# Partial Nudity



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Whilst the members may be surprised to hear this, I am rather familiar with the forum rules. This said, having examined them anew just now, I remain uncertain as to how an image of partial female nudity (posted on the Interchange) may be recieved by the moderators? Acceptable? Warning? Suspension? Ban-hammer?


----------



## tda003 (Aug 16, 2009)

I'd say it's far more acceptable than partial male nudity that includes plumber's butt.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

Shaver, 
It depends on the woman.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

If a couple of our esteemed moderators might offer reassurance that a perma-ban would not be applied then, in 9 days time, you may judge for yourself SG. 
:great:


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

Oh my! Are you sure you're not PT Barnum reincarnated?


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

I would say it's acceptable just as long as nothing else sticks out like a nipple or an aureola, or maybe a side boob would be OK?


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

The image I have created is, I'm afraid, marginally more revealing than mere side boob, Howard. But it is witty and designed specifically to amuse my fellow AAAC members. I do so hope permission may be granted.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

Oh man! I thought you had some dirt on Pippa.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Sorry to disappoint, it is a commoner. To the best of my knowledge at least. I didn't bother asking too much about her. It wasn't that type of an encounter.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

Isn't Pippa a commoner? For that matter, so is, or at least was, Kate. No?


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Remind me, which one's which?


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

SG_67 said:


> Oh man! I thought you had some dirt on Pippa.


I don't want to see Pippa naked but does she have leaked photos?


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

Shaver said:


> Whilst the members may be surprised to hear this, I am rather familiar with the forum rules. This said, having examined them anew just now, I remain uncertain as to how an image of partial female nudity (posted on the Interchange) may be recieved by the moderators? Acceptable? Warning? Suspension? Ban-hammer?


Fine! But I draw the line at one-eared-elephants! :happy:


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson (Jan 16, 2017)

My vote....YES!

Cheers,

BSR


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

Gentlemen I enjoy looking at the ladies just as much as the next guy, but in this day and age it just seems fully clothed photo's are the way to go. Reflect if you will on past threads/posts in the Interchange and elsewhere throughout the AAAC fora in which partially nude photos/paintings/prints/sketches/etc. have been posted. As I recall, in most instances we have ended up having to delete posts and sometimes close entire threads. If we want to look at skin pics/flicks, IMHO, this is not the forum in which to do it. At present, I am not claiming this to be the final corporate line, but it is the way I see this issue.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

eagle2250 said:


> Gentlemen I enjoy looking at the ladies just as much as the next guy, but in this day and age it just seems fully clothed photo's are the way to go. Reflect if you will on past threads/posts in the Interchange and elsewhere throughout the AAAC fora in which partially nude photos/paintings/prints/sketches/etc. have been posted. As I recall, in most instances we have ended up having to delete posts and sometimes close entire threads. If we want to look at skin pics/flicks, IMHO, this is not the forum in which to do it. At present, I am not claiming this to be the final corporate line, but it is the way I see this issue.


While I'm not certain that friend Shaver's suggestion embraced much more than the sort of photos or paintings possessing artistic merit, I must sadly agree that given the essential nature of AAAC, the inclusion thereof runs the risk of unintentionally offending some participants. And there is the obvious problem of the slippery slope, not to mention the imposition of adding greatly and unfairly to the responsibility of the mods. Were this site of a different nature and visited by those with different and less specific interests, the issue would of itself be very different.


----------



## Dhaller (Jan 20, 2008)

If it's anything beyond a breath-quickening glimpse of ankle, I wouldn't risk it.

Not a commentary on the moderators, but I can imagine some members ("my latest acquisition are these white flannel trousers, which I intended for playing tennis at my club, what do you think?", etc) might find the time to disapprove.

DH


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

There is, I'm afraid, no pretence of merit - artistic or otherwise - merely wry humour.

I already possess the photographs and it would be a shame to let an afternoon's work go to waste, as pleasantly diverting an afternoon as it may have been.

Does anyone have any suggestions as to how I might share the image I have chosen from the set? Perhaps a link to a site which could host the photo? I am open to recommendations.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

The expiration to this offer is now 7 days.....


