SF Supervisor to Introduce Legislation Forcing Nudists to Wear Clothes

[garbon]

http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2012/10/supervisor_scott_wiener_to_pas.php

The debate over public nudity has finally come to a head.

Supervisor Scott Wiener says he plans to introduce legislation later today that will seriously restrict public nudity in San Francisco. According to the plan, naked men (and women, if there are any) would no longer be allowed to flap freely in city plazas, parklets, sidewalks, streets, and public transit.

So basically everywhere.

Nudity would be allowed at places and events where you go to see naked people -- Folsom Street Fair, Bay to Breakers, Pride parade, or your own backyard.

See also: Here's How S.F. Nudists Would Dress, if They Did Wear Clothes.

Wiener blames his draconian move on one too many wieners walking around. According to the District 8 supervisor, there's been a "sharp increase in public nudity in the Castro, including an almost-daily ad-hoc nudist colony at Jane Warner Plaza."

Per Wiener:

While most people in San Francisco, myself included, have no problem with occasional public nudity, we've seen a shift in public attitude because of the over-the-top situation at Jane Warner Plaza and elsewhere in the Castro. Until recently, public nudity in our city was mostly limited to various street festivals and beaches as well as the occasional naked person wandering the streets.  What's happening now is different. Jane Warner Plaza is the only usable public space in the Castro and serves as the neighborhood's town square.  Use of this small but important space as a near-daily nudist colony, while fun for the nudists, is anything but for the neighborhood as a whole.  This plaza and this neighborhood are for everyone, and the current situation alienates both residents and visitors.  We are a tolerant neighborhood and city, but there are limits.

Wiener swears he wasn't out to get nudists; he tried to allow the exhibitionism to run its course, but instead, the situation "has gotten more extreme. Many in the community have reached the end of their rope," Wiener says.

If the legislation passes, anyone busted without clothes on in public will be subjected to a $100 fine -- the first time. That penalty will double if they're spotted sans clothing again in the same one-year period. If that still isn't reason enough to get dressed, a third offense will amount to either a $500 fine or a misdemeanor citation. But here's the silver lining: If convicted, you won't have to register as a sex offender, Wiener says.   

"The goal here isn't to punish people, but rather to get them to put their clothes on," Wiener explains.   

Oh, and don't worry Noe Valley moms, this legislation won't apply to children under 5.

I've been reading messaging board bits put together by groups of nudists themselves and its interesting to hear how they really feel as though this is a major issue / a question of key personal rights.  Additionally it is interesting to see how they are thinking of some sort of self-policing (I guess in the last few days there was a nudist acting particularly obscene and they are concerned about how that will impact this issue) as well as trying to form a core nucleus of them that will actually step forwards to make sure their voice is heard at public meetings and via letter writing campaigns.  It sort of seems like a small-scale version of the buddings of OWS but on a much less important issue.

[merithyn]

Do they not understand how lucky they are compared to the rest of the country?

[mongers]

Whilst I find the public display of genitalia somewhat yuck and can see how older people might take genuine offence, I think this minor issue, less important than dog poo in public places and littering, is best not solved with 'legislation' like that used by the Ayatollahs and Saudis.   

[Syt]

Supervisor Scott Wiener

[Eddie Teach]

Whilst I find the public display of genitalia somewhat yuck and can see how older people might take genuine offence, I think this minor issue, less important than dog poo in public places and littering, is best not solved with 'legislation' like that used by the Ayatollahs and Saudis.   

There's a big difference between making you cover your dick and making you cover your face.

[garbon]

Whilst I find the public display of genitalia somewhat yuck and can see how older people might take genuine offence, I think this minor issue, less important than dog poo in public places and littering, is best not solved with 'legislation' like that used by the Ayatollahs and Saudis.   

I think the issue is that as SF gets more known about being open to nudity - there has been an increase in nudist flocking to places like Castro & Market from all over the country. Many of those aren't so well behaved and flaunt their genitals about somewhat lewdly.

[garbon]

Do they not understand how lucky they are compared to the rest of the country?

That's the part that is so fascinating to me - as even within conditions in SF - there are so much more pressing issues than the ability to walk around naked as a jaybird.  They seem rather out of touch to me.


That said, Scott Wiener says that he's taken a stand against this as complaints about the nudists have outstripped(!) complaints about homeless in his district.

[Malthus]

Journalist missed a title opportunity: "Wiener stands firm on nudity". 

[Barrister]

That's the part that is so fascinating to me - as even within conditions in SF - there are so much more pressing issues than the ability to walk around naked as a jaybird.  They seem rather out of touch to me.


That said, Scott Wiener says that he's taken a stand against this as complaints about the nudists have outstripped(!) complaints about homeless in his district.

The "there have to be more important issue" question is an interesting one.

Yes, you can argue that poverty, homelessness, health care, the environment, are all 'more important'.  However, on a day to day basis, the kinds of issues that actually affect people more significantly are questions like this - public nudity, grafitti, littering.  It really goes into how safe and secure does the entire community feel.

[DGuller]

Not sure that safety argument applies.  I think the odds of a naked guy carrying a concealed weapon are fairly low.

[garbon]

That's the part that is so fascinating to me - as even within conditions in SF - there are so much more pressing issues than the ability to walk around naked as a jaybird.  They seem rather out of touch to me.


That said, Scott Wiener says that he's taken a stand against this as complaints about the nudists have outstripped(!) complaints about homeless in his district.

The "there have to be more important issue" question is an interesting one.

Yes, you can argue that poverty, homelessness, health care, the environment, are all 'more important'.  However, on a day to day basis, the kinds of issues that actually affect people more significantly are questions like this - public nudity, grafitti, littering.  It really goes into how safe and secure does the entire community feel.

Actually I'd say that homelessness on a day-to-day basis has more of an effect of the citizens of SF than public nudity.  For the most part, even in Wiener's district, nudity doesn't really have much effect on passerby's besides the ick factor.

[MadImmortalMan]

Actually I'd say that homelessness on a day-to-day basis has more of an effect of the citizens of SF than public nudity.  For the most part, even in Wiener's district, nudity doesn't really have much effect on passerby's besides the ick factor.

Way more. Those guys can get aggressive. I've never been harassed by a naked person.

[Malthus]

Not sure that safety argument applies.  I think the odds of a naked guy carrying a concealed weapon are fairly low.

But if they are, it is really, really gross. 

I mean, who wants to be stabbed with a knife a guy pulled out of his asshole? Even if it had a sheath. 

[Malthus]

Actually I'd say that homelessness on a day-to-day basis has more of an effect of the citizens of SF than public nudity.  For the most part, even in Wiener's district, nudity doesn't really have much effect on passerby's besides the ick factor.

Perhaps part of the problem is that many associate public nudity, not with naturist types, but with crazy people.

[Valmy]

If the are naked in front of children isn't that some sort of sex crime?    Like indecent exposure or something?