| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Digital_Cowboy
Forum Member
|
 Posted - 05/28/2006 : 3:58:20 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Spontanudity
More valid on what basis?
<Snip>
As for the argument that a woman could cause the male to become aroused that is simply unbelievible and follows a similar line of thinking of a rapest that blames their victim for their criminal actions. If you get aroused by something you see on a clothed beach or nude beach its your responsibility to deal with it! Simple as that.
Naturism is an expression of freedom. Freedom for men, women and children to enjoy their nudity and nature free from sexually offensive behaviour.
Flame away.
Cheers,
Spontanudity
"Forever Naked"
http://groups.msn.com/YoungSydneyNaturists
Spontanudity,
So you’re saying that regardless of the venue IF a woman was to sit down beside you and start to rub your leg, or your penis, or to sit in your lap and move about that you would be ale to exert enough control so as NOT to respond by getting an erection? If so then you are a better man then most of us.
Herman
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 310 |
 |
|
|
Digital_Cowboy
Forum Member
|
Posted - 05/28/2006 : 4:11:41 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Belisha
Cheers Spontanudity
I do have to admit that I cringed a bit at the suggestion that provocation should be a Defence to the "Offence???" of having an erection.
It is your presumption that the mere existance of an erection is indicative of some inappropriate intent that I find a little hard to accept.
Exactly, just because a man has an erection does NOT mean that he has “ulterior” motives, behind it.
quote:
I strongly oppose the purported right of nudists to wander the streets naked because to do so is to disregard the fact that others may not share your attitudes and that your actions may result in offence or even harm to the unprepared. Furthermore such behaviour is an open invitation to those with a malign intent to behave badly. How do you legislate for a flasher in our society if naturists are given free reign?
You may well feel that the same point exists with regard to male arousal i.e. how does one differentiate between the benign and the malignant? I would suggest that in the arena of a naturist club, beach or resort the benign and the malignant erection (if such exists)(I have to laugh at my descriptions here! LOL, there that's better)should be treated no differently to an unerect member. After all in my mind it is far worse to have pseudo naturists with inappropriate views wandering around erect or not than to tolerate or even accept as normal and natural the odd erection.
I would say that the difference would be the man a sleep on the beach, or by the pool, or walking through the woods and the wind, temperature, and other non-sexual stimuli causes an erection. And the man who is sitting or laying on the beach, or is sitting or laying by pool, or is walking in the woods, or wherever and is masturbating or is otherwise engaged in some way of actively attempting to get an erection.
And to paraphrase Sigmund Frued “sometimes an erection is just an erection.” And there is NO ulterior motive behind it.
quote:
As someone offered in the previous string; the eloquent double entendre "Boners happen". Being English it took my a while to realise that that was a double entendre!
I am enjoying the debate, and having reviewed the earlier string I do not feel that the issue is resolved at all as yet and I do think that it should be one way or another.
Kind regards to all
Belisha
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 310 |
|
|
|
Digital_Cowboy
Forum Member
|
Posted - 05/28/2006 : 4:41:01 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by MrNatural
It seems one factor in play has not yet been touched upon.
Some of us are leaders of local nudist groups, or have some experience in that arena. In this role, we have had to craft workable rules for our group, rules to include those statistically rare troublemakers or fringe members. Looking at worse case scenarios, granting that an erection is always ok conjures up images of sneaky members  attempting to bend the rules for their own entertainment and gratification.
If you were a club owner, how would you enforce a rule that allowed erections, even near innocents and children? This difficult situation would naturally follow if visible erections were declared exempt from prosecution. What sane club owner would want to defend the rights of a nudist with an erection that had offended someone? Safer to err on the side of caution, and so club owners generally declare all visible erections reason for disciplinary action.
After all, the matter is not obviously settled of its own, as we can see here. (Unless we right here on this board can figure out how to govern nudists with unlicensed erections!) 
“Unlicensed” erections??? So, what IF a man had a “license” for his erection that that would be “ok?”
