Nudity should not be a crime.

[ArmasTermin]

The legality of various states of undress varies by location, but some states have a pretty alarming, and downright sexist, view towards it.

For example, a woman's n****e being publicly visible in Arizona can be a class 1 misdemeanor, but if the person viewing is under 15, it can become a class 6 felony with a minimum sentence of 6 months in prison.

For a n****e.

Now, I want to remind everyone that we live in the year 2015. We've been to space, we've cured diseases, we're beaming episodes of the X-Files and Parks and Recreation into people's homes for a nominal monthly fee into our flashing boxes. But we're still abhorred by our own naked bodies.

I remember working retail, in a store that sells video games. I overheard a woman looking at an obviously violent video game for her somewhat young son. She seemed to have no issue with that until reading the rating details, which mentioned nudity. Of course she was instantly taken aback and would not allow her son to own such a game. Even on night-time television it seems more socially acceptable to feature brutal violence and decapitation than nudity.

Ancient Greeks, Egyptians, Japanese all featured artistic depictions of nudity that we don't consider lewd. Sculptors such as Michelangelo and his David have been praised for their ultimate depictions of the human form. But we reject that in our daily lives, insisting people cover up or risk social rejection and abhorrence.

Is it no surprise our (America's) massive obesity problem and epidemic of body shaming? Young girls growing up hating their bodies because they've been told to. Told that they're sinful and shameful and wrong.

I'm not proposing an all-nude Utopian society where we break down all social and economic barriers and ascend to a higher plane of existence as energy beings. I'm not saying that you, personally, should take off all your clothes for your next trip to the mall.

I am proposing we drop this social stigma on the arbitrary few inches of skin between the thigh and belt line for men, and those same few inches for women, along with those above the rib cage and below the collarbone.



Common arguments against nudity and why they are irrelevant:
"I don't want to see fat old naked grandmas at the beach."
Too bad, there was a time we didn't want to see black people using the same restrooms and water fountains as white people. That was ******** up, so is this. Laws shouldn't be made just so you don't have to look at things that make you uncomfortable. If it's not personally hurting you, let people do what they want.

"Public nudity features germ-related health hazards."
Sit on a towel. The Japanese communal bath houses don't seem to have an issue with it.

"What about when women are on their periods?"
Don't go naked. Or wear some kind of bottoms. This is not about forced nudity, it's about decriminalizing our natural state.

"We live in a Christian, puritanical society which shames nudity."
In the 50s, maybe. Our country (America) has shown it generally no longer follows those values, or at least that they're picked and chosen on whims.



I hope my little article has implored you to reconsider the indentured fear and shame of nudity. I like clothing, and I like that other people like it. But I don't like that the clothes are often used as a covering device for something seen as "lesser" that needs to be covered. That is a problem.

Side note: I want to link to the site which displays nudity laws by state for the US to site my source about Arizona earlier, but it's on a naturist/nudist web site which displays nonsexual depictions of nudity and would, therefor, probably get me in trouble with Gaia. I think this is a funny, but also sad, coincidence, given the nature of this topic. lol

[Faustine Liem]

The only problem I would have with this is mainly during the winter. People can get hurt if some dumbass decides, hey its legal to go out naked in -20! Why not? That and during various weather conditions, on motorcycles where clothes can literally save you from the hospital. That's about it for my reasons. Wear a helmet it will save your life.

EDIT: Oh I forgot, SHOES, shoes are important as well.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

Nudity is not a crime, public nudity is a crime.

Just as discharging a firearm in public is often a crime. xP


You could create or go to a nudist colony, if you wanted.

As for artistic or scientific forms of nudity, that's still legal and common, but not just nudity for the sake of it.

[ArmasTermin]

Faustine Liem

The only problem I would have with this is mainly during the winter. People can get hurt if some dumbass decides, hey its legal to go out naked in -20! Why not? That and during various weather conditions, on motorcycles where clothes can literally save you from the hospital. That's about it for my reasons. Wear a helmet it will save your life.

EDIT: Oh I forgot, SHOES, shoes are important as well.

