The big naked question

How different our world would be if in the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve saw that they were naked (thanks to that little ol' apple of knowledge) but decided that since there was no-one else around - no-one human at least - they might just slum it in their birthdays suits. Fig-leaves or no fig-leaves, we'd have a society that would be less prudish about the odd display of flesh, perhaps.

Canada, the Huffington Post tells us, is undergoing a possible reconsideration of its nudist laws, which illustrates the phenomenom of nudity as a something indecent that could cause harm to others. The impetus behind the call for change are a number of Canadian nudists, including a 'repeat offender' called Brian Coldin whose court case last year sparked debate over the legitimacy of nudism:

'The criminal trial, which began last fall, heard testimony from one of the workers at the fast-food burger restaurant who cried on the stand when she described how Coldin and two others drove up to the pickup window completely nude. She testified Coldin and the driver of the vehicle both pretended to reach for their imaginary wallets to pay for their orders, causing their genitals to sway back and forth [...]

'Ruby [Coldin's lawyer] had argued Coldin wasn't completely nude in the incidents and was at the very least — wearing sandals. He also argued that the self-proclaimed Christian nudist's behaviour was not done in an 'prurient or indecent manner.'

Nudism with intent to shock causes harm, apparently. Like carrying a gun but only with the intent to shoot someone. Hmmm...

United Kingdom - Excite Network Copyright ©1995 - 2018