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

Isn't Europe littered with nude statues? Plazas, street corners, along streets, in schools, churches, parks, etc.? It seems in America nudity is by default sex, whereas, Europe, not so, hence, many nude art pieces. I think it is brainwashing in America. A person should be able to look at the human body as art (art when it is art) instead of thinking porn. And then, not all sex thoughts are porn. A lot of mindless faults accusing in the US. Man made boundaries can cause problems. What are the real boundaries?


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

^ A perspicacious comment.

Unless my memory deceives me the originally proposed design for the Statue of Liberty was presented bare breasted - as one might imagine given that it was a gift from the French people and considering the primary inspiration cf Marianne and Delacroix's Liberty Leading the People. Of course this version was declined and a more modest Lady Liberty was eventually erected to stand as sentinel, with unceasingly compassionate gaze, over the waters of the Atlantic ocean.

.
.
.
.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

Thanks Shaver. Few people say kind words to me. 

About America's beliefs of nakedness and sex there are many errors. Most of it came from the Bible (much less, nowadays). Doctrines that leave out scripture and twist it creates horse feathers. And shakling people with feelings so that they never escape the horse feathers. You could say, "What a zoo".


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

WA, I trust that you will be delighted to be informed that a kind soul has come forward and so access to the image will be made available without corrupting these fora. 

Just six days to go.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

Six days ago. Nice sense of humor. Maybe you can explain why you wrote this, "...Lady Liberty was eventually erected to stand as sentinel, with unceasingly compassionate gaze, over the waters of the Atlantic ocean."? Is it because those across the Atlantic need more compassion? ☺


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

All of creation can be designed and constructed in six days. The length of the day in question being a matter of dispute, of course.

I wrote those words as adequately describing the expression and direction of the statue. Tired huddled masses and so forth are rather passe nowadays.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

Tired huddled masses and so forth are rather passe nowadays.

With Internet, "huddle masses" doesn't exist. The world changes. In the past people grouped around the radio and TV and other places. Don't need to be around anyone with the Internet. A while ago I was wondering what I used to do before the Internet with the free time I had. Hmm, lots of hiking.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

It is doubtful that Lazarus had radio and t.v. on her mind when she wrote those words for neither had yet been invented.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Shaver, what would you consider partial nudity?


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

It is commonly accepted, Howard, that this term refers to bare female breasts.

Now, promise me that you won't mention it to your mum if you see the photo I will provide next week, OK?


----------



## smmrfld (May 22, 2007)

Does a merkin count?


----------



## tda003 (Aug 16, 2009)

This is a great teaser campaign. Don't those usually end with a display of the product?


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

They do and this will.

:thumbs-up:


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Shaver said:


> It is commonly accepted, Howard, that this term refers to bare female breasts.
> 
> Now, promise me that you won't mention it to your mum if you see the photo I will provide next week, OK?


Sure, mum's the word, You have my promise.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

smmrfld said:


> Does a merkin count?


What's a merkin? Can you elaborate?


----------



## smmrfld (May 22, 2007)

Howard said:


> What's a merkin? Can you elaborate?


To avoid violating forum rules, I'll just let you search the definition.


----------



## FJW (Jan 25, 2012)

smmrfld said:


> To avoid violating forum rules, I'll just let you search the definition.


I just did...this is getting interesting!


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Wait. What? 

Is a 'merkin not a citizen of the United States?

:icon_jokercolor:


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

5 days and counting down......


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Shaver said:


> Wait. What?
> 
> Is a 'merkin not a citizen of the United States?
> 
> :icon_jokercolor:


I thought a merkin was sort of coat or jacket.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

I think he means meerkat. Shaver is going to post a partial nude of a meerkat.


----------



## FJW (Jan 25, 2012)

Shaver said:


> Wait. What?
> 
> Is a 'merkin not a citizen of the United States?
> 
> :icon_jokercolor:


We're going to see photos of a rootin' tootin' born on the 4th of July 'Merkin!


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

4 days until the Not Suitable For Work image. 

If the easily offended could please refrain from clicking on the link I shall provide, or if they do then resist moaning about what they discover, it will do them credit.


