Sex in the news, can nudity hurt?

[KillerMuffin]

I don't know bout all ya'll but I usually look over the Adult Headlines Billy Wildhack provides for the site every other day or so. One of the interesting ones concerned when does nudity hurt children.

In essence, a man waved at schoolchildren from his window when he was naked. He received sentancing at a circuit court; 18 months for lewdness and 4 years in prison for child endangerment. He is currently out after the appellate court overturned the ruling.

http://www.bergen.com/region/nude13200009137.htm

"We don't have the expertise to say nudity impairs," Huff [lawyer for the Defense] said. "Do something. Give us some proof."

Farmer [New Jersey Attorney General] said nudity in front of children is proof enough for the more serious crime. The Legislature said so in 1992 when it rewrote most of the laws on sex crimes, he said.

The article went on to say that if he is convicted on the endangerment charge he will be required to register as a sex offender under Megan's Law.

Does nudity impair children? Is being knowingly nude in front of children proof enough for the more serious crime of endangerment? What do you think should be done to this guy? Is he a sex offender?

 

[CreamyLady]

Well, that's a real stumper, Muffin.

What, exactly, was he waving? His hand, to children he might know? That shouldn't be construed as a sex crime, though in this day and age it would have been prudent to cover up.

Was he nude, waving at the kids to get their attention, and essentially flashing? That is a crime, and yes, under those circumstances, registration is a good idea.

If he was waving his penis at them, definitely.

Personally, I don't see much wrong with people's nudity. I live in an area where it's been over 100 for a few days now, and I wouldn't think any less of a person for sitting without clothes on some cool grass. So what?

However, my view is apparently in the minority; nudity is equated with sex in the eye of the law, and perversion, apparently, in the eyes of others. If I were to sit on my front lawn, nude, with the lawn sprinkler on, just enjoying the coolness, I'd still get arrested. The fact that I don't own a bathing suit at the moment would not matter, nor would the fact that I don't have air conditioning.

I'd be out there in a New York minute if I thought I could get away with it. It's HOT.







[Edited by CreamyLady on 09-15-2000 at 09:18 AM]

 

[MADDOG]

It all depends why he was nude in front of the children. I don't know how it would happen, but if he was just nude and children happened to be there, then that's not so bad. If he was nude for the purposes of being aroused by the children seeing him - even if he had no intent to do anything, he's a sex offender.

MADDOG

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

Agree with Maddog I do. We need more info to judge a person's actions. Just being nude doesn't mean anything. The law recognizes "intent". What was his "intent"?

Kids are fairly cool with nudity, and, until just before puberty, don't associate it with sex, just curiousity.

BUT -- a nude man stroking himself is highly disturbing for a kid, for reasons the kid can't truly understand himself. Kids may not know about sex, but they're "wicked smart" when it comes to sensing threat.

The tricky thing about the intent is this: Say a nude man flashes a kid with the intent of perhaps touching this kid, and that intent is proven. If he never got to the actual touching part, how do you prosecute him for a crime he only committed in his heart?

You can't. You can put him away for being lewd, but not as long as you could for abuse.

 

[Cheri]

This reminds me of a book I head about entitled How I Accidentally Joined the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy : (And Found Inner Peace) by Harry Stein. After reading this news article and have widely conflicting ides, perhaps I need to read it as well because part of me thinks he should be strung up by his testicles while another wonders what's the big deal. I do agree with Maddog and DCL that intent is a good determining factor.

 

[Honeywetlick]

Is intent written into the legislation? Cause if it aint then it doesn't matter what his intent was, if the judge thinks that he satisfies the definition of an act that the law is trying to prevent, then he'll be convicted, sad but true.(I'm not too familiar with US law, but this would be somewhat how it is in NZ)

But I do agree that intent should have a part, but then any flasher could just say 'I didnt intend to flash my penis at those teenage girls, I was just going for a pee'

It works both ways

 

[Guest]

Does nudity impair children? Is being knowingly nude in front of children proof enough for the more serious crime of endangerment? What do you think should be done to this guy? Is he a sex offender?

There are many communities and regions where people (adults, youth, and children) are nude (or damn near) all the time. Oddly enough, those places tend to have a much lower crime/rape rate. No one was ever taught that the naked body was "wrong" or "evil", etc. They don't know anything different...

~Tiggs~
http://smilecwm.tripod.com/sd3/lise.gif

 

[Siren]

The issue of intent is a tricky one. Let me try to explain it.

 

[dancinvixen]

Does nudity impair children? Is being knowingly nude in front of children proof enough for the more serious crime of endangerment? What do you think should be done to this guy? Is he a sex offender?

There are many communities and regions where people (adults, youth, and children) are nude (or damn near) all the time. Oddly enough, those places tend to have a much lower crime/rape rate. No one was ever taught that the naked body was "wrong" or "evil", etc. They don't know anything different...

~Tiggs~
http://smilecwm.tripod.com/sd3/lise.gif

Ok, Tiggs, Thank God someone said something. I must honestly say that as long as children are taught that the nude body is an evil thing, and the parents view it as such, then there is a crime. The nude body was never meant to evil.
Yes, having a sexual intent towards children is wrong. Just simply being nude is not wrong. Even around children. I'm sorry. But this is how I feel. It took me long enough to get deprogrammed to this point thanks to society and it's screwed up views and morals. But this is where I have to say something.

 

[ShyGuy68]

In my honest opinion nudity can't hurt at all! Here in Denmark we are very liberal, and you see nudity very often. On the TV, in movies, an national newspaper have a page 9 girl daily, that poses at least topless, and also nude from time to time. You can buy adult magazines, some with hardcore pics in them, all over the place. X-rated videos are also easy to get your hand on, most video rental stores have them, and you can buy them even in some book and music stores.

In the summer you can see women suntanning topless in the parks in the city, or even in the yard in a block of apartment building. And on the beach you will also be able to see woman and men suntanning in the nude.

I have to admit that I don't look at the men, but I don't mind at all when women suntan topless or in the buff, there is just something about the female shapes I like!!

 

[Samuari]

Re: The issue of intent is a tricky one. Let me try to explain it.

[ But I do find one thing interesting.......
why is that it is predominately men that do this?
and why is it that mostly men molest children?
This is a disturbing thing.

SIREN
____________________________________________________________
~~~I HOPE I HAVENT CONFUSED THE ISSUE MORE~~~ [/B]

This deserves its own thread, and you're corect it is a very disturbing thing, and utterly beyond my comprehension.

Back to KM's first question: Does nudity impair children? The facts indicate that it depends on the culture, and unfortuintly in this one it does, because we are so anal retentive on anything connected with sex. The second question: Is being knowingly nude in front of children proof enough for the more serious crime of endangerment? If it were up to me, no it wouldn't, I think that Siren has a better handle on the legel issue than any of us. I think that getting him treatment might be mor effective. No I don't think he is a sex offender. But I don't have the facts of the case, and I'm not a lawer.

 

[Jester]

I think that Samuari hit the real point of it. It is the viewpoints of the general culture that can determine the effects of nudity.

Plain nudity by itself is not harmful. However, if you get messages from society telling you that it is wrong or hurtfull, your own views could be twisted by that. Thus, innocent nudity becomes abuse or other possible crime because that is what our(American) society tells us. It amazes me sometimes that children can watch television and see people being shot, stabbed, etc. without worry, but saints preserve us if they see a nude human body sunbathing or washing, etc. It's mind-boggling.

I'm not disregarding intent, just addressing whether nudity itself is harmful to children. Intent is a whole other ball of wax.