RE:Yes or No

I didnt know Hunter was in the president cabinet or running for office? If he or anyone did something wrong prosecute them( they had 4 years for Benghazi is classic Conservative smear politics with no outcome! LOL )....Is that hard to understand?....Damn were living through something more corrupt than the Reagan administration and your worried about Hunter? WoW...time to read and wake up my friend!If Joe is "The Big Guy" and was involved in Hunters shady business dealings and used daddy's position as VP, it's relevant. If Joe sold access to the VP office and the President, it's relevant. The fact is the mainstream media buried the story because it looked bad for Joe and the DNC. They are no longer "News" orginazations, they are propaganda arms for the DNC.John aka cobeachbum

Yea I know ignore trade marks for trumps kids from china, 2 billion to the step kids days out of office.....Golfing at owned properties that tax payer pay for everything, endorsing products like beans... Emoluments be damned!..Face it, like always searching for a problem that might exist instead of focusing on things that are confirmed and happen SMFH!

This post was edited
RE:Yes or No

I did not mean to turn this into a political squabble with my comment, more to bring to light the fact that the link offered wasn't working, and that Fox has admitted for the record (court record) that they are not a news source but an entertainment channel. Entertaining it may be to millions of viewers, but to consider Fox News as a true news source and to think that what they offer is a reasonable amount of slant, way too much Kool-aid has been supped.

It is nearly impossible to find fact-based news on television that won't try to sway you in some way now. I think we can all agree that the news services you have referenced here have all fallen victim to slant of one direction or another - but Fox gave the ex-president unlimited airtime via phone whenever he wanted it, and the two of them (entertainment channel & president at the time) would swirl around a fictitious story until it was all of the sudden considered true. That cannot and should not ever be considered hard news.

What should be considered 'hard news'? Does Fox maintain a certain time of day where they give less right wing-oriented news? During what hours does this entertainment channel become news? I would appreciate seeing that schedule because I might turn it on once in a while if that where the case.

See below what I feel is a thoughtful treatment of where many of today's news sources fall in the big picture of information. It isn't too easy to read unless you open it and make it larger (hold down CTRL key and scroll mouse). Notice how far down the page Fox News is found? Finding one's news higher on this chart could assist in garnering credibility when making a case.

https://adfontesmedia.com/static-mbc/?utm_source=HomePage_StaticMBC_Button&utm_medium=OnWebSite_Button

/quote/This case was in reference to Tucker Carlson, a commentator, not a hard news show. Fox News clearly delineates it's hard news shows from it's commentary shows (Unlike many of the other networks where they bleed together).

At least with Fox News, I'm getting the story. Yes it may be slanted to the conservative view point, but I get the story. It's amazing how many stories CNN, MSNBC, and the others blatantly ignore because it's bad for the DNC. (Think pretty much anything about Hunter).

John aka cobeachbum

This post was edited
RE:Yes or No

I'm tuning out the references to Trump and the Bidens, because they aren't relevant to this thread.

What if find interesting is how the media thinks that it's somehow representative of nudism that the killer and the victim were naked. The fact is that nudists are by and large like other people. Most of us are sane, and then there is the VERY occasional whack job.

A few years back, three women were horribly murdered near Yosemite National Park in California. The killer was eventually identified, tracked down, and arrested. And where was he arrested? At Laguna del Sol, a naturist resort. Does that make him a nudist psychopathic killer? Or a psychopathic killer who also happened to b a nudist?

I don't remember the resort getting any bad backlash from the incident. At least, the local papers didn't make a big thing of the fact of his being arrested there. That seems to be the principal difference between that incident and the present one.

This post was edited
RE:Yes or No

While attending nude beaches and resorts I enjoy looking at others and sharing my nude body with other. (Nothing sexual, no staring, no gawking) just enjoying the nude form. I have been told that this is wrong and is not what nudism is about. Is this true. Do "real" nudists not look at each others body? Serious replies only please.
No more than you would on a public beach . Staring , gawking etc is not really on and if the person starts feeling uncomfortable you could get some negative reactions . If you cant help yourself then I suggest staying away from places like that .

This post was edited
RE:Yes or No

I dont think the media is overplaying naked context on this one. The individual who was killed was allegedly exposing himself sexually to a woman at a nude beach. The report suggest the victim had been harassing multiple women at the beech in a sexual manner. So nakedness is definitely part of the context. The idea that nudists are like everyone else is true but the motive for this killing should not be dismissed purely as a whack job. IMO it is more complex than that

I'm tuning out the references to Trump and the Bidens, because they aren't relevant to this thread.What if find interesting is how the media thinks that it's somehow representative of nudism that the killer and the victim were naked. The fact is that nudists are by and large like other people. Most of us are sane, and then there is the VERY occasional whack job.

This post was edited
RE:Yes or No

I think that in order to have a meaningful or "intelligent conversation" about looking, you have to take voyeurism/gawking/leering/staring out of the equation. I would hope that most of the people here understand that it is not ok; and that insisting on making other people uncomfortable is sociopathic behavior that will certainly not be deemed acceptable at most nudist venues.

With that out of the way: yes, people look at each other. I've talked about being in the pool area with some friends, and gazing over at the Yoga class being conducted nearby. Certainly, we glanced over at them from time to time while chatting. There was no contradiction there with nudist etiquette. That reminds me of a quote from the late-great Diane Webber:
"There is an attitude among nudists that chills me." Says Diane Webber. This is the attitude that states nudists dont look at one another.
"Of course they look.
"My goodness! All my friends enjoy watching each other at camp. Can you think of any other real reason why people should sit in the hot sun watching a volleyball game? Is it just for the volley-ball game? No. We sit there and comment favorably on what we see."

So she goes even further in embracing a visual aspect to social nudity.

I'll take in the scene around me, but definitely don't want to be a gawker. Conversely, I've never been worried about others looking at me.

A sound perspective. Early this summer I ran into an old co-worker; and when she recognized me, she reflexively and briefly looked at my "privates" before returning to eye contact. I understood that she was establishing that she was not only naked in front of me; but I was in the same "state" as she was. I, on the other hand, chose to maintain eye contact the entire time. There was no need for me to seek visual confirmation and risk making her uncomfortable in doing so.
But since that day, we've hung out together many times and there aren't any hang-ups about us seeing each other naked; nooks, crannies and all during the course of our many varied interactions. It's the same with the other "regulars"; we don't pretend to be blind to each other. We know that people are going to look when we enter the pool area; and vice-versa. Or when we engage in activities like paddleboarding; or see others doing Naked Yoga. A big part of nudism IMHO is accepting being seen. Those that do not have a really hard time relaxing; and relaxation becomes challenging when you're overly concerned about who might be watching you as you climb out of the hot tub or straddle a lounge chair. Why even bother if you're constantly going to be on "high alert?"

This post was edited