LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

do you support woman's right to choose to be totally naked in public any where?

Transguycharlie said:
I love wanking in public but I have to wait til the twilight hours unfortunately. I’m dying to try this porno cinema near me that plays porn, I want to watch others play too.

I love the idea of women going naked but I’d be wanking watching them
Click to expand...
I think you should be allowed to jerk off in public. (Certain precautions would have to be followed, of course. E.g., your cum needs to be limited to your own body or clothes.)

I also think any kind of CONSENSUAL sex activity should also not be prohibited anywhere.
 
What about the idea of setting up a so-called "tolerance zone" for a trial period.
Clear warning signs stating that if you entered this zone, then you would encounter full male and female nudity.
 
Filipinawife said:
Like a nudist beach
Click to expand...

Along those lines, but also taking the template of how some European cities are dealing with prostitution.
Everyone knows of the Amsterdam Red Light District, but the same principle occurs in Frankfurt, Hamburg and Nuremberg plus other cities across Europe including Copenhagen and Vienna.
 
While I support a woman’s right to choose. Public anywhere is a bit extreme. The consent of other people is a factor, including the presence of children in public.

However, it’s absolutely ridiculous that women’s exposed breasts and nipples can be treated as criminal, including fines, arrest, or loss of social media accounts on some sites. People lost their damn mind when Janet Jackson exposed a nipple during the Super Bowl half-time, and they screamed about having to explain it to children. Those same people didn’t seem that upset with all the erectile-dysfunction med ads on the same Super Bowl.
 
Toffer_Guy said:
While I support a woman’s right to choose. Public anywhere is a bit extreme. The consent of other people is a factor, including the presence of children in public.
Click to expand...
I get that, even though I still can't imagine any scenario where a child would be harmed by seeing a naked person, as long as there's no sexual activity involved. Lots of nudist children grow up to be normal people even though they've been exposed to naked adults all their lives.
 
jehoram said:
I get that, even though I still can't imagine any scenario where a child would be harmed by seeing a naked person, as long as there's no sexual activity involved. Lots of nudist children grow up to be normal people even though they've been exposed to naked adults all their lives.
Click to expand...
It’s not a matter of harm. As you said, nudists don’t have an issue. Nudists also have areas where people understand and consent to random nudity. People know what they’re getting into when they go. Even those locations have rules of conduct.

The question was posed as nudity ‘anywhere.’ What’s the rationale of a random person exposing themselves at a mall or theme park? It’s no shock that many men get sexual gratification exposing their genitalia to women online through nonconsensual DMs. A blatant and disrespectful violation of consent. No one is physically touched but it still counts as harm and harassment.

How does one discern who’s exposing them self publicly for their own sexual excitement or not, even in situations with children? Imagine a scenario where another person seeks out a child for the fetish of exposing themself. Even if they have no intent of touching the child. That is still involving a child in a sexual situation without consent. It shouldn’t matter if it‘s a child or adult. The consent of other’s shouldn’t be violated.
 
Toffer_Guy said:
How does one discern who’s exposing them self publicly for their own sexual excitement or not, even in situations with children? Imagine a scenario where another person seeks out a child for the fetish of exposing themself. Even if they have no intent of touching the child. That is still involving a child in a sexual situation without consent. It shouldn’t matter if it‘s a child or adult. The consent of other’s shouldn’t be violated.
Click to expand...
That's the nub of the problem right there. Who's to say what a guy at a nude beach is thinking when he's exposing his naked body to anybody... a child, an adult, whatever? As long as he's not being blatantly sexual about it, like displaying a boner or wagging his dick at the person, I don't care much what's going on in his head. To anybody but the pervert, it's not a sexual situation. It's just naked people.

As for consent, that's trickier. I'd say that if a person brings a child into a milieu where there's naked people... a beach, a shower room, or a World Naked Bike Ride, and everybody is behaving themself, then consent has been given for the child to see nudity. Again, these are not "sexual situations" to anybody but the person who's perving on it.
 
If society was different. Like a Free Use Society. Sure no problem.

