find go
to a swingers club as there are plenty of them out there, but many
people don't want the pressures and difficulties a nude sexualized
environment brings.
Anna
Mark wrote:
> "Anna" <annal...@lycos.com> wrote in message
> news:1164962339.7...@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >
>
> >
> > The definition of nudism is that the nudity must be nonsexual. If the
> > nudity becomes sexual it stops being nudism and becomes something else.
>
> That's funny. It's also unenlightened and blatantly false. Please cite your
> source for that definition......
Every nudist organization and practically every owner of a nudist park
will tell you that nudism has nothing to do with sex.
Now are they deluding themselves? Well that is what we are discussing.
Terry J. Wood
news:1165006456.5...@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com:
> Now are they deluding themselves? Well that is what we are discussing.
That's what YOU'RE discussing. Maybe you should do some research. Why not
actually TRY naturism and then get back to us.
Richard C.
WRONG!
What YOU are discussing is not even remotely related to what we nudists are
discussing.
David Looser
>
> septithol wrote:
>>
>> If a 'sexual element' ruins the 'environment' needed for something to
>> work, then you better go lock yourself up in the basement, because
>> human beings are the most sexualized creatures on the planet,
>
> There are many, many animals that are more sexualized than humans.
> Monkeys for example.
Frankly I cannot see how one can produce rankings for sexualisation. What on
earth it is supposed to mean to say that humans either are, or are not, the
most "sexualised" creatures?
>
>
> But nudity is different. When the element of an sexualized environment
> is in play most people would not want to expose themselves which makes
> sense. If everything is a sexual environment obviously you wouldn't
> want children involved.
And yet they are. Would you believe many children are actually brought up by
a co-habiting pair of sexually active adults? Can you think of a more
sexualised environment than that? I know it's hard to believe but there it
is.
> And if it is a sexualzied environment it really
> would be inapproprate to be naked among mixed sexes. Clothes in a
> sexualized situation provides a little bit of protection that does
> separate us from other animals.
Do they? really?, how?
>
> So being nude is different than any other activity.
Being nude is not "an activity"
David.
-T.
>and if it comes right down to it.....a liar aint all that bad and
>especially guys like looser and i that prostitute our naked kids out to
>the pedos..
Strawman argument Jon.
>..but a womanizer like jonZeee that
>will tell you his intentions and when and where he may go and things he
>may do even to the president of the US and local police as well as
>nudist is worse than a liar......
>a perverted idiot and a liar is the
>worst kind of person on the planet.....
That's why I don't like you. You admit you are a pedophile. You admit
that you only see women as sex objects. And you admit to having what
can only be described as racist tendancies. This all wrapped up in a
caricature of a human being that has no more substance than a wisp of
smoke. You are worse than a liar. You're a fraud.
>but you being a liar it is
>understandable that you feel comfortable with that kind because your
>mama and daddy were of the same ilk and now your kids will be of the
>same ilk..and you will never be respected by the
>textiles.....truthfulness is the key to respect....
That's why no one respects you, Jon.
Richard C.
news:4tbs3pF...@mid.individual.net...
>
> Being nude is not "an activity"
>
> David.
>
That is for sure!
It is merely a state of "being"; the natural human condition.
Anlatt the Builder
Anna wrote:
> Anlatt the Builder wrote:
> > You know something? There's a sexual aspect to going to church. (Many
> > romances have started there, believe me.) There's a sexual aspect to
> > the supermarket. (I've seen people flirt; food is very sensuous.)
> > There's a sexual aspect to getting dressed in the morning. (Often,
> > people dress to attract.)
> >
> > I suspect that there is a sexual aspect to just about every human
> > activity, because humans are sexual creatures. And so I would have to
> > say that there's a sexual aspect to social nudism as well. But I have
> > never seen any evidence that the sexual aspect to social nudism is more
> > powerful, more overwhelming, or more "dangerous" than the sexual aspect
> > of walking down the street. (Some kids get grabbed by pedophiles while
> > walking down the street! Zee, get on the case!) Possibly less so.
