Nudist Utopia

[OZJames]

<o></o>We have been reading a lot about nudity in<st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1> Spain</st1></st1:country-region> recently where it is not against the law to be nude anywhere. Despite that, people in the main choose to wear clothes. I know that totally nude societies will never be a possibility unless they are in “closed” areas such as Cap D’Agde in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1>France</st1></st1:country-region>. If a country such as <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1>Spain</st1></st1:country-region> were to move more towards a nude society there would need to be some rules. I have listed below some suggested rules. Perhaps members would like to comment and suggest amendments. What I am trying to aim at are rules for a society that could be possible especially if the first country was <st1:country-region w:st="on">Spain</st1:country-region> or even<st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1> Greece</st1></st1:country-region> where nudity is not illegal now.
<o></o><o></o>
1. Nudity (unless specifically prohibited by one of the following rules) is permitted anywhere unless prohibited by a sign erected by the owner of the property or the Government.<o></o>
<o></o>
2. Any nude person who commits an overtly sexual act in public shall be liable to be arrested and/or fined.<o></o>
<o></o>
3. Nudity is forbidden on a public street or footpath <o>
</o><o></o>
4. Nudity is permitted for drivers or passengers of vehicles.
<o></o><o></o>
5. Nudity is permitted on all beaches (except a few listed as “nudity forbidden on this beach” to allow people who hate nudity to find shelter there).<o>
</o><o></o>
6. Nudity is permitted at all public swimming pools, saunas, spa baths.
<o></o><o></o>
7. Clothing must be worn in all shops, plaza, shopping centres, restaurants, theatres, public halls unless exempted by a sign erected by the owner.<o>
</o><o></o>
8. Nudity is forbidden at any premises selling food, cooked or otherwise.<o>
</o><o></o>
9. Clothing must be worn on any public transport<o>
</o><o></o>
10. Unless prohibited by a sign erected by the owner or the government, Nudity is permitted in parks, reserves, National Parks, ovals, sporting venues, <o></o><o></o><o></o><o>
</o>

[RalphVa]

I'd eliminate the "or footpath".

[nudenwv]

fine post! you have some very good rules and cover just about everything. i don't see textiles and nudist walking down the same path. at one point we both may meet and be uncomfortable with the others. non the less would like to see it happen! may blow our cover but sounds great!

[Stu2630]

This topic proves the adage that one man's heaven is another man's hell. I could never live in a society like that. Lucky for me the vast majority of countries are textile-minded.


i don't see textiles and nudist walking down the same path. at one point we both may meet and be uncomfortable with the others.

Dead right!


non the less would like to see it happen!

No harm in dreaming. :)

Stu

[Franklyminim]

Does number 8 mean that sellers of food must be clothed, and/or does it only apply to buyers?

[missouriboy]

No. 2 seems pointless. An overtly sexual act in public has its own standing within the law, irrespective of one's dress or undress. Are you perhaps suggesting the sanction for violation would be different depending on dress?

I also think No. 1 should override and cover Nos. 7 and 8. This way, nudity is legal everywhere except where prohibited by the owner, and would allow an individual business establishment to permit nudity if it so desires. With 7 & 8 as written now, there is no freedom of choice. Hey? If we're going to say "nudity is legal," then nudity should be de facto "legal."

[OZJames]

QUOTE - STU - "No harm in dreaming"
Stu, in Spain and also Greece and probably other countries nudity is NOT illegal but there are few other rules that effect when and where one can be nude. I thought you would favour my rules on the basis that in countries like Spain it sets some restrictions to nudity :D

QUOTE RalphVA - "I'd eliminate the "or footpath"

Ralph, what i am trying to do is not make rules that will allow people to be nude EVERYWHERE at any time. That will never happen, but to suggest rules that may be possible to be introduced in progressive countries like Spain.

QUOTE Franklyminim - "does that mean that sellers of food must be clothed"

YES - I think necessary to eliminate anybody complaining about health issues.

QUOTE - missouriboy - "No. 2 seem pointless"

You are right but in all textile's minds, nudity and sex go together and so they should be reminded that sex and nudity do not relate. I think the word "nude" could be deleted.