On the surface, I understand where you're coming from. People do a lot of dumb things. But I'm not as much a fan of the government telling you what to do "for your own good" because it's kind of a slippery slope.

I'd like to believe the reason people don't go out in -20 naked is because they enjoy living.

That said, nude saunas in Finland (an exceptionally cold place) are quite common. Sometimes when people become too hot in the saunas, they'll get out and walk around in the snow for short periods before getting back in. Or so says an anecdote I read somewhere years ago. Take that worth a grain of salt, but it's not unreasonable.

EDIT: Yes on the shoes, though. Shoes are indeed important.

[ArmasTermin]

Suicidesoldier#1

Nudity is not a crime, public nudity is a crime.

Just as discharging a firearm in public is often a crime. xP


You could create or go to a nudist colony, if you wanted.

As for artistic or scientific forms of nudity, that's still legal and common, but not just nudity for the sake of it.

Equating discharging a firearm in public to nakedness in public is a little bit fallacious considering discharging a firearm in public has very notable public safety hazards that simple don't apply to nudity. I understand where you're coming from, but I don't think that's quite a valid argument.

"Go somewhere you're accepted" is also a little iffy. The idea isn't to corral different people into places where they're safe from persecution under law. Sounds like a "free speech zone" to me. wink

[ratgirl34]

Well, I don't think that making it so that everyone can go naked means that everyone will go naked. And I do feel that most people are nudists at heart... I dunno, I don't like really hairy men so I rather like that they are obligated to wear clothes. Petty? Judgmental? Maybe. But maybe with all the feminism and stuff we just aren't ready for open nudity in our society.

[ArmasTermin]

ratgirl34

Well, I don't think that making it so that everyone can go naked means that everyone will go naked. And I do feel that most people are nudists at heart... I dunno, I don't like really hairy men so I rather like that they are obligated to wear clothes. Petty? Judgmental? Maybe. But maybe with all the feminism and stuff we just aren't ready for open nudity in our society.

I see what you mean. I'm not about to pretend that I don't have any objections to looking at people I consider "ugly" but that's just one of those things we have to get past as a society in general. Judging people as more or less based on their appearance is ingrained in us, and it's not about to change. But being with or without clothes doesn't change that.

And you're right, decriminalizing nudity would not make millions of people all of a sudden just decided to not wear clothes. Nor should it. I'm just supporting a shift in popular opinion to a healthier one where nudity is not morally or legally wrong in itself.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

ArmasTermin

Suicidesoldier#1

Nudity is not a crime, public nudity is a crime.

Just as discharging a firearm in public is often a crime. xP


You could create or go to a nudist colony, if you wanted.

As for artistic or scientific forms of nudity, that's still legal and common, but not just nudity for the sake of it.

Equating discharging a firearm in public to nakedness in public is a little bit fallacious considering discharging a firearm in public has very notable public safety hazards that simple don't apply to nudity. I understand where you're coming from, but I don't think that's quite a valid argument.

"Go somewhere you're accepted" is also a little iffy. The idea isn't to corral different people into places where they're safe from persecution under law. Sounds like a "free speech zone" to me. wink

Or a gun range. ninja

You know, like gun free zones infringing on the second amendment. xP


For safety purposes, I suppose you could argue that nudity could be more dangerous, since it could spread disease, which might spread like wildfire. And especially if they contract diseases due to the cold or warmth resulting in a compromised immune system.

But, that might be seen as a stretch.

[ArmasTermin]

Suicidesoldier#1

ArmasTermin

Suicidesoldier#1

Nudity is not a crime, public nudity is a crime.

Just as discharging a firearm in public is often a crime. xP


You could create or go to a nudist colony, if you wanted.

As for artistic or scientific forms of nudity, that's still legal and common, but not just nudity for the sake of it.

Equating discharging a firearm in public to nakedness in public is a little bit fallacious considering discharging a firearm in public has very notable public safety hazards that simple don't apply to nudity. I understand where you're coming from, but I don't think that's quite a valid argument.

