European nudes and American prudes

But if anyone is needing a session. Check out my work http://www.denverglamour.com/nudes/

If nudity is such a non-issue, why are so many people anxious to get in the raw and go prancing around? Sounds extremely childish to me. Why is a person, who does not have those urges, considered a prude? And I am sure that those who are more libertine would say of the prudes, "They're so anal." Those who need to get naked used to be know as flashers, perverts, and sick.
To get your urges into perspective, imagine your grandma bringing you a bunch of cookies that she just baked and she is standing there in the buff offering you a plate of cookies. Kind of freaky thought isn't it?
And why must the nudes be attractive? That would eliminate about 95% of the people that we see going into King Soopers and Safeway. Very fat would be the norm.
And what if some do not want to stop at nudity? Maybe they want to masterbate in public? What is wrong with that? Would you be so prudish as to think that this activity was disgusting? Why just consider; we could be one step ahead of the Europeans. Must a person be religious to be disgusted by such activity?
Also, could you stand being publicly laughed at? Maybe you are not the most attractive animal in the herd? There is the old saw: The clothes make the man.
Your mate just might find what she/he had not been looking for. Too bad for you.
An appetite for violence is a totally different subject and is not driven by the lack of the urge to get naked.

conifermtman wrote: But if anyone is needing a session. Check out my work http://www.denverglamour.com/nudes/

Nice Segway!!! :thumbsup:

conifermtman wrote: But if anyone is needing a session. Check out my work http://www.denverglamour.com/nudes/

That was a great set up for you to take advantage of. lol

Vice Lord wrote:

RivendaleFarms wrote: VL, troll alert my patootie. Reading any of EM's postings on this forum would negate that charge in a heartbeat.

It was a very strange response, furthermore if you're an extreme moderate in these times there's somethins wrong with a ya. The two parties are polar opposites, it's the Hatfields vs the McCoys, North vs the South, the Tutsi vs Hutu. Theres very little middle ground here for wishy washy fence sitters to occupy

"You're with me or against me". As soon as you start drawing lines in the sand and stop understanding your doomed, except for very rare circumstances nothing good ever comes of it. Because of your desire for an extremest-two-party system, we get crappy candidates to choose from who sure don't represent my interests. Its YOUR exact attitude "very little middle ground" which is driving this country into the ground. You can't change your mind, you can't say your not sure, you have to be an expert on every topic. We set unrealistic expectations and then get pissed when people don't live up to them. crazy.

As for my quote. It fits here because you HAVE to speak up for what you believe in within the communities in which you live. You must set acceptable norms, failure to do so results in crazy things happening. So this is our community and we should work to set the norms in a constructive (Debate), not destructive (calling people idiots), way.

major bean wrote: If nudity is such a non-issue, why are so many people anxious to get in the raw and go prancing around? Sounds extremely childish to me. Why is a person, who does not have those urges, considered a prude? And I am sure that those who are more libertine would say of the prudes, "They're so anal." Those who need to get naked used to be know as flashers, perverts, and sick.
To get your urges into perspective, imagine your grandma bringing you a bunch of cookies that she just baked and she is standing there in the buff offering you a plate of cookies. Kind of freaky thought isn't it?
And why must the nudes be attractive? That would eliminate about 95% of the people that we see going into King Soopers and Safeway. Very fat would be the norm.
And what if some do not want to stop at nudity? Maybe they want to masterbate in public? What is wrong with that? Would you be so prudish as to think that this activity was disgusting? Why just consider; we could be one step ahead of the Europeans. Must a person be religious to be disgusted by such activity?
Also, could you stand being publicly laughed at? Maybe you are not the most attractive animal in the herd? There is the old saw: The clothes make the man.
Your mate just might find what she/he had not been looking for. Too bad for you.
An appetite for violence is a totally different subject and is not driven by the lack of the urge to get naked.

Bean,

The intent of this post was to contrast Americans lack of acceptance of nudity and acceptance of violence (Ronbo said it well). Not to promote the nudist lifestyle. I, for one, find images of murdered people on TV much more disturbing than a woman's breast.

And I say that there is absolutely no correlation between having your clothes off and murder. Anyone who see a black/white situation between being naked or murdering someone is just a little bit daft.

Consider: If we poll all of the people in the England to see if they drink tea we will find that most people in the England do drink iced tea. Then let us look at the murder rate in England.
Next we poll South Africa and find that most people in South Aftica do not drink tea. Then we look at the murder rate in Sourh Africa.

Then we can say that if you drink tea you are much less likely to murder someone and if you do not drink tea you are much more likely so muder someone.

This is rather twisted logic don't you think? There is absolutely no correlation between drinking tea or getting naked and murder.

To compare things they must be related or have similar characteristics. Consider: Life is like a bowl of cherries. Or life is not like a bowl of cherries. This is nonsense.

Let us compare a maple tree seed to a letter written in ink. There is no comparison.

Thus the word

CONTRAST