QUOTE - missouriboy - re rule 1. & 7. & 8. " If we are going to say nudity is legal then nudity should be de facto legal"

My first thought with my suggested rules is to reinforce the law that exists in liberated countries , i.e. it is not against the law to be nude. But we must recognise that most of the population of the world don't want to be nude so
(as Stu would very strongly say) we should not allow the population to inflict nudity on people who would have strong objections. I thought my rules start with the premise that nudity is fine but for very practical reasons nudity is restricted or allowed by property owners or by the Government. Unfortunately the result of these rules would be a plethora of signs all over the place, some allowing nudity, some forbidding it.

Rule No. 8 bothers me because people should be allowed to have nude functions in restaurants, clubs etc where food is of course served. Some modification is of course needed to this rule.

I thank Stu for saying there is "no harm in dreaming", we all dream, and have fantasies. Even if a Government thought these rules are practical I think no Government would ever pass them into law because they would lose too many votes. From my life's experience I know that Governments value votes more highly than even life itself.

[Natureisone]

We can only dream of a complete nudist society.
Stay Nude

[bikerboy]

OK, what an idea first off. I would love and probably move to a country that was a nudist only country, however, I do also think that is a dream. There is nothing wrong with a dream however, and dreams do sometimes come true.

1st off, I would delete the erections of signs to say put up signs. It is more politically correct that way. Also, no confusion with the population at that point.

As for the shops, restraunts and all the other bussinesses, I have been to several places where you can be nude in the restraunts and bars. In Germany as well as here in America, the only thing that is asked is that you have a towell to sit on. I would make the cooks however have some sort of clothing on like a body net or something to keep the health factor alive. There are suits that are made of such material and they can be used for just that prupose, and yes they are see through and breezy as well. Let the shop owners decide on that one, especially if it is going to be a legal nude soceity. Simply put, if those that like to wear textiles were to go on vaccation, they just wouldn't go there or they would have to adapt is all. Why should we put restrictions on such a thing. Anyways, that is my thoughts. Still love the idea, and hope that some of this helps out.:)

[Bob S.]

1) agreed. Nudity permitted everywhere as you said.

2) obvious. Sexual behaviour is always wrong in public.

3) there should be some footpaths and public streets where nudity is allowed. I could understand downtown for now not allowed.

4) agreed. Of course how that relates to number 3 is harder to coordinate.

5) agreed. Each beach could be split into a nude/textile beach when possible.

6) agreed. Private pools, etc. can set their own rules as well.

7) instead of the govt making the rules, the law should read that private businesses have the right to have their own dress codes for their own premises.

8) forbidding nudity where food is sold would eliminate any nudist resorts or restaurants/food /grocery stores that would allow nudity in #7. I will agree with workers, especially those who are in food preparation to be required to wear clothing.

9) well, since public transportation usually exists only on public streets, that would be an offshoot of #3.

10) agreed. nudity should be de facto in public parks and the govt should have to prove a compelling reason to disallow it.

I will add one more.

11) Interfering with a mother who is breastfeeding falls under the Disturbing the Peace ordinances. Mothers have the absolute right to breastfeed anywhere in public or anywhere that can be considered a public place, including businesses as long as the mother has a right to be there.

Bob S.

[Agde]

Incorporating the various comments, your rules could probably be condensed to something like:

1. Nudity is permitted in public and private spaces unless specifically limited by one of the following exceptions.

a) Public government buildings or administrative facilities may establish minimum clothing standards
b) Privately owned commercial or other premises may establish minimum clothing standards
c) Minimum clothing standards under a) and b) apply to immediately adjacent public access property (eg. sidewalks)
d) Clothing standards may be established for defined work or other activities involving safety or public health.

