No Nude for You!

According to the Register, a nudist group lost a court battle to keep Trail 6 of San Onofre Beach a legal haven for the clothing-less.

Problem is that there was no true set policy, the one being relied upon to fight the legal ban on nudity at public beaches being a letter written by a deputy-director parks official twenty years ago.

I’m no jurist, but a letter, as opposed to an official memo, doesn’t sound like a valid reason to being an exception to the existing no-nudity policy.

I don’t think the human body is something one should be ashamed of, but I think it is presumptuous of people who wish to be nude to assume that someone on a public beach is OK with seeing them nude. I have no problem with nudists, but I am of the opinion that they should keep their nudity confined to the eyes of like-minded people.

And on a public beach, that just isn’t possible.

7 Comments so far

  1. Burns! (burns) on June 29th, 2009 @ 4:38 pm

    Amen! Have you ever noticed that most nudists are people you *really* don’t want to see naked? I like getting nekkid as much as the next guy (or girl,) but some people would do well to understand that often it is better to conceal than to reveal.

  2. Rich Pasco (richpasco) on June 30th, 2009 @ 2:20 pm

    According to a 2006 Roper Poll, 74% of Americans believe that people who enjoy nude sunbathing should be able to do so without interference at a beach that is accepted for that purpose, 54% believe that special and secluded areas should be set aside for people who enjoy nude sunbathing, and 25% have gone "skinny dipping" or nude sunbathing a mixed company themselves.

    So, Ms. Gina and Mr. Burns, why not designate the extreme southern end of San Onofre Beach to allow nude bathing? Properly warned, you would not wander into it by accident.

    Simply put, you don’t have the right impose your tastes onto 100% of the beach users. If I think your bathing suit is ugly and offensive, do I have the right to make you remove it? No? Then why do you claim the right to tell others to they have to cover up to please you? If you don’t want to see them, then walk the other four miles of the beach and grant the nudists the same respect you’d want for yourself: to be left alone and choose what works best for themselves.

  3. Gina (oc_gina) on June 30th, 2009 @ 3:10 pm

    If there are areas that are legally designated for nudists, that’s fine.

    The area at San Onofre was not one of them.

    And also, wouldn’t that cause it to be no longer a public beach?

    I have been given to understand that there is no such thing as a private beach in California. All beaches are open to the public, although access is a different story.

  4. Burns! (burns) on June 30th, 2009 @ 5:05 pm

    Perhaps my tongue wasn’t planted firmly enough in my cheek? My comment was more snark about the fact that it never seems to be the super-models that want to hang out at the nude beach, does it? I’m all for designating a section of the beach for nude sunbathing. Have at it.

  5. robertreno on July 1st, 2009 @ 7:22 am

    Gina: People have been using the Trail 6 area at San Onofre for nude sunbathing for the last 30 years…for the most part without any notable problems. How about supporting the idea that the far end be legally classified as "clothing optional public beach", and posted as such?
    That would meet the needs of those of us who like to be nude on the beach, and give full choice to everyone on the beach as to whether or not to see natural human bodies. Afterall, the natuaral/nude/unclothed bodies on the beach do no harm to anyone. Those who feel they might be offended can simply enjoy the other 90% of the beach. All are welcome, just leave your need to control everyone else at home.

  6. Gina (oc_gina) on July 1st, 2009 @ 8:26 am

    As stated above, if it’s a legally designated area, so be it. This would be the group’s next logical move, to get the state or the city to classify it differently. I wouldn’t stand in the way.

    But I fail to see how me wanting to avoid seeing something I don’t particularly want to see is considered controlling.

  7. frazgo on July 6th, 2009 @ 9:17 am

    Well let me chime in on this one. A few years ago I had a debate with a guy who was absolutely convinced that there were state beaches where "nudity was legal". I even went as far as to write the State director of parks and beaches and got the specific code noting no "nude beaches" yet he continued to dispute that.

    Then he was arrested for lewd conduct. Cost him nearly 10 for attorney fees, fines, and sex offender ed classes. He was lucky kids weren’t in eyesight as he could have been put on the sex offender list too.

    I’d have no problem with nude beaches as long as I don’t have to see it, like burns! noted not all people do I want to see nude. I’d even support legislation to change the current code to allow designation of "clothing optional" beaches and parks.

    Until then the law is the law and you have to accept the consequences of civil disobedience.

Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.