Any here? Tell your story

I was born naked. I choose to wear clothes most days.

Quote

I was born naked. I choose to wear clothes most days.[/quite]

Hahaha!!!


Honestly though having a bunch of people walking around naked all the time would not be such a good thing because it would stimulate desire and lust, and desire and lust have a way of lowering people's standards and morality.

I'm an artist and draw nude models multiple times every week. Some of them are extremely hot, but they have no sexual effect on me because I'm so used to seeing naked bodies. When I'm drawing them, all I see are collections of shapes. If everyone walked around naked we eventually wouldn't think twice about it.

Living Food Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was born naked. I choose to wear clothes most
> days.
>
> Hahaha!!!
>
>
> Honestly though having a bunch of people walking
> around naked all the time would not be such a good
> thing because it would stimulate desire and lust,
> and desire and lust have a way of lowering
> people's standards and morality.

HH Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm an artist and draw nude models multiple times
> every week. Some of them are extremely hot, but
> they have no sexual effect on me because I'm so
> used to seeing naked bodies. When I'm drawing
> them, all I see are collections of shapes. If
> everyone walked around naked we eventually
> wouldn't think twice about it.
>
> Living Food Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I was born naked. I choose to wear clothes most
> > days.
> >
> > Hahaha!!!
> >
> >
> > Honestly though having a bunch of people
> walking
> > around naked all the time would not be such a
> good
> > thing because it would stimulate desire and
> lust,
> > and desire and lust have a way of lowering
> > people's standards and morality.



*nods*
Secondly, lust is not correlated with morality for those of us who know what consent and "adult" are.

I like being naked, especially in the sun!

Living Food Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was born naked. I choose to wear clothes most
> days.
>
> Hahaha!!!
>
>
> Honestly though having a bunch of people walking
> around naked all the time would not be such a good
> thing because it would stimulate desire and lust,
> and desire and lust have a way of lowering
> people's standards and morality.


Yes, until people evolve to higher levels l would think such a state is not ideal because most humans wouldn't be able to handle public nudity imo. Conquering the lust demon is the first thing one must do, but it is not such an easy ratbag to conquer unless one lives for taking a very high level path of the divine.

The problem we have is that average humans are made for procreation, so this is going to be a problem for most people. As Hilton Hotema wisely said "some men are meant to make philosophies and other men are meant to have families". As it stands, most people's mentality rightly lies in the later category, so for ordinary folks to be exposed to nude communities can bring upon problems.

www.thesproutarian.com

In "The Science and Fine Art of Natural Hygiene", Herbert Shelton writes, “Man is naturally a nude animal and his body needs and should have the daily contact with the sun and air that it received before man learned to cover himself. The air alone, when playing upon the body, occasions increased metabolism. Let's briefly state the greater evils of clothing:

1) They exclude the sun and air from the body.

2) They bind the excretions of the body upon it and necessitate too frequent bathing. Clothing causes us to literally wallow in our own excretions.

3) They weaken the powers of the skin and cripple its power to quickly adapt itself to weather changes.

4) They interfere more or less with freedom of movement and hamper body development.

5) Tight bands, garters, corsets, etc., interfere both with movement and with circulation and, also, cramp the internal organs.

6) Shoes are the cause of about ninety percent of our foot troubles.

7) Clothes tend to create an air of mystery and one of shame about the body. They are potent factors in producing and maintaining prudery.

8) Clothes help to produce and maintain licentiousness and immorality. Instead of being aids to chastity, morality and modesty, they are hindrances.

By shutting out from the body, the air and sunshine; by creating an unclean body; by necessitating too frequent bathing; by restricting the movements of the body; by interfering with circulation; by cramping the organs of the body; by inducing prudery and licentiousness; by weakening the skin and limiting its resistance to environment; and by lessening the adaptive powers of the skin; clothes are distinctly EVIL and disease producing.”

[youtu.be]

Peace and Love..........John





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/23/2015 09:39PM by John Rose.

> [youtu.be]



IMO, it is wise to beware of taking "sunning" advice from those who say they have no UV skin damage beyond one spot on their nose when they have had the hubris to post videos of themselves which clearly show their massive amount of skin damage spots, their skin looking at least 10 years older than their claimed age, and skin quality that looks like leather.

I look a whole better than YOU!!!

[www.youtube.com]

Why mankind is not meant to be naked all the time

Imo mankind is not meant to be naked for very good reasons. Why? First l will start out with an example. If we look at films of native communities you will see tribes etc who are topless and show off backsides, BUT the private sexual organs are always covered up. Why?....there is two reasons for this imo. They know in their wisdom that if they were all naked they would not be able to procreate because the stimulation usually provided by nudity would no longer be there because one would become used to nudity and it would no longer be enough to have sexual relations to be able to procreate, so the sexual organs must be kept covered with bark etc to keep it a surprise for when the moment arrives for sexual activities. Now...assuming that desexualisation of nudity didn't occur through constantly being exposed to nudity, the opposite problem would occur where men and women would have lustful thoughts all the time about a variety of people and cheating etc would occur.