2. Clarifications:

a) Any transport vehicles serving the general public fall under the rules for 1a or 1b
b) Individuals in enclosed private vehicles are considered to be on private property.
c) Public sexuality laws apply whether an individual is clothed or unclothed.
d) Minimum clothing standards must apply equally to all individuals regardless of gender
e) Where minimum clothing standards differ on adjacent properties, neither may impose on the other
f) Mothers have an absolute right to breastfeed their children regardless of a location's clothing standard

[NakedGary]

Time to get naked, hang out the :laundry::laundry::laundry::laundry:

and listen to some :musicband::musicband:


and get something to :eat::hungry::eat::hungry:

then some "ZZZ's" before morning :zzz::zzz::zzz::zzz:

:mademyday::mademyday::mademyday::mademyday: :goodbye:

[OZJames]

AGDE - I read your amended rules/law and decided you must be a lawyer or Government law writer. What you have written is great :D but I am about to print it out and analyze and will comment on next post.

If we are to present these DRAFT laws to Governments around the world we must get them right :cool: :cool:

NAKED GARY - I gather from your wonderfully graphic response that you have gone to bed :DVERY HAPPY:D with the DRAFT laws :book: but need more time to study them tomorrow

[Stu2630]

f we are to present these DAFT laws to Governments around the world we must get them right :D

(just kidding!)

Stu

[DEg]

Wow....imagine the bag you'd have to take with you.....I live naked; I get into my car (naked) to visit a friend.

I have to park in the street, so need to get dressed to walk to their house.... where I can strip off again.

We decide to go to a good nude restaurant & so get dressed to get the bus there (being eco-consious types!) and when we arrive, can disrobe again.

.....heavens, that sounds more of a living hell :laugh:

[OZJames]

We decide to go to a good nude restaurant & so get dressed to get the bus there (being eco-consious types!) and when we arrive, can disrobe again.

.....heavens, that sounds more of a living hell :laugh:

Isn't that what happens NOW - do you consider life a "living hell" ?. We would not be worse off but if you consider all the positives of the rules - "WOW" :laugh:

[Bob S.]

DEg:"We decide to go to a good nude restaurant & so get dressed to get the bus there (being eco-consious types!) and when we arrive, can disrobe again."

Wear a sarong or some other lightweight wrap. It would be similar to wearing a coat. Of course, towels must be required as well at restaurants.

Bob S.

[Agde]

LOL, James! I wasn't trying to offer a solution, just a summary! I'd rather hang out with Gary listening to some good music! :)

Writing workable rules is really tough. There are those who complain that Spain doesn't have any laws on nudity, but I think Spain may have it right: just de-criminalize nudity, treat it as the ultimate form of casual attire, let laws on sexuality etc handle behavior issues, and then just have practice and common sense arbitrate clothing issues, outside the courts.

[OZJames]

Writing workable rules is really tough. There are those who complain that Spain doesn't have any laws on nudity, but I think Spain may have it right: just de-criminalize nudity, treat it as the ultimate form of casual attire, let laws on sexuality etc handle behavior issues, and then just have practice and common sense arbitrate clothing issues, outside the courts.

:applause:
Yes - it would take a very brave government to de-criminalize nudity and realistically that will never happen. So what do we do instead - as we have been doing - just try and get more and more people to go to nude beaches, nude venues, nude functions so that eventually to tide of public opinion will change.

[Skinview]

1. Nudity (unless specifically prohibited by one of the following rules) is permitted anywhere unless prohibited by a sign erected by the owner of the property or the Government.The "unless" part goes without saying. People have property rights, or they should anyway. Repealing a rule against nudity would be great, but making rules saying something is "permitted" turns the whole idea of liberty on its head. People aren't supposed to need permission from the government to do what they want, unless there is some compelling need to regulate something, like hunting.


2. Any nude person who commits an overtly sexual act in public shall be liable to be arrested and/or fined.
A place where the imposition, by law, of one group of people's sense of decorum is replaced by the imposition of another group's sense of decorum, is not really utopian.


3. Nudity is forbidden on a public street or footpath
Whats the point of this? I thought we were legalizing nudity.

I think it should be a rule that people should resist the temptation to make more rules.

[Skinview]

2) obvious. Sexual behaviour is always wrong in public.

Bob S.

Like nudity is always wrong in public? This seems more than a bit hypocritical. Confounding cultural values and "right and wrong" isn't going to help us.

[Agde]

Yes - it would take a very brave government to de-criminalize nudity and realistically that will never happen.
Of course that is essentially what Spanish legislators did -- they just deleted all the old laws against nudity. The approach is simple and straightforward. I think it might work elsewhere. The other side of the coin of course was that they didn't ban private dress codes. So everybody can be comfortable in their own spaces.