>
> But nudity is such a sensitive thing that if there is a sexual element
You just don't understand, do you? To nudists, nudity is no more
"sensitive" than any other activity. The sexual aspect that may be
present in nudism does not "ruin the environment" any more than the
sexual aspect that may be present in a church or a foodstore.
> If like you said
> there is a sexual aspect to just about every human activity then that
> really is a good reason why men and women should wear clothes in social
> situations.
>
Clothes can be arousing just like nudity can be. This is especially
true for people who are accustomed to nudity. The sexual aspect that is
present in social nudism is, for the most part, minor, manageable, and
not something that ruins the social experience.
By your argument, men and women should all be wearing butquas during
all social interaction, so that there will never be a sexual element to
it. (But even that won't work.)
> Nudists need to be able to look beyond the physical. If they think like
> the textiles then it just won't work.
They think like textiles except that they don't find nudity unusual, or
lothing necessary. And most of the time it works just fine, thank you
very much.
septithol
Zee wrote:
Forget your prozac again Zee? First you claim you have never seen
anything even 'hinting of rape' at a nudist facility. Then you claim
that there are many cases of child molestation, which is a form of
rape. So to start off with, you are contradicting yourself. Which is
it? Is there rape/child molesting going on at nudist camps, or isn't
there? You can't have it both ways. If there is no rape (which would
include no child molesting), then anything else that might be going on,
is none of your concern. This includes the question of whether or not
people are 'sexually aroused' by being nude, or observing others in the
nude. We do not live in the world of 1984. There are no Thought Police.
What someone thinks or feels inside their own head, including being
sexually aroused, is none of your concern, until their thoughts
translate into rape. Grow up and deal with it.
And stop ranting about men having erections. That is not a process
which is completely under the control of the conscious mind. So long as
the man does not USE that erection to harm others, it is not your
business. If the nudist facility in question has a rule that a man
should conceal his erection until it goes down, that's their option. It
is their facility, and they can make any rule they want. If you are at
a facility which such a rule, and you see someone deliberately
violating it, then complain on that basis. Until then, get off your
self-righteous horse regarding other people not being able to
consciously control all of their bodily processes. Let me ask you
something, sweetcheeks: Can you raise your body temperature 5 degrees
Fahrenheit, just by thinking hard about it? Because there are people,
trained in biofeedback, who can. By your standards, would they be
justified in sneering at you, because your body temperature is going up
and down all the time, outside of your conscious control?
Oh, and I don't care if people 'spend a fortune' on naked pictures of
adults, either. The adults in the pictures consented to have their
picture taken. And the people who bought them spent their own money. If
you don't like naked pictures, then don't spend your own money on them,
and don't tell other people what to do with their money. It's really
very simple.
septithol
Anna wrote:
> There are many, many animals that are more sexualized than humans.
> Monkeys for example.
Umm, no. Not only do monkeys only mate when the female is in Estrus,
but the size of a human male's genitals is far larger, in relation to
the body, than any other ape or monkey.
The only 'monkey' that comes close to being as sexual as human beings
is the Bonobo, which is a special case, because in the Bonobo, sexual
acts, such ritual mountings (which are very brief and do not culminate
in orgasm), are no longer sex qua sex, but a replacement for violence
as a means of resolving disputes and questions of status.
As you have shown an ignorance of basic biology, the rest of what you
have said can be dismissed.
Zee
septithol......OK so you figure that all child sex with adults is
rape....and you know i would say that 99 percent of the worlds pop
would agree with you.....but this ignorant 99 percent including you has
never been where i have been apparently.....so brace yourself for the
cold hard facts of reality in a sorry world of fucked up humans such as
you and your ignorance because you been busy not looking in the right
places for your answers......how about the club house of a nudist
facility where there is boys and girls jackin off and having fun with a
few adult men and maybe an adult female that enjoys this
environment....and kids are wanting to have sex with the adults...and
they can be heard panting across the room in their natural state of
turn on and the little girls have been having sex all their life since
when and their parents are incestuous and that is the way they
live......how come you have not considered this human condition....and
if you have then why do you figure these adults are raping those
children..........you explain your ignorance and maybe we could discuss
something else....in the mean time i do not have time for your ignorant
iquiry because you have not tried to learn for yourself.....jonZeee
septithol
(Insane pedophilic fantasy crap SNIPPED!!!)