[quote]In a sense, everyone here is right, but speaking to only a part of a larger more complex question. Yes, erections occur naturally, and sometimes to entirely non-sexual stimulation. Yes, they are sometimes an indication of a hidden intent on the part of its owner. Calling that a rape instinct is one possible defensive posture, though it appears many disagree on this point. Dealing with hidden intent is difficult without an agreed upon framework, hence the reasons this subject has been largely unexplored, and is avoided by erring on the side of caution.
Really now, how would you instruct a lifeguard at a nude beach to deal with erections? What possible set of rules would keep the peace?/quote]
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 310 |
|
|
|
Digital_Cowboy
Forum Member
|
Posted - 05/28/2006 : 5:22:19 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by cyndiann
Belisha I very much support what you are saying. Spont, just because you’ve (supposedly) not ever had a spontaneous erection not caused by sexual stimuli does not mean that it can’t happen to others. What you posted smacks of looking down your nose at anyone that doesn’t have your supposed control. Is that what you intended?
Erections are not a sign of aggression, they aren’t harmful and kids could care less if they were to see one. What is really any different about the arguement that nudity hurts kids vs seeing erections hurts kids?
Well said Cyndiann, very well said. It’s basically like the argument that because Ms Janet Jackson’s right breast was “exposed” during her Super Bowl half time show that the children who saw it were somehow “injured” by it.
Likewise, IF the adults in an area react with “horror and alarm” at the sight of an erection then that is how the children will react. IF on the other hand the adults in the are don’t show any sort of reaction, then neither will the children.
Children only act/react the way that the adults around them act/react to a given stimuli. And IF said children are really young they won’t even know what an erection is, so IF they don’t even know what an erection is, then how can they be “harmed” by seeing it???
quote:
I’m really astounded at many of the prudish relies I’ve found on this website in many of the threads, not just this one. I’m sorry but I can’t stand politically correct nudists. I am lots more comfortable with thinking for myself and not accepting all the nudist philosophy thrown at me at face value. Good thing because I’ve found that a lot of it just isn’t true in the real world.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 310 |
|
|
|
Digital_Cowboy
Forum Member
|
Posted - 05/28/2006 : 5:39:59 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Spontanudity
Melissa,
Yeap... That’s exactly my point. I’m totally against those men who don’t do something about it. Its as easy as rolling over onto your stomach... No issue!
Just like some people are offended by nudity, we take steps to cover up in appropriate places ie shopping malls, work, and textile beaches. Why isn’t an erection treated the same? Cover it up where necessary.
Cheers,
Spontanudity
“Forever Naked”
http://groups.msn.com/YoungSydneyNaturists
Spontanudity,
You are still only “concentrating” on the male who is awake and “conscious” and is aware that he has an erection.
What about the man who is by himself and is a sleep on his back, and while he’s asleep he gets an erection? Being asleep, and unaware, he is hardly in a spot to either “cover-up” or turn over, correct?
And yes I agree that the man who is “flaunting” his erection is wrong. But there are times and places where it is not always practical or possible to either “cover-up” or to roll over. What is a man suppose to do then?
Also has anyone stopped to consider that a person who is attempting to either “cover-up” or to ”roll over” is likely to attract MORE attention to themselves then IF they were to do nothing?
Here would be a good example you have two people laying on a towel on the beach. Both of them have bees buzzing around them. Person “A” chooses to ignore the bee and go about what they were doing, be it reading a book, or just enjoying the sun. Whereas Person “B” starts flailing about, and/or jumping up and down trying to “chase” the bee away. WHO is going to attract attention to themselves and their situation???
Person “B” is going to be the one who is attracting all kinds of attention, and Person “B” is also the one more likely then not to end up getting stung by said bee. Because now the bee feels threatened and will sting in self-defense.