----------



## tda003 (Aug 16, 2009)

Given the use of a merkin, I'd guess a South merkin.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

^ complete with a Berzilian.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

SG_67 said:


> I think he means meerkat. Shaver is going to post a partial nude of a meerkat.


Why would he post a nude picture of a rodent? rodents are already nude.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Shaver said:


> 4 days until the Not Suitable For Work image.
> 
> If the easily offended could please refrain from clicking on the link I shall provide, or if they do then resist moaning about what they discover, it will do them credit.


Would it be what I think it is?


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

Howard said:


> Would it be what I think it is?


Undoubtedly.


----------



## Odradek (Sep 1, 2011)

Shaver said:


> Whilst the members may be surprised to hear this, I am rather familiar with the forum rules. This said, having examined them anew just now, I remain uncertain as to how an image of partial female nudity (posted on the Interchange) may be recieved by the moderators? Acceptable? Warning? Suspension? Ban-hammer?


Facebook reverses policy on nudity if naked woman 'identifies as a man'. Oppression olympics beats terms of service.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/857333121834004481


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

Just blur the questional parts. 

Remember the good old days? "Just stop the earth and let me off"? With all this gay and sex changes, etc. I'm feeling more and more like I need that- Stop the earth and let me off! Notice free speech is on its way out. Those claiming to have tolerance are far from it. God had no tolerance for Sodom and Gomorrah either, and which side of the argument won? Which side do you want to be on?


----------



## smmrfld (May 22, 2007)

WA said:


> Remember the good old days? "Just stop the earth and let me off"? With all this gay and sex changes, etc. I'm feeling more and more like I need that- Stop the earth and let me off!


What a sad, ignorant post.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

smmrfld said:


> What a sad, ignorant post.


Ignorant about what? If you are depending upon modern-day science take a look at the history of science. Change, change, change? Today's theories of science are meaningless, for tomorrow they will believe something else.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

smmrfld said:


> What a sad, ignorant post.


Apotemnophilia, Body Integrity Identity Disorder, both mental illnesses.

The desire towards surgical gender reassignment?
.
.
.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Flanderian said:


> Undoubtedly.


We'll just have to find out and see.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

It never takes long for "outrage chic" to emerge.


----------



## smmrfld (May 22, 2007)

SG_67 said:


> It never takes long for "outrage chic" to emerge.


Agree. And neither does the homophobia.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

smmrfld said:


> Agree. And neither does the homophobia.


I don't think there was anything homophobic said or implied. A member expressed an opinion about something which he just does not comprehend. I don't think he was advocating for any sort of hatred toward them.

By the way, my specialty is not psychiatry, but as a medical professional, I can tell you that if you wake up tomorrow morning, look in the mirror and see a Giraffe, you could use help.


----------



## smmrfld (May 22, 2007)

SG_67 said:


> my specialty is not psychiatry


That's quite obvious. Appreciate you admitting such, though.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

^ Perhaps your goodwill will also lead you to not label people as homophobic.


----------



## smmrfld (May 22, 2007)

SG_67 said:


> ^ Perhaps your goodwill will also lead you to not label people as homophobic.


When warranted, I shall continue to do so, in spite of requests from amateur psychologists to refrain.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

I never claimed to be an amateur anything. 

However, since you labeled someone a homophobe, I believe it's incumbent upon you to explain how exactly how WA's comments were homophobic.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

smmrfld said:


> Agree. And neither does the homophobia.





SG_67 said:


> I don't think there was anything homophobic said or implied.


Normally, my wife does not get involved in my petty postings. However, she was inclined to weigh in on this one. She is a clinical psychologist (license # available upon request). lol She agrees that the post in question was not direct evidence of homophobia. She feels that his words indicate more of a disdain for all "sins" in general, most likely stemming from religious beliefs. This would make him more of a general hypocrite than a homophobe.


----------



## Jgarner197 (Feb 24, 2017)

drlivingston said:


> Normally, my wife does not get involved in my petty postings. However, she was inclined to weigh in on this one. She is a clinical psychologist (license # available upon request). lol She agrees that the post in question was not direct evidence of homophobia. She feels that his words indicate more of a disdain for all "sins" in general, most likely stemming from religious beliefs. This would make him more of a general hypocrite than a homophobe.


