Discussion:
So what percentage of people at Nudism venues are Swingers anyway?
(too old to reply)
Orson Wells as CitizenCain
2008-03-26 04:34:43 UTC
Permalink
In article
when will nudist idiots
*Great* way to begin an idiotic question, by the way.
stop denying that
Falsehoods usually follow the above phrase.
swingers and nudist are exhibitionist....
Now that's a way to just thrust terminology together and pretend you've
made a point.
until they do they will never be taken seriously....jz
Irony is sometimes boring, as above.
--
James Guckert / Rich Gannon / Whore for Bush
guckert...above i made a statement that swingers and nudist are
exhibitionist and you rather than say you disagree...stated a vague
spew about how i was pretending to make a point....i made a statement
and i feel it is true because folks that become nudist are required to
expose their crotches to transition from the textile mode to nudist
official mode....and become a card carrying nudist....this is all true
so what is your opinion regarding the subject....jz



You are proof positive that someone needs to go back in time and stop WebTV
from ever being created.
Dennis M. Hammes
2008-03-26 07:45:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
In article
when will nudist idiots
*Great* way to begin an idiotic question, by the way.
stop denying that
Falsehoods usually follow the above phrase.
swingers and nudist are exhibitionist....
Now that's a way to just thrust terminology together and pretend you've
made a point.
until they do they will never be taken seriously....jz
Irony is sometimes boring, as above.
--
James Guckert / Rich Gannon / Whore for Bush
guckert...above i made a statement that swingers and nudist are
exhibitionist and you rather than say you disagree...stated a vague
spew about how i was pretending to make a point....i made a statement
and i feel it is true because folks that become nudist are required to
expose their crotches to transition from the textile mode to nudist
official mode....and become a card carrying nudist....this is all true
so what is your opinion regarding the subject....jz
You are proof positive that someone needs to go back in time and stop WebTV
from ever being created.
Sounded a little more like someone needs to go back and hand his
Mommy something -- Tazer, leash, pruning shears, dictionary -- to
stop something else from ever being created.
--
-------(m+
~/:o)_|
Gresham's Law is not worth a Continental.
http://scrawlmark.org
BaronLurk
2008-03-26 11:51:06 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 00:34:43 -0400, "Orson Wells as CitizenCain"
<***@here.invalid> wrote:

<...>
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
...and become a card carrying nudist...
So "Orson" - where _do_ nudists carry their card? (And what type of
material are the cards printed on?)
James Dale Guckert
2008-03-27 02:04:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
In article
when will nudist idiots
*Great* way to begin an idiotic question, by the way.
stop denying that
Falsehoods usually follow the above phrase.
swingers and nudist are exhibitionist....
Now that's a way to just thrust terminology together and pretend you've
made a point.
until they do they will never be taken seriously....jz
Irony is sometimes boring, as above.
--
James Guckert / Rich Gannon / Whore for Bush
guckert...
Okay, I will try to parse what you (in a different guise, it appears)
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
above i made a statement that swingers and nudist are
exhibitionist and you rather than say you disagree...stated a vague
spew about how i was pretending to make a point....
Exactly. You put the three terms into a sentence: swingers, nudists,
and exhibitionists and make a broad statement about the three. And
rather than taking the time to prove that this statement is valid, you
assume that "nudist idiots" should just accept it as fact. That's
called circular logic.

Presumably you believe that intelligent nudists already know that they
are exhibitionists, and that they are like swingers in that way.

You then presume that no one will take "nudist idiots" seriously -- as
if you can speak for anyone besides yourself -- until they realize this
supposed fact.

Taken all together, given all the assumptions you want to be accepted as
empirical fact, it is crystal clear that you have in fact MADE NO POINT.

Ironically, you then suggest that you are to be taken seriously, unlike
these supposed "nudist idiots."
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
i made a statement
Not really, but...
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
and i feel it is true
Your feelings are irrelevant.
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
because folks that become nudist are required to
expose their crotches to transition from the textile mode to nudist
official mode....
I don't think it presumptive to say that people who become nudist do not
see exposing their crotches as a requirement, but more on that later.

