Can Anyone Explain How Nudity Laws Make Any Sense?

[Andrew D]

Has the English language become too difficult?

I posted that it is rare for prosecutors to fabricate evidence. And presto! I am accused of claiming that prosecutors usually fabricate evidence.

Is there something about the word "rare" that is mystifying? Does it have too many syllables?

Yes, I posted that most prosecutors would, in particular circumstances, fabricate evidence, suborn perjury, etc.

Is the distinction between "would" and "do" just a figment of my imagination?

Suppose that I were to post that Lord Jim would kill to protect his children. (Which I assume is true; most parents would.)

Ten minutes later, my posting would be buried in a flood of claims that I had accused Lord Jim of running around killing people.

I have been carefully observing the criminal "justice" system for decades. I have been reading appellate opinions in criminal cases for decades.

I have worked with people who spent many years prosecuting serious cases. Not some newbie in Bumfuck, Montana. High-level prosecutors. One person I worked with had to have around-the-clock police protection for himself and his whole family, because he was prosecuting major criminal operations. Another one specialized in prosecuting, under federal civil-rights laws, corrupt prosecutors. She made a career of diving right into the middle of what I'm talking about. She knows the stuff backwards and forwards.

But you, Lord Jim? You don't know shit.

But maybe I'll just hang it all up. Pimping for a "free cash machine" might be more rewarding.

[Andrew D]

As we can all see, the answer to the question posed in the title of this thread is "no".

But who cares?

There's a free cash machine on the internet!

Really!

Free cash machine!

[loCAtek]

Does anyone care -- does anyone even dare to try -- to explain how that makes any sense?

Very well, it's called human sexuality, particularly in males. Biologically, the human man is hardwired to respond to visual sexual stimuli. Some say it is an evolutionary shortcut to picking a healthy, reproductive partner, to judge her by her appearance. Historically, for eons, men have been attracted and stimulated solely by the sight of a female's secondary sex characteristics[ i.e. breasts]. Currectly, there is an enormous, whole wide industry that caters to just that impulse; there's no denying it.
A man is physiologically compelled to look at a woman's breasts, to the point of his own endangerment; which is why it is in society's best interests that they be concealed by clothing, so as to not to distract men from the safe execution of their responsibilities and/or duties.

[Andrew D]

A man is physiologically compelled to look at a woman's breasts, to the point of his own endangerment; which is why it is in society's best interests that they be concealed by clothing, so as to not to distract men from the safe execution of their responsibilities and/or duties.

What planet do you live on?

Narcissus III?

I'm sure that you find it pleasant to imagine that you are so attractive that men are somehow diverted from their attention to their responsibilities by looking at you. (Although, of course, you have described for us the caliber of the men who have fallen into that trap.)

But the truth of the matter is that most men have no difficulty doing the requisite prioritizing.

Sure, because of stupid laws which no one has been able to muster a rational defense for, seeing naked people in public is unusual. And anything unusual attracts the eye.

But the sight of a woman's breasts is enough to make me swerve into oncoming traffic.

Yeah. You wish that you were all that.

[loCAtek]

No, I've witnessed it first hand, if you'd been paying attention;

Really?

I find women's bodies as attractive as does the next (heterosexual) guy. But drive off the road and run the risk of killing someone just so I can see some tits?

No really, it happens. I've seen it myself a few times.

In San Jose, the most brakes squealed in 60 seconds, was caused by a young girl with a pair of Double 'D's that weren't even fully exposed. She was not nude, but wearing a pair of overalls ...and nothing else underneath them. Technically, enough of her breasts were covered by the bib portion in the front of the denim overalls to constitute public decency; but just barely. The side boobage alone, was making massive traffic altercations every minute. While, I was gandering too, and I'm not even lesbo! When she walked, the way those babies bounced was mind boggling, and brakes were burning all over that intersection.

You also might make note of the HUGE publishing industry of nekkid women, that is predominately supported by men.

Men like to look at women- you can't deny that.

[Andrew D]

Yes, men like to look at women. And women like to look at men.

And men like to look at men. Or do you think that only women like to look at Michelangelo's David?

And women like to look at women. Or do you think that only men like to look at Botticelli's Birth of Venus?

And men and women both like to look at trees.

And that somehow means that we need nudity laws so that men will not lose control of themselves staring at what you have to offer?

Get over it.

[loCAtek]

The fact is: men are more visually stimulated than women, as proved by pornography sales for millennium, which leans heavily towards the male market. Men seek out nekkid women at a far higher rate than women seek out nekkid men; As well as men will act out their desires, violently if necessary far more often than women will.

