“Pinhead Nudist?”

Bill O’Reilly is justified in labeling a woman, who gardens topless without sufficient regard for her neighbors or a nearby school, as a “pinhead,” but at the same time the Fox News commentator and his staff needs to get their facts straight http:www.foxnews.com/oreilly

The first and obvious point is that Boulder Colorado’s Catharine Pierce was not gardening in the nude; she was topless. All of the coverage in the Boulder Daily Camera on this ongoing controversy makes that point absolutely clear, http://www.dailycamera.com/ci_14923536#axzz0llMEzZW2

And yet here was the way that O’Reilly introduced the story and bestowed the “Pinhead” designation on Mizz Pierce:

 “On the pinhead front, say hello to nudity in your neighborhood. A Boulder, Colorado, woman likes to garden with no clothes on. You can finish the joke here. But it is no joke for people who don't want to see that. However, the housing authority where the lady lives says it's OK with them. She can garden any way she wants. And so 52-year-old Catharine Pierce will be getting an all-over tan, but she is still a pinhead.”

Besides the obvious distinction between topless and nude, there is also the issue with Fox News using stock photos of two separate nude women in backyard settings, including one with a strategically spraying water hose, but they were not Catharine Pierce.

Maybe there are no sinners in this story, but there are certainly no saints either. We have already discussed the sloppy research by Fox (doesn’t the network pride itself in being “fair and balanced?”). At the same time, Catharine seems to have no interest or respect when she gardens topless in plain sight for her neighbors and local school children.

Godiva is a huge fan of backyard nudity and gardening in the buff, provided it is discreet. Big government should not come down on your right to wear or not wear what you want in your own property, provided that you are not aiming for or not caring about a public display.

If your property for whatever reason does not provide the privacy needed for nudity, then options should be considered such as remote wilderness areas, clothing optional beaches or nudist resorts, such as Mountain Air Ranch in Indian Hills, Colorado http://www.trynude.com/gallery.html.

Going topless or nude in an inappropriate setting violates Godiva’s time-and-place rule. There are appropriate times and places for nudity, and the sense of freedom that comes with it. There are also inappropriate times and places for nudity or in this particular case, topless gardening, and when it does occur the entire nudist movement takes a PR hit in the face, such as a “Pinhead” designation.

We need to be smarter and not so bullheaded. Let’s support the heck out private backyard nudity, discreet nude recreation on public lands, clothing optional beaches and nudist resorts. These are the appropriate places and let’s designate times to go visit them.  

Comments

[Godiva]

Luben, we are going to have to agree to disagree. The decision by the Colorado woman to garden topless in easy sight of parents and a school is selfish and inappropriate. The result is a black eye for nudism. We need to be responsible and adopt a sensible time and place rule. By keeping our love of nudism in the right places at the right times, we have it in our power to convince others that mere nudity is not harmful, but is actually fun and enjoyable. Thank you for your comment.

[Luben Spiridonov]

Why should we assume the "right" to not have to look at you exceeds your right to dress the way you want? Most of the public can handle the sight of a topless woman and children (who find nudity immensely entertaining) are not harmed at all. I think the small, vocal minority who are offended by a shirtless woman are the ones who should show discretion.