Heat wave: For millions without power, little relief

[nimrod]

Nope. I don't recall ever believing or saying any such thing. I have always maintained that our response to nudity is cultural. I think you have mis-remembered.

Stu

Then there must have been another non-nudist on this forum that I was having that discussion with.

[Stu2630]

Then there must have been another non-nudist on this forum that I was having that discussion with.

I told you I didn't say anything of the sort because I do not believe it and that you are mistaken. You are unable to produce evidence that i did say that. So let's leave it at that - there is nothing to be gained by carrying this on.

For the record, I believe that the aversion to nudity is cultural in origin - we are acculturated beings. I am aware that nudity is normal in some cultures and tribes and was probably equally normal among our ancient ancestors, so the aversion to it can not be inherent.

Stu

[Barnard]

There is hardly a part of the anatomy which is not involved in some way in sex - especially the mouth, hands, arms, legs etc, but all the sensory organs too. However, these are not primary sex organs which are reproductive, nor are they parts of the anatomy which distinguish male from female. So, in our culture, they are not deemed to be "intimate", and so can be exposed to family and strangers alike.
Stu

It's amazing how people percieve intimate. Most girls that I know think nothing of giving me a hug as a hello greeting or goodbye, but there's little chance that any of them would feel comfortable in a nude setting. The funny thing is this: The physical contact of hugging a woman is much more intimate to me then seeing that same woman nude.

While on the intimacy side, oral sex seems just as glamourous vaginal. Often times, the two events supplement eachother to complete the experience. In that case, the genitals have equal right to see the light of day as the mouth.

[nimrod]

I told you I didn't say anything of the sort because I do not believe it and that you are mistaken. You are unable to produce evidence that i did say that. So let's leave it at that - there is nothing to be gained by carrying this on.

For the record, I believe that the aversion to nudity is cultural in origin - we are acculturated beings. I am aware that nudity is normal in some cultures and tribes and was probably equally normal among our ancient ancestors, so the aversion to it can not be inherent.

Stu

I know what you have told me, but that does not mean that you are correct, I am not saying I am either since you continue to deny it. I know that my memory fails me at times, but I was having a discussion with a non-nudist on this forum, who was arguing that a negative reaction to nudity is not taught but inherent and that is why nudist need to cover up. If this was not you, then who?

You do not deny that you come here for the debate, so could it be that you were taking the role of devils advocate just for the debate?

[Stu2630]

It's amazing how people percieve intimate. Most girls that I know think nothing of giving me a hug as a hello greeting or goodbye, but there's little chance that any of them would feel comfortable in a nude setting. The funny thing is this: The physical contact of hugging a woman is much more intimate to me then seeing that same woman nude.

While on the intimacy side, oral sex seems just as glamourous vaginal. Often times, the two events supplement eachother to complete the experience. In that case, the genitals have equal right to see the light of day as the mouth.

Hugging is not really intimate at all: it a physical sign which signifies affection in just the same way as shaking hands, or even uttering the words "I am really happy to be with you". It is also gender and age relative in most western cultures: one party to a hug is usually female and/or a child - men rarely hug men, unless they are family or extremely close friends. Nudity is not a sign. It is a state of being which arises from a behaviour and it has strong cultural associations with the intimacy of sexual partners and families.

With regard to oral sex - the entire body is involved with sex, but that doesn't mean that teh whole body is a primary sex organ. We are wired up to achieve arousal by involving our mouths, hands, legs and all our sense organs in order to be able to complete the sex act which is essentially reproductive in character (even if we know that pregnancy will not be the outcome). So our mouths (etc) are not truly sex organs to anything like the extent as our genitals.

nimrod

You do not deny that you come here for the debate, so could it be that you were taking the role of devils advocate just for the debate?

I don't believe so.

Stu

[Corky]

Oral sex, and sex organs [post 43-45] has little [If Nothing] to do with with the intent of the title of this thread "Heat wave: For millions without power, little relief", and or methods to cool off.

Try to stay on topic. Thanks!

[Baron Lake]

sweating is the body's method of cooling off.
If your having sex to increase your sweat rate
and since there is no power (per topic heading)
finding a shady spot would be good advice.

[ibrahim]

Nudist Resort in Wilton CA [Near Sacramento] Sees Boost In Business As Temperatures Rise

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/video...clipId=7498919

The video shows so little of the people that it could have as well have been made at a textile resort.

[ibrahim]

Quote by "ibraham""ibraham"

In the U.S. local affiliates and network TV Stations cannot show any nudity to the public, or on public airwaves by order of the "FCC" Federal Communications Commission. May be different in Northern Europe where you are.

I'm a long term member of that nudist resort, and can assure you it was made at California's Largest membership nudist resort.

I don't doubt it is a nudist resort but what I wanted to say that most people in the video are only seen from the shoulders upwards.

[Bob S.]

ibraham: "In the U.S. local affiliates and network TV Stations cannot show any nudity to the public, or on public airwaves by order of the "FCC" Federal Communications Commission"

That is not correct. They can show nudity to over the air. From the [URL=http://www.fcc.gov/guides/obscenity-indecency-and-profanity]FCC website[URL]: The FCC has defined broadcast indecency as “language or material that, in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium, sexual or excretory organs or activities.” Indecent programming contains patently offensive sexual or excretory material that does not rise to the level of obscenity.

Of course, the increase in fines and the draconian way the FCC operates, they have voluntarily stepped back from showing nudity, although local news didn't really show nudity much anyway. Now I say either get rid of the FCC, which is increasingly irrelevant or force them to go to court to prove their case to a judge before a fine can be assessed. The way it is now is guilty until proven innocent.

Bob S.