Should people found making love in tthe open air be a punishable offence?

[yfenni]

I ask this because to me it seems absurd that one of the most natural acts in the world and certainly the most beautiful if the couple are very much in love should be regarded as objectionable unless it is seen by very young children.

[yfenni]

I ask this because to me it seems absurd that one of the most natural acts in the world and certainly the most beautiful if the couple are very much in love should be regarded as objectionable unless it is seen by very young children.

[Rik]

No it shouldn't be a punishable offence but what has it got to do with naturism?

Rik

[Stevedaoust]

As anyone that has experinced sex knows, there are MANY shades of grey on this subject.
I think that sex in public should remain a private thing between 2-? people, in private.But that has been driller into our heads since day zero, so that's the norm. In certain parts of the african jungle, open sex is looked on as natural.
I personally don't like seeing people going at it, let's say, on a hill for all to see. Which I HAVE seen this at one beach in Michigan one time. Or one time when we DID manage our own time in nature and some guy walks by and thought it was ok to try to join in. WRONG.
Sex isn't a dirty thing but one that should be shared in private. As for being busted? The term grey shades come into play here also.
Steve

[Trailscout]

If someone has open sex at a nudist beach in a nation (such as the US) that has lots of people looking for an excuse to shut the beach down, then they should be confronted or reported to the police.

Let them have sex on the textile beach. We have worked too hard to lose our nude beaches.

[stevenf64]

My first thought was what this has to do with nudism but hey what the heck heres my 2 cents....Yes if you get CAUGHT in public you should be punished...If you get caught then obviously you were doing it somewhere that you shouldnt be....I know all the arguements that its natural and all that BUTT what if a child were to stumble upon it....ok how about a 18 yr old how about a 15 yr old how about a 10 yr old how about a 6 yr old.... get the point anyone MIGHT catch you>>.
just my humble 2 cents
pss their are actually people who like the thought that they might get caught are you saying that they should get away with it???
Steve

[Fresh Air]

We live in a country (US) governed by laws. There are laws about sex in public places...and for good reason. I'd have to say whether they are punished or not should ultimately depend on the law. Though, hopefully, there would be some discretion by those who witness it, given context and situation. However, just because we are nudists or just because we might have access to more remote places does not mean we are free from the law. Remember, the laws are not to punish those who break them, but to protect those who are not commiting them.

We have to share our lives with others and just because we might not find something offensive does not mean others wouldn't.

On the flip side, a 'private' area does not have to be indoors. There are plenty of isolated spots where one can be nearly sure that no one else would be stumbling by. If you are not found, then you can not be punished /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I've been able to partake in the pleasure of sex outdoors. It wasn't anywhere that I felt any other humans were near. If I was caught, I would certainly stop what I was doing and appoligize. I find it offensive when people have sex in plain view for all to see. It's not right in any context that way and it is actually harmful to the nudist cause.

Fresh Air

[Trailscout]

Fresh Air,

I agree with you. Privacy can be found in many outdoor settings.

As a Christian, I would be concerned that public sex in plain view on a beach will entice some onlookers to lust and offend others.

As a man, I would be concerned about the safety of my wife if we were making love in a public place.

As a nudist, I would worry that by having open sex on a beach, I would risk tarnishing the reputation of the beach, thence jeapardizing its nude status.

I don't have a bible verse for this, I just have a gut feel that even if none of the above were a problem, I would still prefer privacy in my most intimate moments with my lover.

Making love under a shrub or tree, well beyond any trails sounds like a little bit of Eden! Go for it.

[nudeM]

I see no problem having sex out in the open, as long as it is out of sight of others. Clearly, the ones who have sex on a beach, out in the open for all to see, they are the ones who I would consider offensive. But on the other hand, if they tried to hide their activity behind bushes, logs, etc., and they are caught, then who is in the wrong? I have stumbled on a couple having sex on a beach one time, but they were clearly out of sight. I was just walking in a isolated area. I just turned aroud and went back the other direction, leaving them to continue "unnoticed". If I would have stayed and watched, then I would be in the wrong by invading their privacy. But you know the laws, the open areas are for the general public to enjoy.

As for having sex on a nudist beach, then I would consider this inappropriate, and as stated, it would be more ammunition for the opposition to shut down the beach.

[Ginge of Oz]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by yfenni:
I ask this because to me it seems absurd that one of the most natural acts in the world and certainly the most beautiful if the couple are very much in love should be regarded as objectionable unless it is seen by very young children. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I find it very strange that we humans seem to find it easy to accept violence of all varieties being openly visible, but anything sexual, whether it be lovemaking, erections or, in the minds of most non-nudists, nudity itself, must be hidden away.

I have always thought we should make more love and less war, but these days the world seems to think the opposite!

Many cultures don't share the same opinions. I've mentioned in other posts on this forum the Trobriand Islanders of Melanesia. Their society openly encourages lovemaking, with absolutely no need for it to be done in private. However, it is forbidden to eat while facing another person! We Westerners may think that strange, but I bet they think our ways equally strange!

One can expect that, from time to time, whether in a nudist context or otherwise, an encounter with a couple making love is possible. I have never had sex in public myself, nor would I be likely to, but I can remember being about 19 or 20 and passionately kissing my girlfriend in a grandstand at a racecourse, when, all of a sudden, a pre-teen boy threw some rocks at us! We looked up, laughed, took a few breaths, and started again! Ah ... young love!

Be nude when you can, and peace be with you!

