I just read that a San Francisco alderman from the Castro District (where public nudity is legal) named Mr. Weiner (I’m sorry, you can’t make this stuff up) wants to pass a law requiring nudists to put something under their bare bottoms when sitting in public, and to cover themselves in restaurants. Well, I guess it is about time they caught up with the rest of the nudist community.
I love San Francisco. It is a beautiful, historic and geologically fascinating city. Never mind that they have learned nothing since the Great San Francisco Earthquake; still build on made land and are all going to fall into the sea sooner rather than later. The, “City by the Bay” is gorgeous. Unfortunately, they have turned weird people into a constituency and don’t seem to see the inherent problems with that. My first problem is that they have nudists running around who don’t know the first and most important rule of nude hygiene. You always (did I say ALWAYS !!!) carry your own towel to sit on at all times. Period! Did they do any research of any kind before legalizing nudism? Did they talk to anyone from AANR? Why would you say yes to nudity without setting out some basic ground rules–oh, yes, because its San Fran and everybody is one toke over the line. [If you don't believe that, just take a good look at their Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi--now there is a woman who stares at a chess board and wonders why all the pieces aren't the same size!]
My point, which I am making rather tongue-in-cheek, is that there is a difference between nudists who want to live naturally in protected environments, away from gawkers and simple exhibitionists. People who want to be naked around those who may find them strange, repugnant or sex objects are not interested in social nudism. They have an agenda and are using nudism for a vehicle. This is certainly their right, but they aren’t fooling me.