Art or otherwise, I'm inclined to leave public nudity illegal as a safety measure if nothing else. Thanks to Murphy's Law, you know that for every young, hot and hard-bodied nudist you have ten fat old men, and whether it's the ghost of Puritan culture or otherwise, I am strongly opposed to any measure that may raise my daily exposure to old man dick. Plenty, if not most Americans are still offended and put off by nudity, myself included, and I think we have a right to not be exposed to that without our consent. If you want nudity as an art form, I say it should be confined to racy theatrical productions or avant-garde art galleries. Anyone running around naked in public ought to be arrested.
I'd say the same about men, all of whom I find physically repulsive clothed or not, but we can't very well lock up half the population without a good reason, and if ugliness isn't a good enough reason to arrest all the men it's not a good enough reason to arrest people for nudity imo. A 'right' not to be exposed to something that makes you merely uncomfortable? If I may say so you are part of the problem. Why do you see every instance of nudity as sexual (whether enticing to you or not?) We're all naked under our clothes. We're naked when we're born, when we bathe or change clothes, when we have certain medical procedures, and when the coroner and undertakers handle our dead bodies; are those sexual instances as well, just because we're nude?
I'd say the same about men, all of whom I find physically repulsive clothed or not, but we can't very well lock up half the population without a good reason
Well that's a new one. Anyway, the difference is that people can't help being ugly or male, and to make that a crime would be completely unworkable, as it applies to half the population as you said. People can choose to be clothed or not.
A 'right' not to be exposed to something that makes you merely uncomfortable? If I may say so you are part of the problem.
You can definitely say so, and you may have a point. I admit, the sole reason for my opposition is my distaste for the subject matter. I don't like to see people making out in public, either, so that ought to be illegal, too. The reason why I find them distasteful is perhaps two-fold: one, America still suffers from the ghost of Puritan culture. The nudity taboo is much less in Europe, as evidenced by the much greater prevalence of nude beaches there. Two, I suspect that disgust at the violation of sexual mores is a natural instinct. If you don't think so, then just go do a Google image search for "lemonparty." (But seriously, don't. That's a shock image, designed to be super gross)
Why do you see every instance of nudity as sexual (whether enticing to you or not?)
Who says I do? How did you infer that, and what does that even mean? All I know is, that whenever I see nudity, on an attractive person or not, I experience disgust and embarassment and am compelled to look away.
We're all naked under our clothes. We're naked when we're born, when we bathe or change clothes, when we have certain medical procedures, and when the coroner and undertakers handle our dead bodies; are those sexual instances as well, just because we're nude?
All of those instances are either out of necessity or otherwise in private. One thing's for sure, nobody may witness them who did not consent. You bathe with the door close, and doctors and undertakers become de-sensitized to the disgusting nature of the human body as their chosen profession requires.
I really fail to see the difference. Bottomless or topless is still sufficient for public indecency, and if they were made legal separately, what judge could argue that the prohibition against full nudity was still justifiable?
It has nothing to do about whether or not it's art. I completely agree that nudity can be a part of art, but unlike nude portraits, nude public demonstrations are an art form you can be exposed to without your consent. For example, I hear there was once a fellow in Spain named Jaime del Val who rigged up a system of projectors that could project an image of his genitalia onto the sides of buildings and such. He was doing it for artistic expression, too, but in my mind that's just flashing on an unprecedented scale. If I was a judge I'd throw his ass in jail, if not an asylum.