The key legal difference from countries like the US, however, is that smaller governmental entities in Spain (eg. municipalities, counties) do not have the authority to establish stricter public dress codes than apply nationally. In layered legal systems, the local ordinances need to be deleted first. The advantage there of course is easier access to the legislators.

[Bob S.]

Skinview:"Like nudity is always wrong in public? This seems more than a bit hypocritical. Confounding cultural values and "right and wrong" isn't going to help us."

We are talking about a nudist utopia. As it is defined today, nudism is generally against public sex.

A utopia can be defined as an ideal society. In that vein, this society has to also have cultural values that we deem right and wrong. The nudist utopia deems forced dress codes as wrong as well. Is that OK that we are declaring something wrong?

In my utopia, the main thing that would change about society would be the public dress codes. There would be none and nudity would be as fine as a bathing suit, sweats, or a suit and tie.

Bob S.

[Centauri4]

The only substantial addition I would make to this thread is to suggest a possible "end result" of patchwork "Nudity Allowed" coverage across a city or county that might drive people nuts!! I mean, if three blocks long are Pro and then a cross-street if Anti, because its a privately owned lane, what do nudists do? Put 'em off, put 'em on, put 'em off again! Oh, the vicious cycle!

I think simple nudity should be permissable and a general code of etiquette taught in grade schools. If nudity were permitted but some shop owners preferred not to serve nude customers, that *could* be their right. We would then have a "polarized" economy with possible segregation lines drawn between 'Nudes Allowed' and 'Textiles Only' segments; it goes from being a simple "dream" issue to complex real-life challenge in no time.

That is, unless the customers mingle amiably and the majority of businesses elect NOT to state a preference and post no signs; even when pressured by the CTSN (Committee for the Taxation of the Socially Nude)! Thank heavens they are not a 'Task Force'!

Well anyway, there's a slightly utopian scenario for you.

"Peace and peaceful ways should rule society, and that's something to dream about!" Please quote me so I may become the nexy Ghandi.

[Stu2630]

We would then have a "polarized" economy with possible segregation lines drawn between 'Nudes Allowed' and 'Textiles Only' segments; it goes from being a simple "dream" issue to complex real-life challenge in no time.

Isn't that what we have now?

A nudist utopia is great for nudists to live in but not so great for some other people. A prude's utopia may be a place where no nudity was allowed anywhere beyond enclosed private premises. So the real world tends to avoid trying to create utopias and settles for compromises like the one we live in.

Stu

[Sanslines]

Isn't that what we have now?

So the real world tends to avoid trying to create utopias and settles for compromises like the one we live in.

Stu


Ummmmmm, no, it is not what we have right now. What compromise do we have when so many 'officials' can only state that nudity is 'tolerated'? In most locals, nudity is not allowed period as state or local laws prohibit it. The nudists are still getting the very short end of the stick and this is not even remotely close to being fair or a real compromise. Many who say 'compromise' honestly want to eliminate nudism but don't have the courage to come out and say exactly that so they resort to their usual deceptive games of 'discourage nudism by harassment and abuse with other laws'.

[Stu2630]

Sanslines

Fair enough. You are speaking of how things are in the US. In most European countries nudists do have better facilities than you describe - although even here in the UK they still don't get anything like their share. Denmark is much fairer because about every 4th or 5th beach is a "fribadestrand" where nudists can enjoy their chosen mode of dress.

There is no harm in dreaming and we should never lose sight of the fact that a utopia is just a dream. A fair compromise, on the other hand, is achievable with persistence and patience.

Stu

[Skinview]

Skinview:"Like nudity is always wrong in public? This seems more than a bit hypocritical. Confounding cultural values and "right and wrong" isn't going to help us."

A utopia can be defined as an ideal society. In that vein, this society has to also have cultural values that we deem right and wrong. The nudist utopia deems forced dress codes as wrong as well. Is that OK that we are declaring something wrong?

