Dogs penises are completely hidden in their sheath, so are horses, cats and almost every other mammal, obviously not including when they are aroused but human penises freely hang and flop around all the time. We accept animal nudity and there are no laws to keep their sheath hidden, we even laugh when a dog has an erection.

I noticed that not including "certain cultures" humans find it EXTREMELY unacceptable to see or be around a naked male. If humans had penises EXACTLY like a dog and only their balls were visible at all times, would public nudity be more acceptable?

Why can we go to a zoo and laugh at animals having sex or animals with erections and giggle when our dog shows his "red rocket" but a male human becomes an outcast from society for walking around naked?

In a world where all males has sheaths and pointy penises, would nudity be more accepted?

nope.

eof

You see, that's interesting then. It would be illegal for men to walk around naked but not dogs even if they had the EXACT same genital anatomy. We must ask ourselves...whhhy?

Because.

Because dogs aren't people. Can you honestly not see the difference between a dog eating his own poop and a human contributing to the world? We live in a society and we are supposed to act in a civilized way.

Clothing and modesty are established social mores inherent to centuries worth of the development of human civilization.

post #109279

Besides, clothes are pretty cool guys. They feel nice to wear, protect you from the elements, look pretty, and doesn't afraid of anything.

Nope. People will still see it as sexual.

END OF RINE

I would think the first step is for people to stop treating breasts as sexual attributes for sake of breastfeeding...

Lyokira said:
I would think the first step is for people to stop treating breasts as sexual attributes for sake of breastfeeding...

what if i see suckling a breast as a sexual act?

I don't see the draw of not wearing clothes. It's 2012 AD, not 5000 BC.

null0010 said:
what if i see suckling a breast as a sexual act?

Considering that anything can be a kink, keep it to yourself. :p

Outstanding question, FurryFan!

I don't think the physiology would make any difference at all. If our anatomy were constructed that way, then the sheath would likely be sexualized with the penis and therefore hidden.

The question isn't so much about hiding the penis specifically as the facet of our society that null0010 indicates: some people see anything sexual (beyond the narrowly defined parameters of one woman, one man, married) as uncivilized.

While others of us have accepted that sex is biological, natural, and completely normal, our culture is strongly influenced by a religious construct that doesn't portray it that way. As a result, anything sexual is immediately confined behind walls and clothing.

But maybe that's okay for now. It makes it naughtier and more fun for those of us who choose to ignore puritanical prudishness we think is silly. ;-)

I feel that with humans being arguably the most sexual of species and the fact that our intelligence has us at a high level of self awareness that other animals tend to lack, the anatomy of a male or female wouldnt really matter... We would inevitably end up with the same outcome of nudity being shunned in public, let alone any sort of sexual acts. Its a shame really but I suppose its to be expected from an intelligence humans have developed.

Lyokira said:
I would think the first step is for people to stop treating breasts as sexual attributes for sake of breastfeeding...

I honestly think it should be ok for women to be shirtless since men can be shirtless, but that's just how I feel. I don't enjoy looking at breasts, but I don't think it's fair that men can be shirtless if they want but women can't.

Ivory_Wolf said:
I feel that with humans being arguably the most sexual of species and the fact that our intelligence has us at a high level of self awareness that other animals tend to lack, the anatomy of a male or female wouldnt really matter... We would inevitably end up with the same outcome of nudity being shunned in public, let alone any sort of sexual acts. Its a shame really but I suppose its to be expected from an intelligence humans have developed.

But even then there has to be some fair limits. There're some cultures who treat the WHOLE body as something to be hidden, thus requiring full clothing at all times.

Lyokira said:
But even then there has to be some fair limits. There're some cultures who treat the WHOLE body as something to be hidden, thus requiring full clothing at all times.

Right you are, so I guess most cultures are lucky to not be so strict

Ivory_Wolf said:
the fact that our intelligence has us at a high level of self awareness that other animals tend to lack, the anatomy of a male or female wouldnt really matter... We would inevitably end up with the same outcome of nudity being shunned in public, let alone any sort of sexual acts.

Yea, like the story how Adam and Eve ate that apple or "forbidden fruit" then they suddenly had self awareness and was covering themselves up but here's a good physiology question?

Do WE feel uncomfortable about being naked around others
~OR~
Do we feel uncomfortable about SEEING OTHERS naked

Because we obviously see lots of penis and balls if we own animals, go to parks, zoo's or anything like that and instead of running away with fear or disgust, we seemed extremely amused when a monkey starts masturbating in front of everyone facing the glass and their penises are the closest thing to humans.

