or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › is it ever ok for toddler to be nude in public?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

is it ever ok for toddler to be nude in public? - Page 6

post #101 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post
Well, the sicko at my community poll went there, precisely so that he could observe kids in bathing suits. There were always at least some naked kids around outside...but in the summer, he haunted an indoor pool, with "no nudity" rules. So...I'd guess it really depends on the sicko.
True, but I wonder if nudity WAS allowed - who would the sicko have been watching then? The nude children, likely.

No, nothing to back it up. It just makes sense, doesn't it? : Is there anything to back up the claim that it makes no difference whether the child is clothed or not? <--I agree that a pervert will be a pervert regardless the way a child is dressed, but I speculate that being naked piques his interest much more.
post #102 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sancta View Post
True, but I wonder if nudity WAS allowed - who would the sicko have been watching then? The nude children, likely.
It's not that likely, imo. There were places he could have gone to watch nude children, so if that was what he wanted, why was he at a pool where there was no chance he'd see one? He chose to hang out somewhere and look at clothed children.

Quote:
No, nothing to back it up. It just makes sense, doesn't it? : Is there anything to back up the claim that it makes no difference whether the child is clothed or not? <--I agree that a pervert will be a pervert regardless the way a child is dressed, but I speculate that being naked piques his interest much more.
Well, no - it doesn't make sense to me.

I've never seen anything about human psychology that suggests that nudity is more titillating, or more likely to promote sexual speculation, than being covered up...never. Citing things like Playboy doesn't even count, for the aforementioned reasons (deliberately provocative poses, etc.). If nudity is the most titillating, why does sexy lingerie even exist? I think the "nudity=sex" mindset is largely a self-fulfilling prophecy. We hide nudity and think of it as something sexual, and turn it into something sexual.

I'm not a child, so it's a different issue, but I can guarantee that there's nothing any sexier about my naked butt sitting on the couch reading a book than if I were doing the same thing in clothing.


ETA: I can't prove my point, either...but I do have life experiences that back up the idea that nudity doesn't make a difference to perverts and pedophiles. I have no life experience to suggest the opposite. I just have to wonder how the assertion that pedophiles will obviously be more interested in a naked child than a clothed one has become such an accepted belief, without being backed up.
post #103 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post
I'm not a child, so it's a different issue, but I can guarantee that there's nothing any sexier about my naked butt sitting on the couch reading a book than if I were doing the same thing in clothing.
I know nothing about Playboy. Never even seen one. (I just assumed in other words that everyone was naked).

My hubby would disagree with you about the naked butt on the couch thing, though. I'm definitely more sexy to him when I'm unclothed than clothed.
post #104 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sancta View Post
I know nothing about Playboy. Never even seen one. (I just assumed in other words that everyone was naked).
Oh, they're naked...but they're not just naked.

Quote:
My hubby would disagree with you about the naked butt on the couch thing, though. I'm definitely more sexy to him when I'm unclothed than clothed.
Fair enough. For whatever reason, turn dh on incredibly, whether I'm clothed or not. But, my being naked really doesn't add to it for him, as far as I can tell. I've talked to a lot of guys about it, and most of them have expressed a preference for clothes (or lingerie) over nudity, until they're ready to actually have sex. They liken it to opening a birthday present...ie. clothing creates a sense of anticipation that nudity lacks. I've also heard more than one person say - sadly - that the naked human form is nowhere near as stimulating as what one's imagination can conjure when a person is clothed and hiding things.

And, I'm going to drop it now, as we're going way OT. This has nothing to do with toddlers, anymore.
post #105 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sancta View Post
True, but I wonder if nudity WAS allowed - who would the sicko have been watching then? The nude children, likely.