[Gary Naturist]

I agree with Ginge that it's regrettable that viewing violence is much better tolerated than viewing sex.

I have said before that I think that public nudity ought to be controlled by social pressure, not by laws. Example: Put up a sign saying "No shirt, no shoes, no pants -- no service". If someone is nude on another's private property and won't get dressed or leave when asked, then charge him with trespass.

I would say the same thing for public sex -- it should be controlled by social pressure. If this doesn't work in a given situation, then it should be possible to charge the offenders with disorderly conduct.

However, I don't believe that this charge should be possible for mere public nudity because I don't believe that mere display of the human body should ever be considered illegal.

Gary

[Fresh Air]

In regards to violence. If we are speaking of "viewing" it on television or movies, that's one thing. If we are talking about violence in the real world, then I personally wouldn't put up with that either. I would even rank that higher than sex in public, as far as it's offensiveness. I probobly wouldn't do a thing if I saw a couple having sex. But, I'd surely do something if I observed an act of violence or a fist fight. Which is against the law in public or private settings.

Fresh Air

[Croydon]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by yfenni:
I ask this because to me it seems absurd that one of the most natural acts in the world and certainly the most beautiful if the couple are very much in love should be regarded as objectionable unless it is seen by very young children. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>So what are you saying? People should start having sex in public wherever they want and in front of whoever? So if I feel like it, I should be NATURAL and do the NATURAL thing, sex, in front of my mother? As natural as sex is, there's a level of respect we all must have for others. It is innappropriate to conduct such behavior out in the open. There's a saying that goes..."there's a TIME and PLACE for everything." At your own time and place, you do as you please. Why run the risk of offending people or getting yourself in trouble. One thing many people lack is COURTESY for others.,

[Rik]

What has all this got to do with naturism?

Rik

[Croydon]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rik:
What has all this got to do with naturism?

Rik <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Rik, good question. But knowing the original post of Yfenni, this post doesn't surprises me as his first post went on about how his swim instructor had a big penis and how he touched his groin and there was nothing sexual about it

[chuckster]

I agree that to have intercourse were it is in full view of all members(including children and especially children)is improper conduct. I'm not saying it's wrong to do it but that it should be done privatly or semi private. In other words why not have a specific area for adult couples only.

[shãybare]

Chuckster, They do have an area for that. It's called "your own home". /infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

[gamblefish]

Or "Dennys"...

[gamblefish]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rik:
What has all this got to do with naturism?

Rik <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I think a lot of these so-called naturists on this board are just looking for cheap thrills...

[Bob S.]

You know, there is a case before the Supreme Court right now where they will decide whether anti sodomy laws are legal. I'm sure you heard the comments from Sen. Rick Santorum where he commented that if one type of consensual sex between two adults is allowed, then how can society ban any consensual sex between adults such as incest.

Now that case would be interesting in terms of outdoors sex between two consensual adults. Now IMO, people who make an effort to hide themselves such as finding a secluded spot where there is no expectation that others would be around, then if caught, they should just be given a warning. If they are having sex in an open place where there is an expectation that others would pass by, then they should be prosecuted.

I do question why you make being seen by children as something worse than being seen by adults. Many children have seen their parents having sex without any lasting after-effects, so why would seeing strangers be any worse?

Bob S.

[stevenf64]

Bob
that post was just weird
Are you advocating sodomy or just stating that there is a case...and how could anyone not know the diff between that and incest....
as for incest AND you last paragraph...
Has the world all gone mad...kids should be kids not subject to incest or exposed to sex. nudism is exceptable but having or letting kids see sex acts between adults is WRONG...If a child innocently catches his parents will his/her eyes fall out? NO but that being said we shouldnt go out of our way to flaunt it...
I am sure at 13 my son knows that dad and mom are having sex when the door is locked (the only time we lock the door) and we have ALWAYS been open with him about sex and bodies BUT that doesnt meen that its something to share...
I am sure most people here are decent people and would agree...
People lets let the KIDS HAVE A CHILDHOOD...anything less is wrong and robs them of something that they can never get back....

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by stevenf64:
Bob
that post was just weird
Are you advocating sodomy or just stating that there is a case...and how could anyone not know the diff between that and incest....
as for incest AND you last paragraph...
Has the world all gone mad...kids should be kids not subject to incest or exposed to sex. nudism is exceptable but having or letting kids see sex acts between adults is WRONG...If a child innocently catches his parents will his/her eyes fall out? NO but that being said we shouldnt go out of our way to flaunt it...
I am sure at 13 my son knows that dad and mom are having sex when the door is locked (the only time we lock the door) and we have ALWAYS been open with him about sex and bodies BUT that doesnt meen that its something to share...
I am sure most people here are decent people and would agree...
People lets let the KIDS HAVE A CHILDHOOD...anything less is wrong and robs them of something that they can never get back.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Kids knowing that there is sex in the world does not rob them of their childhood. In days gone by people lived in one big room and had twelve kids. How do you think that happened?

Also, long ago children were exposed to sex because of the animals kept by their parents on farms and just in the back yard for food and knew about the birds and the bees firsthand. We've moved away from all that and I'm not sure that is such a good thing.

I think you totally missed his point about incest and sodomy. Perhaps I can dig up a link to that for you so it makes sense to you. Please I think your judgements need to be witheld until you understand the total issue. Obviously you didn't get it the first time.

Here is the Senator's quote:

Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, yesterday made homophobic remarks during an interview with Associated Press. During the interview, he criticized homosexuality and insulted most of the nation by stating, "If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual (gay) sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything."