Today, people expect me to wear a shirt in a store. Few people would say that it is "wrong" to go without a shirt in a store. It harms no one to go shirtless, and there is no law that says that I have to wear a shirt in a store. Our culture simply values wearing shirts in stores. If what you do is harmless, and violates no one else's freedom, then it really doesn't rise to the level of being "wrong".


We are talking about a nudist utopia. As it is defined today, nudism is generally against public sex.
That seems like an issue above and beyond nudism. Nudist institutions may typically prohibit public sex, but I expect that is much like stores requiring shirts. They are catering to their patrons' and their own aesthetic sense.

[OZJames]

I used the Nudist Upotia heading rather "tongue in cheek". Of course the suggested and amended rules/laws would not give rise to what nudists would call a "Utopian" situation but compared with what America has today it would seem Utopian. The suggestions were to provide some sort of compromise thus allowing a recognition that people who liked being nude could be nude in many places without fear of arrest and people who liked to be dressed could be in places where there was no nudity.

I know that many people are offended by nudity but I do not believe that there is any good reason to be offended so if a country's laws cause nudity which offends some people then thats too bad. Times change, peoples attitudes change, laws change to reflect those changing attitudes. THAT is what I am aiming at.

I was thinking only a few days ago that my grandparents would be totally SHOCKED at what is presented on TV these days - violence , sex and "shock - horror" , nudity. Most people in todays society clamour for MORE violence sex and nudity on TV. That is why TV and movie producers keep producing it. Facing the above realisation new laws allowing a bit more nudity (NOT SEX or VIOLENCE) in society seems a very small request.

[Bob S.]

Skinview:"If what you do is harmless, and violates no one else's freedom, then it really doesn't rise to the level of being "wrong"."

Agreed. Which is why I said that forced dress codes, which do limit one's freedom, can be seen as wrong. But that is just for the govt position. What happens in private businesses and private homes is different. I respect the rights of them to have and fairly enact a dress code above the need for others to violate those rules they set forth.

Skinview:"Nudist institutions may typically prohibit public sex, but I expect that is much like stores requiring shirts. They are catering to their patrons' and their own aesthetic sense."

Public sex, as defined as intercourse or other sexualized genital contact, is not allowed at any nudist park. Those which do allow it are generally misusing the term "nudist." They may allow the patrons to be naked as in other nudist parks, but the open sex would be against the spirit of the nudist lifestyle/definition.

Bob S.

[MichaelJB]

1. If we allow govt and private businesses to put up signs prohibiting nudity in certain places youll find the crop up everywhere and youll end up not having very many places to go nude. I think if you must have a sign it better be for a darn good reason.

2. Im not really against sex in public unless its really over the top or in someone's face if people are being discreet about it and minding their own business id just leave them alone. Most people like to have sex in private anyways. I wouldnt waste time on laws like this.

3. I wouldnt forbid nudity on public streets or footpaths, id merely put signs up warning that people might encounter nudity or find some way to make people aware that if they are walking down these streets they are likely to encounter nudists and should use their best judgement as to weither to continue down these paths.

4. I agree with this one.

5. All beaches should be clothing optional, textile people who dislike nudity can find spots free of nudists because beaches are huge and most nudists are few and far between. I dont like the idea of total textile or nude beaches, it involves too much segregation.

6. I agree with this.

7. I would not have a rule or law requiring clothing in stores, it should be legal there unless the owner has a practical or compelling reason to deny the customer. I really hate private property dress codes. I would ask they bring a towel in case they must sit down though.

8. I would not have this as a law unless a person is working there and even then I think most people can use common sense.

9. I wouldnt require clothing on public transit, but would ask that people use a towel when sitting on a seat. I do beleive public transit should have dress codes as it should be available to everyone.

10. Of course nudity isnt forbidden by federal law so any national park or forest should be fair game for nudity.



Today, people expect me to wear a shirt in a store. Few people would say that it is "wrong" to go without a shirt in a store. It harms no one to go shirtless, and there is no law that says that I have to wear a shirt in a store. Our culture simply values wearing shirts in stores. If what you do is harmless, and violates no one else's freedom, then it really doesn't rise to the level of being "wrong".


