Nakedness around non-spouse

[Orbert]

It sounds like he had a problem, and was presuming that others did as well and was looking for some support.

...because he's a coward and would not actually confront you one-on-one about what's bugging him.  You took the high road.  He didn't ask you directly, so you were under no obligation to respond.  He asked the room, and got nothing, so I would guess that he got his answer.  If he's smart, he'll figure out that yes, he's the only one with the problem, and take it to the coach or the board or whatever the governing body is.  Or he'll just shut up and live with it.

He's in an uncomfortable position and as I mentioned, it's in something of a grey area as far are mores are concerned, so I'd cut him some slack.  But if he gives you some shit about it, body check to the crotch.

[chknptpie]

  Would probably be a shoulder to the crotch since I'm vertically challenged

[Orbert]

Even better!

[Ben_Jamin]

I don't think God cares very much about this.

Yeah, I doubt Eve had a problem with Adams flop.

[El Barto]

And enter Zeke Mowatt.

I've been mulling this over, and it's an interesting situation.  I'm inclined to defer to the person seeking privacy in a locker-room, where it's generally expected.  Still, if the owners of the facility haven't left you with any other options, then it's pretty much on them, I suppose.  Out of curiosity, I'm assuming you're not the only female in a co-ed hockey league.  What to the other chicks do?

And another contribution: I've been in places that were both co-ed and textile free.  Doesn't bother me, but to each their own.  What people need to keep in mind is that there's an unspoken decorum that says you don't ogle each other, and there's also a very real human tendency to check people out.  Everybody's going to do it; hopefully discretely.  You (Tricia) mentioned checking out cute college guys.  I'm sure people tend to behave themselves in that situation, but there's nevertheless a sexual element.  Some people just aren't comfortable with that.

[chknptpie]

And enter Zeke Mowatt.

I've been mulling this over, and it's an interesting situation.  I'm inclined to defer to the person seeking privacy in a locker-room, where it's generally expected.  Still, if the owners of the facility haven't left you with any other options, then it's pretty much on them, I suppose.  Out of curiosity, I'm assuming you're not the only female in a co-ed hockey league.  What to the other chicks do?

And another contribution: I've been in places that were both co-ed and textile free.  Doesn't bother me, but to each their own.  What people need to keep in mind is that there's an unspoken decorum that says you don't ogle each other, and there's also a very real human tendency to check people out.  Everybody's going to do it; hopefully discretely.  You (Tricia) mentioned checking out cute college guys.  I'm sure people tend to behave themselves in that situation, but there's nevertheless a sexual element.  Some people just aren't comfortable with that.

On the particular day, I was the only female playing. However, all the other times there are other women, we all change in the same rooms with the boys. It really never crossed my mind that someone might have an issue with it - until someone did. I've been at one facility that did have women's locker rooms - however they were never/rarely used.

[Orbert]

That may have been part of the problem, then.  If you were one of many, then the issue of providing separate facilities for each gender is somewhat complicated.  But if you're the only girl, then it's not unreasonable to ask why you can't change in an office or some other more private area, and also, most guys would assume that you'd prefer it, rather than changing with a bunch of guys right there.  Again, you're just taking the pads off and going home to shower, but they don't all know that.

[Implode]

I can't help but picture Andy every night:

"Andy calling Orson. Come in Orson."

[King Postwhore]

And enter Zeke Mowatt.

I've been mulling this over, and it's an interesting situation.  I'm inclined to defer to the person seeking privacy in a locker-room, where it's generally expected.  Still, if the owners of the facility haven't left you with any other options, then it's pretty much on them, I suppose.  Out of curiosity, I'm assuming you're not the only female in a co-ed hockey league.  What to the other chicks do?

And another contribution: I've been in places that were both co-ed and textile free.  Doesn't bother me, but to each their own.  What people need to keep in mind is that there's an unspoken decorum that says you don't ogle each other, and there's also a very real human tendency to check people out.  Everybody's going to do it; hopefully discretely.  You (Tricia) mentioned checking out cute college guys.  I'm sure people tend to behave themselves in that situation, but there's nevertheless a sexual element.  Some people just aren't comfortable with that.

I remember the hoopla over that with the female reporter and how some of the Pats players acted around her.  In these days the rules have changed for female reporters.

[Orbert]

What are the rules now?  Seriously, I don't know.  I thought the whole "controversy" was kinda stupid and haven't really followed up on it.

[slycordinator]

What are the rules now?  Seriously, I don't know.  I thought the whole "controversy" was kinda stupid and haven't really followed up on it.

I don't know either but I assume they involve not going up to the reporter and fondling yourself... 

[King Postwhore]

Don't quote me but there is some allotted time that a player has to have a towel around him or not get undressed untill after the interview period unless going out to the main interview room and not in the locker room.