What he's talking about is laws and rights, not personal morality. He is talking about rights behind closed doors for the most part. Except for the part about incest (and only in cases involving pedophilia) I think none of those things should be illegal. If we were arresting for adultry the jails would be a huge revolving door, let's face it. Some might consider some of these actions as not moral but that should not be confused with being legal.

[NW Nude]

How the heck did this go from public sex to sodomy laws? My wife and I went to a nude campground just for the fun of a one time experience. We liked being nude so much, and the people, that we went to several nude swims in the winter months. She was concerned that swingers or weirdo's may approach. After we signed the registration forms and I've read further into what a real naturist behaviour is, I would actually be ok with bringing my kids. However, public sex is inappropriate an would bring this cause and movement backwards. I have the best fantasy to make love with my wife out in nature, when the time is right and nobody could be around, it will happen. It can be in nature and at the same time private and appropriate.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by New Nude in NW:
How the heck did this go from public sex to sodomy laws? My wife and I went to a nude campground just for the fun of a one time experience. We liked being nude so much, and the people, that we went to several nude swims in the winter months. She was concerned that swingers or weirdo's may approach. After we signed the registration forms and I've read further into what a real naturist behaviour is, I would actually be ok with bringing my kids. However, public sex is inappropriate an would bring this cause and movement backwards. I have the best fantasy to make love with my wife out in nature, when the time is right and nobody could be around, it will happen. It can be in nature and at the same time private and appropriate. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I think the definition of public sex has been different for different posters. If you are out in nature having sex that is technically a public place even if you think you are in a place where nobody will find you.

Bob S had the best definition going... if you are having sex outside expecting to be seen by the general public that should be against the law (at least for now). If you have sex outside expecting privacy that should not be against the law.

As for how this thread went from one topic to another I suggest you read the thread and see for yourself. Thread drift happens as you enter specifics of a dialog and someone decides to misinterpret what was posted and why it was posted.

[Bob S.]

steven, if you are calling me weird, well then, thank you for noticing. I am neither advocating nor condemning sodomy. If you read my post, I was only informing the group of that case. And thanks cyndiann, for the quote.

I think you misread my whole post. First, the reference to incest dealt with two consenting adults. As in two adult cousins who fall in love and want to marry. And I was referring to children who happen upon their parents in the middle of their lovemaking session. I am not saying that anyone should involve thier children in their sexual encounters. Parents need to let their children know that Mommy and Daddy need some alone time. Parents need and deserve it.

And to comment on cyndiann's response to the yesteryears when children shared rooms with parents and lived on farms, yes, children actually learned about sex by watching either animals or sometimes their parents. Nowadays, many children's lessons come from textbooks in school.

Parents are failing when they hand over to the schools the lessons of life that they themselves should be teaching. The whole of society is going to he_ll because of these irresponsible parents. (Soapbox issue)

NW Nude, I mentioned it in my first post. And I agree that people who go to nude beaches and have sex there are going to put those beaches in peril, but notice that nothing is said if they have sex on a non-nudist beach. Sigh.

Bob S.

[chuckster]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by shaybare:
Chuckster, They do have an area for that. It's called "your own home". /infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>shaybare, I think the point was whether or not it is a natural act that either should be recognised as such or not. What if the person doesn't have the privacy of an outdoors setting? To each his own. As far as my doing it on a beach with someone I think that would be like .......of with sand paper.It has no appeal to me but like I said to each his own. Just an opion.

[Gary Naturist]

I think that it is a big mistake to continue to criminalize behavior that is not materially damaging to the public. Some (not necessarily the best) examples: public nudity, public sex, smoking pot, prostitution.

We often leave individuals with a criminal record that screws up their lives on a long-term basis -- e.g. making it more difficult to get a job. They are the ones who were unlucky enough to get caught; the rest of us do these things and

Rather than using the courts to punish people, it makes more sense to teach people from an early age to behave appropriately in a community setting AND to tolerate non-standard behavior in others when no real harm is being done.

Gary

[Budski]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ginge of Oz:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by yfenni:
I ask this because to me it seems absurd that one of the most natural acts in the world and certainly the most beautiful if the couple are very much in love should be regarded as objectionable unless it is seen by very young children. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I find it very strange that we humans seem to find it easy to accept violence of all varieties being openly visible, but anything sexual, whether it be lovemaking, erections or, in the minds of most non-nudists, nudity itself, must be hidden away.

I have always thought we should make more love and less war, but these days the world seems to think the opposite!

Many cultures don't share the same opinions. I've mentioned in other posts on this forum the Trobriand Islanders of Melanesia. Their society openly encourages lovemaking, with absolutely no need for it to be done in private. However, it is forbidden to eat while facing another person! We Westerners may think that strange, but I bet they think our ways equally strange!

One can expect that, from time to time, whether in a nudist context or otherwise, an encounter with a couple making love is possible. I have never had sex in public myself, nor would I be likely to, but I can remember being about 19 or 20 and passionately kissing my girlfriend in a grandstand at a racecourse, when, all of a sudden, a pre-teen boy threw some rocks at us! We looked up, laughed, took a few breaths, and started again! Ah ... young love!

Be nude when you can, and peace be with you! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I completely agree. The act of sex is beautiful and shouldnt be put down just as nudity shouldnt be either. My husband and I have alaways been open with sex.