I have the same problem. I beleive it is not wrong to go shirtless and it indeed does not harm anyone. There is no law requiring shirts and there should be laws protecting the rights of a person to go shirtless if they wish anywhere they want that is reasonable or practical. Obviously if you are going somewhere that saftey gear must be worn or that is formal then a shirt or protective covering would be needed but otherwise I think people should have the right to go shirtless where they wish and store owners should not be able to deny customers entry into their business. Just because the store owner doesnt "like" you being shirtless in his/her store, it doesnt give them the right to require you to wear a shirt. You are the customer and they are there to serve you not give their input on their dislike of your attire.



What happens in private businesses and private homes is different. I respect the rights of them to have and fairly enact a dress code above the need for others to violate those rules they set forth.


I dont see it as different. People have the right to decide for themselves what they put on their bodies and as I stated above unless they require clothing for saftey or formal/practical reasons then a private business owner should be obligated to let them come into their store and purchase things and make use of their business unless that person is breaking the law or causing some sort of disturbance like interefering with others shopping or acting in an inappropriate manner.

[walter05]

I believe in freedom. If a private entrepreneur wants to require anything, that should be fine.

If I object to a policy in a store, I don't shop there.

If many people object, the marketplace will correct the issue.

Stu has stated that he would agree that a private establishment that has a sign up front saying this is a clothing optional or nudity required establishment should be allowed to be nude.

I agree that if a restaurant wants to require coats and ties, that is their right. Private people should be free to choose.

The bottom line is that private people should be able to have the freedom to choose.

[Dario Western]

Hi OZJames,

1. Nudity (unless specifically prohibited by one of the following rules) is permitted anywhere unless prohibited by a sign erected by the owner of the property or the Government.<o></o>
<o></o>
2. Any nude person who commits an overtly sexual act in public shall be liable to be arrested and/or fined.<o></o>

Definetely agreed.

<o></o>
3. Nudity is forbidden on a public street or footpath <o>
</o><o></o>

Disagreed - what about people whose religion mandates or endorses nudity such as the Jain monks? They walk around naked in the streets of India and nobody objects.

4. Nudity is permitted for drivers or passengers of vehicles.
<o></o><o></o>

Agreed.

5. Nudity is permitted on all beaches (except a few listed as “nudity forbidden on this beach” to allow people who hate nudity to find shelter there).<o>
</o><o></o>

Agreed.

6. Nudity is permitted at all public swimming pools, saunas, spa baths.
<o></o><o></o>

Agreed.

7. Clothing must be worn in all shops, plaza, shopping centres, restaurants, theatres, public halls unless exempted by a sign erected by the owner.<o>
</o><o></o>

Disagreed - nudity needs to be the individual's choice.

8. Nudity is forbidden at any premises selling food, cooked or otherwise.<o>
</o><o></o>

Somewhat agree.

9. Clothing must be worn on any public transport<o>

Disagreed, see my comments about people whose religions endorse nudity.

</o><o></o>
10. Unless prohibited by a sign erected by the owner or the government, Nudity is permitted in parks, reserves, National Parks, ovals, sporting venues, <o></o><o></o><o></o><o>
</o>[/QUOTE]

Agreed.

[MichaelJB]

I believe in freedom. If a private entrepreneur wants to require anything, that should be fine.


I just want to avoid any customers being discriminated against because the owner of the business has some personal prejudice against them. They are there to serve the customer, the customer deserves to be treated better than that.



If I object to a policy in a store, I don't shop there.


What if you HAVE to shop there or if every place you want to go has the same policy? That is not fair. Thats what I want to avoid. I want people to be able to shop where they wish without such hassles, you just choose a place and go. Im trying to protect the customer's rights since everyone is so worried about protecting the owner of the establishment, they forget the customer. I want to remedy that.



If many people object, the marketplace will correct the issue.


Thats the problem though many people are non confrontational and dont object so the business thinks everyone is okay with the policy and keeps it as is. I want to protect their rights so they dont have to object.



Stu has stated that he would agree that a private establishment that has a sign up front saying this is a clothing optional or nudity required establishment should be allowed to be nude.


Every place should be clothing optional unless saftey or practical reasons dictate otherwise, such as a formal event.