No, nothing to back it up. It just makes sense, doesn't it? : Is there anything to back up the claim that it makes no difference whether the child is clothed or not? <--I agree that a pervert will be a pervert regardless the way a child is dressed, but I speculate that being naked piques his interest much more.
Actually it doesn't make sense. Behaviourists have found that men tend to be more attracted to the mystery of what's under the skimpy clothes then the non-mystery of no clothes. So that logic states the clothed children are more of a target for pedophiles then the nude ones.
post #106 of 153
Quote:
is it ever ok for a toddler to be naked in public
No way! I would never be comfortable with my child of any age being naked in public! This may have a lot to do with the fact with I was molested as a child.
post #107 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post
Good point. It honestly would have never crossed my mind to think of this, as "modesty" to me, has absolutely nothing to do with nudity or the lack thereof. (I find the two usages of "modesty" - the humility one and the nudity one - really interesting, actually.) I don't really understand the concept of body modesty, and have no idea how it applies to a small child.
Yes, I find it difficult to understand too, and I've only found these two separate meanings of 'modesty' in the English language - in mine, 'modesty' only covers 'humility', not showing off or bragging. I guess it can be stretched to mean not showing off your beautiful and sexy body, or something like that. But I fail to see how that can apply to small pre-sexual kids.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sailor View Post
Re: sand - I also found that being nude at the beach is WAY easier in terms of not getting sand where you don't want it. Bathing suits seem to trap sand in all the wrong places. In my experience, at least.
Yes. Last year, my naked daughter had fewer sand problems than dh and I, who were wearing bathing suits, did.
post #108 of 153
well, that's why I chose to clothe my ds on the beach after the age of two. The risk of people tsk-tsk-ing and rolling their eyes at my child's nudity is FAR GREATER than that of him being targeted by a predator.

As I said before, the only times I saw perverts obviously looking at children and masturbating, was near schools, where children were fully clothed. And the speculation that a pervert would go to the beach and prefer looking at naked toddlers instead of diapered ones is just that... a speculation.
post #109 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post
I guess I have trouble with this one, too. It's like the only way people can respect their own intimate areas is by adhering to the rules/norms somebody else sets for them. I just don't get how that works.
Well, as we get older, we tend to learn what is erotic or sexual from the culture around us - I think this is true even when we are aware of the cultural aspect, and perhaps don't like the particular way it is percieved. As well, because we have to live with other people, we can't avoid being affected by what they perceive as sexual.

So, in one place men and women may wear no or little clothing. So nakedness and the body would not automatically be seen as a sign or public sexuality. But of course they still have actions/words that indicate sexual interest or intent to others. Engaging in those things inappropriately (with a sister-in law, or a communal area, for example) would still be inappropriate. And there is no real way to get away from the perceptions of others. If the sign for being sexually interested in someone is sticking out your tongue, you can't go around doing it, and claiming you just like to do it and don't accept the other meaning or intend anything by it. As long as the person knows the meaning, they are in some way bound by the fact that society gives it that meaning. And someone else sticking their tongue out at the person in question is still making asexual gesture, no matter what the first person thinks it should mean.
post #110 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by angie7 View Post
Frankly, I think it is completely irresponsible on the parents part. First off, no child should ever be naked in public and secondly, wth where they thinking? Perverts might be perverts with clothes on too but come on, that's just asking for it. Poor little boy.

I don't even let my girls diapers show if they are wearing a dress. I put little shorts on underneath b/c I don't want someone getting their "rocks off" at my dds' :
So I realize that a lot of people have found what angie7 said to be outrageous, and I don't mean to join in on a stoning or anything...
But seriously. I can't believe that you would say "that's just asking for it". That is just ignorant. I was fully clothed when I was picked out of my 1st grade class to be hauled off to the custodian's closet and sodomized by a school janitor when the moment was right for him. He saw right through my clothes.
It doesn't matter whether you have clothes on or not- a predator will prey.
post #111 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mama.Pajama View Post
So I realize that a lot of people have found what angie7 said to be outrageous, and I don't mean to join in on a stoning or anything...
But seriously. I can't believe that you would say "that's just asking for it". That is just ignorant. I was fully clothed when I was picked out of my 1st grade class to be hauled off to the custodian's closet and sodomized by a school janitor when the moment was right for him. He saw right through my clothes.
It doesn't matter whether you have clothes on or not- a predator will prey.
To be fair, angie7 did apologize for the "that's just asking for it" comment. It sounds like she didn't mean it like that, but mistyped because she was distracted at the time by her dd. I think that's what she said, anyway.
post #112 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sancta View Post
True, but I wonder if nudity WAS allowed - who would the sicko have been watching then? The nude children, likely.

