Sure; at CAVMEN. Not to mention you used to live in my building. What are you doing sending notes at 3 a.m. in the morning?
Calling me a midwesterner? Them's fightin' words where I come from! Fortunately, I ain't where I come from. I never meant to suggest anyone was fibbing or fantasizing. I do not doubt there are people who walk around naked in their apartments (as I suggested, I do so on occasion). I have been to NYC myself, and I have also seen the kind of juxtaposition of wealth and poverty you mention right here in Our Fare (sic) City: Chicago's Gold Coast has a huge breadth of income, and there are homeless people outside the building where I'm writing this. I don't fully understand what that has to do with voyeurism, except that you seem to be saying NYC residents are blase about a lot of things and nudity is one. That's somewhat off the subject, I think, as I'll explain later.
You and I? Never. However, I have been party to such discussions with other people. Depends on the company, and I know several women who would talk about Such Things either because they're uninhibited or deliberately for shock value. As for taking things seriously, according to my records what I said was this WAS funny in the show, but would NOT be proper in real life (paraphrase). I feel that I am still capable of distinguishing between the two.
Sure, and if I walk down the street without a gun and someone mugs me, that's life too, right? We live in a jungle where life is nasty, brutish, and short, we can only protect ourselves and we have no moral responsibility to any other individual. I hope this is not entirely true; rather, in any society, there are rules governing what behaviors are considered acceptable. These rules vary from one society to another. Some individuals choose to violate the rules; in some cases, these individuals are considered heroes in other societies or other times (civil rights protestors, for example).
There is also a distinction between social conventions (e.g., segregation, or wearing clothing), and moral rights (such as the right to privacy, free speech and association, or safety). There is no clear line between the two. For purposes of this discussion, I would say that wearing clothing is a social convention, while privacy is a moral right.
Actually, I agree with you there, but that's not the point. *I* feel that I live in a society with a nudity taboo. I think that's silly, but again that's not the point. The POINT is that many people WOULD be embarrassed to be seen naked by a stranger, and therefore I hope that when the situation arises I would look away. *NOT* because I feel nudity is morally wrong, and *NOT* because *I* would be embarrassed, but because my perception is THAT person would be likely to be embarrassed, and I feel I have a moral duty to protect THEIR rights. How you or I or someone in Munich feel is not at issue.
I feel the U.S. would be psychologically healthier if nudity and sexuality (two different things, really) were less repressed, and I have no objection to public nudity. People who are naked in public presumably know that they are in public; someone who is at home, with or without the shades drawn, in my opinion, has reason to expect privacy. What really bothers me about the U.S. is that violence seems to be much more acceptable in the mass media than nudity and sexuality (both depictions and discussion). THAT is really sick.