Thanks!
K

[Lilwilly]

Getting back to the original question--Sex in the open air per se shold not be punnishable. It all depends on the circumstances such as time, location and intent. If the intent was to be seen, or the location was such that it was likely they would be seen, then it may be punnishable. On the other hand, if they were most likely to be seen by members of a swingers club, even then it should not be punnishable. In our scociety, the most likely scenerio is that some prude would deem that any sex in the great outdoors should be punished even if it was not seen.

[namedun]

Although I admit, this has nothing to do with nudism and would certainly hurt the movement if we were to endorse it, I have nothing wrong with public acts of sex. In fact, I agree with Gary that this is something that may "offend" people, but has no actual bearing on their physical or mental health. Thus, arguing that public sex "offends" them and shouldn't be allowed is as much a limitation on freedom as imposed clothing. In fact, I've noticed nudism is basically taboo because people connect nudity with sex. Nudists in turn tend to argue that nudity isn't connected with sex, and additionally, sometimes that sex isn't bad anyway.
As for children seeing sex, I am again unconcerned. Children are growing up these days sheltered from virtually everything, including things they will eventually experience and things that won't even impact them negatively. Please explain to me how a child that views a sexual act will be damaged, because I've seen studies that suggest they will be fine and sometimes with better mental health and sexual adjustment later on in life.

[Bob S.]

namedun:"arguing that public sex "offends" them and shouldn't be allowed is as much a limitation on freedom as imposed clothing."

Society wants to put a limit on behaviour. Nudists believe that public sex is the limit, textiles believe that public nudity is the limit. It is all a matter of degree.

namedun:"Children are growing up these days sheltered from virtually everything, including things they will eventually experience and things that won't even impact them negatively. Please explain to me how a child that views a sexual act will be damaged, because I've seen studies that suggest they will be fine and sometimes with better mental health and sexual adjustment later on in life."

The problem today is that sexual imagery is extremely commonplace. The children and teens hear it in their music, see it in the videos, movies, internet, magazines, even in the clothes that they and their peers are wearing. But when it actually comes to discussing sex, the US fails horribly.

Sex is the forbidden fruit that is tempting them from everyehere and all the responsible adults can say is "Just say no." Now children and teens should not be intentionally exposed to sexual actions, but if they happen upon it accidentally, oh well. Everything that happens in a child's life can be a learning experience. Age appropriate discussions can guide them.

Bob S.

[David77]

Margaret Mead, the noted anthropologist who lived in Samoa to study their culture, tells in her book entitled Coming of Age in Samoa about children often casually seeing persons having sex in the open, and not being adversely affected be the group's sexual mores.

But since our fateful destiny did not assigned us to be born in the Samoan culture of years past, we do not go by ancient Samoan mores. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/happy.gif Even in Samoa, I assume that they have become more westernized by now.

[sw1sweendog]

it's funny how 2 humans having sex in public is gross and offensive,yet 2 monkeys at the zoo is funny..............

[jon71]

The biggest problem is that commercial sexuality is splashed all over the media willy-nilly while any kind of healthy talk about sexuality (proper use of contraceptives for one example) is shut down if not villified. Society needs MORE healthy sex to be visible and LESS commercail sex visible. Expect the fundies to pitch a fit about anything positive while only making the occasional routine complaint about the media. Think about this. More people got upset about Janet Jackson showing a breast for a split second than "Silence of the lambs" making "I ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice chiante" a part of the pop culture every teen and tween knew by heart. Which is worse? I know the latter isn't sexual but it does illustrate messed up priorities. What if the second example was "girls gone wild". That's all over the place but could a group advocating use of contraceptive and practicing safe sex get that kind of air time?

[Pete Knight]

The original question was "Should people found making love in the open air be a punishable offence?" and my answer would be NO, but if the question had been "Should people found making love in publc be a punishable offence?" the answer would have been YES,

Whats the dfference hear you ask, well I would offer the answer 'Discretion'!!!!!!!!

Open air sex is a real turn on, and there's nothng wrong with it at all, as long as care is taken not to offend, but those people who purposefully go to beaches to have sex and to be watched are the ones who spoil it for those of us who just want a nudist beach.
At Cap d'Adge there is a nudist beach which has a section where open sex is accepted, if thats what gives you a buzz thats where to go, but its kept seperate to the nude section, much as a nudist beach is kept seperate from the rest of the beach elsewhere.

Nothing wrong with sex, its how, when, and where that causes problems.

Pete Knight

[Wbn]

I found an article of a young couple and their experence with a bad situation..[ Textile Point of view ]
1.Remember this guy, & his Girl friend are young, having their freinds two boys on a camping trip.

This is their story:
Outdoor Sex?

hi there,
Went out for a weekend backpacking in the Adirondacks. The weather was not that great so we had to spend a long time around the camp with our 2+ old, and having our friends 10 & 11 year old kids along. We set up our camp pretty early on friday, around 3, cooked some dinner and hiked around a bit. As it was getting darker we came back to the camp site to discover that another couple has set up a tent very close to us. ( less than 20 ft ) they seem to be very politely asked if that was okay with us, or not. We did not mind at all.

Then soon after things gotten dark, we started hearing the other couple making a lots of sounds, to be specific, sexual sounds, pretty loud I might add. The 10 & 11 old both looked at us with lots of questions. But we were not sure what to tell him, specially not knowing what their parent have told them so far. The sound re-occured couple more times before we fell asleep. Now, I don't mind that.