Herman
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 310 |
|
|
|
Digital_Cowboy
Forum Member
|
Posted - 05/28/2006 : 5:52:06 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Spontanudity
Nudeisntlewd,
Thats my other point... I've never had it happen to me and I've only seen it once before and the two guys certainly intended it to happen!
As I've said in the past, one of the great things about surviving pubity is the ablity to control bodily functions such as an unwanted erection. I can't believe some men can't!
Cheers,
Spontanudity
"Forever Naked"
http://groups.msn.com/YoungSydneyNaturists
Spontanudity,
Why is it so hard to believe that some men cannot “control” an unwanted erection? Some men can and some men cannot. Is it not better to accept them for who and what they are rather then to “chastise” ‘em for NOT being able to control an unwanted bodily function/reaction?
Some people suffer from a frequent urge to urinate. Does that mean that they should be “chastised” for NOT being able to "control" their urge to urinate???
That is basically what you are saying, when you say that you “cannot believe that some men cannot control their erections. . .” That they are some how “weak” and "deficient" because of their lack of control. . .
Herman
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 310 |
|
|
|
Digital_Cowboy
Forum Member
|
Posted - 05/28/2006 : 6:02:25 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cheri
I would still like not to see it, covering is considerate.
Hugs, Cheri
Doing what I can to positively promote nudism
-
-
Cheri,
But what about those times where it is not possible to cover up, or otherwise conceal the fact that one has an erection???
An example would be you are walking through a field in one direction, and a man is walking through the field in the opposite direction. Because of the movements his walking, the feel of the sun and breeze on his skin, he has an erection. He does not have a towel with him because he has gone for a walk in an area with no seats, or benches. And is in the process of returning to where his towel and other stuff is.
What is he suppose to do? Clasp his hands over his erection? Is that NOT calling undo attention to his state? Is he expected to “hit the ground” until his erection passes? Is he suppose to turn his back to you, an act that MOST would consider to be even MORE rude then having an erection in the first place?
Just what is a man suppose to do when in a situation with an erection and he has no way to cover it up, or conceal it?
Herman
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 310 |
|
|
|
lordpacal
New Member
|
Posted - 05/28/2006 : 6:30:24 PM
|
I have been in situations where this happened to me. From a man's perspective, I consider an erection a natural behavior (reaction) with a real purpose for human survival on the planet. Women have responses as well but not so noticeable.
So, what is the big issue for nudists and naturists as long as those men who have the occasional erection are not jumping around masturbating all over the place like chimpanzees?
We are human beings so who are we trying to fool? Why should we ignore this basic part of being human? If an erection offends you, look the other direction. Ignore the display and the monster will likely go away. My experiences have been that most women have a look then turn away. If they like what they see, they stay.
By the way, men are looking at women and enjoying the view as well.
Respectfully written,
Larry
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 4 |
|
|
|
Digital_Cowboy
Forum Member
|
Posted - 05/28/2006 : 6:40:30 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by ombreath
I think it is shame males have to be ashamed of part of their bodies and have to cover up in the occurance of an erection. If the spontaneous erection is sustained in view of others I would consider this inappropiate but usually that is not the case. Spontaneous and innocent erections will pass wihtin a few minutes. If naturists can not accept this state of erections then they are not really about about acceptance at all.
As a male I'm tired of having to be ashamed, embarrassed of my penis and I think it is pathetic that I should have to roll over or cover up when my penis takes an erect form. This sometimes happens if I sunbath nude earlier in the morning or sometimes from the warmth of the sun. I simply let this natural state of my penis pass which only takes a few moments.
I'm not published but my opinion is just as critical and important.
Thank you.
Ombreath,
Very well said, and very well put. And it is a behavior that only men are expected to take, and not women. Yet, some (granted not ALL) women also have pronounced signs of arousal. Yet, they are NOT “required” to do anything to either “cover up” or “conceal” or to draw unwarranted attention to the state that they are in.