Zee, you are one sick fuck.
Zee
person has told you that nudist kids are into sex and you have been
saying it was rape.....there is only one stupid kindergarten sniffling
words you are left with to say and you said it.....it is all
fantasy.....bye bye....you fucking lying piece a shit.....jonZeee
Richard C.
news:1165055419....@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> Zee wrote:
> (Insane pedophilic fantasy crap SNIPPED!!!)
>
> Zee, you are one sick fuck.
>
you are, of course, 100% CORRECT!
his fantasy is exactly that............
Neosapienis
naturism that she has the right to be educating US. :-S
--
Regards,
Dario Western
http://www.icq.com/38318214
http://www.myspace.com/25155501
http://theglamgod.spaces.msn.com
http://360.yahoo.com/larrikin70
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
"Terry J. Wood" <Terry...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns988CA2303B1...@216.168.3.30...
Neosapienis
textile friends who know that I am a nudist. They may not be interested in
joining me in my lifestyle but they respect my choice to do so.
The amount of shit that comes out of your mouth could fill the Grand Canyon,
jonZeee.
Zee
everyone is interested in that subject when it comes to social crotch
exposing....do you tell them about the little girl that was clinging to
the guy with a hard on......they would love that story...jonZeee
Terry J. Wood
>> environment is in play most people would not want to expose
>> themselves which makes sense. If everything is a sexual environment
>> obviously you wouldn't want children involved.
> And yet they are. Would you believe many children are actually brought
> up by a co-habiting pair of sexually active adults? Can you think of a
> more sexualised environment than that? I know it's hard to believe
> but there it is.
There ought to be a HALL O' SHAME about something like this!
It's a *BIG* problem!
Did you know I've found "co-habiting pairs of sexually active adults" in
nudist camps too?!?!?
Someone contact Rep. Mark Foley and let him know about this ASAP!
Terry "Good Golly Miss Molly!" Wood
Terry J. Wood
news:l0l1n2p9jdes682ij...@4ax.com:
> You admit you are a pedophile.
So why won't Nikki Craft believe him?
Dan Abel
"David Looser" <david....@btinternet.com> wrote:
> And yet they are. Would you believe many children are actually brought up by
> a co-habiting pair of sexually active adults? Can you think of a more
> sexualised environment than that? I know it's hard to believe but there it
> is.
When our son was pretty young, he told my wife that he found out what
sex was, and that it was really disgusting. He couldn't believe that we
had done it THREE TIMES! (We have three children)
--
Dan Abel
da...@sonic.net
Petaluma, California, USA
-T.
They're related. It's a family thing. In an incestuous sort of way.
(cue dueling banjos)
Anna
People shouldn't go to nudist camps so they can get "turned on" and
then have sex.
People should go to nudist camps to experience non sexualized nudity.
Stuffed Tiger
<david....@btinternet.com> wrote:
...
>Frankly I cannot see how one can produce rankings for sexualisation. What on
>earth it is supposed to mean to say that humans either are, or are not, the
>most "sexualised" creatures?
In this case, I am guessing that the word "sexualized" refers to being
endowed with the character of engaging in sexual activity. In most
sexual creatures, sexual activity is restricted to a short time when
the female can become pregnant. In humans, dolphins and few others,
sexual activity seems to provide some other function, and is engaged
in a large number of times when the female cannot get pregnant.
It is also interesting that the typical signs of pending ovulation are
hidden in the human female and that human females sleeping in close
proximity tend to synchronize their periods. This leads to the thesis
that there has been evolutionary selection favoring more fathers in a
group rather than one dominant male fathering most of the young.