But, in the morning after we got up, and gathered around the stove at the pinic table to have some breakfast in front of our tent, the couple started making that same loud sounds. We kind of all looked at each other, and did not know what to do. Then we left for a short hike. When we returned around 1:30 we found the coulple well into their love making naked right infront of our tent (we had the better spot, and there were a patch of grass coverage area right in front of our tent), making sexual sounds of love making. We left the area for another short hike, and came back half an hour later, but the couple was still laying down completely butt naked in full view right in front of our tent again. My GF, and I started speaking loudely, and the couple carenessly & slowely moved towards their own tent with exposing everthing in it fullness as without shame.
Worst part to all of this, What was going thur our friends 10 & 11 y/o boys minds., and really not knowning if, or what their parents have told them...
We felt ( GF & I ) it was best wrapped up our camp gear, moved out to a different place. The Kids didn't talk as much to us during duration of this campout since this started. My (GF) did notice a booklet containing information to a nudist resort on the ground near the pinic table before leaving. I just through it on the pinic table, and Left.

Now, I don't know how common it is. But, if you face this kind of situation? Honesty what do you do? in such a situation? Specially when there is someone's elses kids with you?

Now, Think about What this situation is, how is interuped by Textiles.
speacially after finding a Nudist Resort Booklet.

This really points out positive thoughts, great way to give Nudism a bad rap?.....

[Fresh Air]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I ask this because to me it seems absurd that one of the most natural acts in the world and certainly the most beautiful if the couple are very much in love should be regarded as objectionable unless it is seen by very young children. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's not a matter of love, it's a matter of law. If a couple wants to get it on at the local mall, I would think they are judged by the local laws. If they are doing it across the street at the local nudist club, those same laws would apply.

It is the preference of society, not the preference of the couple, that wins and determines what is and is not offensive in public.

[Centauri4]

I am sure that at one time or another while growing up in a oceanfront beach community, and as a Minor (under age 18) I witnessed couples involved in a "deep embrace" in the ocean. They were discreet about it, did not make any sort of noise or commotion, and simply appeared to be in love. I also have very little doubt they were doing more than simply hugging in the water.

In no way did this effect my attitude towards sex, women, men or relationships.

Another thing to consider is that if a couple were engaged in public sex, they would certainly attract an audience. Some of these people may speak up and tell them to "get a motel", have some respect for others, or have a little 'decency', and others may simply stand by and watch the drama unfold. Simply watching is something you might expect to see done by animals in the wild where "sex" is ordinarily referred to as a reproductive act, not a "social experience" (eg. doing anything together in groups of two or more for entertainment or fun).

Animals may remain nearby while reproductive acts occur out of group safety (to insure the continued growth of the pack/herd), or out of concern for the female in the case of an unwanted advance by the male.

It is only our sense of "values" and "community standards" which allows us to think and form laws regarding socially acceptable behavior, and that is WHY nudism does stand a chance of eventually being acceptable.

If the camping with older children tale printed above is accurate, those sex out in the open parents were very irresponsible for doing the things they did in front of the other couple without at least informing them their boys knew all about it.

It put the second couple "on the spot" and forced them to become responsible for the children's disposition, education or sexual awareness.

[NakedTao]

I'm of the "get a room" persuasion. There is a time and a place for lovemaking. In public - and especially at a nude beach/nudist resort - is not the place. By the way, I feel this way about making out as well.

[retnuh76]

And let kids rule the world? I agree with Bob, in that if your in a private place in nature where you expect no-one then a warning should be given. At the beach I frequent in Golden Valley, MN, its on a hidden lake and is an un-official nude beach. But last year an older couple who frequents the beach and whom I later found out were swingers, several times they went at it right in the middle of the beach. Both times it was all adults/young adults down on the beach, and many were naked, but no-one there wanted to watch. Yet nothing was said. If they were caught by police, yes they should be punished in that situtation.

[NakedGary]

<span class="ev_code_PURPLE">No, but its an offense to offend most with nudity or being sexually explicit in view of others in public view or areas.</span>

[yfenni]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Croydon:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Rik:
What has all this got to do with naturism?

Rik </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Rik, good question. But knowing the original post of Yfenni, this post doesn't surprises me as his first post went on about how his swim instructor had a big penis and how he touched his groin and there was nothing sexual about it </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I visit this website onl occasionally, and rarely do I "trawl" it. However, I have just discovered your e-mail making objectionable comments about my postings. It is true that I did have nude swimming lessons and I was touched but there was absolutely nothing sexual about it. I said that the instructor had a splendid body for his age but I made no comment about the instructor having a big penis. I take grave exception, sir, to your comments, and I feel that at least you could apologise.

[Nude in the North]

Wow! Another 3+ year old topic I entirely missed.
Some of the side topics and twists to this thread are interesting.

On the origional subject. I say no.
Simply because "OPEN AIR" is too broad. There is a lot of "open air" in this world. Banning love in all of it would be rediculous.

I have on occasion made love in the open air. I would hate to think I could be charged with a crime even though only the two of us were there.
But making love in the privacy of my own yard where nobody is likely to come into view is a far cry from "doing it" in the middle of the food court at an outdoor mall. Or a crowded public beach or Ball park.

The general public (Society) does not want to see people having sex at every street corner, bus stop, or city park. And I agree. But should a couple seek an out of the way "secluded" area for a little added thrill, I see no reason to make them criminals.