[slycordinator]

Don't quote me but there is some allotted time that a player has to have a towel around him or not get undressed untill after the interview period unless going out to the main interview room and not in the locker room.

I'm such a dick, aren't I?

[King Postwhore]

Banned!

[Orbert]

What are the rules now?  Seriously, I don't know.  I thought the whole "controversy" was kinda stupid and haven't really followed up on it.

I don't know either but I assume they involve not going up to the reporter and fondling yourself... 

But... what if she's really hot?

[AndyDT]

I play co-ed ice hockey. It's just a rec league, nothing fancy. One time I went for a pick up game, this guy had serious issue of me changing in the same locker room. It was the first time I ever had the issue come up. I come already dressed for hockey - just need to put on my pads. So it wasn't the fact that I might show skin, it was the fact that he didn't want me to see him. I don't gawk at dudes, especially this one as he was 50-60 age range. I'll admit, the college boys are nice to catch a glimpse of... back to the topic on hand, he dressed in the same locker room - I went to the restroom while he was changing. However, after hockey, he grabbed his stuff and changed somewhere else. If that's what he has to do to feel comfortable, I see no problem. My problem was when he vocalized "She isn't changing in here is she?" like I couldn't hear him.

In that case, I'd say he had a legitimate gripe.  You may have arrived already dressed, but after the game, there's no telling what's gonna happen.  Are you gonna just gonna take the pads off and leave pretty how much you came in, are you gonna strip down and hit the showers with the guys, or what?

And even if you're completely comfortable with that, you must realize that it's still against social norms (at least in this country) and most guys aren't gonna be okay with it.  Most guys would probably joke about how much they'd love it if they could shower with girls, but I betcha if the situation actually arose (heh heh) there would be more than a few who weren't as okay with it as they claimed.  And really, just changing clothes with a girl right there would bother a lot of guys.

how do these guys know the women aren't going to be affected by their partial nakedness?

If you're "partially naked" in an area that it's acceptable to be, such as the pool, beach, playing football in the park, or whatever, if the women have a problem with it, it's their responsibility to leave, not yours to cover up.

What in the hell is "partial nakedness"?  Naked means you're not wearing clothes.  If you're wearing clothes, you're not naked.  If you're wearing a short-sleeved shirt, your arms are exposed.  If you're wearing shorts, your legs are exposed.

  Holy shit!  Bare skin!  Partial nakedness!

Oddly enough, this ties into Tricia's post a bit.  There are cultural and societal norms, and they vary depending on where you are.  But follow them, and all is well.  In the western world, right or wrong, it's okay for guys to be topless and not okay for women.  In a locker room, where it's a given that there will be various stages of undress, it's okay for member of the same gender to see you, because (again, no moral judgement here, just the facts) most people are heterosexual and it's not an issue.  If you're shy or self-conscious anyway, then you are.  Okay, it's a problem, but it's yours and shouldn't be anyone elses.  But as others have suggested, you may be making a bigger deal out of this than it really is.

As a Christain though I don't think you're supposed to encourage situations where another person could get aroused. Changing is probably fine. We have to do that in the dojo anyway sometimes and the women usually go to the bathroom. But modesty I'd have thought is the key thing as a Christian.

If Bruce Lee could do martial arts bare-chested, so can you Andy.

I suppose I would if I had to. I'm not sure Lee was being vain though.

[El Barto]

If anybody on Earth had room for vanity, it was Bruce Lee. 

Don't quote me but there is some allotted time that a player has to have a towel around him or not get undressed untill after the interview period unless going out to the main interview room and not in the locker room.

I don't think there are rules that prohibit you from hanging out nekkid in the presence of reporters.  I think that's still common place. I seem to recall that Charles Hayley was quite fond of intimidating people with what I gathered was a highly imposing wang. 

There was also an incident that predated Lisa Olson where one of the Bengals, possibly Lewis Billups, smacked a girl across the cheek with his. 

I always thought the right move would have been to ban all reporters from the lockerroom, thus eliminating the equal access problem that female reporters created. 

[slycordinator]

As a Christain though I don't think you're supposed to encourage situations where another person could get aroused. Changing is probably fine. We have to do that in the dojo anyway sometimes and the women usually go to the bathroom. But modesty I'd have thought is the key thing as a Christian.

1) I highly doubt that the women (or men) in your martial arts classes are getting aroused because of these situations. They're going at this as a training session for self-defense.
2) If you think that dressing in a gi is being immodest, then talk to your instructor about accomodating this. But I really think it's crazy to think that dressing in a gi is immodest at all yet alone immodest to the point of being un-Christian.

[Ħ]

I highly doubt that the women (or men) in your martial arts classes are getting aroused because of these situations. They're going at this as a training session for self-defense.

Don't many people go into group athletics because they want to see lots of skin?