Herman
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 310 |
|
|
|
Digital_Cowboy
Forum Member
|
Posted - 05/28/2006 : 7:09:35 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by sweep
I must admit to not having read most of this thread (there is rather a lot of it!), but I'm a little shocked and disappointed in some of what I have read.
In fact, I find the need to have this conversation at all a little baffling.
If a man has an erection, is that alone an act of illicit sexual behaviour?
I thought nudist/naturists were supposed to accept people just as they are. No?
And regardless of what some may claim, a male erection is not always fully controllable.
Though I'd tend to agree that if a man were to stroll around in public sporting a full erection for all to see it would seem crude, a "semi" erection should be considered fairly normal I'd have thought. This is something that often occurs in normal day to day life, clothed or not.
And after all, surely the whole point of “body acceptance” is to have nudity accepted as a whole in every day life!
If the laws on public nudity were relaxed, would you have it that any man with anything that may be deemed as an erection should be arrested and charged with sexual harassment?
The whole idea is simply ludicrous!
Much of the content of this thread shows a hypocrisy one would not normally associate with a "free body culture".
In short: get a life and leave others alone!
You really shouldn't judge somebody on his or her appearance, more their actions, attitude and beliefs.
Sweep,
Well put, and everyone who has “chimed” in that an erection “needs” to be “covered up,” or “hidden,” or “concealed” in some way, what about a partial erection?
Herman
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 310 |
|
|
|
Digital_Cowboy
Forum Member
|
Posted - 05/28/2006 : 7:46:20 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kimberly
Hillbilly;
The first thing a woman thinks when a male around her gets an erection is "Am I in any danger?" Especially if she is single or not with her husband. Its just and uncomfortable feeling, like walking down a dark alley. There are not as many attacks against women in Europe as there are in the USA and Canada. The prelude to having sex is the man getting erect. I know, and most women know that sometimes the male erection is involuntary, no problem there. All we are saying is that if it happens, be considerate of females and cover it up.
Now if I sneeze, my nipples get erect, its involuntary, but I can not threaten a man with them. Its usually quite the contrary, they usually move in for a closer look.
Kim =^.^=
Kim,
When I am dressed and out in the “textile” world I carry a knife on my belt. That DOES NOT mean that I am going to do anything with it more “dangerous” with it other, then either cleaning my nails, or sharpening a pencil. Yet by your analogy a person “should” feel “fear” the moment that myself or anyone else who carries a knife removes it from it’s case/sheath and/or opens it.
But that’s basically what is being said here by some but not all that an erection is an “automatic” sign of either aggression or overt sexuality. When that isn’t always the case.
Here’s another very good question on a point that several people have brought up concerning erections. That is that they should “go somewhere and ‘deal’ with it.” Ok, let’s say that a man who has an erection does “go off and do something about it.” By say going off into the woods, or behind a sand dune, where they think/feel that they would be unobserved, and “took” care of it.
Yet, while they were “taking” care of it, someone DID see/observe them. What then, do they get banned from the beach/resort? Do they get arrested, WHAT then, huh???
Herman
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 310 |
|
|
|
Digital_Cowboy
Forum Member
|
Posted - 05/28/2006 : 7:57:57 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tweety
I have saw very few erections in our nude life style. Most often a male sleeping by the pool. I never felt threatened, until one day I was sitting by the pool reading and a man kept floating by with what I thought was a very notiable erection. I finally turned my back to the pool. The mans wife had noticed my discomfort and came over and told me that it was ok . The husband had had a penile implant and it was always that way. So folks the moral of the story things are not always what they seem.
Tweety
Tweet,
That was very well said.
Herman
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 310 |
|
|
|
Cheri
Forum Member
|
Posted - 05/28/2006 : 9:11:33 PM
|
Herman, Your knife is not allowed in courthouses or in some other public buildings. It's because there is a possibility that someone "might" use in an other than harmless manner.