As can be clearly seen, primitive man and women always knew to cover the private areas, and they always had the ability on ordinary socities to do this for the reasons stated above. I challenge anyone to find ordinary societies that are completely naked 27/7 from birth to death.

See...just imagine if everyone was nude all the time and everyone become desensitized to nudity and couldn't become aroused when needed. Mankind would die out. That is why mankind cover those sexual parts imo.

www.thesproutarian.com



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/23/2015 10:22PM by The Sproutarian Man.

SueZ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > [youtu.be]
>
>
>
> IMO, it is wise to beware of taking "sunning"
> advice from those who say they have no UV skin
> damage beyond one spot on their nose when they
> have had the hubris to post videos of themselves
> which clearly show their massive amount of skin
> damage spots, their skin looking at least 10 years
> older than their claimed age, and skin quality
> that looks like leather.

How can the old man in these videos be in such deep denial about his over exposed skin being sun damaged? Ask yourselves that before you follow him down his imaginary garden path ...

<<<primitive man and women always knew to cover the private areas>>>

This was "primitive man" after the FALL!!!

Ask yourself, why was man ashamed to be NAKED?

It's because his "DIETARY MISTAKES" are RECORDED in his FLESH!!!





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/23/2015 10:49PM by John Rose.

Hey OOZY SUEZ,

How old are you in this picture?

[classconnection.s3.amazonaws.com]

Now that we've looked at YOU, let's take a better look at me!!!

[www.youtube.com]

Now who looks older - YOU or ME?!?!?!





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/23/2015 10:57PM by John Rose.

>See...just imagine if everyone was nude all the time and everyone become desensitized to nudity and couldn't become aroused when needed. Mankind would die out. That is why mankind cover those sexual parts imo.


doesn't seem to be a problem for bonobos



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/23/2015 10:58PM by fresh.

Brian/TSM wrote:

<<See...just imagine if everyone was nude all the time and everyone become desensitized to nudity and couldn't become aroused when needed. Mankind would die out. That is why mankind cover those sexual parts imo.>>>

fresh wrote:

<<<doesn't seem to be a problem for bonobos>>>

It boggles my mind that Brian/TSM actually thinks that he is enlightened when he makes comments like this!

People become aroused by a lot more than just sight. What about the other senses? If we were nude all the time then we would place more emphasis on the other senses in attraction. Placing less emphasis on superficial looks and more on things like smell and touch would be a good thing.

SueZ:
post videos of themselves which clearly show their massive amount of skin damage spots

Tai:
It turns out that being in really hot weather, it's hard to cover up. The hotter it is, the more skin gets exposed and the tanner one gets. Try covering up in 100 degree weather. It's miserable. The stories I heard from Arugula and that other man who did low calorie, who both used sun screen, hats and long clothes sound only possible in cool weather.

Clothing is there to protect the body and feet, not just from the sun and cold but from many forms of insects and injuries.

John Rose:
Ask yourself, why was man ashamed to be NAKED?

8) Clothes help to produce and maintain licentiousness and immorality. Instead of being aids to chastity, morality and modesty, they are hindrances.

Tai:
Total innocence, purity, and holiness is a state of mind with or without clothes. Perversion, immorality, selfishness, lust and desire is a state of mind with or without clothes.

Holiness is far more than what you eat. Being ashamed in God's presence results from every impurity being revealed in one's heart, mind and deeds. Being less than holy will make one ashamed in God's presence. His presence is so holy, people won't stop saying, Holy Holy Holy is the Lord almighty. Grabbing some fig leaves to cover up means that Adam got busted...he got caught red-handed.

Think about it. Eve was related to Adam, because she was made from one of his ribs. What kind of relationship was that? Yes, she was made to be his companion but to what extent physically? People like Methusalah lived to like 900 years. But what was the potential for Adam and Eve, if they didn't sin, if they didn't fall from grace? Wasn't the tree of life blocked from them that could grant immortality, because of their sin?

John Rose Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hey OOZY SUEZ,
>
> How old are you in this picture?
>
> [classconnection.s3.amazonaws.com]
> rds/666097/jpg/978-1-4377-0151-7_03221315342692782
> .jpg
>
> Now that we've looked at YOU, let's take a better
> look at me!!!
>
> [www.youtube.com]
> e=youtu.be
>
> Now who looks older - YOU or ME?!?!?!

No one can stop your lies, deceptions, and self deceptions, rose - not even you can, IMO, because you are not anywhere near sane enough to even realize what you are doing much less knowing right from wrong.