[El Barto]

I highly doubt that the women (or men) in your martial arts classes are getting aroused because of these situations. They're going at this as a training session for self-defense.

Don't many people go into group athletics because they want to see lots of skin?

I suspect that's the difference between spectating and participating.  I'm into women's tennis, but I have no desire to be a woman or play tennis. 

[slycordinator]

I highly doubt that the women (or men) in your martial arts classes are getting aroused because of these situations. They're going at this as a training session for self-defense.

Don't many people go into group athletics because they want to see lots of skin?

He's asking about martial arts classes where they wear gi's.

[Orbert]

I took some martial arts years ago.  There were females in the class as well, and they wore T-shirts and tank tops underneath the gi.  Problem solved.

As a Christain though I don't think you're supposed to encourage situations where another person could get aroused. Changing is probably fine. We have to do that in the dojo anyway sometimes and the women usually go to the bathroom. But modesty I'd have thought is the key thing as a Christian.

Andy, are you making some of this up, or are you part of a very, very strict sect of Christianity that basically says that anything fun or potentially arousing is bad?  I'm completely serious.  I'm Christian, and admittedly from what is apparently a somewhat liberal sect (United Methodist, which I'd thought was pretty strict to be honest) and I've never heard of half the restrictions that you seem to be deathly afraid of.

Situations come up.  Normal interactions in which normal people interact normally.  Like going to the pool.  According to the laws and customs of the land, you're properly covered.  But you're saying there's something wrong with showing so much skin, because some people might get aroused by it?  I'd say that that's their problem, not yours.  As I pointed out upthread (somewhat sarcastically, but the point was serious), there are people who will become aroused by any amount of exposed skin.

I had a co-worker who was meeting with some of our colleagues from the Middle East.  She was coached ahead of time to be sure to wear long sleeves, a skirt or dress and not pants, and dark hose.  They would prefer it if she wore a hat, but they would not insist.  Why?  Because the guys from the Middle East would be offended at the sight of so much bare female skin.  Yeah, bare arms.  They would get turned on, so it was her problem.

With martial arts practice, I can see a somewhat greater concern, because the garment is loose-fitting and yeah, you might get a glimpse into her top once in a while.  She can wear an undershirt, or you can be a gentleman and not look.  This deal with where "you're not supposed to encourage situations where another person could get aroused" is absurd to me.  You're not encouraging a situation; you're practicing a skill, an art form if you will.  And again, if someone gets aroused during it, then they're obviously not concentrating hard enough on what they're there for.  First time a guy tries peeking into a girl's top, I hope she delivers a good kick to his face.  He won't try it again.

[Gadough]

How is this thread even a thing?

[Silver Tears]

Because Andy.

[King Postwhore]

If anybody on Earth had room for vanity, it was Bruce Lee. 

Don't quote me but there is some allotted time that a player has to have a towel around him or not get undressed untill after the interview period unless going out to the main interview room and not in the locker room.

I don't think there are rules that prohibit you from hanging out nekkid in the presence of reporters.  I think that's still common place. I seem to recall that Charles Hayley was quite fond of intimidating people with what I gathered was a highly imposing wang. 

There was also an incident that predated Lisa Olson where one of the Bengals, possibly Lewis Billups, smacked a girl across the cheek with his. 

I always thought the right move would have been to ban all reporters from the lockerroom, thus eliminating the equal access problem that female reporters created.

I think after that incident the NFL did something to allow female reporters into the lockerroom without the players harrasment by being naked and with the comments.  I can't quite remember how it went down though.

[AndyDT]

I took some martial arts years ago.  There were females in the class as well, and they wore T-shirts and tank tops underneath the gi.  Problem solved.

As a Christain though I don't think you're supposed to encourage situations where another person could get aroused. Changing is probably fine. We have to do that in the dojo anyway sometimes and the women usually go to the bathroom. But modesty I'd have thought is the key thing as a Christian.

Andy, are you making some of this up, or are you part of a very, very strict sect of Christianity that basically says that anything fun or potentially arousing is bad?  I'm completely serious.  I'm Christian, and admittedly from what is apparently a somewhat liberal sect (United Methodist, which I'd thought was pretty strict to be honest) and I've never heard of half the restrictions that you seem to be deathly afraid of.

Situations come up.  Normal interactions in which normal people interact normally.  Like going to the pool.  According to the laws and customs of the land, you're properly covered.  But you're saying there's something wrong with showing so much skin, because some people might get aroused by it?  I'd say that that's their problem, not yours.  As I pointed out upthread (somewhat sarcastically, but the point was serious), there are people who will become aroused by any amount of exposed skin.