Maybe it's because guys have that whole "small penis" thing to where if you are in the cold, extreme heat, water or any non sexual situation, it can shrink 4 to 5 times smaller than the real size, if guys had Sheaths, they would technically all look more or less identical. Females seem to be able to take showers with each other, get dressed around each other, stare and touch each others breasts, maybe it's because almost all breasts and vaginas are the same but NOT almost all penises are the same... BY FAR!

It seems EVERY animals penis of a certain exact breed of a species looks IDENTICAL, maybe that's why they get along so well naked!

xxxFurryFanxxx said:
Yea, like the story how Adam and Eve ate that apple or "forbidden fruit" then they suddenly had self awareness and was covering themselves up but here's a good physiology question?

Do WE feel uncomfortable about being naked around others
~OR~
Do we feel uncomfortable about SEEING OTHERS naked

Because we obviously see lots of penis and balls if we own animals, go to parks, zoo's or anything like that and instead of running away with fear or disgust, we seemed extremely amused when a monkey starts masturbating in front of everyone facing the glass and their penises are the closest thing to humans.

Maybe it's because guys have that whole "small penis" thing to where if you are in the cold, extreme heat, water or any non sexual situation, it can shrink 4 to 5 times smaller than the real size, if guys had Sheaths, they would technically all look more or less identical. Females seem to be able to take showers with each other, get dressed around each other, stare and touch each others breasts, maybe it's because almost all breasts and vaginas are the same but NOT almost all penises are the same... BY FAR!

It seems EVERY animals penis of a certain exact breed of a species looks IDENTICAL, maybe that's why they get along so well naked!

Not all us girls are so open about being nude in a crowd... Or even friends. We do have personal quarrels that rival the guys penis size thing or what have you... Most common being breast size, weight, body structure and facial appearance. I think were more self consious then men most of the time, but some like myself can sometimes get into playful banter with both male and female counterparts and indulge in skinny dipping and the likes. Doesnt mean im too keen on the idea of pawing off in front of people, having sex in a crowd or taking a stroll to the store in the nude. Would get too much attention lol.

KloH0und said:
Clothing and modesty are established social mores inherent to centuries worth of the development of human civilization.

post #109279

Besides, clothes are pretty cool guys. They feel nice to wear, protect you from the elements, look pretty, and doesn't afraid of anything.

Lol who's clothing, who's modesty, who's "development" and who's civilization? Let me see your historical cross cultural research on this, and give your parameters for defining "development" and "civilization". Some specific numbers linking "clothing levels" and "modesty levels" (however you choose to define those two things, female hair has sometimes been very taboo and strictly covered while breasts are either left bare or an afterthought when it comes to concealment for example) to "level of advancement" would be really nice as well.

xxxFurryFanxxx said:
I noticed that not including "certain cultures" humans find it EXTREMELY unacceptable to see or be around a naked male.

See above.

Besides, men DO have sheaths. It's just that it's usually CUT OFF at infancy in our oh so civilized and advanced culture. Human foreskin does look very partial compared to something you'd see on say a dog; but it (human foreskin) evolved the way it has in order to keep the penis as an internal organ and protect it from harm, among it's other functions. (Like adding about 20,000 more nerve endings to the penis and naturally ribbing the texture of it for his and her pleasure when pulled back.) So not as functionally different as may first appear. If you want to talk about "human sheaths" we have them already, no need to go into the hypothetical.

xxxFurryFanxxx said:
In a world where all males has sheaths and pointy penises, would nudity be more accepted?

i'll make sure to ask everyone i meet
(when i eventually leave my basement)

Or you guys can realize that now we actually have the intelligence and brainpower to clothe ourselves. As above, it's not five-thousand BC, our brains are large enough to realize that putting clothing on makes us:

1.) Warmer, or actually
2.) Cooler
3.) More protected from the hazards of our environment

So you really have no good position to stand on for favoring nudity unless you've somehow timetraveled to 5000 BC and lost all of your intellect.

Remember, kids. Nudity = stupidity.

Mechaniatrix said:
Or you guys can realize that now we actually have the intelligence and brainpower to clothe ourselves. As above, it's not five-thousand BC, our brains are large enough to realize that putting clothing on makes us:

1.) Warmer, or actually
2.) Cooler
3.) More protected from the hazards of our environment

So you really have no good position to stand on for favoring nudity unless you've somehow timetraveled to 5000 BC and lost all of your intellect.

