An Experiment in Psychology - those who know me, and nudity

Bah - you guys can only get away with that 'cuz you only pick up men that are whipped!

ROFL. . .

btw, do you have a boob fetish? You mention that word an awful lot.

I am grateful to the Universe for boobies Makes life worth living!!!

lol, you are one strange cookie . . . and I mean that in the nicest way

Okay sidestepping the issue someone introduced about nude RL beaches where kids and adults are nude together (could turn this thread twice as long)...And trying to stay on topic...

Maybe there should be times in which nudity is OK at the Hangout and all other times are safe for anyone and are declared PG. Or vice versa.

I hadn't thought about it but yes some members do like to be nude or nearly nude and some other members are child avs. So, maybe that could be a consideration to make.

As for what I would do I'm not great with hypotheticals but I would at least go stand in another part of the Hangout land. I don't wish to be ARed when I have done nothing wrong.

(FWIW I don't do public nekkies myself. Dakota asked what if he tp'd in and *someone else* there was naked, I think. So I answered that.)

I'm answering the OP's questions without reading any of the other responses yet -- I'll maybe reply to those as I read.

If you showed up in your child avi form and we were nude dancing, I would remind you of the time and tell you that I did not think it was appropriate for you to be there in child form given the current activities that were going on. Not sure how I would handle the situation if you insisted on staying there, in child avi form.

If you were an adult, I would simply talk to you as I did any others, whether you stayed clothed or not.

No need to pay extra. That comes standard with me.

This is a long thread and this may have been addressed, but in case it has not:

There is not "official adult time", but there has always been an unwritten rule that there would be no adult activity of any sort, including nudity, before 6:00 pm SLT. Given that, most of us have always been pretty good about commenting in group chat that adult stuff is going on at the Hangout so that the kids know they should not pop in.

Given the various statements by LL on adult activities, I still am not sure if a nude avatar will be permissible in the future or not.

That would be called "our prudish puritan thinking here in the US".





wanna bet





No it is not the same at all. The inworld hangout is not any sort of officially sanctioned area nor is it promoted by LL in any way. It is simply a casual spot that a bunch of the folks here got together and created -- and it has always been classified as a Mature hangout, not specifically PG (though it really is pretty PG most of the time).

Not necessarily. People have different temperaments including children. And some do report feeling traumatised by being forced to be nude in public, or being around others who were.

I'm thinking of an example of a 12 year old girl whose family were nudists and talked of being followed around a nude beach by a middle aged man leering at her. That isn't a puritanical reaction or a political reaction on her part, that's instinctual self defense. Nor did her parents listen when she tried to tell them she was not comfortable about it.

Emilio Estevez I offhand remember has talked about how his mother was always nude around the house and how he found it uncomfortable and embarrassing, for instance when his friends came over.

I think once kids are old enough to know what nudity is, which is actually fairly little, at the minimum, adults should keep their clothes on around them.

It isn't only about sex = nudity (which I think should not be discounted itself) either. It's also about kids not growing up too fast, and not wondering why they are different looking, etc., etc.

But I think to say that adult nudity is never a sexually charged situation or that it can never be sexually exploitative of children in its own right is naive.

While I think that you are mostly right, Clarissa, I do feel that our puritan heritage plays a large part in the country's extreme modesty and overall extreme views around nudity. There is definitely a time and place for everything, but to much of the country, nudity and our bodies in general are still very much a taboo topic. I personally think that if there was more discussion about nudity and sex both, we would not have as many perverts out there trying to figure out how to deal with their suppressed urges. But then, that is likely a topic for another discussion.

Aren't face lights suppose to point the other way?

I don't know - Europe has a fair amount of sex crimes as well.

And there are other countries which are much more 'puritanical' - how about the woman who is about to be jailed for wearing pants?

Puritans came from England anyway...LOL we just get the blame for it.

This from the person that claims to have screwed damn near every male alive and is proud of that fact.






This is exactly what I thought when I met and interacted with Cody the first time in SL -- and every time since.

