Recent Posts

71

NAG General Discussion. / Re: What the papers say

« Last post by John Wood on July 08, 2023, 02:19:04 PM »

I've written to the first two newspapers in the links above in response to thier online stories. Indentical emails were sent to KentOnline and ITVX in an attempt to ask them to show more respect to naturists and to advise them about the legal position relating to public nudity. It's unlikely to make much difference to the newspapers but we have to keep trying. I'll post back here if I get any responses.  Below is a copy of my email to KentOnline. The email to ITVX was identical except the headline link.

----------------------------------------

Dear Sirs,

I refer to the report relating to two naked men who were seen in various places as illustrated in your story.

https://www.kentonline.co.uk/tonbridge/news/naked-cyclist-on-bridge-exposed-himself-to-paddleboarders-289396/

To begin with, it is not an offence to be seen naked in a public place so the police should not be ‘hunting ‘for these men. If the men are behaving as naturists, as your story suggests, then the police should be following police guidelines and should not be pursuing this matter in the first place.

Your headline refers to “Indecent Exposure”. Indecent Exposure belongs to a law called Section 28 of the Police Town Clauses Act 1847 which makes it a criminal offence “to cause shock and offence by wilfully and indecently exposing your person to the annoyance of residents and passengers“. But this law was repealed in 2003 when it was replaced by the Sexual Offences Act. That means that Indecent Exposure has not been a criminal offence for 20 years. People (including the police) have got to start adapting to the changes in the law!

Section 66 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 covers ‘Exposure’ - not ‘Indecent Exposure’. There is a big difference between the two. Indecent Exposure covers any aspect of a person’s genitalia being visible for any reason and, as we’ve already established, that law was scrapped in 2003. Exposure, under Section 66 of the Sexual Offences Act, relates ONLY to ‘flashing’.

An offence for Exposure (flashing) requires two distinct elements:

1 – It requires a sexual element. This means that the person exposing himself must be doing it for sexual gratification. Since naturism is non-sexual, this box remains unticked.

2 – It requires that a person’s genitalia is directed toward somebody with an intention to cause alarm and distress. The fact that somebody could feel alarm and distress is not enough. There has to be a CLEAR INTENTION to cause it (as would be illustrated by a flasher). Again, no genuine naturist is going to run up to somebody and force his groin in people’s faces! Dedicated naturists don’t behave like that. So this leaves another box unticked.

For the above reasons, Section 66 of the Sexual Offences Act cannot be used against a naturist.

I mentioned the Police Guidelines. The Guidelines were issued by the College of Policing in 2018 to clarify the way the police should interpret the law regarding naturism and public nudity. The guidelines make it perfectly clear that no offence is being committed. A briefing note is freely available from the police website at:

https://library.college.police.uk/docs/nudity.pdf

A PDF copy is attached for your reference. Different sections are aimed at Responding Police Officers and Call Handlers but, in my experience, the police will actively ignore the briefing note until it is assertively brought to their attention.  The police should now be following the guidelines as a matter of course!

I hope I have clarified the legal position and you will appreciate the amount of flaws in your story. I also hope you will take this opportunity to show respect for naturists who are innocently going about their lawful business. But most of all, I hope that you will question any naturist related information given to you by the police. It would be wise to question any information they give you to compile your story.

Please feel free to contact me if you require any further information regarding naturism or the laws relating to it.

Yours faithfully,

John Wood.

Secretary of the Naturist Action Group.

Email: secretary@naturistactiongroup.co.uk

72

NAG General Discussion. / Re: What the papers say

« Last post by SouthamptonLee on July 08, 2023, 10:45:20 AM »

I don't think it will change any time soon.  The papers like the occasional "nudie" story as it is great clickbait - people assume they will see some pictures of naked ladies.  They don't care what the story is, how accurate it is, or even if it's true.  They only care about click numbers on their web sites.

73

NAG General Discussion. / Re: The Nudist Story (1960)

« Last post by Ray Ward on July 07, 2023, 04:31:35 PM »

The worst thing, in my view, was the omission of an apostrophe!

74

NAG General Discussion. / Re: The Nudist Story (1960)

« Last post by MrJorrox1956 on July 07, 2023, 09:11:11 AM »

Pussycats Paradise?  Strewth!

75

NAG General Discussion. / Re: The Nudist Story (1960)

« Last post by Ray Ward on July 07, 2023, 08:34:48 AM »

The link in John Wood's post is the film - though it gives it the American title, Pussycats Paradise!

76

NAG General Discussion. / Re: The Nudist Story (1960)

« Last post by MrJorrox1956 on July 07, 2023, 07:49:05 AM »

... The prosecuting counsel in the Lady Chatterley's Lover trial who famously asked the jury if they would wish their wives or servants to read the book was Mervyn Griffith-JONES, not Johns.