Cheri
Doing what I can to positively promote nudism
-
-
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 3519 |
|
|
|
Digital_Cowboy
Forum Member
|
Posted - 05/28/2006 : 11:30:32 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by cheef
quote:
Originally posted by hillbilly
Cheef just what is "rude" about a man's erection.
Two things:
1) It is, admittedly, a cultural convention. What is rude about passing gas when you stand next to someone? How about giving them the finger? What about using certain words to refer to their ethnic or racial background? All of these things are cultural conventions... that fact doesn't make them any less rude.
And, yes, they may have some element to them which isn't merely a cultural convention. However, the same is true of erections.
2) There are people who have asked politely that it not be done. In particular, this group includes women who are newcomers to naturism. Saying, "I'll walk around with my erection if I want to, and if you can't handle it I don't care" is a great way to chase them away. In my book, that's rude.
[On a side note, the guy with the penile implant is a special case, which is informative but not of import to this particular discussion]
http://cheef.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nudist-news-group/
Cheef,
But is it also NOT rude for the minority to expect the majority to conform to them?
I mean isn’t that our “argument” with the “Moral Minority???” I mean how many times have we heard from them or people like them that we nudists are nothing more then a bunch of “Exhibitionists, or sinners, or swingers, or perverts” or any of a “hundred” other labels that they try to put on us. . .
Yet, we know that they are wrong in their preconceptions. Likewise it is wrong for people to assume that because a man has an erection that he has or is doing something “wrong” particularly IF he doesn’t do something to “cover it up” or to “conceal” or otherwise try and “hide” his aroused state.
Now then IF on the other hand some guy is sitting out in the open and is very publicly is stroking his penis to achieve an erection. Or IF he is likewise “running around stroking his penis, and is chasing someone (be it male or female) while doing so.
Then in that case, YES the man is wrong, and should be dealt with. But simply having an erection and not trying to cover it up, or conceal it, or hide it in anyway is not wrong, or at least it shouldn’t be.
Why is it of no import that the man had a penile implant? Given that we are learning everyday that ED (erectile dysfunction) is more common then it was once believed, it stands to reason that there are more-and-more men who are getting penile implants to help with their sex lives.
And given that, it is safe to presume that more men will be getting penile implants.
Herman
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 310 |
|
|
|
Digital_Cowboy
Forum Member
|
Posted - 05/28/2006 : 11:49:09 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bartman
<Snip>
quote:
What about semi-erect? I dunno. What in the world is semi-erect????? (Mom???)
An erection is a simple hydraulic process. The prostate controls blood flow into and out of the penis. If the prostate is allowing more blood in than it is allowing out, the penis will become inflated. Anything between empty and mostly full would be considered semi-erect. As the blood pressure inside the penis increases, but before there is sufficient pressure to cause rigidity, the penis will go through a variety of visual changes. Some will elongate, some will thicken, (most do both).
The scrotum expands and contracts all of the time. (The biological reasons is to regulate the temperature of the testes. Maintaining the proper temperature is important for reproduction.) For the most part men are exceedingly unware of this. As the scrotum is doing its thing, it can and often does cause movement of the penis. The prostate may then react briefly increasing or decreasing the ambient internal blood pressure and causing a further shift. This generally goes unnoticed by most men, most of the time.
It is quite possible to be visually semi-erect, and not be aware of it. The degree of erectness that can go unnoticed will vary greatly from man to man and from situation to situation. Put simply, it is a rather straight forward and normal biological function, and occurs quite frequently for autonomus (and thus completely non-sexual) reasons. The less a man is thinking about sex the more likely he will not notice these semi-erections.
<Snip>
Bartman,
Being as I think that we all know that temperature is a key component of a successful or unsuccessful pregnancy attempt. And also affect male production. Would a nudist be at an advantage or disadvantage?
Herman
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 310 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Nudist-Resorts.Org Discussion Forum Bulletin Board Nudism Clothing Optional Resort Naturism Nude Beaches |
© 2002-2020 SUN |
|
|
|
Where do you stand on Male Arousal?
