HikeArizona.COM

What are your views on naturists/nudists? Has anyone come upon a naked hiker/camper and what was the outcome ?

Jeff has articulated some good points here, in a very clear manner. The old hippie ideal of being in tune with nature and becoming as natural as a human being can be, has given way, very unfortunately, to this YouTube voyeurism. He said it better than I can.

I remember Black's Beach (La Jolla/San Diego) in the 70's. Legal swimsuit optional area, which later was revoked by voters, most of whom lived in East County and never went to the beach. Anyway, there would be upwards of 20,000 people on the beach, just having fun, doing what people do on the beach. But, after awhile, there started being these really disgusting guys up on the cliff with their long-lens cameras and spotting scopes. A friend of mine saw one of those guys right down on the beach. He came at her with the camera. She threw a lot of sand in his eyes and wrecked his camera with it, too! Right on!

So there have always been these sicko people who just don't get it. You may be thinking just about freedom and fun and an all-over tan, while all they can think about is getting photos of you to sell, etc. This is why nowadays if you want to go skinny-dipping it's better to be way back in the woods somewhere away from everyone else's eyes. Lots of places like that in AZ, still. However, you may notice, I don't give directions. I may say "the Black River" but hey, it's a long river, and there are so many crossings between trailheads and swimming holes that it stops most people from going very far on foot.

Today while passing through Kinder Crossing, we came across a guy wandering around nude. We were comming from up-canyon and were trying to find the route out when my wife pointed out that there was a naked man behind us. We went about our business trying to find a way out of the canyon and he put some shorts on. It was the first time that I've run accross naked people on the trails, and I couldn't have been less offended by it. He wasn't hurting anyone and he even took measures to make sure we weren't offended.

nude is great no matter where,hang ups about nudity are just silly,of course hiking nude in cactus zones is asking for pain.
Iam always saddened by folks being uptight around their body image.Leads back to knowing nude is not about sex,nude is about freedom. ;)

mapit wrote:nude is great no matter where,hang ups about nudity are just silly,of course hiking nude in cactus zones is asking for pain.
Iam always saddened by folks being uptight around their body image.Leads back to knowing nude is not about sex,nude is about freedom. ;)

Remember, please, that the rest of us also have freedom. One of those freedoms is to not encounter you nude on the trail...especially if I have a young child with me. Ya wanna get naked way out in the middle of nowhere and dance a seance around a bonfire with bongos? Knock yourself out!! Just don't hike naked on a popular trail on Saturday morning and expect to get a medal for your behavior...

Don't take your small child to Oregon if you are so determined to prevent him or her from viewing nudity. People there are known to walk around nude at fairs and ride bikes nude around Portland, etc! One would assume that at least some children there grow up around nudity and don't think about it too much.

Jeff MacE wrote:Remember, please, that the rest of us also have freedom. One of those freedoms is to not encounter you nude on the trail...especially if I have a young child with me.

That's not true. As long as whoever is nude is not violating the law in the jurisdiction of the trail you are all hiking on, then there's nothing you can do about it.

Somewhere along the line in this country the PC Police decided that we all have the right to never be offended. Offensive things are part of life because different people deem different things to be offensive. I may be offended by a naked hiker on a popular trail, but if the law doesn't prohibit it there, it is ME who must concede that he or she has the right to do it despite it offending me.

Only if the law prohibits it do you have the "freedom" to not see it. I think this thread has established fairly well that most public lands in Arizona have no such laws.

While I think most of us probably agree that such activities should occur only after considering others, there often isn't a legal requirement to do so. And being inconsiderate isn't illegal.

i could debate the effect that nudity has on children. i could argue in favor of nudity, in that children are not naturally offended by it, that is to say the 'offensive' nature of nudity is passed down from parents, and society as a whole. I certainly dont approve of nude people walking around a popular trailhead in the Supes, but then again my child takes a shower with me and has seen both his parents nude, and doesnt seem to find issue with it. A nude hiker in the wild definatly isnt going to "scar him for life" as seems the opinion of some folks. Not necessarily on this board, but some folks. There certainly is a strange and dibilitating sexual hangup with the majority of people in this country, a place ironically where sex is used to sell almost everything.

I could also argue that a nude guy in the Supes is a child molester psychopath with nothing but bad intentions, but that would just be silly and Im not paranoid.

have a nice day.

If it's just me out there I'll ignore you. If I have a kid along...get ready for an earful. Freedom, isn't that what we're talking about? I am free to think that people who go nude on trails have underlying self-esteem issues that make them want to give the finger to society whenever and wherever possible instead of trying to live a responsible and sensible life. Everyone out there is free to disagree.

BTW - you're just plain wrong about it not being against the law. It is not globally illegal on federal lands. Each FS district may enact their own regulations. It s illegal in some NPS controlled parks. It IS illegal on AZ state land and in state parks; same goes for Tucson and Pima County parks:

ARS Title 13

13-1402. Indecent exposure; classifications

A. A person commits indecent exposure if he or she exposes his or her genitals or anus or she exposes the areola or nipple of her breast or breasts and another person is present, and the defendant is reckless about whether the other person, as a reasonable person, would be offended or alarmed by the act.

B. Indecent exposure does not include an act of breast-feeding by a mother.

C. Indecent exposure to a person who is fifteen or more years of age is a class 1 misdemeanor. Indecent exposure to a person who is under fifteen years of age is a class 6 felony.

