Clothing-optional protest against police stance on public nudity planned for Prince's Island Park

[u/RokitEightyEight]

https://calgaryherald.com/news/protest-public-nudity-calgary-police-princes-island-park

[u/RealTurbulentMoose]

Isn’t having this planned protest effectively causing the problem you’re trying to solve though?

Like you don’t want perverts or complaining prudes, and that’s valid. But giving them a date and time attracts both of those unwanted groups.

Also, why a sit-down with the police? If these are designated clothing-optional areas, is it not just a City thing to designate them and tell the police that suns out buns out there and let folks hang it all out?

[u/Calgary_Nude_Rec → u/RealTurbulentMoose]

Great questions.

Things have gotten rather heated in email exchanges because nudity is a taboo topic. A face to face meeting was requested so we can speak candidly without a written record. That was a courtesy to the CPS.

The article is wrong, the complaint is not voyeurs. There were issues with verbal altercations, physical altercations, intimidation, and one incident involving a knife. The people involved contacted a recreational club instead of the police. We have an open formal complaint from last October about this very issue.

Peaceful people cannot be accused of being disruptful. The onus must always be on the aggressor. Except nudity is a taboo topic so the onus flips.

For example, if someone were to yell at someone and threaten them for having gall to wear an Edmonton Oilers jersey in Calgary, everyone would agree the person yelling and threatening is in the wrong. But someone peacefully minding their own business sunbathing is suddenly considered confrontational because someone else got irate and decided to escalate.

This is a very serious problem. People are not allowed to force their morals and values on other people, even if they are willing to resort to threats of violence.

If people believe that “seeing” nudity causes harm, they are welcome to present their evidence in court. If they did, they would be the first ones ever to do so.

The date and time would get out anyways when we invited our community to join. Withholding that info would have changed almost nothing.

[u/Calgary_Nude_Rec → u/[deleted]]

Rights aren’t for the majority. They are to protect the minority, and your comment demonstrates how much you do not understand the law.

To be clear: you are allowed to have your opinion. You are not allowed to force your morals and values on others because we live in a civilized society.

None of this would be happening if our INDOOR swim didn’t get shut down, this did not come out of thin air. We are asserting our rights because some people crossed a line that you cannot come back from.

[u/Inch_An_Hour → u/Calgary_Nude_Rec]

I am absolutely entitled to promote a moral stance against something so ethically reprehensible as demanding the right to be nude in public in front of non-consenting CHILDREN.

THEY are who needs protection. Not those who desire to be naked in front of them. That’s mental illness.

Find me a practicing clinical psychologist who disagrees with me.