Sunday Nude-In at Jane Warner Plaza Ends in Arrests

Nude Activists, (L-R) Rusty Mills, Gypsy Taub, & Jaymz Smith

Nude Activists, (L-R) Rusty Mills, Gypsy Taub, & Jaymz Smith protest at Jane Warner Plaza. Photo: Raphael Kluzniok

Sunday, November 17th, San Francisco’s nudity ban was challenged, yet again, at Jane Warner Plaza in the Castro when activists disrobed in an act of civil disobedience and were detained and cited by SF’s finest.

According to the SF Gate prolific body freedom activist, Gypsy Taub, 44, her fiancé Jaymz Smith, 20, accompanied by three others nudist and a small cadre of supporters, including Taub’s three children, staged the protest in their ongoing campaign challenging the Scott Wiener initiated public nudity ban that went into effect February 1st.

Since its passing, Miss Taub, the Russian-born, Berkeley-based public access cable show host/blogger, has violated the law four times and been arrested or cited by SFPD. She was in court earlier last week challenging her conviction stemming from her first arrest, February 2nd, along with three others that took place on the steps at City Hall.

The small, but determined group of San Francisco urban naturists continue to push the envelope and the letter of the law by risking arrest every time they disrobe in public. They feel that challenging the ban is their civic duty to battle what they refer to as the ‘taming’ of the City and an infringement on their personal First Amendment Right to self-expression.

Jaymz Smith is arrested for violating SF public nudity ban. Photo: Raphael Kluzniok

Jaymz Smith is arrested for violating SF public nudity ban. Photo: Raphael Kluzniok

Jaymz Smith, Ms. Taub’s fiancé, is a new face on the body freedom scene and this was his first citation. He, like fellow activist Trey Allen who was arrested with Ms. Taub back in Febrary, had written ‘War is Obscene Not My Body’ across his chest. He met Ms. Taub at the Rainbow Gathering in Montana and is committed to help her and the cause.

Ms. Taub and the other protesters were warned that if they disrobed they would face possible arrest and citation. Ignoring the SFPD, protestors stripped down and began their protest outflanked by photographers nearly five to one.

Smith and Taub also used the moment to announce their upcoming nuptials –which will be done in the nude of course– on December 19th at San Francisco City Hall. “Everyone is invited!”, Ms. Taub stated through her bullhorn which, at the time, was the only thing she was wearing besides a handmade hat emblazoned with the phrase ‘Recall Wiener’.

SFPD offered protestors an opportunity to get dressed but were refused which led to the citations being issued. Ms. Taub and her troops have vowed to continue to challenge the law with these acts of civil disobedience until the law is repealed.

Waiyde Palmer

Waiyde Palmer loves San Francisco, social activism and punk rock(ers). His work has appeared in Handbook Magazine. SF Bay Times, The Advocate, Diseased Pariah News and American Music Press . He also has an extensive and repeatedly redacted FBI file.

You may also like...

38 Responses

  1. Liv says:

    We get it, nudity has nothing to do with sexuality. But we are in 2013, not in 2500 BC, we wear clothes because it’s cold out, also it’s more hygienic. Do you imagine a world where everyone is naked? On the muni? At work? Shopping? On a plane? Skid marks? BO? That’s not freedom it’s common sense. Also why would someone walk around naked when it’s 45 is beyond me….
    Incidentally, what is the latest with the recycling center across from whole foods? It’s still open apparently.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 8

  2. rblack says:

    Where do all the female nudists congregate?

    Are there/were there areas of Pac Heights and the Marina where groups of nudists hang out?

    Why does Gypsy Taub only turn up for protests? I don’t ever recall seeing her hanging out on the weekends with all the other naked guys.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 6

    • 212kelvin says:

      does it really matter who protests? Why do you want to see the female nudists congregating? That implies that you are ok if you like what you see but arrest those you find unattractive? This is about freedom, not what you like. This is America, the beacon of freedom, the country who fights wars oversees to promote freedom and democracy. Why is this an issue in the land of free and home of the brave? .. scratching my head… I just don’t get it.

      Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. Mitch Mansfield says:

    If we ignore Gypsy maybe she will go away. I feel sorry for her children being dragged to something like this.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 6

    • 212kelvin says:

      where do I take the course on ignoring people completely, with emphasis on looking right through them even if they are speaking? The ignore effect will serve only to intensify the behavior you are ignoring. They will turn up the heat and be more in your face. Ignoring a problem does not make it go away. Didn’t you learn that growing up?

      Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. Matthew says:

    Why doesn’t she do this in Berkeley? That is where she lives after all.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 5

  5. Liv says:

    Next let’s claim the right to defecate on sidealks because it’s natural and we are all animals …. Come on!

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 9

  6. Cameron says:

    Please arrest these people more often.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 9

  7. Stop with the heteros invading our turf, creating anti-gay stereotypes that live up to the expectations of homophobes everywhere. Stop using the Castro for every political issue under the sun…that simply adds to the burden of our overstressed neighborhood. Do your thang in some non-queer district, such as Nob Hill, the Financial District, Inner Mission, Outer Richmond, etc. Are we sure this isn’t some cult-like plot to keep us LGBTs under the thumb of heterosexist hegemony? Yeah, send the homophobic bums to occupy the Castro, along with naked heteros presuming they have any sort of relevance toward the gay struggle. (Not to mention the numerous queer lackeys under their spell, prancing about swinging their wangers through a skimpy swatch of cloth!)

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 6

    • What are anti-gay stereotypes? Do you mean gays that aren’t normative or “straight acting”? I don’t know where you are looking, but I’ve never seen any of the other nudists who obey the letter of the nudity ban “prancing about.” I suspect your choice of language betrays your own internalized homophobia.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 6

    • Independent1 says:

      Love the straight people. Don’t love the naked people. I’m gay.

      Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3

  8. ChasMader says:

    If Ms. Traub would like recall Supervisor Wiener, I’d suggest that she first move from Berkeley to SF; into his district.

    Why can’t these straight, out of town nudists protest in their own neighborhood and not mine?

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 6

  9. {{ What are anti-gay stereotypes? }}

    Acting like perverts to titillate the hetero assumption that that’s exactly what we gays are. Walking around naked and swinging your wanger like a pole in the wind in the Castro is a perfect example.

    {{ Do you mean gays that aren’t normative or “straight acting”? }}

    Of course not.

    {{ I don’t know where you are looking, }}

    Jane Warner Plaza. Duh.

    {{ but I’ve never seen any of the other nudists who obey the letter of the nudity ban “prancing about.” }}

    Naturally, I’m speaking of those who /don’t/ obey the letter. But even the ones who do, push the envelope and trash the neighborhood.

    {{ I suspect your choice of language betrays your own internalized homophobia. }}

    I suspect everyone with an IQ of at least 30 can see through your manipulative false accusations. Reminds me of a drunk fool at the Eagle Tavern five years ago who accused me of homophobia because I told him I think fist fukking is disgusting.

    And another time I was called “homophobe” was when I asked some fool to take his stinky cigar out of the doorway of the cafe in which I was seated. He wouldn’t, so I slammed the door in his face.

    Ho-hum. Your disingenuous, self-centered kind are a dime a dozen in the Castro. And that’s a shame…’cause you don’t really give a flying fuk about our ‘hood, and feign “civil rights” or some such ideal to then go ahead and trash our streets, which includes exacerbating further homophobia to our difficult existence.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 5

    • nudewoody says:

      The problem with your analysis is, who gets to decide what is perverted and what is not? Frankly, I do not now, nor never have I been, overly worried about trying to tittilate or conform to anyone’s preconcieved notions about what they believe my behavior should or should not be. If you feel that makes me disingenous or self-centered, so be it. But please don’t tell me I don’t give a flying fuuk about the neighborhood I have lived in for 35 years just because my beliefs, pleasures, and behavior doesn’t conform to what you feel is appropriate for other gay men. What a minute, that sounds like … oh, never mind.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 8

      • rblack says:

        “who gets to decide what is perverted and what is not?”

        Society does. And currently, right or wrongly, society has decided it wants people in clothing, not standing on the street corner semi erect and wearing a cock ring.

        Maybe one day societies mores will change and no one will care about people walking around nude. But for now, that’s how it is.

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4

        • Society’s attitudes can be changed. However, the only way to change is by challenging them. It does no good to sit back and wait for society to give you what you want. You must stand up and demand it.

