|Part of the series on|
|A baker's dozen on sex|
Nudity is politicized, generally by religious groups, into "that which is not controlled", "the sin-filled" and "profane". To show skin is to challenge society; to show total skin is to say rules and norms do not, or should not, apply.
As with most things that might imply sexuality, nudity or the showing of any skin has special applications to women, who are, in western society, controlled in terms of what they may and may not show at any given time.
 Arguments for anti-nude laws
Most arguments against legalizing nakedness come from the viewpoint of 'Ew, I don't want to see naked people in public' (unless they're hot women) and that going in public places without clothing is immoral, sinful, obscene and lewd. In the Abrahamic religions, this stems from the story of Adam and Eve, who were naked in the Garden of Eden until they ate the fruit of knowledge and realized that they were, shock of horrors, in the buff. It's likely that this story, and its teachings about nudity, were made up after social norms settled on "clothed is better than naked".
There are logical arguments for clothing, of course, including protection from inhospitable weather and its potential harmful effects (e. g. hypothermia, sunburn, etc), the preservation of dignity (especially for men with small penises) and privacy, and general public hygiene. This utilitarian nature of clothing has since evolved into the arguments about "decency" that we know and love today.
There is also the argument that people working in the textile industry will become jobless if clothing is abandoned. The textile and clothing industries form an important part of low-wage developing nations' economies. However, this is a bit more post facto than the above, and quite ridiculous as well.
 Arguments against anti-nude laws
A nude protest in full swing. (NSFW)Warning: NSFW Image!
Arguments against clothing come primarily from people who are associated with naturist movement and various clothes-free organizations. Most of these don't advocate complete abolition of clothing (first person to climb Everest nude wins the prize!), but many believe the cultural norm - and laws - that one must wear clothes in public places should be abolished.
They advocate greater acceptance of social nudity. Some naturists argue humans are more natural without clothes -- they point out that when Homo sapiens first evolved, they did not wear clothes, to make their point. Some advocates of social nudity view compulsory clothing as a violation of personal freedom.
Secondly, public nudity is a good weapon for protests -- though this would likely change if it become widely accepted. There have been numerous examples of nude protests.
 Arguments against clothing that's designed to look like nudity
Not only is it ridiculous, it's also a
little fuckload creepy (NSFW, obviously).
 Arguments for clothing that's designed to look like nudity
If designed well, clothing designed to look like nudity in a different way than the above example (due to a skintight fight, for example) is potentially safer (in environments where loose clothing can snag, for example), can be particularly advantageous in certain sports, and in other recreational applications can look somewhat attractive.
 Naturism, or nudity as religion
"Naturism", also known as "nudism", is a political, social and cultural movement advocating public and private social nudity, based on the loose concept of "returning to nature".
Despite the New Age sounding reference to nature, naturism is not generally a religious expression nor is it allied with any particular religion as much as it is a movement about political expression and freedom. And middle-aged people who really can't be bothered giving a shit any more about getting skin cancers in places no one should.
 See also
- American Nudist Research Library
- American Association for Nude Recreation
- Nude & Natural
- International Naturist Federation