As for the tiresome "What about the Children" issue.
I'm willing to bet that more children have been harmed by the "Sex is dirty and sinfull" philosophy that so many parents teach, than would be harmed by happening accross an occaisonal couple making love in a secluded place.

Steve

[kphoger]

i agree that sex should be kept private between a man and his wife. but, i also agree that "open air" is much too broad. if i'm backwoods camping with my wife, we decide to have sex on a blanket under a tree, and a hiker happens by, it is definitely a far cry from doing the same thing in a city park, where dozens of people walk by every day.

perhaps the law should read something like ontario's nude swimming law: that it's legal as long as the couple can be reasonably confident that they're away from everyone else. that way, if someone stumbles upon them by chance, they're not treated like sex offenders.

[Bob S.]

yfenni, when you see such a post, make sure you are responding to it in a timely fashion. Three and a half years is way too long to respond. The next time, look at the date.

Thank you for coming.

Bob S.

[Swimguy]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by yfenni:
I ask this because to me it seems absurd that one of the most natural acts in the world and certainly the most beautiful if the couple are very much in love should be regarded as objectionable unless it is seen by very young children. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I feel that sex is such a powerful part of a relationship that it should be kept private. Public displays cheepen the intimacy, in my opinion.

[DoctorSurferDude]

I don't want to see it...

So to answer the question.... if nobody knows it happened, and no evidence is left behind...then I think no punishment would be ok.

[emsdude]

Sex should be kept in the bedroom, the world thinks if your nude you are having sex.It give nudist a bad name. It would be all over the news if someone was found to behaving sex out the open. They would not see how good it feels to go to a beach or place that has open nudity.So I would say if your going to have sex keep it in the bedroom not in the public eye. Have the world thinking going nude is not a sex thing after all.

[walter05]

I think this would open up a series of questions.

If making love in public is okay, what about other sexual activities. I think this could lead to some public displays that most would not want to see.

[K and C]

I would think sex in open air would be healthy. However, It must be out of view of others. Some just may not want to see it. But on the the other hand Alot of folks believe Nudism would be healthy as long as out of sight of others. I see both sides of the argument. It is a tough subject and hopfully none of us have to deal with the fact that it may be a punishable offense.

[nacktman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> "Should people found making love in tthe open air be a punishable offence?" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/shocked.gifHummmm http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/blush.gif, well I quess it depends on weather or not they're any good at it or not ... I mean it should be a crime for a poor performance, now shouldn't it?! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/eusa_dance.gif

Seriously, if they are in the middle of the neighborhood park engaged in the Horizontal Bop and can be seen from anywhere in the park, then they need to be held accountable for their actions by statute ...

If, however, they are not within vision of the general public and one would either have to stumble upon them in a secluded area by accident or make a concerted effort to see what they were up to, then it ain't none of the law's business, except maybe penalties for the 'making the concerted effort' individual.

[yfenni]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bob S.:
yfenni, when you see such a post, make sure you are responding to it in a timely fashion. Three and a half years is way too long to respond. The next time, look at the date.

My, some people are touchy! Of course I looked at the date of the offending posting. That does not make the offence caused any the less. You may be a moderator of this site, but yours was hardly the polite way to respond.

"Thank you for coming"? No sir, I will not cone again if that is your attitude.

Thank you for coming.

Bob S. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

[tiger79]

Don't worry - it's a Welsh thing. He'll be back.

[hm0504]

Noting that quite a few countries ban kissing, what level of public physical affection should be legal? What is the rationale for your position?

[Sasquatch]

I have never been to a nudist resort of any type. Frankly, after reading a few of the threads on this board, I'm not sure I ever will. It is absolutely absurd to me to see nudists use the exact same arguments against public sex that non-nudists use against public nudity. "It's offensive", "it will scar the children", "there's a place for that sort of thing". On a recent trip to the Riverbanks Zoo in Columbia, SC I stood with a fairly large group of people of all ages and laughed as we watched through the glass while a 500 pound gorilla fondled itself. I didn't see children crying or parents rushing to shield them from the sight. Sex is instinctive with us just as it is with any animal. The idea that children could be harmed by seeing it is positively laughable. One would expect people who revel in the natural human body to understand that sex is not something dirty that must be hidden away. It's especially ludicrous when you consider, as has been mentioned, that many of these same people see absolutely no problem with children watching the WWE or UFC. "Look, son. Learn to beat people up and you could grow up to be rich and famous. Just don't dare think about sex."

Seriously, why is "it's offensive" a legitimate argument against public sex, but not against public nudity? I would really like a sound, rational explanation.

Why do we have no problems teaching our children how to wipe after a bowel movement, but don't dare let them find out what that thing on the other side of their pelvis is for?

I'm not saying everyone should have sex in public, but it shouldn't be punishable in any way. Just because some find it disgusting does not mean it should be banned. I'm sure there are many like me who find the idea of eating oysters to be completely revolting, but that doesn't justify arresting people who enjoy oysters. When I see someone eating an oyster I may cringe, but it doesn't ruin the taste of my steak.

Remember, we may vote on a majority-rule basis, but minorities still have rights. Just because the majority of the country is Christian doesn't mean we can ban Judaism. And just because the majority doesn't approve of public sex doesn't mean it can or should be banned.

[Bob S.]

yfenni:"My, some people are touchy! Of course I looked at the date of the offending posting. That does not make the offence caused any the less. You may be a moderator of this site, but yours was hardly the polite way to respond."

I agree, the post may still sting, but I am sure that Croydon had forgotten even writing that post. Heck, I question those who revive long-dead topics--but that is just me.