Remember, kids. Nudity = stupidity.

Lolololololo see my post above. Appropriate levels of clothing have to do with the specific environment. You can't say "more clothes = more advanced" and "less clothes = more primitive". Let's see how long and how far your very civilized 3 piece suite will get you in the desert or an island in the tropics.

Oh snap. Ratty is technically correct. The best kind of correct!

I have been shown who is the boss

Ratty said:
Besides, men DO have sheaths. It's just that it's usually CUT OFF at infancy in our oh so civilized and advanced culture. Human foreskin does look very partial compared to something you'd see on say a dog

Shut up, don't give me that shit (U__U Non rudely) about foreskin is a sheath, a humans penis(uncircumcised) is not very partially compared to a damn thing. A humans penis is visible at all times and doesn't go in or out of a sleeve of skin and weather erect or flaccid, you still have to pull the foreskin back. A males entire penis is called the penis, not just what is revealed when the foreskin is pulled back.

I'm talking about a flap of skin that pockets the entire penis to the point where it couldn't be measured or called "small" or "tiny" like a dogs, when you see a dogs penis erect, the whole actual penis comes out of it and when they are flaccid it goes completely back inside, and DOGS DO HAVE FORESKIN TOO, you see it hanging down from the end of their "SHEATHS"

I'm just trying to correlate why people find male nudity "offensive"? Horse, monkey or elephant penis is funny but someone of the same species is repulsive, we jerk our heads so fast we damn near get whiplash. I understand not wanting to be naked yourself because you don't like your body but why feel uncomfortable when seeing ANOTHER person naked... assuming they were fit and in shape and everything.

A male humans flaccid penis is pretty non impressive, hardly anything to feel uncomfortable around... you know, as long as it's clean and all.

I think people would still think of it as nudity, and it would still be inappropriate to them. However I see what you're saying, and I agree. Plus sheaths would be awesome :)

However you're also not taking into account females. Human females have boobs. Lol. Boobs. And a fairly noticeable vagina, unlike other species.
Plus, this is just the way it's always been, and probably always will be, so there's not much of a hope to change it, even if it would be for the better. I do agree, though.

Ratty said:
Let's see how long and how far your very civilized 3 piece suite will get you in the desert or an island in the tropics.

Is it air-conditioned?

Wouldn't work. Even if we had sheaths, we still have assholes, which are considered unsanitary, and would need coverage. And as for boobs, NYC and Ohio have top-freedom. I don't think the rest of the states will follow though because of all the soccer moms.

DobiesHot said:
Outstanding question, FurryFan!

I don't think the physiology would make any difference at all. If our anatomy were constructed that way, then the sheath would likely be sexualized with the penis and therefore hidden.

The question isn't so much about hiding the penis specifically as the facet of our society that null0010 indicates: some people see anything sexual (beyond the narrowly defined parameters of one woman, one man, married) as uncivilized.

While others of us have accepted that sex is biological, natural, and completely normal, our culture is strongly influenced by a religious construct that doesn't portray it that way. As a result, anything sexual is immediately confined behind walls and clothing.

But maybe that's okay for now. It makes it naughtier and more fun for those of us who choose to ignore puritanical prudishness we think is silly. ;-)

I can see where these nudists are coming from, it depends on what you mean uncivilized. These are some questions to think about, Why couldn't African American children play in the playground 50 years ago? Why are animals considered "stupid"? Why are women considered "weak"? Honestly, if a women can show off her body legally than why can't a man?

Ratty said:
Lolololololo see my post above. Appropriate levels of clothing have to do with the specific environment. You can't say "more clothes = more advanced" and "less clothes = more primitive". Let's see how long and how far your very civilized 3 piece suite will get you in the desert or an island in the tropics.

Interesting, every time I look in a geography book in the African section I usually see their butt and sometimes their dick showing in the photos.

And really, why is people watching animals nude or doing sexual stuff, bestially people that's even worse than nudity in a religious scene why not cover them up?

TwilightSparkle said:
Interesting, every time I look in a geography book in the African section I usually see their butt and sometimes their dick showing in the photos.

