Talk:Skinny dipping

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Before complaining about article content, please read: Wikipedia is not censored.
Nudity Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nudity, which collaborates on articles related to nudity and naturism topics. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Locations

"Places where skinny dipping takes place"? That's kinda...stupid, how about removing that section? WP:NOT a directory – Paul 15:55, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree. If the locations listed do not exist on the List of public outdoor clothes free places (some are, some aren't), they can be added and the link to the list can be put under See also. – Albert109 05:28, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CFNM fetishism

I've removed the reference to 'CFNM swimming' as this is more someone's fantasy than anyone's reality here. The article on CFNM states that this term basically applies to a certain genre of Pornography. I see no reason why this should be mentioned in the Skinny Dipping article. Skinny Dipping is a well-known phenomenon that in fact does occur outside of the internet. "CFNM Swimming" is not a phenomenon I have ever heard of. The information on this particular breed of fetishism can be found in the CFNM article. – Colonel Mustard 12:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

From what I've read (from a nudity forum that used to be on voyforums) it's not unheard of for boys to skinny-dip while girls wear bathing suits. In that sense, "CFNM" swimming does technically exist, but I think the acronym is reserved for the fetish. In any case, I've removed the passage because there's no evidence it's well-known enough for us to care about it. I noticed that CFNM redirects to this page, which I think is misleading since a CFNM situation doesn't necessarily mean swimming, so I changed that too. (Btw, the novel "At Swim, Two Boys" features two teens trying to swim to this island about a mile off-shore. In the novel they swim naked, but, oddly enough, on the cover they're in swim suits.) – 151.203.178.253 21:55, 8 July 2006 (UTC) John S.
I agree, and I've reverted the undelete. If someone wants to write something on variations (with references), that's fine, but there's no point making an unsourced speculative reference to these terms, which are both non-notable and not relevant to this topic. (People may also be interested to see the AfD discussion which these articles are now both under.) – Mdwh 22:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

hey guys, i know this might sound dumb, but do you have to be gay to go skinny dipping with a bunch of guys? i mean im not gay but if some guys started skinny dipping and i swam with them..............isnt that a bit strange —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.161.225.202 (talk • contribs) 00:25, 3 December 2006

Only if you equate nudity with sex. While they go well together, the former does not always suggest the latter. —MJBurrage • TALK • 01:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image

Whatever happened to the YMCA photo? Was it deleted off wikipedia? It is still referenced to in the article, but it is nonexistent... Does anyone have a copy? – Spudmonster 22:56, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, it had to be deleted for lack of copyright-justification, so re-posting a copy without a satisfactory tag wouldn't suffice to restore that fine image. – Fastifex 10:18, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I have been able to find a miniscule version of the image on answers.com, but if I remember right, the photo posted in this article was about 600 pixels resolution. Does anyone happen to know where I might find a copy of that image in a large format? – Spudmonster 21:21, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

As it is, the article text refers to an image which doesn't exist. That should be changed. But I lack the willpower. – TRiG 13:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A prime example of USA-centricism

Various counties and municipalities may enact their own dress codes, and many have. There is no federal law against nudity. Nude beaches, such as Baker Beach in San Francisco, operate within federal park lands in California. However, under a provision called concurrent jurisdiction, federal park rangers may enforce state and local laws, or invite local authorities to do so.

Why the sudden mention of [US] federal law? Huh? – TRiG 13:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Skinny dipping animated movie

An article about skinny dipping, that had a fun "wish I was there" animated movie of someone skinny dipping, and somebody removed it. That makes absolutely no sense at all. 68.158.149.3 12:30, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I think that the animated gif is refreshing and adds "life" to the article. Including this kind of image (animated gif) to Wikipedia articles is new and welcomed from me. Regular encyclopedias can't give you these kinds of images. I think that doing this is "cutting edge". As far as the statement about people with slower connections, when did we start censoring for connection speed? Did you take into consideration those of us that have faster connections and enjoy this image? 66.191.248.80 05:35, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

hahahhahahhahah nice picture to do................i like this picture too much.................i lover this too

Not to be "overly concerned" with user-made images, but Image:2 Friends Sknydpg.jpg is two guys standing naked in ankle-deep water, not really "swimming" in any sense of the word. As for the animated gif...well it is amusing, but I'm torn. Sherurcij (Speaker for the Dead) 13:26, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Child Pornography??

Arent those pictures of naked boys considered child pornography? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.134.12.230 (talk)

  • I doubt it. They're not doing anything sexual. 70.17.136.222 23:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Why does this article need four images of naked boys? There are two paintings which include older boys and two photos of younger boys. That seems excessive regardless of content. Regarding the content, though, aren't there potential legal problems for including photos of those undressed underaged individuals without their parents' consent? Wryspy (talk) 20:09, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
I am guessing that skinny dipping has historically been more of a male activity than a female activity. I am no historian so I do not know for sure, and I mean no offense to any women in the world, but I doubt that historically women had any right to skinny dip when around men in a lot of cases. This historical habit would surely have some bearing on skinny dipping habits in the modern age. My only problem is that the last image on the page doesn't mention where or when in the world it was taken. The image can surely not educate anyone on anything if it does not mention when and where in the world it came from. It may as well be a cartoon of animated humanoid bananas skinny dipping, for all the world value the caption provides. JayKeaton 17:30, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image

The image of the two boys standing in ankle deep water is not swimming nor skinny dipping. I am removing the image and ask it not be restored. It has nothing to do with the articles subject. Nevilledad 00:35, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree, they may be naked, they may be wet, but they are not skinny dipping. I a removing them as well.D8a 02:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I enlarged all images to make them more plain Nevilledad 06:40, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Movie Section

I removed the list of movies and paintings with skinny dipping as I feel that whole section only cluttered up the article and was usless and irrelevant to the article. Nevilledad 05:15, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it should be removed, as it is an attempt to show it's affect on modern culture. However, if it could be organized, it would be more useful.D8a 17:14, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I feel it needs to be made less list like if you don't want to take it out? Or at least shorten it. It seems too long really, in my humble opinion. 82.108.65.121 (talk) 11:20, 8 April 2008 (UTC)