Now I didn't see my post as impolite. Maybe a bit terse I'll grant.

And whether you choose to come again or not is up to you. That was actually more of a wry joke regarding your infrequent posting status.

Bob S.

[Liam]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Sasquatch:
....Seriously, why is "it's offensive" a legitimate argument against public sex, but not against public nudity? I would really like a sound, rational explanation...... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You won't get one here.

[NakedGary]

Sasquatch

The CFI Terms of Service you agree to abide by says:

By using this service, you agree to:

* Never post any material that is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law. This rule will be vehemently upheld when dealing with adults posting to minors.

You should refer to the link below and print out a copy for handy reference in posting.

Link to CFI/CFF Terms of Service page (http://clothesfreeforums.com/terms.html)
.

[tiger79]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Liam:
You won't get one here. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Liam - the flag has returned!

[Liam]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by tiger79:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Liam:
You won't get one here. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Liam - the flag has returned! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hoy Tiger! Yes, I left in a huff and left an avatar message. After a couple of weeks I'm giving things a try again....complete with flag. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/happy.gif

[tiger79]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Liam:
[Hoy Tiger! Yes, I left in a huff and left an avatar message. After a couple of weeks I'm giving things a try again....complete with flag. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Good to have you (and the flag) back! You shouldn't get in a huff over something as trivial as a forum, although I have to say the "thought police" here are rather tiresome. I posted a message this morning in the seemingly-endless circumcision thread regarding this report (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6176209.stm) by the BBC that research has shown that male circumcision can significantly cut HIV risk. The findings were described as a "significant scientific advance" by the World Health Organisation's Director of HIV/Aids. However, my post was banned by the thought police. The reason? I can only surmise that it was because the Director I quoted is called Dr Kevin De C<span class="ev_code_BLACK">oc</span>k.

[DKirkpatrick]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by yfenni:
I ask this because to me it seems absurd that one of the most natural acts in the world and certainly the most beautiful if the couple are very much in love should be regarded as objectionable unless it is seen by very young children. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Much depends on what you mean by "public".

There is a big difference between the town common and 'public land' that is otherwise deep into the woods.

Laws vary by state. Sexual unions that can be observed by passers by, even if in one's own home or backyard when caution is not taken to shield view from passers-by can be an arrestable offense.

There are however grey areas that are best left to the realm of an attorney.

For example, lets say you are engaged in your back yard. Your yard is fenced-in with an 8 ft privacy fence and the fence is 20 ft inside your property line. The real property line is marked by a series of stakes or a smaller fence. Someone approaches your privacy fence and views you through a knothole then calls the police.

In this case they have tresspassed well inside your property line and have gone out of the way to observe you. They have no legal standing in the matter. You took precautions to shield yourself and have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Similarly, let's say the same fence is in place but your neighbor goes up to repair the roof of his home and sees you by peering over the fence. The same is true. If however the neighbor had an upper floor that had a clear view of your yard he would have standing and you'd be in trouble. The roof observations don't count because its not a regular place one might observe surroundings from.

If however that same neighbor can easily see over your fence into your back yard from their everyday 2nd or 3rd story window you'd have a problem.

Line of sight has its place in the equation.

In Massachusetts there were issues a few years ago with police raiding known gay crusing sites for people engaged in sexual activities. Often these were roadside rest stops but those engaged would hike into the woods for the encounters.

Courts in MA ruled that by hiking off the beaten path into the woods those engaged created a reasonable expectation of privacy and that the police actions were not legal. This brought to an end police raids of this nature in MA. In the car or *at* the rest stop which was public was one thing but in the woods hidden was another. The court ruled this had nothing to do with any gay sex but rather any people taking the necessary precautions to remove themselves from public access areas and view and having a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Laws in other states will vary of course.

DMK

[Liam]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by tiger79:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Liam:
[Hoy Tiger! Yes, I left in a huff and left an avatar message. After a couple of weeks I'm giving things a try again....complete with flag. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Good to have you (and the flag) back! You shouldn't get in a huff over something as trivial as a forum, although I have to say the "thought police" here are rather tiresome. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Most" people are quite nice about their disagreements with me. Some....not so much. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/happy.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by tiger79:
I posted a message this morning in the seemingly-endless circumcision thread regarding this report (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6176209.stm) by the BBC that research has shown that male circumcision can significantly cut HIV risk. The findings were described as a "significant scientific advance" by the World Health Organisation's Director of HIV/Aids. However, my post was banned by the thought police. The reason? I can only surmise that it was because the Director I quoted is called Dr Kevin De C<span class="ev_code_BLACK">oc</span>k. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is an interesting observation for HIV research. It appears to have little actual scientific importance in it's self. Still it is well worth discussing! I didn't realize that the thread was so troubling. I read it but have not gotten to the newest posts on the thread yet. I did sense some hostility building, but nothing that should result in extreme actions!

Mr. decock's name is not unusual in the area he is from. I quite like it actually. I may adopt it! It reminds me of a woman I new who's maiden name was Kuntz (pronounced Koonts). She dreaded giving it to restaurant reservations.

[kphoger]

many hitchhikers absolutely refuse to be let out at rest areas, because of things like that. supposedly, rest areas are also hangouts for pedophiles. i've only ever hitched from one, but it was well-populated and during the day.