"Go somewhere you're accepted" is also a little iffy. The idea isn't to corral different people into places where they're safe from persecution under law. Sounds like a "free speech zone" to me. wink

Or a gun range. ninja

You know, like gun free zones infringing on the second amendment. xP


For safety purposes, I suppose you could argue that nudity could be more dangerous, since it could spread disease, which might spread like wildfire. And especially if they contract diseases due to the cold or warmth resulting in a compromised immune system.

But, that might be seen as a stretch.

It's a stretch. There are many countries with more relaxed attitudes towards nudity, like much of Europe, Finland, and Japan that aren't overwhelmed with disease any more than we are in the US. I'm sure if nudist beaches or resorts reported overwhelming amounts of disease spread, they'd be taken down. Though at the same time, the folks whom attend such events and communities might be cleaner overall. But really, clothes just soak up and hold in sweat and dirt, which leads to increased bacteria and general dirtiness.

[JFeatherston]

ArmasTermin

The legality of various states of undress varies by location, but some states have a pretty alarming, and downright sexist, view towards it.

For example, a woman's n****e being publicly visible in Arizona can be a class 1 misdemeanor, but if the person viewing is under 15, it can become a class 6 felony with a minimum sentence of 6 months in prison.

For a n****e.

Arizona Revised State Statute (AZRS 13-1402)

A. A person commits indecent exposure if he or she exposes his or her genitals or a**s or she exposes the areola or n****e of her breast or breasts and another person is present, and the defendant is reckless about whether the other person, as a reasonable person, would be offended or alarmed by the act.

B. Indecent exposure does not include an act of breast-feeding by a mother.

C. Indecent exposure to a person who is fifteen or more years of age is a class 1 misdemeanor, except that it is a class 6 felony if the defendant has two or more prior convictions for a violation of this section or has one or more prior convictions for a violation of section 13-1406. Indecent exposure to a person who is under fifteen years of age is a class 6 felony.

D. A person who is convicted of a felony violation of this section and who has two or more historical prior felony convictions for a violation of this section or section 13-1403 involving indecent exposure or public sexual indecency to a minor who is under fifteen years of age is guilty of a class 3 felony and shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment as follows:

Mitigated Minimum Presumptive Maximum Aggravated
6 years 8 years 10 years 12 years 15 years


E. The presumptive term imposed pursuant to subsection D of this section may be mitigated or aggravated pursuant to section 13-701, subsections D and E.

Parts which I feel need special emphasis in the above have been bolded.

ArmasTermin

it can become a class 6 felony with a minimum sentence of 6 months in prison.

For first time felony offenders:

Arizona Revised State Statute (AZRS 13-702)

D. The term of imprisonment for a presumptive, minimum, maximum, mitigated or aggravated sentence shall be within the range prescribed under this subsection. The terms are as follows:

Felony Mitigated Minimum Presumptive Maximum Aggravated
Class 2 3 years 4 years 5 years 10 years 12.5 years
..........
Class 6 .33 years .5 years 1 year 1.5 years 2 years

The mitigated sentence is the technical minimum, but not the explicit minimum.

[Divine_Malevolence]

Feel like there should be sanitation requirements, but otherwise agreed with the premise.

[Faustine Liem]

ArmasTermin

On the surface, I understand where you're coming from. People do a lot of dumb things. But I'm not as much a fan of the government telling you what to do "for your own good" because it's kind of a slippery slope.

Yeah, true. I'm just saying that it should be common sense but some people don't actually HAVE that.

Quote:

I'd like to believe the reason people don't go out in -20 naked is because they enjoy living.

Or that they are from Canada.

Quote:

That said, nude saunas in Finland (an exceptionally cold place) are quite common. Sometimes when people become too hot in the saunas, they'll get out and walk around in the snow for short periods before getting back in. Or so says an anecdote I read somewhere years ago. Take that worth a grain of salt, but it's not unreasonable.

That's not all they do, they also take fir branches and hit themselves to avoid passing out in the heat. They take packs of snow, and put them on their head during the sauna to stay cool as well. I know this stuff from excellent sources.