The Puritans got kicked out of both England and Holland, as I recall. Getting kicked out of Holland was pretty impressive.

Still, they do not represent the whole of America. And I thought they chose to leave so that they could have freedom of expression.

I find the whole "Puritanical Americans" label to be inaccurate anyway. We (read: media) are absolutely sex OBSESSED in my opinion.

They had to leave because England and Holland wouldn't let them forcibly prevent people from evangelizing among them. After they got to the New World, they quickly corrected that... they persecuted Baptists and Quakers and even killed some Quakers for preaching to them. Rhode Island was founded by people they'd persecuted and expelled from their colonies.

I really cannot agree with this.

I have 2 children 8 & 9, and i am often nude in the house. It is no big deal. Of course i would not be nude with their friends over - that would be wrong. Nudity is not to be feared and my children will never be uncomfortable with nudity - which i think is how it should be.

Really think about the "no nudity" in your own house around your own kids idea. It is not too practical and not really healthy. My sister-in-law is a hardcore Christian, and she won't let her husband go nude in the house EVER because they have 2 girls, so what happens? They do freaky things like try to look at my sons penis when he goes to the bathroom, or when they walk in my husband in the bathroom, they don't leave immediately, but instead crane their necks to see that thing they NEVER see. It is pretty sick in my opinion, and my sis-in-law is going to have a rude awakening when her precious 13 year old goes berko over the first boy-bits she encounters with no adults around.

Outlawing nudity in your own home because you have kids makes nudity 'taboo'. It makes it something not normal, when in reality, nudity in the house is normal, nudity outside the house, is not. It also creates a great deal of curiosity where there should be none. If the only place your child is seeing a nude body is in a biology book at school or when they are standing in the mirror alone at home, then you are really raising some sheltered kids outside the realm of reality - reality being, nudity happens and that nudity is not sex.

I just think there is plenty of time for that later in life. Nor is it for religious reasons. And nudity isn't really 'normal' in a household, (who defines normal anyway, that works both ways) anywhere but bathroom or bedroom. (I define normal as 'usual' in that instance, not as a value judgment.)

I've yet to go to Thanksgiving and see everyone sat round the table nude, for instance (only the turkey).

There will probably be accidental nudity at some point, and all kids have endless curiosity including about their own bodies, but it's different than it being a usual thing. But that's probably (what I think of as usual/normal), because that's how it's done anywhere I was exposed to as a child.

I was a very modest child, also. That is who I was naturally, just like not eating meat was who I was naturally, from nearly a pre verbal age. Temperaments vary. Some kids are just not into parading around nude, and it's those kids I had in mind when I typed the first post on the particular topic.

Marilyn Monroe talked later in life about now natural nudity is, and how she had to suppress herself from whipping off her clothes to run around naked even as a kid. As an adult she walked around nude in front of household staff and all. So I guess in her case the other mode was oppressive.

But for some kids, the opposite would be the case.

My main point though was that if nudity does not = sex then why is absence of nudity puritanical?

Because Puritans are bat s**t crazy. (^_^)y

Weren't they the ones where you couldn't possibly show any ankle, it was scandalous yet they could have their boobs pushed up so far in the low cut dresses, they were practically falling out over the top? Or was that the French?

Oh I hadn't meant to imply anything negative about it - Monroe had multiple things to deal with from her earlier life, as well as being given pills that wrecked her ability to sleep, long before there was a Betty Ford clinic or awareness of those things.

If I had to hang out a dime psychologist shingle I'd guess her urge to run around nude was a reaction to feeling suppressed but it could've also just been a feeling of joy in her own body and not seeing sense in the rules around her, to be fair.

(Immy made me LOL. Kylie that sounds like a Cabaret costume not sure. Lol. Puritans kinda dressed like Pilgrims.)

Clarissa - You are probably right about Marilyn. Definitely right about the Puritans.
I'm thinking about back in Napoleons day.

Always was a fan of hers. What a loss.