[missouriboy]

Liam, did you happen to see the old teeny-bopper comedy movie where some boy got a waitress to page his friend over the PA system? She said, "Paging Michael Hunt... Mike Hunt... Has anyone seen Mike Hunt?" http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/wink3.gif

[LamontCranston]

Moboy... that's Porky's from about 1981. One of the funniest movies I've ever seen.

Remember the scene with the gym teacher in the principal's office demanding action against the boys? She wanted to do a strip search to identify the culprit who exposed himself in the girl's shower.

"How 'bout we bring in a sketch artist.." Hilarious.
Even Pres. Eisenhower was smiling on the wall. A classic.

[ Of course, 25 years later, the kid would be tabbed as a sex offender... humor changes ]

Oh and welcome back Liam. Nice to see the flag of Ireland waving around here again.

[LamontCranston]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">No, but its an offense to offend most with nudity or being sexually explicit in view of others in public view or areas. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Nothing personal Gary, but I really hate this sort of statement, whenever it pops up, not just attached to the practice of nudism or sexual activity.

At the heart of it is the phrase "to offend most". Simply because "most" are offended is not necessarily cause for making any change.

How can I know what offends a complete stranger? I'll tell you how. Soemone or somegroup decides what they like and don't like. Then they pass a law or make a rule. Now I have to live by their standards.

I choose to be free and so should they. How about if "most" just buzz off and leave the rest of us alone?

How about not looking if it bothers you and walk away? Why do people feel the need to control behaviors of others?

...and before the hens and jackals decend upon me.. no, public sexual activity goes beyond the social norms of an organized society. With subjects like this, I'm more apt to be persuaded by arguments of morality rather than, "I don't like it, so you can't do it."

[FireProf]

A fair amount of assumptions made here and the original post doesn't really give much as far as details to where and when this is happening.

Are these people out in the open, in public, in full view of others? Or...has this couple made an attempt to be in a public area, but out of sight of others and taken adequate precautions to not be seen but then is.

I'm sure many of us have either felt like making love to our significant other out in the open, in the woods, at the beach, in a park...wherever. It's a very natural thing to want to make love to someone you love out in the open air, out in nature but..........many of those same people also are not into exhibitionism and to assume they are just because they have this desire, is unfair and unjust.

So, it would depend on where and when these people were found making love in the open air. At the train station, bus depot, at the mall or......on a secluded beach, in the woods, in a canyon, in a large park out of the sight of others. Should they be punished? No more so then the many of us that got caught by the police in the back seat of a car as teenagers and told to button up and go home.

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/wink3.gif

[Liam]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by missouriboy:
Liam, did you happen to see the old teeny-bopper comedy movie where some boy got a waitress to page his friend over the PA system? She said, "Paging Michael Hunt... Mike Hunt... Has anyone seen Mike Hunt?" http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/wink3.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Heh, Heh! No, I didn't see that, but it is funny! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/laugh.gif

[Liam]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LamontCranston:
Moboy... that's Porky's from about 1981. One of the funniest movies I've ever seen.....

Oh and welcome back Liam. Nice to see the flag of Ireland waving around here again. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks Mike! I've never seen "Porky's". I should rent it and see what I've missed! I love comedy, even silly comedy!

[Liam]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FireProf:
....So, it would depend on where and when these people were found making love in the open air. At the train station, bus depot, at the mall or......on a secluded beach, in the woods, in a canyon, in a large park out of the sight of others. Should they be punished? No more so then the many of us that got caught by the police in the back seat of a car as teenagers and told to button up and go home. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/wink3.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A very fair evaluation. Well said. I would like to offer one more possible condition: it can also depend on who any spectators are. Not everyone is offended by such activities. If no one is offended there should be no problem that would concern anyone else.

[Pete Knight]

During my teenage years, and indeed into my twenties I had sex on the back seat of the car, but the car wasn't parked in Main Street, Mytown, thats the difference.
I even had sex at a raised grass verge on a picnic rug thinking I was safe from the prying eyes of the passing traffic about ten feet below, that is until a double deck bus came along and the upper deck pasengers were level with our little hideaway.

Sex in the open air is great, I think everyone should try it at least once in their life, but discretion should be the overriding factor when considering a location.

Pete Knight

[kphoger]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> At the train station, bus depot, at the mall or..... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i know a guy who has had sex ON a greyhound bus. his advice: wait until dark and have a big blanket. i've been offered drugs at a bus station, propositioned for sex at a train station, so public sex there wouldn't surprise me all that much.

i remember the story my dad told me about the couple who had a private box at a baseball game. they decided it would be great to have sex, but later realized they had left the blinds open and there was a crowd of baseball fans peering in through the window.

[Zerokini]

You know, I've always been struck by the similarity -- one would almost say "identity" -- between being busted because someone else chooses of their own free will to be offended by sexual activity within their view, and being busted because someone else chooses of their own free will to be offended by nudity within their view.

I know the answer to this question, but I wonder if anyone else does: Can anyone explain to me why anyone, ever, should be arrested and legally sanctioned for any activity that someone else chooses, of their own free will, to find offensive?

If the following statement is true:

"No one, adult or child, pagan or religious proselyte, has ever been harmed by witnessing the nudity of others."

Then the following statement is true:

"No one, adult or child, pagan or religious proselyte, has ever been harmed by witnessing the sexual activity of others."

Now, from a realistic standpoint there is a problem with that putative equality, and by defining that specific problem, the whole issue becomes a lot easier to deal with for both the nudist and the sexual player.

I'm going to leave it there for comments before I continue, since I don't want to be seen as lecturing.

--Zerokini