No, nothing to back it up. It just makes sense, doesn't it?

Actually, NOTHING about a grown man, or woman, getting sexually turned on by a child makes sense to me. Assuming, for a moment, that nudity=sexual (which I DO NOT), the parts of the body that are supposed to arouse someone (i.e.- the ones we cover) are underdeveloped in children. There's much more to look at on an adult. So to me, the logical conclusion is that the attraction has NOTHING to do with nakedness, but simply about the child being a child.

The assumption being made with the pervert argument is that a pervert will be sexually aroused in the same ways as normal people. That's a big assumption, IMO, since just the very fact that these individuals are turned on by children means that what turns them on is VASTLY different from a normal person. Does that mean that they AREN'T turned on by naked children? No. Some probably are, but to try to figure out what a pervert is thinking, and then doing anything you can to "prevent" their thoughts, is a waste of time, IMO. You CAN'T know what they're thinking, and normal logic doesn't work here, since normally, they SHOULDN'T BE AROUSED BY CHILDREN!

Again, that does NOT mean there is anything wrong with you if you choose to cloth your children. Others who choose not to cloth their children are not wrong either. And neither group is logically more likely protecting their child from perverts. Perverts are not logical.
post #113 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by MusicianDad View Post
The perverts will still be perverts if the boy had had clothes on. It's up to the parents and the toddler to decide if he wears clothes and no one else. I say no big deal.
I agree with that perverts will still be perverts if the child has or doesnt have clothes on.But one must be carefull with that..
post #114 of 153
i cringe cringe cringe from the attitude towards nudity here - esp. towards children. i am from asia.

it pains me that a toddler has to learn so young that taking off clothes is not ok.

my dd had to learn too and it was a huge internal struggle for me.

i dont buy into the pervert thing. they have existed right from teh beginning which is why incest has been taboo in many ancient societies. they are just getting caught now. i am sure when i ran around naked outside as a toddler some pervert surely was watching me. *shrug*
post #115 of 153
I often see naked toddlers on the beach here in Vancouver. I went to Cuba around Christmas and there were a lot of Italian tourists at my resort. All the little Italian girls ran around the beach with no tops on, even up to age 9 or 10. Before they start developing I'm guessing??? They're kids. I don't see what the big deal is. Sure there are some perverts out there but the vast majority of people do not see children as sexual beings and it's just so footloose and fancy free to be naked as a child. Maybe as an adult too
post #116 of 153
Well, I have a recently turned six year old boy; who still loves to be naked. This year at the beach, I got him to wear his underwear, when he wanted to strip down out of his bathing suit. But at home in the back yard on a summer day he loves to be naked. We don't have a back fence so the yard is fairly open to the alley. Last year I remember him riding his bike naked around on the paved part of our property. And, I delight in his freedom and his innocence.. I, personally am much more reserved and would not be caught naked outside anywhere; but I know that this time will probably be coming to an end for him soon. We homeschool so he hasn't yet had the pressure of conforming as much as in the school system.