I don't see how this makes humans more sexualized than other creatures
and could even mean humans are less sexualized in that competing for
females happens over years rather than in one battle to be top male.
It does indicate that human sexuality is significantly different than
sexuality in most other creatures.
...
>Being nude is not "an activity"
A point worth repeating over and over. Thanks. Allow me...
Being nude is not "an activity," it is a state of being. Getting
dressed is the activity. We are being forced to perform that activity
for religious reasons, i.e. a cultist, religious notion of modesty.
Zee
required in social situations because of health reason.....same as the
health department requires food handlers to wash their hands after
using the bathroom.....ref...feces and urine are the prime reason..same
as the wearing of clothes.....if the crotch is not kept covered there
is a chance of feces and urine being transferred from one person to
another so society accepts this requirement but you being a fucked up
street idiot kid hates religion and comes to rec nude to perpetuate
your hatred for religion.....while being too cowardly to go to a
reglious NG and make that stupid statement you made below.....jonZeee
Terry J. Wood
@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
> People shouldn't go to nudist camps so they can
What nudist camp have you been to?
-T.
>....the activity of wearing clothes is
>required in social situations because of health reason.....
Horse shit. Produce one shred of evidence to support this claim.
>same as the
>health department requires food handlers to wash their hands after
>using the bathroom....
How do you equate excratory function with simple nudity?
>.ref...feces and urine are the prime reason..
Actually, urine is sterile.
>you being a fucked up
>street idiot kid hates religion and comes to rec nude to perpetuate
>your hatred for religion.....
Can't think up an argument so resorts to name calling.
>while being too cowardly
You're the expert on being a coward, aren't you?
Anna
Stuffed Tiger wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Dec 2006 23:27:58 -0000, "David Looser"
> <david....@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> ...
> >Frankly I cannot see how one can produce rankings for sexualisation. What on
> >earth it is supposed to mean to say that humans either are, or are not, the
> >most "sexualised" creatures?
>
> In this case, I am guessing that the word "sexualized" refers to being
> endowed with the character of engaging in sexual activity.
Perhaps in the case that it was being used here. I use the term to
denote activity done as a result of sexual urges. Kissing for example
can't technically be said to be a sexual act but no one would argue
that a guy kissing a girl is usually doing it out of a desire that
comes from his sexuality.
I use the word nonsexualized as a replacement for "family friendly".
While I like the term "family friendly" people might think that the
activity or the atmosphere MUST have families there whereas the way I
mean it is that the activity should be ok even if families were there
but families do not need to be there. Non-Sexualized seems to fit that
idea better.
Now can men and women ever be together in a nonsexualized matter? Well
that is the question that is at the heart of whether nudism is
appropriate or not.
Dan Abel
"Anna" <annal...@lycos.com> wrote:
> I use the word nonsexualized as a replacement for "family friendly".
> While I like the term "family friendly" people might think that the
> activity or the atmosphere MUST have families there whereas the way I
> mean it is that the activity should be ok even if families were there
> but families do not need to be there. Non-Sexualized seems to fit that
> idea better.
No. First you change your name every few months, and now you want to
change the definitions of things, even though you aren't a nudist. Most
*normal* people understand what family friendly means. It means both
non-sexual and also a tolerance for children. My family goes to Family
Camp every summer. It is a church camp. Singles are welcome. People
who don't want to be around children may not want to come, although they
usually have "quiet" areas where children don't go.
> Now can men and women ever be together in a nonsexualized matter? Well
> that is the question that is at the heart of whether nudism is
> appropriate or not.
No. If you had ever tried it, you would know.
ObNude: Family Camp has only one group shower, so it is mixed gender.
Also, there are CO beaches outside of camp. Generally about half the
people at the CO beaches are from Family Camp. There is also a sweat
lodge in camp. People are generally nude. The church district had some
problems with this as far as teens. So, the camp group has
dissassociated itself from the district and formed a non-profit.