Yes, like this for example.

http://www.african-tribes.org/naked-african-tribes.jpg

When you watch shows about Africa and you read their subtitles, they speak EXACTLY like Americans do, they cuss and use slang, they make fun of each other and play jokes. I was surprised at how much they talk like us so "clothes=civilized" is dumb. Also I totally understand wanting to wear clothes, that's not my point, my point is

What's so offensive about SEEING a male naked? Or being naked around other people? Are we disgusted by our bodies or the body parts of others and if we are literately disgusted by the body parts of others, why are we ONLY disquieted by humans body parts and not other animals? Whats so hard about changing your clothes in front of other people in a store to try on clothes instead of flowering in a hole to do it?

xxxFurryFanxxx said:
What's so offensive about SEEING a male naked? Or being naked around other people? Are we disgusted by our bodies or the body parts of others and if we are literately disgusted by the body parts of others, why are we ONLY disquieted by humans body parts and not other animals? Whats so hard about changing your clothes in front of other people in a store to try on clothes instead of flowering in a hole to do it?

I don't want to see the swingin' dick and balls of every single man I pass on the street. I only want to see those things on attractive young males, and certainly not my dad or my uncle or my grandfather or Bill Cosby.

null0010 said:
I don't want to see the swingin' dick and balls of every single man I pass on the street.

Null, can I ask you 2 questions?

#1 - If a man who JUST came out the shower was walking past you naked down the street. How would you feel differently if it were man 1 or 2

(1) http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-gf7zHTD21e8/TgbBjOvdXWI/AAAAAAAADz0/28UdyOxTogQ/s320/naked-man.jpg

(2) http://selfmalenudes.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/naked_older_man_nude_beach.jpg

#2 - What if it were this man?

http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2010-06-02/1275471743701.jpg

No, no, no.

I don't want to see any of that. I like to be able to choose who I want to see naked. Most people like to be selective with their nude viewing. Wearing clothing is polite. It's kind of like how sane people don't run down the street screaming their opinions at the top of their lungs. There is a time and a place for certain behaviors, and the street is neither the time nor the place for nudity.

It's just a tube of muscle covered in skin. Just some balls.
Humans are interesting specimens indeed... Gorlax wasn't exaggerating when he told me so.

xxxFurryFanxxx said:
It's just a tube of muscle covered in skin. Just some balls.
Humans are interesting specimens indeed... Gorlax wasn't exaggerating when he told me so.

null0010 said:
No, no, no.

I don't want to see any of that. I like to be able to choose who I want to see naked. Most people like to be selective with their nude viewing. Wearing clothing is polite. It's kind of like how sane people don't run down the street screaming their opinions at the top of their lungs. There is a time and a place for certain behaviors, and the street is neither the time nor the place for nudity.

Okay, let me get this strait. The general public likes looking at animal's bits because they are attracted to them? What about the kids that go to the zoo and see animals having sex is it appropriate? Furry Fan, have you actually seen animals having sex in front of children?

omgwtf I was thinking of that last night, yo...

Turns out, men DO have sheathes: "Foreskin."

I win.

Okay with FurryFan's new record, now I'm really confused. o.O

There is only one way to solve this debate.
*pulls out giant spinning wheel*
~Wheel of Morality turn turn turn. Tell us the lesson that we should learn~
*BING*
Lesson Number 13
*printer making printer noises*
*rips out results*
"Try apple juice for softer, sweeter ribs"
Hmmm...

Some cultures allow nudity in public for both men and women. these cultures are usually in tropical climates with year round warm temperatures.
Besides isnt fur on dogs basically clothing? its a protective layer outside the skin meant to hold heat and protect the skin.

Gamerlynx said:
Some cultures allow nudity in public for both men and women. these cultures are usually in tropical climates with year round warm temperatures.
Besides isnt fur on dogs basically clothing? its a protective layer outside the skin meant to hold heat and protect the skin.

And inversely some cultures do not alow any exposure of skin whatsoever (at leasr for females). These cultures tend to be in desert regions with year yound hot temperatures, though i don't think that's the base reason for such.

Lyokira said:
And inversely some cultures do not alow any exposure of skin whatsoever (at leasr for females). These cultures tend to be in desert regions with year yound hot temperatures, though i don't think that's the base reason for such.

Most cultures requiring concealment of women under garments in public involves their beliefs after marriage, and in some cultures only after marriage is a woman required to completely conceal all but their eyes when in eye sight of the public. They do this to keep others from becoming attracted to a married woman and prevent desire of someone they cannot have. Often if a woman of such culture does step into public with any skin exposed after marriage and someone recognises her and her marital status the punishment is severe... Often vicious beatings, stoning and even death. Some of my facts might be a wee bit off, been a while since ive researched said material but I know im close, made me appreciate being able to walk out of the house in a skirt and tube top... Married or not.