You may know that that picture you keep posting of some poor sick old woman you found on the web to intentionally try to lead people to believe it's me is not me. But do you know that all that sun damage to your skin is clearly and obviously apparent on your videos? Are you so far gone that you can't even be objective about such an blatant fact? You seem to be just THAT delusional and so incapable of coming clean on the obvious state of you skin damage.

Were you counting on your video's viewers watching on itsy bitsy screens so they wouldn't be able to see the real truth about your skin and so would believe your lies about it? Do you maybe simply not see it for yourself and just need glasses? Or is it just all to be attributed to your being bat @#$%& crazy as I tend towards squarely pinning it on?

Tai wrote:

<<<Wasn't the tree of life blocked from them that could grant immortality, because of their sin?>>>

Here is an Audio Tape that addresses "immortality"!!!

Per Audio Tape JR# B-62 - 09:33 made 7-10-14:

The Biblical Version of the Garden of Eden starts off with a Lie by Changing the Tree of Life from our Needs to Immortality that way they can end this Story by claiming the Solution lies in just believing that Jesus died for our Sins and now we’ll have Immortality again in Heaven! The rationale behind getting Kicked out of the Garden is we got to keep you away from this Tree of Immortality - you don’t get the Tree of Immortality anymore.

Again, keep saying you don’t need those Needs - forget the Needs - don’t look at the man behind the curtain - look over here - don’t look over there - it’s all about Mis-Direction. If we start off on the Wrong Assumption, we end up with the Wrong Assumption. If we think Immortality is the Solution, then we’re screwed. The Tree of Life is supposed to represent our Needs - that is NEVER taken away from us.

But if we say, forget that the Tree of Life is our Needs, we’ll say it’s Immortality. Then when we get Kicked out of the Garden, they’re going to keep us away from the Tree of Life because you did what God knew you would do - Eat from the Tree of Knowledge.

But what does that mean?

What do you do when you Eat from the Tree of Knowledge?

Another Flaw in this Story is using a Tree as an Analogy for Knowledge. There are 3 Stages of Knowledge and you can’t use something that can represent a Need to 3 Stages of Knowledge.

Note: Let’s reword that to make it more explicit because, otherwise, Needs are in all 3 Stages of Knowledge. We Acquire the Knowledge of our Needs in the 1st Stage of Knowledge and if we Apply that, we make it to the 2nd Stage and then, it’s an automatic we get to the 3rd - we’re in the Garden. But if we don’t Apply the Knowledge of our Needs, we make Mistakes - that’s the Fall of Mankind in the 2nd Stage of Knowledge and where do we end up - Outside of the Garden - Hell!

So according to the Biblical Version of the Garden of Eden Story, one person comes along and provided the Problem - Sin and another provides the Solution - Redemption through Forgiveness of Sin and now we’ll have [Immortality] (Eternal Life).

So the whole Story is designed to make sure we Stay Outside of the Garden. According to the Story, we can Never have the Tree of Life and we’re doomed forever to have this Sin Nature. No matter what you do - you’re Born with it - you have this tendency - Man has a Propensity for Evil.

No, a long time ago, Man Violated a simple Law. It did Kick him out of the Garden, so to speak, and that’s because we Destroyed the Source for 1 of our Senses and, in effect, Lost 1 of our Senses. That’s why we’re No longer in the Garden of Eden - we Lost the Sense that allows us to Feel one with everything and that Changed our Mentality (and that’s the reason why we have a Tendency for Evil - Not a Propensity - a Tendency for Evil. Propensity means a Natural Tendency and there is nothing Natural about the Dark Side to our Behavior. The Dark Side of our Behavior is part of our Feedback System to let us know we’re making Mistakes - to let us know we’re Not Nurturing the Tree of Life and when we don’t Nurture the Tree of Life, it Changes our Mentality.) and that’s the reason why most people think we have a Propensity for Evil when we only have a Tendency for Evil.

Yes, we have a Dark Side to our Behavior, but there’s nothing Natural about this Behavior - it’s Unnatural and it’s part of our Feedback System. Our Brains are wired for Pleasure & Pain to help us know whether or not we are Satisfying all of our Needs - to let us know if we are Nurturing the Tree of Life, which has nothing to do with Immortality as some Stories have been altered to make us believe - it has to do with our Needs.

Why identify a Tree for Immortality?

That’s because of Man’s Fear of Death, but the main reason why the Tree of Life has been changed from a Tree that supplies all of our Needs to this make believe Immortality is to take the attention off of our Needs and change the emphasis of what we do in this lifetime to what we get in the [After Life] (next lifetime), which if we ask for Forgiveness for our Sins, we will have Immortality in Heaven.

So in both the beginning and in end, the purpose of using Immortality is to shift the focus from Satisfying our Needs on this Planet to some factious Garden of Eden where we live forever, but only in the After Life.

