Zipline Topless for Breast Cancer Research....although they seem to say "naked" a lot when they mean topless....
Zipline Topless for Breast Cancer Research....although they seem to say "naked" a lot when they mean topless....
Last edited by Navigator; 06-23-2012 at 03:08 AM.
"You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality." - Ayn Rand (probably speaking to Teabaggers, IMHO)
Stu: "Swimwear only has one purpose, namely to conceal parts of the anatomy which society considers intimate"
So why did this woman have to ask anyone's permission to go topless? She has no breasts to conceal. Why should she or anyone else who has no breasts have to put on a top? They are not in any violation of any law.
Bob S.
"I think 'naked' is a word others came up with but we’re not naked; we are dressed in God’s clothes, the best clothes of all."
Emily Robbins
If culture determines what is intimate ,than a mixture of culture should allow diversity. Therefore a place set aside for one perspective,should allow a time an space for other perspectives. In some parts of the world clothing option areas are allowed ,even encouraged to admitt that the culture is diverse. Usa is behind in some respects,admitting diversity but carefull an often resistant to other than main stream culture. Things have taken a radical move in recient years,gay becomes main stream tollerable,nudes ride bicycles,thousands book nude cruise ships etc. The age of the nudist colony or resort s slowly moving over,to allow some ocassional expressions of life without clothes. Watch carefully how the future developrs
BobS
The rules are clearly framed with the expectation that women have breasts and the staff were following the rules. Obviously her particular circumstances were considered by more senior staff who were authorised to make an exception to the rule. Seems reasonable enough to me.So why did this woman have to ask anyone's permission to go topless? She has no breasts to conceal. Why should she or anyone else who has no breasts have to put on a top? They are not in any violation of any law.
I don't really share your vision. Neither, interestingly, do some mainstream European nudist organisations, like British Naturism, which recently stated: "Nudity everywhere, beaches, clubs, TV, film, magazines, absolutely everywhere is under a serious and new threat."
http://www.bn.org.uk/articles.php/_/...rmous-thre-r44
Of course, there are changes in both directions - some which suggest society is becoming more accepting of nudity and others which indicate the opposite. I think nudists should largely disregard mainstream attitudes to nudity and focus their efforts on preserving and extending nudist venues. This issue of the lady with no breasts is interesting, but not really significant to nudism.
Stu
I understand british naturism,not mainstream at all,the woman here important but the main note here is the process of reconsideration,this is the point of change from culture no to culture yes reasonable,well ok---------as we have discussed many naturists an non naturists are learning reasonable.
Some aspects of Victorianism were actually very good - and show signs of returning. For example, in a British newspaper just a couple of days ago:
A born-again Christian from Ontario has launched a line of modest swimsuits that protect their wearers from sun, chlorine and, most importantly, lustful stares.
Crystal Huyben, 27, isn't a fan of baring all by the pool and prefers to cover her body from head to toe when she takes a dip in the water.
'Modesty has always been important to me, believing that our sexuality is an amazing gift from God, it's something to be protected, not put on display for all eyes to see' she told the Huffington Post.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...#ixzz1ymzCoPoW
Interestingly, most of the comments, and all the most recommended comments, have been in favour of these garments.
I am a born-again atheist, but I totally get this - and guess what my wife and daughter will be getting for Christmas.
Stu
I took a look at the article,very well done,nice suits. But contrary to there premise of downplaying there ability to limit lustfull stares forget it,there still hot.there efforts to hide there skin from the men that hide there skin,as in the victorian era,does not deminish there desireability.if you took most of thease ladies to public swimming area full of men in speedos there is no doubt that they would get an eye full and denie there inner desires. So this is not a naturists issue . To go clothes free is to except your vernerability inexchange a natural feeling of freedom an mutual axceptance.stu in your case ,let your wife an daughter make there own decision,anyman that trys to buy clothes for a woman is nuts. Any atire chossen based on religeon is bs an the real issue is vanity or self righteous. Therefore space for diversity in public areas ,clothes no clothes reasonable
Stu: "Some aspects of Victorianism were actually very good - and show signs of returning. For example, in a British newspaper just a couple of days ago:"
Those swimsuits are not making a comeback. It is just something a minority so small that they can't even be counted will buy. The story is just an interest story, a fluff piece. The bikinis and regular swimsuits are still queen.
Bob S.
"I think 'naked' is a word others came up with but we’re not naked; we are dressed in God’s clothes, the best clothes of all."
Emily Robbins