TwilightSparkle said:
Okay, let me get this strait. The general public likes looking at animal's bits because they are attracted to them? What about the kids that go to the zoo and see animals having sex is it appropriate? Furry Fan, have you actually seen animals having sex in front of children?

I won't upload it here before I get banned again for "RL BESTIALITY" BUT IF YOU TYPE IN [Animal] sex then yes, any animal that can be seen in a zoo, you can type in that animal followed by sex and there are HUNDREDS of videos of people recording them at a zoo and EVERY video has kids laughing and screaming at the horse/elephant/monkey having sex. Believe me, this is what I do, there are THOUSANDS of videos total where kids are watching animals have sex

Also: Go to a zoo yourself, one pass by every few years doesn't count, if you went there often, you would see sex and kids watching sex VERY often, more than 50% of every visit, hence, the countless videos on Youtube.

xxxFurryFanxxx said:
I won't upload it here before I get banned again for "RL BESTIALITY" BUT IF YOU TYPE IN [Animal] sex then yes, any animal that can be seen in a zoo, you can type in that animal followed by sex and there are HUNDREDS of videos of people recording them at a zoo and EVERY video has kids laughing and screaming at the horse/elephant/monkey having sex. Believe me, this is what I do, there are THOUSANDS of videos total where kids are watching animals have sex

Also: Go to a zoo yourself, one pass by every few years doesn't count, if you went there often, you would see sex and kids watching sex VERY often, more than 50% of every visit, hence, the countless videos on Youtube.

So animal sex is rated G? You have got to be kidding me. Why does this remind me of a stripclub? >.<
Talk about humiliating the animals.

null0010 said:
No, no, no.

I don't want to see any of that. I like to be able to choose who I want to see naked. Most people like to be selective with their nude viewing. Wearing clothing is polite. It's kind of like how sane people don't run down the street screaming their opinions at the top of their lungs. There is a time and a place for certain behaviors, and the street is neither the time nor the place for nudity.

I see where you are coming from null, do you think parents would want to view animal nudity? Animals are people too sort of after all. :/ Like the Native American culture that I was adopted by, the Chinook/ Shoalwater Bay Tribe the key moral is to respect animals like your brothers. This is boggling my mind right now. ><

TwilightSparkle said:
I see where you are coming from null, do you think parents would want to view animal nudity? Animals are people too sort of after all. :/ Like the Native American culture that I was adopted by, the Chinook/ Shoalwater Bay Tribe the key moral is to respect animals like your brothers. This is boggling my mind right now. ><

Sparkle: "Animals are people too."

Response: Lolno. Animals are animals. They shit on the ground, piss on the carpet, and chew up your Yu-Gi-Oh cards.

Animals are nice companions, but, they comewith soooooo manyyyyyy flawsssss...

// as humans do, also

I digress.

Animals are always naked. We were born naked. Quite sure that you didn't come out your mom's vagoo wearing a tux. Naked wecame into this world, naked we shallleave it.

Now, about the time in-between? I walk around as naked as possible when I'm in my room. Sometimes, no shirt. Sometimes completely rocking out with my cawk out.

Nudity is freedom.

Embrace that shit.

On an off note, I would like to note nudist societies which do embrace nudity (where clothing is not required for protection). There's the full spectrum, the question is which point of the spectrum is preferable. I would personally advocate the reduction of unnecessary restrictions. (unnecessary meaning restrictions which does not cause harm to others, harm not including factors which are created by upbringing)

Lyokira said:
On an off note, I would like to note nudist societies which do embrace nudity (where clothing is not required for protection). There's the full spectrum, the question is which point of the spectrum is preferable. I would personally advocate the reduction of unnecessary restrictions. (unnecessary meaning restrictions which does not cause harm to others, harm not including factors which are created by upbringing)

Agreed ;)

UltravioletMoonRay said:
chew up your Yu-Gi-Oh cards.

I nearly beat my cat from that memory alone.

Poor, poor Sphinx Telia.
I bought a movie for that, dammit!

I personally do not find anything repulsive about male nudity-either animal or human. Soft cock hard cock, all look good to me or any other male body parts.

HairyHorsey said:
I personally do not find anything repulsive about male nudity-either animal or human. Soft cock hard cock, all look good to me or any other male body parts.

Nice thread necromancy.

Why the hell was this idiotic discussion revived?

ippiki_ookami said:
Why the hell was this idiotic discussion revived?

Because derps don't understand the two week rule.

Locked for the second stupid necromancy in the same day.