San Francisco is a well-known city. One of the things it’s
best known for is its public nudity policies. Where some areas across the
nation have banned nudity and tagged it as indecent exposure, San Francisco
has, over the years, embraced public nudity.
There are three clothing optional beaches within San
Francisco city limits, and it’s not uncommon to see nudists going about their
daily business even in areas that are not designated clothing optional areas.
In 1972, the California Supreme Court determined that nude
sunbathing on an isolated beach was not considered lewd. In the years since
then, nudists have thrived on the general understanding that if there is no
sexual intent or gratification, they cannot be convicted of criminal charges.
Nudists may be approached and notified that they are
violating a city ordinance when in non-nudist designated areas, whereupon they
can choose to either clothe or be issued a citation (which takes some effort to
get rid of). However, this civil ordinance is pursued rarely at best, and no
criminal charges can be pursued from it.
But there has been growing unrest in the nudist community
over San Francisco lawmakers’ plan to vote on banning nudity in public areas.
The laws would make it illegal for those over the age of five to be publicly
nude, except for certain street fairs and events. First-time offenders would be
charged up to $100, but if prosecuted fines could reach $500 and a year in
jail.
Nudists have already filed a federal lawsuit that argues the
laws infringe on their free speech rights. The law is coming through after
several complaints of naked men gathering in a plaza in the Castro District.
Earlier this year, the city passed a law that required nudists to use a piece
of cloth when sitting in public places. Since then, the number of protesters
has only increased.
Post a Comment