Anna
Dan Abel wrote:
> In article <1165771507.5...@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com>,
> "Anna" <annal...@lycos.com> wrote:
>
>
> > I use the word nonsexualized as a replacement for "family friendly".
> > While I like the term "family friendly" people might think that the
> > activity or the atmosphere MUST have families there whereas the way I
> > mean it is that the activity should be ok even if families were there
> > but families do not need to be there. Non-Sexualized seems to fit that
> > idea better.
>
>
> No. First you change your name every few months, and now you want to
> change the definitions of things, even though you aren't a nudist. Most
> *normal* people understand what family friendly means. It means both
> non-sexual and also a tolerance for children.
Ok, that is why I believe the term nonsexualized is better to describe
the atmosphere that there needs to be for nudism to exist.
Family friendly can mean what you said it means.
And then you have sexualized nudity like you find in swinger clubs.
That isn't nudism because part of the definition of nudism is that the
nudity has to be nonsexualized.
Terry J. Wood
ppp5025.per.dsl.connect.net.au:
> In article <1165771507.5...@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com>,
> "Anna" <annal...@lycos.com> wrote:
> No. First you change your name every few months, and now you want to
> change the definitions of things, even though you aren't a nudist.
I asked "Anna" which nudist camp "she" has been to, but I have yet to get
an answer.
Could it be that "Anna" has never been to a nudist camp? Surely that isn't
the case? Tell us what camp(s) you've been to, "Anna".
Terry J. Wood
@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
> That isn't nudism because part of the definition of nudism is that the
> nudity has to be nonsexualized.
What nudist camps and groups have you been to?
-T.
<Terry...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Could it be that "Anna" has never been to a nudist camp? Surely that isn't
>the case? Tell us what camp(s) you've been to, "Anna".
Pretty difficult to convince anyone of "her" credentials with an
invalid email address.
-T.
Terry J. Wood
news:ksi9o2theljalj5ht...@4ax.com:
Have you tried contacting Jeff Jenson and asking him if he's seen her? :-)
Bert Clanton
> Nudity has a sexual element to it. Now I believe that nudity can be
> practiced carefully eliminating this sexual element but everyone
> involved would have to be like minded about this and always mindful
> that only through conscious effort will "textile" thoughts and feelings
> about nudity be avoided.
I have no intention of suppressing my sexual thoughts, even when I'm at
a nudist venue. The intention that I have is to keep always in mind
that women aren't just sexual objects, but are people like me, who have
thoughts, feelings, beliefs, memories, and loves just as I do. I intend
to treat women with appreciation and affection and respect at all
times, whether I'm at a nudist venue or not. And I intend also to
continue to enjoy the beauty with which God blesses many of them.
Best wishes,
Bert
Dan Abel
Bert Clanton <eubi...@sonic.net> wrote:
Nudists and textiles are just alike, except that nudists like to be nude
in social situations. Nudists like sex just as much as textiles. What
bothers nudists is that some textiles think that social nudity is all
about sex, which it isn't. There's nothing about sex in social nudity.
When nudists have sex, they call it SEX, not social nudity.
Zee
for love....hey i can testify that in those hollywood hills...everyone
knew they were professional level folks lookin for the spice...and we
all knew that and that everyone was civilized enough to show respect
but we were there to exploit and be exploited with a smile on our
face....sex for sex sake....at ponderosa in tx....in the mid seventies
when there was the kiddie porn mag produced in florida...i cant
remember the name of it...it came out i think once a month....and one
of the photographers and his wife was there to one of those little girl
beauty contest and there was a crowd of us standing just inside the
sliding doors to the patio looking out as they posed on the
patio....and of course i was there watching all the slobbering and
dripping.....and i heard someone whisper in my ear....a gentle sexy
voiced female....which was the photographers wife about the mid
twenties.....and she said.....you can really see their pussies better
when they dont have hair....and i said you are a woman after me own
heart...and her husband let us be friends for the fun of it.....hey
Bert thats the way it is.....jonZeee
Neosapienis
Why don't you answer the rec.nuders questions about which nudist camps you
have been to?