Exposing one's crotch is generally a requirement for a genital exam at
the doctor's office, and to perform a number of functions that are part
of basic human hygiene. It may also be the case that certain nudist
locales require full nudity of its visitors -- I don't know. Certainly
the phrase "clothing optional" is frequently used at locations visited
by nudists.

But nudism itself is not about requirements.

And I'm not sure what you mean by "nudist official mode." Where is the
Office of Nudism? Is there a federal or state regulatory body?

Setting that aside, none of what you have said equates nudism with
exhibitionism in any way. Or swinging, for that matter.
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
and become a card carrying nudist....this is all true
Can you be a nudist without a card?

I'm sorry, but nothing you have written is remotely true. In fact, it's
confused and void of sense, partly due to the terrible syntax, but
mostly due to fuzzy thinking.
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
so what is your opinion regarding the subject....jz
My opinion is that you may not be up to a nuanced discussion of nudism,
exhibitionism, or swinging.

However, here's a simplistic breakdown of how wrong you are, in the
opinion of yours truly:

EXHIBITIONISM: The exposing of one's body to the public -- with emphasis
on the primary and secondary sexual features of the body -- with the
intent of drawing attention to one's self. For this to happen, said
exposure in public has to be seen as remarkable.

SWINGING: The consensual participation in sexual acts involving people
who are not part of a given conventional relationship (e.g. marriage) in
various combinations, including threesomes, "swapping," orgies, sex in
full view of others who are also having sex, and so forth.
Exhibitionism tends to be an integral part of swinging, part of the
spice of the experience being the observation of one's lover/spouse in
the throes of ecstasy at the hands (etc.) of someone else, or more than
one person.

NUDISM: The philosophy that public exposure of the human body should not
be remarkable or inherently sexual in nature, that the social and/or
legal requirements to cover certain "taboo" parts of the body in certain
situations, especially those where nudity would make sense -- e.g. at
the beach, in or around swimming pools, etc. -- has no basis in reason.

Get that? Nudism is, as I understand it and have experienced it, about
making nudity UNREMARKABLE. Ordinary. Commonplace.

It therefore is inherently incompatible with exhibitionism.
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
You are proof positive that someone needs to go back in time and stop WebTV
from ever being created.
WebTV? I've never used such a thing. Actually, I would have assumed
that you were a WebTV or AOL user, given your weak grasp of logic and
syntax.
--
James Guckert / Rich Gannon / Whore for Bush
655321
2008-03-27 23:33:29 UTC
Permalink
It appears there is an attribution problem. It was not "Orson Wells"
that I was responding to; it was "Zee." It became clear to me later that
"Wells" tacked on the snarky comment about WebTV.