As society as it is today? No chance. Yes it would be nice.
 
dominatrixjane said:
do you support woman's right to choose to be totally naked in public any where?

to ruthlessly cock tease men

http://thehairylady.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/118.jpg

https://hwcdn.voyeurweb.com/albums/3164192/large/5153055-bri-pantiless-in-heiligenberg.jpg

https://img-hw.xnxx-cdn.com/videos/...16e1d/e689fe1ad3b5a7d24a186913ee816e1d.26.jpg

https://bootyoftheday.co/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/thick-argentinian-public-nude-1.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CzYRuakW8AEhZRI.jpg:large

https://www.amateurscrush.com/wp-co...y-public-flashing-curvy-booty-supermarket.jpg

https://static-ca-cdn.eporner.com/photos/257256.jpg

http://adultxxxarea.com/all_img/93ozn7daewyquwa4nla74zd37suth2tb5bj34efyg4j6tq9r3z.jpg


https://imgur.com/OelBlLK
Click to expand...
Its all about the tease, if they're totally nude you'll accustom yourself and not bother looking after a while.

It's much sexier to be granted a view of something you was hoping to see.

And so hot too if they're accompanied by a male and the flashing was definitely intentional
 
I have to say no for a couple reasons. First, if the gender were reversed, the answer would very likely, and should be, a hard no for most. In fact men go to jail and prison for exposing themselves in that way. And they are recognized as a danger to the public. The equation didn't change because it is a woman.

Second is a bit more nuanced. A man should indeed be able to control his behavior, and wrong behavior by men towards women is never excusable. That said, I oppose anything that makes it more likely that women are objectified or assaulted. If I leave the keys in my new car, the door unlocked, in a neighborhood known for theft, whilst the criminal does indeed bear the brunt of responsibility for stealing the car, I can't complain that I bore no responsibility in the situation. This is a very sexualized world that objectifies women on every level, putting them at risk. I oppose calling anything that feeds into that "empowering". To my mind, that's a twisting of definition for one side's benefit. Notice it's mostly guys who support such a thing. Women generally hold their own bodies far more sacred.

Put it this way. If it were your daughter, your sister, would you support her being on display for the whole world to objectify? I would hope not. I would hope you would honor and protect her honor more than that.
 
These two sisters felt it was a woman's right to be naked in public anywhere. The big sister argued that their public nudity was meant to be a statement on covering up societal issues. To change the world and break free from patriarchal control, big sis attempted to recruit her friends and any other willing women to participate in her feminist causes. Her little sister was one of her recruits. They were attempting to encourage other women to strip down and cover themselves in whipped cream. The plan was for them to use the whipped cream to cover their private parts and post photos of it on social media to attract attention to their cause.

I'll admit, I didn't quite understand the reasoning behind it, but I fully support any cause that involves women stripping down!

I didn't want to post the naked photo as I didn't know if it was appropriate on this forum. BTW, both sisters are 18+.


[ material prohibited per our forum guidelines]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MyBitchyExGF said:
These two sisters felt it was a woman's right to be naked in public anywhere. The big sister argued that their public nudity was meant to be a statement on covering up societal issues. To change the world and break free from patriarchal control, big sis attempted to recruit her friends and any other willing women to participate in her feminist causes. Her little sister was one of her recruits. They were attempting to encourage other women to strip down and cover themselves in whipped cream. The plan was for them to use the whipped cream to cover their private parts and post photos of it on social media to attract attention to their cause.

I'll admit, I didn't quite understand the reasoning behind it, but I fully support any cause that involves women stripping down!

I didn't want to post the naked photo as I didn't know if it was appropriate on this forum. BTW, both sisters are 18+.
Click to expand...
See, this is my point. How many guys are using this as jacking material? My guess, a lot. This is not liberating. This is reducing a person to skin instead of soul, physical instead of the greater spiritual substance, body instead of identity. It lessens a person's perceived worth to themselves and others. I would object if it were men, and object as vehemently. Some things are just too sacrosanct to be put on display for all the world to ogle.
 
Last edited:
JaySecrets said:
See, this is my point. How many guys are using this as jacking material? My guess, a lot. This is not liberating. This is reducing a person to skin instead of soul, physical instead of the greater spiritual substance, body instead of identity. It lessens a person's perceived worth to themselves and others. I would object if it were men, and object as vehemently. Some things are just too sacrosanct to be put on display for all the world to ogle.
Click to expand...
JaySecrets said:
See, this is my point. How many guys are using this as jacking material? My guess, a lot. This is not liberating. This is reducing a person to skin instead of soul, physical instead of the greater spiritual substance, body instead of identity. It lessens a person's perceived worth to themselves and others. I would object if it were men, and object as vehemently. Some things are just too sacrosanct to be put on display for all the world to ogle.
Click to expand...
So a woman only has a soul, spiritual substance, and identity when she's dressed?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top