Hahaha, classic!! Great post. I re read the statement in question and didn't see anything homophobic in it. I saw a strong sense of frustration and clearly a religious overtone but no homophobia.
I for one have never cared what two consenting adults do in the bedroom or otherwise. I mean who the hell am I to tell anyone what to do or how to live. Point in fact, my wife was in a relationship with another woman for a number of years long before we met. Many of our friends are gay and we love and support them as we should. My frustration mimics that of WA as I'm getting tired of the phony micro aggressions, trigger warnings, and hypersensitivity. I long for the days of old where it was ok to have a difference of opinion and you went about your day like it didn't matter (because 9 out of 10 times it didn't). There weren't riots in the street by those pretending to be righteous and tolerant, both of which that group actually knows very little about. Just my two cents.


----------



## smmrfld (May 22, 2007)

drlivingston said:


> This would make him more of a general hypocrite than a homophobe.


Bwahahahaha. Good one!


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

smmrfld, there has been far more sermons against fornication than gay. Fornicators aren't out in the streets rioting and falsely accusing when some speak against fornication. Why are gay people doing it? Preachers preach against many sins. Do you see those people out rioting, etc.? In the end God is your judge, not me. Besides, only God can reveal Himself to you. Therefore, it is impossible for me to force you to believe in Him. Those who think they can force you to become a Christian are far from God. Go live your life however you want. 

About shrinks. The sex experts of thirty forty years ago are gone. The new sex experts have entirely different view points. Some day they will be replaced with new people with new ideas, and so on. What is there to have faith in of this world? It is like houses built upon the sand. A flood comes and a new house is built, then another flood and so on.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Psychology, phrenology, astrology, palmistry- pseudo sciences all.

.


----------



## tda003 (Aug 16, 2009)

It's interesting to me to see how a post about the possibility of seeing a partially nude woman has "exposed" such deep seated rancor. I shutter to think what a post about a totally nude woman would have started, so please don't go there.


----------



## Mr. B. Scott Robinson (Jan 16, 2017)

^One can only hope the juice has been worth the squeeze.

Cheers, 

BSR


----------



## tda003 (Aug 16, 2009)

We can touch on two posts here with a photo of Venus de Milo: partial nudity and apotemnophilia, although my late Aunt Blanche would be aghast.

If it turned out the model had started life as a male, we could possibly reverse the earth's orbit.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

tda003 said:


> It's interesting to me to see how a post about the possibility of seeing a partially nude woman has "exposed" such deep seated rancor. I shutter to think what a post about a totally nude woman would have started, so please don't go there.


Don't look here:

https://askandyaboutclothes.com/com...?84759-Trad-in-the-movies&p=944697#post944697


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Mr. B. Scott Robinson said:


> ^One can only hope the juice has been worth the squeeze.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BSR


I do so hope it will supply you with a grin, at the very least.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Shaver said:


> Don't look here:
> 
> https://askandyaboutclothes.com/com...?84759-Trad-in-the-movies&p=944697#post944697


So this is what you were referring to all last week, telling people not to click on the link but I did anyway, Did someone put that there as a joke?


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Howard said:


> So this is what you were referring to all last week, telling people not to click on the link but I did anyway, Did someone put that there as a joke?


No Howard, that is not what I have been referring to. I have unique content to reveal tomorrow. A first, and doubtless a last, in menswear forum history.

As to the motive of that other member- who can say?


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

Shaver said:


> *Psychology*, phrenology, astrology, palmistry- pseudo sciences all.


My wife would actually agree with you on this one. There are many "psychologists" out there with mail-order degrees. They are not board certified and can not accept insurance. If your shrink is "cash-only," make sure that they didn't get their degree from the University of Phoenix.

Also, phrenology is definitely pseudo-science. But reading about the history of it is quite entertaining.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

This OP _always_ delivers!

https://askandyaboutclothes.com/community/showthread.php?236605-Five-Years&p=1830718#post1830718


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Shaver said:


> This OP _always_ delivers!
> 
> https://askandyaboutclothes.com/community/showthread.php?236605-Five-Years&p=1830718#post1830718


Wow! Incredible!


----------

