Disgraceful behaviour at Studland naturist beach

MaxUK · #1 07-17-2003, 12:07 AM

Yesterday I spent a few hours at Studland nude beach before having to go off to work at noon. I was there early with only a few others around when a single lady came and sat down a little behind me close to where the beach turned into sandy dunes. About 30 mins later a guy came wandering along, saw the lady and sat down about 10m away from her.

I was slumbering on my front but could see from time to time that he was definitely angling himself to get a good look at her lying on her towel - not a good start, but it gets far worse.

After trying to engage her in conversation, when she fell asleep with her hat over her head, this creep turned to face her and basically started touching himself whilst staring in her direction.

I only saw this when I raised my head from my towel and whilst he had his back turned to me, it was plainly obvious what his right hand was doing.

What to do?? I was disgusted by this perverts actions, so sat up, coughed and stared in his direction. He turned round, saw me glaring at him and stopped - only to start again a few minutes later!! Unbelievable!!

This time I got up and walked right over to where he was, on past and past the lady, up into the dunes. Then I turned and glared at him again. I could feel a confrontation coming on if he had started again after I went back to my towel, but the lady woke up, sensed he was trouble, packed up and left.

Sorry for the long post but this sort of behaviour really angers me and women should not to have to put up with total jerks like this on a nude beach. The fact is there are plenty of them and it makes me ashamed to be a guy at times.

The 'fun of nude recreation'? Not for that lady it wasn't.

Max

#2 07-17-2003, 03:19 AM

Hi Max. You're dead right. This idiot ought to have been locked up - if that behaviour doesn't constitute indecent exposure then I don't know what does.

Am I right in thinking that Studland Bay is owned by the National Trust?

Stu

missouriboy · #3 07-17-2003, 04:32 AM

There ya go, Stu! It's a good example of why 'indecent exposure' is a misnomer. It ought to be 'indecent behavior' instead. The indecency of this man's actions would be the same even if he happened to be fully clothed at the time, right?

MaxUK · #4 07-17-2003, 09:02 AM

Stu,

I couldn't believe what I was seeing - sad ba****ds like him do need locking up. As Missouri Boy so rightly said - it's all in the 'behaviour' that goes on, same as anywhere really.

Having said that, I am still not in favour of open public nudity being allowed anywhere, as I consider some locations to be appropriate for nudity, most others not so.

I guess I subscribe to the view of 'appropriate behaviour in appropriate places', not just to naturism but just about anything else. I feel my views on what's 'appropriate' or not are fairly relaxed, but are no doubt different (or more conservative) to some people, including a good number that post here.

Oh, and yes, Studland is owned by the Nat. trust but it seems they are trying to sqeeze the naturist zone into a smaller and smaller area, from what I read of the situation from the official studland naturist website:

www.studland-naturists.co.uk

Max

MaxNik · #5 07-17-2003, 09:48 AM

other than doing what you did, there doesn't seem to be much more that could be done. there always will be creeps like this around so you have just illustrated a way to deal with them, without being confrontational...which could have resulted in a fight.

#6 07-17-2003, 10:24 AM

Missouri

"There ya go, Stu! It's a good example of why 'indecent exposure' is a misnomer. It ought to be 'indecent behavior' instead. The indecency of this man's actions would be the same even if he happened to be fully clothed at the time, right?"

Not under English Law. Here we have two statutory offences of indecent exposure, either of which would have sufficed in the circumstances Max describes. It is a pre-requisite of both, however, that the offender "exposes his person". Neither of these offences would be appropriate for a simple nudist even if he or she were in a public place. The appropriate charge for that would come under section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 - "insulting behaviour likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress".

MaxUK

"I guess I subscribe to the view of 'appropriate behaviour in appropriate places', not just to naturism but just about anything else."

Me too!!!!

"Oh, and yes, Studland is owned by the Nat. trust but it seems they are trying to sqeeze the naturist zone into a smaller and smaller area"

Now the National Trust should be canvassed about that. There are precious few designated beauty spots for naturists in the UK as it is without reducing the places you guys can go still further. I hope there is a campaign to keep this place clothing optional. I'd sign a petition to that effect!

Stu

Gary Naturist · #7 07-17-2003, 11:28 AM

quote:
Originally posted by missouriboy:
[qb] There ya go, Stu! It's a good example of why 'indecent exposure' is a misnomer. It ought to be 'indecent behavior' instead. The indecency of this man's actions would be the same even if he happened to be fully clothed at the time, right? [/qb]

Missouriboy, I agree with you 100%. It's the behavior, not the clothing choice, that is indecent and that should be illegal.

Gary

NUDKIWI · #8 07-17-2003, 12:50 PM

These sorts of idiots get nude beaches closed.Max you done good in the way you dealt with the situation but i wonder if a direct confrontation would have ended in a fight.I believe if you had confronted this spineless sexually depraved excuse for a human being he would have turned tale and run ,hopefully with your boot up his backside.Get these sex fiends off our beaches and give them back to the sunlovers and families.Maybe a group of locals forming a beach warden group could be an idea.

Prometheus · #9 07-17-2003, 01:45 PM

It's easy to think what we would have done in that situation, but actually being there is another story. But I will say this:

MaxUK, there probably wasn't much more you could do by yourself. If you had walked straight up to the guy and told him to get lost, he might have fought back or at least started an argument. However, if there had been more than one of you, he probably would probably have left quickly.

Fresh Air · #10 07-18-2003, 12:27 AM

MaxUK,

I think you handled the situation well. I never thought the confrontation thing through, but I suppose it could result in a fight. Especially if the beach is secluded.

Mission accomplished, even though the results would have been better if the guy left, at least the sickness of it diffused.

Another good way I have seen it handled is by going to the woman being "violated" and inform her of her situation. This allows her to handle it how she sees fit and gives her an ally at the same time.

Fresh Air