I had a co-worker who was meeting with some of our colleagues from the Middle East.  She was coached ahead of time to be sure to wear long sleeves, a skirt or dress and not pants, and dark hose.  They would prefer it if she wore a hat, but they would not insist.  Why?  Because the guys from the Middle East would be offended at the sight of so much bare female skin.  Yeah, bare arms.  They would get turned on, so it was her problem.

With martial arts practice, I can see a somewhat greater concern, because the garment is loose-fitting and yeah, you might get a glimpse into her top once in a while.  She can wear an undershirt, or you can be a gentleman and not look.  This deal with where "you're not supposed to encourage situations where another person could get aroused" is absurd to me.  You're not encouraging a situation; you're practicing a skill, an art form if you will.  And again, if someone gets aroused during it, then they're obviously not concentrating hard enough on what they're there for.  First time a guy tries peeking into a girl's top, I hope she delivers a good kick to his face.  He won't try it again.

That's not my point - I'm just saying that for a Christian especially I'd have thought that you'd take care not to be parading around half-naked. Needless to say you don't have to be christian to know or realise the virtue of this.

[Sir GuitarCozmo]

It sounds like he had a problem, and was presuming that others did as well and was looking for some support.

...because he's a coward and would not actually confront you one-on-one about what's bugging him.  You took the high road.  He didn't ask you directly, so you were under no obligation to respond.  He asked the room, and got nothing, so I would guess that he got his answer.  If he's smart, he'll figure out that yes, he's the only one with the problem, and take it to the coach or the board or whatever the governing body is.  Or he'll just shut up and live with it.

He's in an uncomfortable position and as I mentioned, it's in something of a grey area as far are mores are concerned, so I'd cut him some slack.  But if he gives you some shit about it, body check to the crotch.

Undoubtedly, the guy was hoping that CPP was planning on changing clothes, then when he realized she wasn't, he got all  and irritable.

[Orbert]

Yeah, I kinda hinted at that in my post before that one, but I didn't want to say it in case it did bother her.

I'm just saying that for a Christian especially I'd have thought that you'd take care not to be parading around half-naked. Needless to say you don't have to be christian to know or realise the virtue of this.

Honestly, no.

There is nothing inherently wrong with nudity.  It is our culture, actually only some cultures, which have taught us to hide our bodies and therefore get all excited when we actually get to see one.  God made us naked, and considered that to be our normal state.  When Adam and Eve covered themselves, that's when He knew they'd sinned and eaten from The Tree.  You could even make an argument that covering ourselves is therefore sinful, not going naked.

There are societies where both males and females run around naked, and there's no wanton raping or abuse going on.  Now, you may say "But those are primitive people.  We are civilized."  Why?  What does being "civilized" have to do with dressing comfortably and practically?  They live where it's 100 degrees and humid, so they wear little to nothing.  We live where it gets cold, so we wear clothes.  Clothes are first and foremost protection against the elements, not something to hide our bodies because it's sinful for others to see them.  That's why it's perfectly okay to be naked or partially naked in a locker room.  Everyone just got out of a shower, or is going in.  It's just practical, and you'll notice that the vast majority have no problem with this.  This is not because we're all Godless heathens.  It's because we're comfortable with what He gave us, and nudity does not equal sexuality.

There are beaches where it is permissible for women to go topless, or all persons to just go naked.  I've never been to one, but my understanding is that people do not go around ogling each other, and let's face it, if men were aroused by this, it would be obvious.  There's a little bit of that, but that can be chalked up to an involuntary hormonal reaction; the vast majority of guys and gals behave themselves.  Why?  Because it's rude to stare and unacceptable to walk around at half-mast.  If you have that problem, don't go there.  But again, the vast majority of people are just there to get some sun, and the best way to do that is to take your clothes off.

I know others have said it, but I can't help repeating it.  You seem to be the only one with this problem, Andy.  Now, which do you think is more likely: Literally everybody around you is Godless and sinful and you are the only one who sees it, or you're taking an idea which admittedly has some merit and going much farther with it than was originally intended?

[Nekov]

Andy, I'm not a religious person and i don't know where Christians stand with nudity but I believe that it's more a social thing. And also, if God brings you to this world naked then I don't think he would mind that you are naked anywhere else.

[lateralus88]

Because Andy.

Because huh?

[Ryzee]

There was also an incident that predated Lisa Olson where one of the Bengals, possibly Lewis Billups, smacked a girl across the cheek with his. 

   This made me smile!

[slycordinator]

That's not my point - I'm just saying that for a Christian especially I'd have thought that you'd take care not to be parading around half-naked. Needless to say you don't have to be christian to know or realise the virtue of this.

Wearing a gi is not parading around half-naked, for fuck's sake.

[bosk1]

But what if you're only wearing a gi-string?

[Implode]

*groan*

[Adami]

Andy, I suggest you study Islam and perhaps consider moving to Saudi Arabia.



Something tells me you'd find yourself at home there.