San Francisco’s Public Nudity Ban: A Different Kind Of Government Cover-Up

Writer Quamdiu Sebene Gesserit considers San francisco’s new nudity ban

The residents of San Francisco have always been free-spirited. However, as of February 1st, 2013 they are no longer free to saunter around their world-famous city in the buff – thanks to S.F.’s new public nudity ban. Originally introduced by Castro district supervisor Scott Wiener, San Francisco’s new city-wide ban went into effect on February 1st after S.F. supervisors voted 6-5 to adopt it. Both before and after the ruling, activists staged nudity-themed public protests and NakedSword.com even created a parody episode of Golden Gate Season 5 about it called The Cover Up. The protests were titillating and a bit absurd, so they attracted massive PR and helped to stir up a fair amount of grassroots, bandwagon-led public outcry. One group of residents even sued the city in an effort to block the ban, but it was upheld in Federal court by Judge Edward Chen. After thoughtful consideration, Chen determined that showing one’s genitals in public wasn’t something that deserved “free speech” protections.

Despite the dramatic talk of far-reaching implications, the ban itself doesn’t really ask a whole lot of S.F. residents. In a nutshell, the ban simply prohibits folks from exposing their genitals in most public places. However, horny S.F. men can still prowl their favorite neighborhood jogging trails while wearing nothing but a tiny pair of boner-bulged Dolphin shorts. Likewise, S.F.’s pretty ladies are free to strut around Fisherman’s Wharf in nothing but thongs, pasties, and stiletto heels. But if you just can’t resist the urge to show off your pussy/cock to passers-by, the first offense will cost you $100. Your third violation could cost you up to $500 – and it could even put your naked ass in jail for up to one year.

Rather than taking an idealogical stance against nudity or attempting to perpetuate “body shame”, S.F.’s nudity ban appears to be an attempt to define some basic, predictable ground rules for public conduct. To the ban’s credit, it actually does allow for public nudity during annual events that have traditionally involved it, such as the gay pride parade and the Folsom Street Fair. If residents can agree on other events or areas of the city that warrant nudity, perhaps some additional exceptions can one day be added to the ban’s language.

There’s no denying that S.F.’s nudity ban has put a minor limitation on personal liberty, but civilization has always been based upon small tradeoffs like this. Before you begin mourning this devastating loss, you might want to ask yourself if going around nude on the streets of San Francisco was ever such a bright idea to begin with. Modesty isn’t the primary reason that we wear clothes, after all. At a very basic level, clothing is intended to insulate us from environmental hazards. Walking through forested glades, rolling down grassy knolls, and picnicking on baseball fields in S.F.’s Golden Gate park can make for a memorable afternoon. But would you really want to conclude your fun day with a pussy full of brambles and deer ticks? Do you want old ladies banging their bowling bag purses into your dangling balls as you try to do your naked grocery shopping in Noe Valley? Nonchalant public nudity sounds fine and dandy – until you sit down on a freshly tagged bus seat and end up with a gang symbol screen-printed onto your hairy ass for the rest of the day.

The debate over S.F.’s public nudity ban will surely continue. A lot of the arguments against public nudity are based on cultural dogma and unsubstantiated assertions, but the arguments in favor of public nudity are often equally baseless. For a refreshingly scientific and evidence-based take on both sides of the argument, check out the The Science of Nudity: The Skinny on Showing Skin by Peter Lollo on KQED’s Science site. Lollo’s article looks at scientific studies on nudity and considers the ways in which it does (and does not) affect us.