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 6

          • rblack says:

            My problem is the inconsistency of it. Go hang out on the Marina Green and see how far it gets you. Go hang out in Lafayette Park – challenge society there.

            Where are the non cock ring wearing, straight, male and female nudists hanging out? Go be nudist with them.

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3

          • ZekeBlog says:

            {{ However, the only way to change is by challenging them. }}

            I see: walking about naked is a challenge far more noble and worthy than challenging homophobic violence which plagues gay folks everywhere, including the Castro. Instead, you invite anti-gay goons to witness what a bunch of perverts gays really are!

            I CHALLENGE you to put your clothes back on, and start some sort of meaningful form of civil dissent. Such as blockading churches that continue to preach hatred against sexual minorities. And /don’t/ be nude during the event: you’ll just be perceived as a clown. No one will take you seriously.

            Just like now.

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4

        • “My problem is the inconsistency of it. Go hang out on the Marina Green and see how far it gets you.”

          Why should I have to leave the neighborhood in which I live to lead the life I wish to lead. I already did that once when I moved to SF. I will not do it again.

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5

          • ZekeBlog says:

            {{ Why should I have to leave the neighborhood in which I live to lead the life I wish to lead. }}

            And why should I be forced to hang out in other districts, to get away from the Castro’s noise pollution, homophobic bums, alcoholic backstabbers and speed freaks, and now: dirty old men running around naked under a phony pretense of civil rights? This has all become too shameful, harrassing and insulting to be called a real neighborhood (or any semblance thereof).

            Too many vulgar goofballs parading these mean Castro streets, to enjoy any kind of peaceful strolls or amicable encounters. To get this, I must go to other (non-gay) areas such as the Inner Sunset, Cole Valley, Fillmore District and Ocean Beach…and wonderful Berkeley, too.

            {{ I already did that once when I moved to SF. I will not do it again. }}

            Your strutting around naked is a recent change, Woody, after so many years clothed. Now, you strip down to the buff and offend most residents here (as well as tourists), thus making the Castro yet /less/ pleasant a place in which to reside and hang out.

            No one’s asking you to leave (yet), we’re just asking you to act like an adult, instead of some whiny juvenile who can’t distinguish his Nintendo games from real life.

            It is a downright shame that /some/ gays who move here for a greater degree of freedom, also retain some of the ignorance and vulgarity of their former home town.

            Your equation of nudity with freedom rings hollow. Like a cheap, $1 dildo.

            Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4

          • Claudia Center says:

            Wow, strong comments. I am a long-time Castro resident, and queer, and decidedly NOT a nudist (from New England, practically Amish in my dress/modesty comfort zone). But I applaud the nudists and welcome them to the Castro. They are part of what makes the Castro and San Francisco great — free expression, challenging norms, trying out new ways of living. I never saw the nudists doing anything untoward — no littering, no spitting, no shooting up, no drunkenness, no drugs, no yelling, no assaults. I never saw the much-ballyhooed cock ring or semi-erect penis. I just saw a group of peaceful folks living as nudists, chatting, reading the newspaper. And I never saw tourists or other visitors upset about the nudists — rather, I saw them smiling and taking pictures and interested in checking out this little sub-culture. I oppose the ban on nudity. I oppose matching the Castro and San Francisco to the norms of other places — I want us to be true to our history and our celebratory differences from other places. I oppose situating our equal rights as gays or as citizens upon our having the same norms here as in other places.

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5

          • ChasMader says:

            You must not get out much then.

            Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4

          • Peter Sferra says:

            I keep seeing the very same arguments from those who support the nudity ban. They continue to insist that the vast majority of Castro residents and business owners adamantly supported Wiener’s efforts to create the city-wide ban and they repeatedly refer to the exhibitionists whose egregious behavior caused the problem.

            I don’t for one minute believe the vast majority of residents opposed public nudity and quite frankly, I think most San Franciscans have no problem with the phenomenon. Many residents I’ve spoken with say they’re proud to live in a city that’s enlightened enough to have even allowed such a rare freedom to exists and they’re saddened that it was taken away. Any time there’s a controversial expansion of social boundaries, there will be some sort of uproar. In the case of public nudity, the number of people it directly impacts is relatively few. How many folks really want to stroll around naked on a warm afternoon?