Therefore, as a societal precaution, it is in its best interests to keep women clothed from men.

[Andrew D]

So we should have laws prohibiting women from going naked, so that we can protect ourselves from the consequences of men's being driven to derangement by the sight of naked women; but we don't need laws prohibiting men from going naked, because women aren't going to be driven to derangement by the sight of naked men?

[loCAtek]

Actually, fairly accurate. Women are fair less attracted to man's looks than to his strength, productivity and/or confidence. Which is why there is a huge 'make-up' business for women, who are judged by their looks, and far less of one for men who are judged by their works.

[Andrew D]

Okay. So half of the nudity laws that we have now should be scrapped. We should keep only those that target women. You're just all over this shit, aren't you?

[loCAtek]

Well, nekkid men stimulate the homosexual portion of the community. Shouldn't discount them.

[Andrew D]

Well, thanks for that clarification.

Are you really stupider than a box of rocks, or are you just pretending?

[Guinevere]

Lo, far too often the characterizations of women that you post here are so inaccurate, out of date, and sad, I feel bad for you. C'mon Welder-Lady, get your mojo back!

[Lord Jim]

Gee, you choose to criticize LoCa rather than the viscous little bully....

[Andrew D]

The viscosity of my bullying must really be getting on his nerves.

Thin, watery bullying?

That he could probably handle.

[loCAtek]

Well, it wasn't name calling at least, however I do wish it was the point being debated.

In most cultures, women have had to be more covered than men, until only the recent centuries. The dress or gown mutes the shape of a women's curves so, they aren't as noticeable. A woman wearing slacks was considered scandalous, as well leaving her hair uncovered. It's still practiced in the Middle East, that a woman hides her 'crown of glory' in public. Sure, men blame the women for their arousal, but the fact is it's there; it got to the point that ME culture instituted the veil.

http://www.mapageweb.umontreal.c...
Areas of Brain Activation in Males and Females...
excerpt from long abstract -
Only for the group of male subjects was there evidence of a significant activation of the thalamus and hypothalamus, a sexually dimorphic area of the brain known to play a pivotal role in physiological arousal and sexual behavior. When directly compared between genders, hypothalamic activation was found to be significantly greater in male subjects

Just being in the presence of attractive women make men do stupid things- or at least take more risks, according to a study published in Social Psychological and Personality Science.
http://www.richardronay.com/CBS/Researc ... 0testo.pdf

According to researchers, testosterone levels increased in men when attractive women were present. Since testosterone is a sex hormone, and has also been shown to play a role in fight-or-flight responses and risk-taking behaviors, this result is not surprising. Is anyone shocked to find that men subconsciously try and "be more manly" in front of pretty females? I filed this study away with the other blatantly obvious papers under the heading "Well, no kidding."

Just attractive and clothed; is it any surprise there's high security in strip clubs?

Sex Differences in Response to Visual Sexual Stimuli: A Review

Heather A. Rupp, Ph.D.1,2 and Kim Wallen, Ph.D.3
1Department of Biology and The Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender and Reproduction, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana
3Department of Psychology and Center for Behavioral Neuroscience, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
2Correspondence and gally proofs: Heather A. Rupp, Ph.D., The Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender and Reproduction, Indiana University, Morrison Hall 313, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, (812) 856-0009, Fax: (812) 855-8277 ; Email: hrupp@indiana.edu

This article reviews what is currently known about how men and women respond to the presentation of visual sexual stimuli. While the assumption that men respond more to visual sexual stimuli is generally empirically supported, previous reports of sex differences are confounded by the variable content of the stimuli presented and measurement techniques. We propose that the cognitive processing stage of responding to sexual stimuli is the first stage in which sex differences occur. The divergence between men and women is proposed to occur at this time, reflected in differences in neural activation, and contribute to previously reported sex differences in downstream peripheral physiological responses and subjective reports of sexual arousal. Additionally, this review discusses factors that may contribute to the variability in sex differences observed in response to visual sexual stimuli. Factors include participant variables, such as hormonal state and socialized sexual attitudes, as well as variables specific to the content presented in the stimuli. Based on the literature reviewed, we conclude that content characteristics may differentially produce higher levels of sexual arousal in men and women. Specifically, men appear more influenced by the sex of the actors depicted in the stimuli while women’s response may differ with the context presented. Sexual motivation, perceived gender role expectations, and sexual attitudes are possible influences. These differences are of practical importance to future research on sexual arousal that aims to use experimental stimuli comparably appealing to men and women and also for general understanding of cognitive sex differences.