The other day a friend and her daughter came over. Well, half way through the visit outside, he takes off all his clothes and just starts playing whatever it is they were playing. I felt torn inside, one part of me wondered how my friend felt, and I had that feeling of wanting to ask him to put clothes on; but there was another part of me that just wanted him to be himself and not make him cover up. So I bit my tongue and didn't say anything. After reading this thread, I see that she may not have felt comfortable. I imagine if that is the case they won't be coming over again on a hot day. That said, I do have other friends who feel the same way I do and we have been treasuring these moments.
post #117 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluegoat View Post
I tend to think that public nudity is really a cultural thing, so in some places being nude at the beach is ok, others you need a bathing suit, the Victorians covered themselves entirely. And they don't necessarily mean one culture is being oppressive and another not - it's somewhat random.
That makes sense. But even something like this being cultural doesn't matter IMO. There are sexual predators in all countries. They aren't limited to our country so even in countries where it's considered "normal" to roam a beach naked it doesn't mean there aren't a bunch of sexual predators there just for that reason, to see barely clothed and naked people. So it's the same no matter how you look at it. All it comes down to is someone feeling comfortable enough to do this or to allow their very young child to do this and to not give a darn about what is going on around them.

If some people are comfortable doing this then that's fine IMO, but realize that there are going to be people who are not comfortable with it and people who are on that beach solely seeking out children and adults to watch and get off on it. What boggles my mind is that someone would allow their toddler to run naked on a beach knowing beforehand that sexual predators may be out there looking. I'd keep them at home so my child is safe and not being exposed to just anyone who feels like getting off on looking at them. I'm not naive so I know there's that possibility. Maybe some parents just don't know? And definitely if I were the type to let my toddler run naked on a beach (which I'm obviously not ) then I would be aware of my surroundings and definitely would not continue to do it if I saw a wedding going on very close. That's rude.
Quote:
Originally Posted by intentionalmama
That said, I do have other friends who feel the same way I do and we have been treasuring these moments.
but there are a lot of moments that I treasure with my children. This just isn't one of them. I too treasure the moments when they are not shy about their bodies to a certain extent, but I also treasure the cute things they say and do and how they won't talk cute anymore as they get older, stuff like that, milestone stuff. But teaching them to be appropriately dressed when company comes over or when outdoors in front of our neighbors would be of utmost importance to me, especially if they are already school-aged and are old enough to know better.
post #118 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ericka1999 View Post
I agree with that perverts will still be perverts if the child has or doesnt have clothes on.But one must be carefull with that..
I agree. It's still up to each individual parent to decide what is best for "their" child, regardless of how long sexual predators have existed or whether or not they are out there and oh well, no big deal. I think that's strange if someone has that type of thinking. I never think what if, no big deal when it concerns my child and me making a decision that is best for them.
post #119 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post
I've never seen anything about human psychology that suggests that nudity is more titillating, or more likely to promote sexual speculation, than being covered up...never. Citing things like Playboy doesn't even count, for the aforementioned reasons (deliberately provocative poses, etc.). If nudity is the most titillating, why does sexy lingerie even exist? I think the "nudity=sex" mindset is largely a self-fulfilling prophecy. We hide nudity and think of it as something sexual, and turn it into something sexual.
I disagree. I agree that nudity can be seen as sexual and not sexual. And certainly a child on a beach running naked is not being sexual BUT to a sexual predator they are. So that's the thought in my mind. And I do see nakedness as more sexy depending on how it is delivered to the person seeing it and depending on the behavior of the person who is seeing it. If a perve looks at a naked girl posing sexy in Playboy then uhhh..yeah, it's safe to assume he's not just looking at it for no reason other than to get off. Why would someone buy the magazine in the first place if they weren't intending on looking at it for that reason?
post #120 of 153
Plenty of men say they prefer women to be more covered so they can use their imaginations.

When I was with my climbing boy friend, there was nothing hotter than seeing him fully clothed with all his climbing gear on.

With DH I just love seeing him in ripped jeans.

Yeah, naked people can be sexy, but so are dressed people.

Naked or clothed, makes no difference.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Parenting
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › is it ever ok for toddler to be nude in public?