So anyway...
Post by James Dale Guckert
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
In article
when will nudist idiots
*Great* way to begin an idiotic question, by the way.
stop denying that
Falsehoods usually follow the above phrase.
swingers and nudist are exhibitionist....
Now that's a way to just thrust terminology together and pretend you've
made a point.
until they do they will never be taken seriously....jz
Irony is sometimes boring, as above.
--
James Guckert / Rich Gannon / Whore for Bush
guckert...
Okay, I will try to parse what you (in a different guise, it appears)
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
above i made a statement that swingers and nudist are
exhibitionist and you rather than say you disagree...stated a vague
spew about how i was pretending to make a point....
Exactly. You put the three terms into a sentence: swingers, nudists,
and exhibitionists and make a broad statement about the three. And
rather than taking the time to prove that this statement is valid, you
assume that "nudist idiots" should just accept it as fact. That's
called circular logic.
Presumably you believe that intelligent nudists already know that they
are exhibitionists, and that they are like swingers in that way.
You then presume that no one will take "nudist idiots" seriously -- as
if you can speak for anyone besides yourself -- until they realize this
supposed fact.
Taken all together, given all the assumptions you want to be accepted as
empirical fact, it is crystal clear that you have in fact MADE NO POINT.
Ironically, you then suggest that you are to be taken seriously, unlike
these supposed "nudist idiots."
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
i made a statement
Not really, but...
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
and i feel it is true
Your feelings are irrelevant.
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
because folks that become nudist are required to
expose their crotches to transition from the textile mode to nudist
official mode....
I don't think it presumptive to say that people who become nudist do not
see exposing their crotches as a requirement, but more on that later.
Exposing one's crotch is generally a requirement for a genital exam at
the doctor's office, and to perform a number of functions that are part
of basic human hygiene. It may also be the case that certain nudist
locales require full nudity of its visitors -- I don't know. Certainly
the phrase "clothing optional" is frequently used at locations visited
by nudists.
But nudism itself is not about requirements.
And I'm not sure what you mean by "nudist official mode." Where is the
Office of Nudism? Is there a federal or state regulatory body?
Setting that aside, none of what you have said equates nudism with
exhibitionism in any way. Or swinging, for that matter.
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
and become a card carrying nudist....this is all true
Can you be a nudist without a card?
I'm sorry, but nothing you have written is remotely true. In fact, it's
confused and void of sense, partly due to the terrible syntax, but
mostly due to fuzzy thinking.
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
so what is your opinion regarding the subject....jz
My opinion is that you may not be up to a nuanced discussion of nudism,
exhibitionism, or swinging.
However, here's a simplistic breakdown of how wrong you are, in the
EXHIBITIONISM: The exposing of one's body to the public -- with emphasis
on the primary and secondary sexual features of the body -- with the
intent of drawing attention to one's self. For this to happen, said
exposure in public has to be seen as remarkable.
SWINGING: The consensual participation in sexual acts involving people
who are not part of a given conventional relationship (e.g. marriage) in
various combinations, including threesomes, "swapping," orgies, sex in
full view of others who are also having sex, and so forth.
Exhibitionism tends to be an integral part of swinging, part of the
spice of the experience being the observation of one's lover/spouse in
the throes of ecstasy at the hands (etc.) of someone else, or more than
one person.
NUDISM: The philosophy that public exposure of the human body should not
be remarkable or inherently sexual in nature, that the social and/or
legal requirements to cover certain "taboo" parts of the body in certain
situations, especially those where nudity would make sense -- e.g. at
the beach, in or around swimming pools, etc. -- has no basis in reason.
Get that? Nudism is, as I understand it and have experienced it, about
making nudity UNREMARKABLE. Ordinary. Commonplace.
It therefore is inherently incompatible with exhibitionism.
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
You are proof positive that someone needs to go back in time and stop WebTV
from ever being created.
WebTV? I've never used such a thing. Actually, I would have assumed
that you were a WebTV or AOL user, given your weak grasp of logic and
syntax.
Orson Wells as CitizenCain
2008-04-02 04:29:45 UTC
Permalink
It appears there is an attribution problem. It was not "Orson Wells" that
I was responding to; it was "Zee." It became clear to me later that
"Wells" tacked on the snarky comment about WebTV.
So anyway...
So anyway WebTV still sucks.
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
In article
when will nudist idiots
*Great* way to begin an idiotic question, by the way.
stop denying that
Falsehoods usually follow the above phrase.
swingers and nudist are exhibitionist....
Now that's a way to just thrust terminology together and pretend you've
made a point.
until they do they will never be taken seriously....jz
Irony is sometimes boring, as above.
--
James Guckert / Rich Gannon / Whore for Bush
guckert...
Okay, I will try to parse what you (in a different guise, it appears) are
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
above i made a statement that swingers and nudist are
exhibitionist and you rather than say you disagree...stated a vague
spew about how i was pretending to make a point....
Exactly. You put the three terms into a sentence: swingers, nudists, and
exhibitionists and make a broad statement about the three. And rather
than taking the time to prove that this statement is valid, you assume
that "nudist idiots" should just accept it as fact. That's called
circular logic.
Presumably you believe that intelligent nudists already know that they
are exhibitionists, and that they are like swingers in that way.
You then presume that no one will take "nudist idiots" seriously -- as if
you can speak for anyone besides yourself -- until they realize this
supposed fact.
Taken all together, given all the assumptions you want to be accepted as
empirical fact, it is crystal clear that you have in fact MADE NO POINT.
Ironically, you then suggest that you are to be taken seriously, unlike
these supposed "nudist idiots."
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
i made a statement
Not really, but...
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
and i feel it is true
Your feelings are irrelevant.
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
because folks that become nudist are required to
expose their crotches to transition from the textile mode to nudist
official mode....
I don't think it presumptive to say that people who become nudist do not
see exposing their crotches as a requirement, but more on that later.
Exposing one's crotch is generally a requirement for a genital exam at
the doctor's office, and to perform a number of functions that are part
of basic human hygiene. It may also be the case that certain nudist
locales require full nudity of its visitors -- I don't know. Certainly
the phrase "clothing optional" is frequently used at locations visited by
nudists.
But nudism itself is not about requirements.
And I'm not sure what you mean by "nudist official mode." Where is the
Office of Nudism? Is there a federal or state regulatory body?
Setting that aside, none of what you have said equates nudism with
exhibitionism in any way. Or swinging, for that matter.
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
and become a card carrying nudist....this is all true
Can you be a nudist without a card?
I'm sorry, but nothing you have written is remotely true. In fact, it's
confused and void of sense, partly due to the terrible syntax, but mostly
due to fuzzy thinking.
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
so what is your opinion regarding the subject....jz
My opinion is that you may not be up to a nuanced discussion of nudism,
exhibitionism, or swinging.
However, here's a simplistic breakdown of how wrong you are, in the
EXHIBITIONISM: The exposing of one's body to the public -- with emphasis
on the primary and secondary sexual features of the body -- with the
intent of drawing attention to one's self. For this to happen, said
exposure in public has to be seen as remarkable.
SWINGING: The consensual participation in sexual acts involving people
who are not part of a given conventional relationship (e.g. marriage) in
various combinations, including threesomes, "swapping," orgies, sex in
full view of others who are also having sex, and so forth. Exhibitionism
tends to be an integral part of swinging, part of the spice of the
experience being the observation of one's lover/spouse in the throes of
ecstasy at the hands (etc.) of someone else, or more than one person.
NUDISM: The philosophy that public exposure of the human body should not
be remarkable or inherently sexual in nature, that the social and/or
legal requirements to cover certain "taboo" parts of the body in certain
situations, especially those where nudity would make sense -- e.g. at the
beach, in or around swimming pools, etc. -- has no basis in reason.
Get that? Nudism is, as I understand it and have experienced it, about
making nudity UNREMARKABLE. Ordinary. Commonplace.
It therefore is inherently incompatible with exhibitionism.
Post by Orson Wells as CitizenCain
You are proof positive that someone needs to go back in time and stop
WebTV from ever being created.
WebTV? I've never used such a thing. Actually, I would have assumed
that you were a WebTV or AOL user, given your weak grasp of logic and
syntax.
Stuffed Tiger
2008-04-02 06:34:24 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 02:04:46 GMT, James Dale Guckert
<***@Bush.Ass> wrote:

...
Post by James Dale Guckert
Get that? Nudism is, as I understand it and have experienced it, about
making nudity UNREMARKABLE. Ordinary. Commonplace.
Yes, and also relaxing, accepting, natural and fun. :-)
Post by James Dale Guckert
It therefore is inherently incompatible with exhibitionism.
Indeed, and voyeurism. When people are not using clothes to highlight
this or that body part as a sex object, there is a freedom, a release
from the bondage of constant voyeurism that can surprise newbes.

One can always go back to the tease by acting sexual or by a bikini
that screams, "Look at my brightly colored sex objects," or a power
suit that oozes, "High caste breeding stud."
Orson Wells as CitizenCain
2008-04-04 02:41:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stuffed Tiger
On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 02:04:46 GMT, James Dale Guckert
...
Post by James Dale Guckert
Get that? Nudism is, as I understand it and have experienced it, about
making nudity UNREMARKABLE. Ordinary. Commonplace.
Yes, and also relaxing, accepting, natural and fun. :-)
Skinny-dipping and walking nude in the woods are tremendous experiences.
Post by Stuffed Tiger
Post by James Dale Guckert
It therefore is inherently incompatible with exhibitionism.
Indeed, and voyeurism. When people are not using clothes to highlight
this or that body part as a sex object, there is a freedom, a release
from the bondage of constant voyeurism that can surprise newbes.
One can always go back to the tease by acting sexual or by a bikini
that screams, "Look at my brightly colored sex objects," or a power
suit that oozes, "High caste breeding stud."
Or "Hey! I shaved my pubic hair into the shape of a unicorn!"

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...