That’s right, that one single Act of Dis-Obedience, which God knew would happen, took the Tree of Life or the Tree of Bogus Immortality away from us. But this is why the Story has been changed because they want us to think this Tree is unattainable and they also want us to think that the Tree has to do with Immortality. It has nothing to do with Immortality - it has to do with our Tree of Needs and this is what the Rulers of the World don’t want us to understand because there are No Rulers in Paradise.

The first requirement in order to Rule people is they have to be Sick. If aliens ever came to our Planet and we weren’t already Sick, the first thing they would have done is to make sure we had already Mastered Fire and if we hadn’t, they would have helped us out. But if we had already Discovered Fire or once they helped us understand how to use Fire, the next thing they would do is teach us to make a Bad Application with that Fire.

And it is the 1st Bad Application to the very 1st thing we mastered that is the Fall of Mankind. This is how we got Kicked out of the Garden. The very 1st Bad Application Destroyed a Nutrient that Feeds 1 of our Senses. In effect, it Destroyed 1 of our Senses and that’s what Changed our Mentality. We No longer are Capable of Perceiving everything around us like we used to because the most important of all Senses has been Damaged where now, most of us are barely having a fraction of what we should have - a small fraction - 10% or less.

Note: I could talk for another 10 minutes easily - go into Biophotons, etc., but I just don’t want to work on that right now and type everything out.
[End of B-62] [1163 words]





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/23/2015 11:41PM by John Rose.

Picture this...

In some oily hot damp dark Texas city, in the middle of the night, there is an old bat @#$%& crazy half naked man with a poo p bowl and scales walking the streets preaching into a tape recorder so tomorrow you, too, can be enlightened by his hare brained notions of how things are in life.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2015 12:31AM by SueZ.

[www.youtube.com]

what skin problems are you talking about suez ?

What happened to raw foodists who ski with shorts on.

fresh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [www.youtube.com]
> e=youtu.be
>
> what skin problems are you talking about suez ?

If you are truly having trouble, and/or maybe just have a tiny cheap screen to view on, you'll need to view the videos that aren't so bleached out by direct sun like the one you've preferred to link.

Try this one if you just aren't seeing it all ...


[www.youtube.com]

SueZ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> fresh Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> [www.youtube.com]
>
> > e=youtu.be
> >
> > what skin problems are you talking about suez ?
>
> If you are truly having trouble, and/or maybe just
> have a tiny cheap screen to view on, you'll need
> to view the videos that aren't so bleached out by
> direct sun like the one you've preferred to link.
>
> Try this one if you just aren't seeing it all
> ...
>
>
> [www.youtube.com]


asking what specifically you are talking about.

dark spots?

1. if so, are you expecting perfect skin on a 60 year old?
2. and then, why is this so important?
(if it's just to "get him" on something,
ignore number 2. since it would be irrelevant)

hugs all around

Quote

Total innocence, purity, and holiness is a state of mind with or without clothes. Perversion, immorality, selfishness, lust and desire is a state of mind with or without clothes.

Beautifully said. We want to be full of light, not darkness. Full of purity, not immorality. These impure things will drag us downward, but we are here to ascend upwards by purifying our hearts and minds. There are higher things than lust, but you will not get to enjoy them if you insist on operating at that level.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2015 02:59AM by Living Food.

deleted.....no point saying anything.

Good post Tai.

www.thesproutarian.com



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2015 04:38AM by The Sproutarian Man.

Let's see your pics oh great youthful Suez, but of course you won't post any...

NuNativs Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Let's see your pics oh great youthful Suez, but of
> course you won't post any...

Have you already forgotten that YOU are the very other one who here who claims sun UV light does not damage skin? Are you lying, like rose is, too? Do you also claim you can't see Rose's severe skin damage on his series of videos?

Your skin is probably not as old as he is so it might not be as bad yet but I dare you to view this video and maintain your unsubstantiated claim.

[www.youtube.com]

SueZ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NuNativs Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Let's see your pics oh great youthful Suez, but
> of
> > course you won't post any...
>
> Have you already forgotten that YOU are the very
> other one who here who claims sun UV light does
> not damage skin? Are you lying, like rose is, too?
> Do you also claim you can't see Rose's severe skin
> damage on his series of videos?
>
> Your skin is probably not as old as he is so it
> might not be as bad yet but I dare you to view
> this video and maintain your unsubstantiated
> claim.
>
> [www.youtube.com]

Suez,

I have already asked you to be specific.
why you have not done so?

are you talking about lines in the face?
dark spots?
what?

if you think his skin looks old, then it looks old.
everything is relative and perspective.

what is it that you are trying to prove?

you have already made your statement several times.

his skin looks aged to you and you think its related to his diet

fine! why are you repeating it ad nauseum?

he has already stated that long time low fat raw eaters lose subcutaneous fat, in his opinion.


and you have ignored nunativs statement.

show your own skin or shut yer yap.