Yes it was, thanks.  A typo I think, I hope - could have been fatigue.  That's my excuse , anyway.

77

NAG General Discussion. / Re: The Nudist Story (1960)

« Last post by Ray Ward on July 07, 2023, 06:57:38 AM »

Haven't seen the film, but the man mentioned who became the first male voice of the speaking clock was the actor Brian Cobby, and I remember the story as an example of the amazing way in which the British "popular" press could find things out even before Google and the Internet and all that. A search for a new voice of the speaking clock was announced in 1984, the choice fell on Cobby, then an assistant telephone exchange supervisor, and almost immediately a paper revealed than in his acting career he'd been in a "nudist" film, complete with a still of him from the film! He nonetheless remained the voice until 2007. He died in 2012.

The prosecuting counsel in the Lady Chatterley's Lover trial who famously asked the jury if they would wish their wives or servants to read the book was Mervyn Griffith-JONES, not Johns. 

78

NAG General Discussion. / Re: The Nudist Story (1960)

« Last post by MrJorrox1956 on July 06, 2023, 08:54:10 PM »

Sorry about that, I don't know what to do about it.  OK is not a stable platform, or easy to use and I have no history to consult to get it back.

79

NAG General Discussion. / The Nudist Story (1960)

« Last post by MrJorrox1956 on July 06, 2023, 06:40:39 PM »

I'm watching a 1960 film called The Nudist Story, which I expected to be a cheap voyeur flick of the grubby raincoat on a Saturday afternoon sort, however, I'm pleasantly surprised.  The film is silly and the plot simple: attractive but bossy and prim young woman inherits her grandfather's business empire, which includes a 'nudist colony' whose lease is about to expire.  She needs to sell some of the assets to pay the death duties and the club's future is in doubt, largely because Little Miss Prim is digusted by nudity.  The handsome young director (played by the man who became the first male voice of the speaking clock, in 1985) of the club goes to see her but fails to persuade her to change her mind. 

To cut a long story short everything turns out well in the end, and there's a silly bit of romantic drama, however, the portrayal of nudists is positive.  One early sign is the change in the woman's behaviour towards her secretary; she goes from petulant martinet threatening to sack the woman for being a little late before her first vist to 'the camp' to offering her the day off because her mother isn't well after it, which I saw as an assertion of the positive mental health benefits of clothes free living and social nudity.  Later in the film the woman's stuffy old maiden aunt describes nudists as disgusting and the young woman vehemently states the contrary, remarking that the people at 'the camp' are the cleanest living she has met.  It's all a bit simple and slightly OTT but given the, probably just, pre Chatterley trial date of release, the trial at which counsel for the prosecution, Mervyn Griffith-Johns,  asked the jury "would you approve of your young sons, young daughters — because girls can read as well as boys — reading this book? Is it a book you would have lying around your own house? Is it a book that you would even wish your wife or your servants to read", necessary as subtelty was unlikely to have made much impression on audiences constrained to behave as my parents used when the subject occasionally arose on television. 

There is a surprising amount of nudity, discreet but still obvious, with women's breasts, from a modest but not great distance, and bottoms on show and a naked man moving about with a newspaper picked up from a table and held in the right place.  In one near close-up a woman's breast and nipple peep from an open shirt, which most of the female cast wear most of the time in the studio shots, with men wearing swimming trunks, which all seemed more than a little absurd.  There is a daft scene in which the members have a rock and roll music evening, all dressed in swimming gear and brightly coloured shirts, however, there are some happy children present, which makes the point nicely, and one in which a long line of 'nudists' troop through a grassy clearing in the studio wearing the the trunks and shirts, and are then filmed naked playing in the pool.  Daft stuff but it does make some helpful points and isn't obviously aimed at the dirty mac and spotty youth market.  One aspect of the film that is notable is that the most vociferous and strident opponents of the 'the camp' are the two principal women and both are won round after visiting and seeing that nudists aren't deviants after all.

The word 'naturist' is used once, 'nudist colony' once and there is one double entendre, which fits into the script well, as an inadvertant slip laughed off by the young female club owner who made it, and is not obviously aimed at the sniggering Sun reader.  As a film it's just another flimsy supporting picture made on a budget, however, as a piece of lifestyle education almost certainly released before servants were allowed to read Lawrence's mucky book I think it does well.

The film can be seen here (you may need an account): (Useless link removed)

80

NAG News. / Re: Naturism in SAGA magazine

« Last post by rockondoghampshire4 on July 05, 2023, 02:10:19 PM »

Excellent article.