...

Although the general neural networks underlying sexual arousal are the same in men and women, these circuits may be differentially activated based on the characteristics of the sexual stimuli presented. As described earlier, there are sex differences in what types of stimuli men and women report to be sexually attractive and arousing (Janssen et al., 2003; Kelley & Musialowski, 1986; Schmidt, 1975). Recent work supports the idea that the brains of men and women respond differently to sexual stimuli contingent upon the content of the stimuli. There are sex differences in neural activation between men and women depending upon the sex of the actor in the stimuli (Rupp, Herman, Hamann, & Wallen, 2004). While in the fMRI scanner, subjects viewed still photographs depicting male nudes, female nudes, a neutral condition, or fixation, presented in a block design. Activation to sexual stimuli was compared to activation during the neutral condition. Greater activation to opposite sex stimuli compared to same sex stimuli was seen in men in the inferior temporal and occipital lobes. Women did not show any areas of increased activation to opposite sex compared to same sex stimuli. Men showed more differential activation of brain areas related to sexual arousal than women, including the amygdala, hippocampus, basal ganglia, and some areas of the prefrontal cortex. Women did not show these differences, suggesting that women do not emotionally discriminate between opposite sex and same sex stimuli in the manner that men do. Women only showed increased activation to same sex compared to opposite sex stimuli in visual cortical areas. These differences may reflect different strategies for women in the cognitive processing of stimuli, specifically in how women focus their attention to sexual stimuli. Increased activation by women in these cortical areas may reflect a more complex approach to sexual stimuli that focuses not only on sexual aspects of a stimulus, but also on nonsexual and perhaps more contextual factors (Rupp & Wallen, 2007).

...

Biological Influences
In addition to social pressures, biological differences between men and women likely contribute to the sex differences in response to sexual stimuli. Although social factors may strongly modulate men and women’s reactions to sexual stimuli, biological factors may determine the extent to which social factors can modulate subjective and physiological arousal. Gonadal steroid hormones are likely candidates for biological influences on the cognitive component of sexual arousal, including stimulus evaluation, attention, and sexual motivation. Hormones may act by altering the attention to and the valence of sexual stimuli. Previous work demonstrates that men have more subjective and physiological arousal to sexual stimuli with higher attention and positive emotion (Koukounas & McCabe, 2001). Attention and other cognitive processes may be influenced by testosterone levels in men. A PET study found that activation in the right middle occipital gyrus and right inferior frontal gyrus, areas linked to emotion and motivation, in response to viewing erotic film clips was positively correlated with testosterone levels in men (Stoleru et al., 1999).

From the same page as above, a list of more research studies of this natural phenomenon.

PubMed related articles

Men and women differ in amygdala response to visual sexual stimuli.

[Nat Neurosci. 2004]
Sex differences in viewing sexual stimuli: an eye-tracking study in men and women.

[Horm Behav. 2007]
Sex differences in visual attention to erotic and non-erotic stimuli.

[Arch Sex Behav. 2008]
Review Elucidating women's (hetero)sexual desire: definitional challenges and content expansion.

[J Sex Res. 2010]
Review Gender differences in erotic plasticity: the female sex drive as socially flexible and responsive.

[Psychol Bull. 2000]


Sex Differences in Response to Visual Sexual Stimuli: A Review
Gender differences in the effect of visual sexual stimulation on the perceived covariation...

PubMed

Women's sexual and emotional responses to male- and female-produced erotica. [Arch Sex Behav. 1994]

Male-female differences in sexual arousal and behavior during and after exposure to sexually explicit stimuli. [Arch Sex Behav. 1975]

A comparison of male and female patterns of sexual arousal. [Arch Sex Behav. 1981]

[Andrew D]

So this is all intended to justify nudity laws how?

[loCAtek]

It doesn't, it justifies clothing.
Nudity isn't practical nor socially conducive to harmony between the sexes.

Take the opposite of the current social world-wide situation; say clothing was made illegal except in cases of extreme weather. Relationships would be further sexualized, since the option to exclude the flesh from interaction wouldn't be there any longer. The more mature(say celibate monks) could refrain from physical/hormonal influences and judgements, but really, in most societies that would be the exception rather than the norm. Gender would be further exploited rather than de-emphasized.

I think that's because nudity symbolizes intimacy. Surely, that's the ultimate in physical intimacy to see someone sexually?

...but are humans really fulfilled by physical intimacy, or do they really crave emotional intimacy? Is one really a substitute for the other?
Or has society realized it isn't and choses to separate the two by fabrics and fashions?