Again, stay away from popular areas and there will be no issues. Get in my face and try to strut your stuff just to show me that you can and I will show you what I can do, in return

showing a nipple is a crime.. how strange. using that logic, the repubs should have slipped a Palin nipple and theyd be in the White House for sure!! no way could they lose!! a hot chick could take over the world on one nipple alone.. my question is why hasnt this happened? its a conspiracy, man

but seriously folks - at what age does "indecent" come into play, is a 10yr old boy indecent? or does he have to have pubes?
what?! just asking...

Thank goodness I'm not a lawyer :bigth:

I just want to be clear about one other thing: I'm guessing a lot of you who are getting hot under the collar assume that my replies to this topic are driven by some wacko devout puritanical faith or moral code, or whatever. People on here who know me know how ridiculous that is. There may be people who object to this kind of behavior on moral grounds but don't count me among them. As I said, keep it out of public view and there's no controversy...

No, my objection is with the wanton nature of the act when it is a part of a bigger sense of entitlement that someone has built up inside his or herself; a sense that he or she is in a position to be shocking and provocative and therefore must have license to do so. When done in the interest of voyeurism, it is just another in a spectrum of acts that mentally ill or marginalized people resort to in an effort to feel like they are sticking it to the rest of us.

Fast forward to the year 2020 and someone has just found this thread and posted a reply about how they get 'nekkid' and perform a dance routine at the top of every series of switchbacks they encounter...yep, you guessed it: I'd reply again.

I don't have a problem with naked people in the wilderness. I've never hiked nude, but I've been nude in camp, etc.

I once passed a nude hiker in Canyonlands. What's the etiquette in that situation? lol ... I just sorta giggled as he passed. And no I didn't take photos ..

I usually just smile and roll my eyes...

Jeff MacE wrote:A. A person commits indecent exposure if he or she exposes his or her genitals or anus or she exposes the areola or nipple of her breast or breasts and another person is present, and the defendant is reckless about whether the other person, as a reasonable person, would be offended or alarmed by the act.

So, for argument's sake ... If the nude person encountered you and a child, all he would have to do is apologize and turn away and he wouldn't be "reckless" about it. Or if you start giving him an earful, he might even just claim that you aren't a "reasonable" person!

This is some very vague wording here, sort of like the definition of pornography: I know it when I see it.

And for the record, I'm not a nude hiker. I just think that there's too many restrictions telling people what they should or shouldn't do. In my opinion, nudity should not be offensive to anybody, regardless of age. Why is a nipple more offensive than a belly-button? Because somebody, sometime told them it was. How silly.

I agree that those who want to run around the woods with their clothes off should realize that there are plenty of people in the world (or at least in the US) who are uncomfortable with that, and try to respect others. But as one of the potential "others" I too should respect them. We're not talking about lewd behavior, we're talking simple nudity.

I didn't write the law you have quoted that I quoted; but I agree in whole with your last paragraph. This would be much the same as if I liked to sing opera music at the top of my lungs while hiking. I couldn't carry a tune if it were packaged for transport and strapped on my back. My behavior would be aggravating, unwanted, and, ultimately...completely self-serving. If it did it out in the middle of nowhere beyond public consumption then...who cares??

This is why I'm looking forward to going to Europe. Not to hike nude, but the fact that they don't make a big deal of it over there. Many places in the Caribbean I've been too were pretty free about it as well. Granted most of those places were beaches, but there were plenty of kids around.

To each, his own...I just hope that you and the others don't consider yourselves "more enlightened" or otherwise better people than the rest of us who just don't want to see someone's nude body on display when we're out to enjoy the wilderness; to assume yourselves as such would be a grave misjudgment and highly pontificatious...

Jeff MacE wrote:To each, his own...I just hope that you and the others don't consider yourselves "more enlightened" or otherwise better people than the rest of us who just don't want to see someone's nude body on display when we're out to enjoy the wilderness; to assume yourselves as such would be a grave misjudgment and highly pontificatious...

I don't consider myself enlightened or better than anybody else, but I must confess that while I respect your opinion, I fail to see the logic behind it. How is it that the human body is offensive? Again, what makes a belly button ok, but a nipple offensive?

I don't buy the child argument either. I think that children have sensitive minds and should be sheltered from some of the realities of life in their formative years. Violence and sex on TV and in movies are good examples. But somebody nude in the shower, on the beach, on a trail, etc. I'm open to opinions on how that is harmful to a child.

chumley wrote: I think that children have sensitive minds and should be sheltered from some of the realities of life in their formative years. Violence and sex on TV and in movies are good examples.

I agree with your sentiment here, as well. I find it interesting that you keep coming back to "nipples." With two notable exceptions, every time I have encountered nudists or voyeurs in the wild they have been male and over the age of forty.

One of the exceptions was at the Salt River where a number of inebriated young men and women were cliff diving nude. Unfortunately, the local authorities were not too keen on this sort of conduct and an example was made of them. After being charged with the statute I quoted, all seven of them were forced to register as sex offenders. One was a signal guy for the army reserve out at Watts and lost his TS clearance. Was that fair? Heck no...but it happened.

OK, so change the question. What makes a belly button ok, but a shiny rifle and reproduction juice holders offensive? I've seen some pretty offensive noses, crazy hair-filled ears, and some gnarly toes hanging out of flip flops. One could certainly argue that the male bits aren't the most attractive appendage on the human body, but I don't think this has anything to do with aesthetics.