Whenever someone asks you for proof of where you have been for your nudist
holidays you always go off-tangent with some self-righteous threads. Is
there something you are trying to keep from us?
Here are the nudist places that I have been to:
1) Pacific Sun Friends
2) Balkaz Retreat
3) Sunshine Families
4) SunLeisure
5) Alexandria Bay
6) Tyagarah Beach
Now, your turn to play. :-)
If you can't answer this thread in an honest, straightforward manner, then I
frankly think you are wasting your time (as well as everyone else's) in this
NG.
--
Regards,
Dario Western
Ph: 61-437-428-859
Terry J. Wood
@cor8-ppp5025.per.dsl.connect.net.au:
> Nudists and textiles are just alike, except that nudists like to be
> nude in social situations. Nudists like sex just as much as textiles.
> What bothers nudists is that some textiles think that social nudity
> is all about sex, which it isn't. There's nothing about sex in social
> nudity. When nudists have sex, they call it SEX, not social nudity.
Am I a geek or what? For some reason I'm reminded of the Star Trek
episode "Mirror, Mirror".
See: http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/series/TOS/episode/68738.html
In "Mirror, Mirror", Kirk and company are transported to an evil
universe where brutality is the norm. They are able to hide their true
identities because as civilized people they can adapt to the situation
as needed. However their brutal counterparts, trapped in a civilized
universe, are quickly unmasked and jailed when they can't behave as
civilized people.
Now, how could I possibly be reminded of this by the above quote? Well,
first I'm a geek. And second I've read rec.nude since the early 80s.
You see, there are nudists who can act in a civil manner regarding
social nudity. Then there are the textiles from the evil universe (you
can tell them from the rest of us because the have a beard) who can't
act in a civil manner when confronted with social nudity and see it as
nothing but one wild orgy after another.
I have the feeling that some of the evil universe textiles have been
"transported" to our galaxy and are trying to take over the nudesgroup.
They're not interested in getting back to their own world. They want to
change ours into theirs. They won't even give our universe a try. They
know it's "bad" because they *know* that "nudity == sex", no matter what
we say to the contrary.
They post about what nudist is all about, even if they've never
experienced it. They post things that we just can't believe and we
wonder what planet they come from.
But you see it's not a planet. It's the EVIL UNIVERSE!
All of the civilized nudists are shocked at this and we want to throw
them into the brig. (Oh where is Mr. Spok when you need him? If only
he could mind meld with these people and convince them that we aren't
sex crazed nor are we mindless, sexless monks.)
So you see life really does imitate art. If you call Star Trek art,
that is.
Terry "Live Long and Perspire" Wood
PS: Did you know that Capt. James T. Kirk's middle name is TERRY?
PPS: Yes, I come from my *own* evil universe.
Terry J. Wood
news:4585a32a$0$21861$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au:
>
> If you can't answer this thread in an honest, straightforward manner,
> then I frankly think you are wasting your time (as well as everyone
> else's) in this NG.
I think I said more or less the same thing in September:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.nude/msg/4508bda27bfe7663?hl=en
I don't know what the fascination with naturism might be. If it's a
genuine interest, why not just try it? If it's about something else, such
as an axe to grind, then "she's" doing a lousy job of it.
Stuffed Tiger
wrote:
...
>I have no intention of suppressing my sexual thoughts, even when I'm at
>a nudist venue. The intention that I have is to keep always in mind
>that women aren't just sexual objects, but are people like me, who have
>thoughts, feelings, beliefs, memories, and loves just as I do. I intend
>to treat women with appreciation and affection and respect at all
>times, whether I'm at a nudist venue or not. And I intend also to
>continue to enjoy the beauty with which God blesses many of them.
Nice post, Bert. It's true that not all men and women have beauty; I
am thinking of some shallow and self-centered celebrities that are
held up as sex objects, for example. Fortunately for me, all the women
I interact with in my family and at work overflow with beauty, and
many of the men also, and their beauty often runs incredibly deep. I
suspect if I knew you, you'd be among them.