natural state of being, and discrimination on this basis is prohibited. It should be equally prohibited to discriminate on the

basis of appearing in the natural state common to any or all humanity.
134. Given the challenge of defining modesty standards, which are by nature ambiguous, legislators have
Frequently found it to be more complicated to forbid nudity than to sanction it.
For examp le, in the local anti-nudity legislation of St. John’s County, Florida, we find this painstakingly
Complex definition of “bottom:” “The place in the rear of the human body (occasionally called the gluteus
maximus) which lies between two imaginary straight lines running parallel to the ground when one is standing,
the very first or top such line being a half-inch below the very top of the vertical cleavage of the nates (i.e., the prominence
formed by the muscles running from the back of the hip to the back of the leg) as well as the second or bottom such line
being a half-inch above the lowest stage of the curvature of the fleshy protuberance (occasionally referred to as the
gluteal fold), and between two imaginary straight lines, one on each side of the body (the ‘outside lines’), which
outside lines are perpendicular to the ground and to the horizontal lines described above, and which perpendicular
outside lines pass through the outermost point(s) at which each nate meets the outer side of each and every leg.
Notwithstanding the preceding, buttocks shall not include the leg, the hamstring muscle below the gluteal fold, the
tensor fasciae latae muscles, or any one of the previously described part of the human body that is between either (i) the
left inside perpendicular line and the left outside perpendicular line or (ii) the right inside perpendicular line and the
right outside perpendicular line. For the purpose of the prior sentence, the left inside perpendicular line shall be
an imaginary straight line on the left side of the anus (i) that is perpendicular to the earth and to the horizontal
lines described above and (ii) that’s one third of the distance from the anus to the left outside line. (The above
description can normally be described as covering one third of the buttocks centered over the cleavage for the span
of the cleavage.)” 200
135. A big portion of state and local government anti-nudity regulations have been legislated by
individual superior officials or small groups, without public review. This really is undemocratic and contrary to the principle
of due process.
Florida, for example, shut most of its own nude beaches in 1983 without . By wide-ranging legal precedent, it is unquestionably legal to be naked in private, on private property.
137. Many state or local governments have also expressly legislated the right to be naked in designated
public regions, such as legally-sanctioned nude beaches.
Legal nude beaches are uncommon but not nonexistent in North America. British Columbia, by way of example,
currently has one lawfully sanctioned nude beach, and Oregon has two.
138. There isn’t any worldwide national prohibition against nudity on public land. In general, public property agencies
view nude diversion–conducted with discretion and sensitivity to the varying values of others–as “valid
activity.” 201
Many state and local governments (notably Oregon, Vermont, and the California Department of Recreation
and Parks) have followed the national policy also, without battle.
William Penn Mott, a former Manager of the National Park Service, wrote: “NPS must actively seek to
respect and adapt wide ranging differences among visitors and professional colleagues in lifestyles and
values with sympathy, dignity, and tolerance. I really believe that parks are a place where the human spirit is more free,
more capable of allowing people to be themselves, nearer to a oneness with universal truths about world and
about our relationship to nature as well as the sacred truths by which we live. . . . I believe it is too simple for government
Workers–all of us–to believe there is only one means to enjoy and use the parks and that when the visitor enters ‘our
parks’ they must ‘do it our way.'” 202
139. The nude use of most federal lands is, actually, constitutional because there isn’t any worldwide federal law
prohibiting it. The Ninth Amendment expressly says that no independence shall be denied which are not specifically
140. The mandate of public land agencies including the U.S. Forest Service provide for diversity of

recreation. Historically, provisions are made even for extreme minority types of diversion. Recreational
diversity must also include provisions for nude recreation.
A 1983 Gallup poll found that 14% of Americans occasionally loved naked diversion.204 How many
Tasks does 14% of the American people participate in, of any sort? Absolutely not hunting, snowmobiling, mountain
Cycling, or using off-road vehicles, all which have designated areas set aside for their use!
141. Clothes-optional diversion is less offensive to the majority of people than many other types of recreation