            So who is most likely to speak out? Clearly, the ones who are opposed to the behavior will scream to their elected officials, and the handful of nudists themselves, along with dedicated supporters, will certainly voice their opinions. That leaves the vast majority of citizens who are fine with the behavior but not vested enough to bother to go out of their way to be heard. This gives the illusion that the masses are unhappy, a myth perpetuated by half-truths that Scott Wiener shared with virtually no substantiation.

            Wiener also stated that the business community was overwhelmingly in support of his ban and he provided the endorsement of the MUMC. Pure fantasy! The “endorsement” that they crafted was voted on at a meeting attended by around thirty members . . . out of well over 200! So the 2/3 vote that day represented less than 10 percent of the business owners’ group. How does that demonstrate any overwhelming business support.

            When my wife and I visited the Castro, we brought our hard-earned dollars to support businesses that welcomed nudists. It seemed like a “win-win” to us, and obviously those store owners agreed. We always bought lunch and dinner (clothed of course) on every visit and we made a point of shopping for things we could easily have bought back home.

            I hear ban supporters say things like “I had nothing against the honest and courteous nudists but it was the offenders that ruined it for everyone.” So because a few social deviants chose to behave in a lewd manner (behavior already against the law and punishable) in one small parklet, the only solution was to create a sweeping city-wide ban on an lifestyle that had become an integral (albeit controversial) part of San Francisco’s character?!

            It may surprise some people to know that when Wiener was ramping up his ban efforts in September of 2012, he held a “problem solving” meeting with several nudist leaders. They were highly motivated to find a compromise solution that could please everyone and one subject that was brought up was self-policing. Two of the most blatant offenders were already tracked down and admonished about their behavior’s consequences and they had agreed to cease such activities. More self-policing was promised. Wiener told this group that he was willing to wait and see if such efforts could solve the problem. Four days later, he submitted his draconian ban. it sure appears that he had no interest at all in looking at alternatives to outright banishment.

            And let’s look at what Scott’s ban has actually bought the citizens of the Castro. Before nudity was outlawed, they could expect to see random naked folks strolling around the neighborhood and relaxing in Jane Warner Plaza, more so on warmer days. Yes, there was the occasional display by one of the reprobates but this behavior was definitely on the way out. With the ban in place, you are now required to cover your genitals, but that’s pretty much it. As long as you don’t bend over, you don’t need to wear anything on the “backside”.

            So this past summer, the Castro saw an influx of restricted nudists roaming around and sometimes protesting in ultra-miniscule yet totally legal “outfits” that drew far more attention to their genitals than mere nudity ever could. Men donned fluorescent colored socks and women appeared in strap-on dildos, all to make a point that you should be careful what you wish for. What has really been accomplished?

            Whether you’re bothered by nudity or not, I have to believe that any intelligent individual would prefer to see a completely naked human being than someone wearing a lime green sock on their penis. It’s certainly a lot easier to explain to your children who, by the way, have to be taught that the body is shameful. Respected studies have repeatedly shown that children raised where non-sexual nudity is accepted tend to have fewer emotional hangups and a better sense of self-esteem as adults.

            I applaud folks like Woody who put actions behind their words. He has shown the courage to fight for a sometimes unpopular right freedom that should have been given to everyone long ago.

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5

          • rblack says:

            The nudist community should get together and get enough signatures to get a Prop on the ballot to repeal the ban.

            Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2

    • “It is a downright shame that /some/ gays who move here for a greater degree of freedom, also retain some of the ignorance and vulgarity of their former home town.”

      I agree with you here 100% It is a shame that some gays retain their closed-minded judgmental attitudes and feel it is necessary to hierarchize oppression.

      Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4

  10. douglas says:

    What i don’t understand is, given that a lot of residents in District 8 and our district supervisor, don’t appreciate the nudists, why didn’t the “nudists” take their “cause” to, say, Supervisor Jane Kim’s district, since she stated she has no problem with public nudity and leads me to think she will support their “cause.” It seems to me that these “nudists” in the Castro are more interesting in seeking attention for attention sake and harrasing our district supervisor, than trying to free us from our bodily shame, as they say! Personally, I felt this whole “experiment” felt like a “conquest and rape” by outsiders, invading our neighborhood and telling us that we must change our ways for them. I have no problem with nudity. I have a problem with rude people, period! Take your “cause” and your impolitness somewhere else.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2

  11. {{ Take your “cause” and your impolitness somewhere else. }}

    I second the motion. Thank you, Douglas.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3

  12. ZekeBlog says:

    {{ have lived in for 35 years just because my beliefs, pleasures, and behavior doesn’t conform to what you feel is appropriate for other gay men. }}

    Gotcha! I’ve lived in and around the Castro for 40+ years. But how /long/ one has dwelled in this neighborhood is not always an indication of one’s regard for the district. Other reasons come to mind that have little to do with integrity, respect or politics.

    Wandering about like naked fools is /not/ appropriate in /any/ neighborhood…but even /worse/ when in a gay neighborhood. Such irresponsible behavior perpetrates a negative stereotype of LGBT folks in the eyes of this nation, and the world. Right up there with shooting up in public, pissing in the streets, and drunken mayhem.

    What happens in the Castro does not /stay/ in the Castro: it is broadcast across the entire world via tourist cell phones, news media, and word of mouth when visitors return home. Naked displays in a /major/ gay epicenter only serves to titillate homophobe’s expectations that their stereotypes of homosexuals are well grounded.

    Gay people may be somewhat free here in Baghdad by the Bay, especially if you are somewhat affluent and have time on your hands to brandish your wanger (albeit in a thin cloth pouch) and wave your fanny in the air before the masses of tourists and motorists that flood Castro & Market daily.

    But we are /not/ free across most of this tragic nation…most LGBTs live in poverty (or near that), and terror of being “discovered.” What good does your strutting about nude do them? Your unconscionable behavior marks you as a rabble rouser to Our Cause, in the world’s very epicenter of Queer Struggle for Liberation.

    Naked display has /nothing/ to do with LGBT Rights. Do you ever bother to wander around in your birthday suit in any /other/ area of the city? IOW: if you are so passionate about your supposed “right” to be naked in public, seems that you would perform your exhibitionism in many other neighborhoods that have yet to be blessed by your magnimous presence.

    In sum: I sincerely advise you to cease denigrating the most urgent matter of Homophile Rights in a violently anti-gay culture. Or do you /not/ care upon which side of history you come down?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4

    • I find it saddening that you conflate the ranked, natural human body with shooting up, pissing in the streets, and drunken mayhem. That only reinforces the urgency in the body freedom movement’s message that the human body is not disgusting or shameful, but a beautiful, natural gift which should be celebrated rather than hidden. Body shame is a learned behavior, a social decease.

      I apologize if I gave you the impression that I believed Body Freedom Rights and LGBT Rights were related. I realize the body freedom movement covers a much broader spectrum of identities than does the LGBT movement. I just happen to be a gay man involved in the body freedom movement, which is why I felt the need to question your accusation of creating “anti-gay stereotypes.”

      In case you haven’t been following the news, and apparently you haven’t, the Castro is not the only place these protests and naked appearances have occurred. Most notably, they have been happening at City Hall. The reason I choose to appear naked in the Castro is that happens to be were I live.

      I am well aware of the inequities my fellow queer brothers and sisters suffer around the nation as well as the word. I am also aware that 30% of all homeless youth in SF identify as queer, and I also see daily the disdain and revulsion with which these same youth are held in the “world’s very epicenter of Queer Struggle for Liberation.”

      I would urge you to become more informed about what the body freedom movement entails before flinging wild accusations.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 7

      • {{ Most notably, they have been happening at City Hall. }}

        I see, and you regard that as a “neighborhood”? Hmm. Seems to me you and your naked ilk only go that for the occasional demonstration. IOW: there are no naked people roaming about that area other days of the week. And that is the /only/ neighborhood you cite outside of the Castro.

        FYI: I have no lack of awareness re. “body freedom.” I simply disagree with your selective targeting of our gay neighborhood and no other. Makes me wonder if some fundamentalist church and/or far-right-wing group is /paying/ your kind to infiltrate and sabotage gay-designated locales.

        If such be the case, they are also likely dispersing homophobic bums to target these places. Jane Warner Plaza has become totally trashed.

        Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2

  13. Peter says:

    “Why does Gypsy Taub only turn up for protests?”

    More to the point, why doesn’t she stay at home in Berkeley protesting THEIR fascist, police-state anti-nudity laws?

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2

  14. Matthew says:

    Dear Woody,

    While I applaud your “Body Freedom” movement, you have to agree that there is a time and place for eveything. I have been nude before; at a nude beach for example. And no problems there.

    However, being nude on a very busy active street corner is not the place. Even if you are not being exhibitionist, that is what it comes across to everyone, even more so when cockrings are worn, or a wig with sunglasses to “hide” your real identity.

    If only Jane Warner Plaza did not exist, I believe this problem would not be happening. The nudies just seemed to walk around, and I don’t think anyone had a major problem with that. Of course there were people who snickered and joked, but that is to be expected.

    But when a group of people that are not in the norm start congregate it does create a spectacle. I don’t blame you the nuditst, I blame the real exhibitionsits that caused the uproar within the community. Honestly, if you would have policed yourselves and the exhibitionists you would most likely still be enjoying your body freedom.

    I personally witnessed two guys show up at the Plaza, get undressed, put on cockrings, and started to fondle themselves and each other. This was on a Wednesday at 1 in the afteroon. The other members of the body freedome movement were there and did NOTHING! I called the police, but they were done and gone by the time the police arrived.

    I witnessed three exhibitionists (all three were wearing cockrings) sit outside a Saturday afternoon showing of “The Little Mermaid” at the Castro theater. Out came 100′s of little girls and their parents. I’m sorry, but little kids should not be subjected to seeing grown men wearing cockrings on a Saturday afternoon. You put them and their parents in a terrible situation. You forced you beliefs on people that could not “look away”.

    I’m sorry that you lost. Perhaps it is time to put your energies elsewhere.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3

    • Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

      Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6

    • Peter Sferra says:

      Many ban supporters continue to point out that the many good and honorable nudists weren’t the problem. It was the disrespectful reprobates (who numbered very few) that caused the uproar. So the unacceptable behavior of a few clueless hooligans in a very limited area of San Francisco is sufficient to drive sweeping, city-wide legislation banishing a group of people who simply prefer the freedom of not wearing clothes on a warm day?! I guess I don’t see how that’s a particularly egalitarian solution. And the utter dismissal of the many people who did choose to speak out in support of nudity is not something to be particularly proud of as a San Franciscan. That’s really where I see the biggest problem here.

      There really was no constructive problem-solving debate at all, nor were there efforts of any kind by elected community-leader Scott Wiener to try to reach a middle-ground with this decidedly “District 8″ concern. The only open forum where citizens of the city were allowed to voice their opinion was not only shamelessly “hijacked” and run by Wiener himself, but virtually everything ban opponents shared that day was summarily dismissed. I found it appalling that 64 percent of those attending the public opinion hearing on nudity opposed Wiener’s ban and they were utterly ignored. And they came with a good many diverse reasons why nudity should continue to be allowed. Ban supporters, on the other hand, all echoed the same two arguments. They either claimed that nudity somehow harms children or they flat out stated that they just don’t want to see naked people. Respected studies have strongly countered the notion that children are in any way harmed by exposure to non-sexual nudity and I won’t even comment on the idea of banning things simply because people don’t want to look at them.

      After a clearly manipulated battle with a supervisor who had a single-minded agenda from the get-go, Nudists lost the freedom to practice their lifestyle in San Francisco . . . but it was by a VERY close margin (6 to 5). If everyone attempting to expand social boundaries simply walked away after the first significant hurdle, I dare say all of our lives would be impacted in a very negative way. I’m glad there are folks like Woody who don’t feel inclined to give up on something that matters so much to them . . . and to others.

      Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

  15. Gypsy’s BF is sexy! Maybe instead of harassing a neighborhood he doesn’t live in, he can do porn.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • {{ Gypsy’s BF is sexy! }}

      I have a hunch he’s a closet case, showing off his nice body to hit up on dudes. What better place than the Castro? In fact, what /other/ place?

      Does he really give a damn about this feigned political agenda for “nudity rights”? I doubt it. Does he really wanna lay his life on the line for this cause, or just get laid? Were I youngers and better looking, I’d find out.

      Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

Speak your mind...