Quote:

EDIT: Yes on the shoes, though. Shoes are indeed important.

My goathead infested town agrees. And my feet.
I actually got a funny story my dad once told me, he was out with friends on a hike and heard screaming. They of course being medical people went to go see what was happening. It was a crazy woman who was barefoot walking along with her son who luckly had shoes on, every step she took she screamed because of all the stickers and goatheads and sharp rocks on the ground. You'd think she would be smart enough to know that humans made shoes for a reason.

[ArmasTermin]

JFeatherston

ArmasTermin

The legality of various states of undress varies by location, but some states have a pretty alarming, and downright sexist, view towards it.

For example, a woman's n****e being publicly visible in Arizona can be a class 1 misdemeanor, but if the person viewing is under 15, it can become a class 6 felony with a minimum sentence of 6 months in prison.

For a n****e.

Arizona Revised State Statute (AZRS 13-1402)

A. A person commits indecent exposure if he or she exposes his or her genitals or a**s or she exposes the areola or n****e of her breast or breasts and another person is present, and the defendant is reckless about whether the other person, as a reasonable person, would be offended or alarmed by the act.

B. Indecent exposure does not include an act of breast-feeding by a mother.

C. Indecent exposure to a person who is fifteen or more years of age is a class 1 misdemeanor, except that it is a class 6 felony if the defendant has two or more prior convictions for a violation of this section or has one or more prior convictions for a violation of section 13-1406. Indecent exposure to a person who is under fifteen years of age is a class 6 felony.

D. A person who is convicted of a felony violation of this section and who has two or more historical prior felony convictions for a violation of this section or section 13-1403 involving indecent exposure or public sexual indecency to a minor who is under fifteen years of age is guilty of a class 3 felony and shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment as follows:

Mitigated Minimum Presumptive Maximum Aggravated
6 years 8 years 10 years 12 years 15 years


E. The presumptive term imposed pursuant to subsection D of this section may be mitigated or aggravated pursuant to section 13-701, subsections D and E.

Parts which I feel need special emphasis in the above have been bolded.

ArmasTermin

it can become a class 6 felony with a minimum sentence of 6 months in prison.

For first time felony offenders:

Arizona Revised State Statute (AZRS 13-702)

D. The term of imprisonment for a presumptive, minimum, maximum, mitigated or aggravated sentence shall be within the range prescribed under this subsection. The terms are as follows:

Felony Mitigated Minimum Presumptive Maximum Aggravated
Class 2 3 years 4 years 5 years 10 years 12.5 years
..........
Class 6 .33 years .5 years 1 year 1.5 years 2 years

The mitigated sentence is the technical minimum, but not the explicit minimum.

I admire your researching biggrin . You are correct, but it was simply a general example of the legal problem. Of course laws like this are always going to have a degree of grey area where maybe it's legal, maybe it's not. And there's the fact that in most cases, it would need to be proven that the defendant was indeed trying to illicit sexual gratification or response. My aim was simply to use this particular law, as it is indeed written, to show an example of government over-reach.

[ArmasTermin]

Divine_Malevolence

Feel like there should be sanitation requirements, but otherwise agreed with the premise.

Excellent. I believe this would be hard to quantify and legislate into law. A kind of "You must be this clean to go naked" thing xd . I'm not sure how that would work, if it would, but it would be a step in the right direction if nothing else.

[JFeatherston]

ArmasTermin

I admire your researching biggrin .

My pleasure! I enjoy reading Law, and I have AZRS bookmarked.

ArmasTermin

You are correct, but it was simply a general example of the legal problem. Of course laws like this are always going to have a degree of grey area where maybe it's legal, maybe it's not. And there's the fact that in most cases, it would need to be proven that the defendant was indeed trying to illicit sexual gratification or response. My aim was simply to use this particular law, as it is indeed written, to show an example of government over-reach.

I completely understand. I wanted to contribute to the discussion, but my mind in regards to the matter has not been made up. I understand that many people shy away from legal research, so I figured I would at the least pitch in a helping hand to make understanding that section of the law hopefully a little bit easier. smile