I agree that if a restaurant wants to require coats and ties, that is their right. Private people should be free to choose.


If its a fancy restaurant then sure but that falls under the practical category. Doesnt make sense to go to a fancy restaurant nude.



The bottom line is that private people should be able to have the freedom to choose.


Thats the problem they have too much freedom and ignore the rights of the customer and there areint any consequences for that. I want these people to realize they have an obligation to respect the customer and meet any reasonable need they have.

[walter05]

You said, “They are there to serve the customer, the customer deserves to be treated better than that.”

This is a false statement. Private businesses exist to make money. They also exist for whatever are the goals of the owner.

As a customer, one chooses to patronize a private establishment if it provides services and/or products that one wants. Don’t confuse the goals of the customer with the goals of the private business owner.

It is possible that many of the people don’t object to restricting nudity in public streets, etc. because they agree with the policy. I agree that most people don’t share Stu’s fear of nudity. However, whether you agree with the position or not, most Americans are against nudity on public streets and in the marketplace.

There is no practical reason to require coats and ties. It is done because the restaurant is attempting to create an aura or ambiance of a fancy restaurant. It probably helps them charge more. Unless you concede that creating ambiance and making money are practical reasons, there is no practical reason. If you do concede that creating ambiance and making money are practical reasons, then any business is free to set any dress code that the entrepreneurs want to.

MichaelJB said, “That’s the problem they have too much freedom and ignore the rights of the customer and there areint any consequences for that. I want these people to realize they have an obligation to respect the customer and meet any reasonable need they have.”

First of all, I would never say that someone has too much freedom.

Second of all, there are very few rights of customers. Except for fraud and placing the customer in danger, the entrepreneur owes few duties. Customers who find business people to be rude or don’t service their needs can choose not to patronize those businesses.

I eat only kosher. There are very few kosher restaurants in America. I have no right to demand that every restaurant be kosher. Where there is enough demand for kosher restaurants, entrepreneurs who want to make money serving kosher food open restaurants. I don’t see this as discrimination and don’t demand that everyone in America only eat in kosher restaurants unless there is a specific need.

Likewise, it is unreasonable to insist that all establishments be clothing optional. If enough Americans want clothing optional establishments, they will open. If not, they will not be open.

One more point, just because you have come to a conclusion, that does not mean that you are correct or anyone else, much less the majority agree.

[Skinview]

I think people should have the right to go shirtless where they wish and store owners should not be able to deny customers entry into their business. Just because the store owner doesnt "like" you being shirtless in his/her store, it doesnt give them the right to require you to wear a shirt. You are the customer and they are there to serve you not give their input on their dislike of your attire.
...unless they require clothing for saftey or formal/practical reasons then a private business owner should be obligated to let them come into their store and purchase things and make use of their business...

I agree with everything that Walter wrote, but I will add this:
People, and this includes private business owners, have, or should have, property rights and freedom. Businesses don't have to, nor should they have to, let anyone in who they don't want, for whatever reason or whim they have. I don't have a right to walk into your house clothed, naked, or otherwise, and you don't have any right to someone else's property. A buisness owner can require anyone they let into their business to wear rabbit ears if they so want. And thats the way it should be.

Many people seem to think that government ought to be able to require anything of anyone if enough people want it. Thats called the tyranny of the majority, and its morally wrong.

[OZJames]

OZJames quote "1. Nudity (unless specifically prohibited by one of the following rules) is permitted anywhere unless prohibited by a sign erected by the owner of the property or the Government."

Skinview - QUOTE "A business owner can require anyone they let into their business to wear rabbit ears if they so want. And thats the way it should be.

Many people seem to think that government ought to be able to require anything of anyone if enough people want it. Thats called the tyranny of the majority, and its morally wrong."

Nudity is about freedom. Skinview, I think you are absolutely right. We should not demand that others lose their freedom - of choice, of speech, of action i.e. their civil rights in the course of forcing a nude society on a population that in the main does not want it. There are many conflicting situations and Governments are continually trying to walk a tightrope between laws that restrict but maintaining our civil rights. Unfortunately they mostly ignore the civil rights and make laws that help them get re elected. [sorry thats' somewhat off topic]