If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(LA Times)   50-year-old website manager, nicknamed "Sir Godiva," who stripped naked for the TSA says liberty has trumped modesty in his court appearance   (latimes.com) divider line 86
    More: Followup, TSA, Multnomah County, Oklahoma City Bombing, direct response, World Naked Bike Ride, the liberal state  
•       •       •

7506 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Jul 2012 at 10:47 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



86 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-21 05:28:53 AM
This cracks me up.
 
2012-07-21 10:15:50 AM
Dude seems to be #winning
 
2012-07-21 10:49:37 AM
FTFA: 50-year-old website manager

Man, that's an old website.
 
2012-07-21 10:49:39 AM
Why is it always the ugly ones?
 
2012-07-21 10:52:30 AM
i283.photobucket.com

While I agree in principle ....
 
2012-07-21 10:53:44 AM
If he's acquitted on indecent exposure charges, then what exactly is indecent exposure?
 
2012-07-21 10:54:50 AM

chaddsfarkprefect: If he's acquitted on indecent exposure charges, then what exactly is indecent exposure?


Opposite of decent exposure; duh.
 
2012-07-21 10:57:06 AM

One Bad Apple: [i283.photobucket.com image 596x413]

While I agree in principle ....


BAAAAAALD!!!
 
2012-07-21 10:57:44 AM

chaddsfarkprefect: If he's acquitted on indecent exposure charges, then what exactly is indecent exposure?


Rosanne Barr doing nude jumping-jacks on a glass ceiling above a mirror factory's display showroom.
 
2012-07-21 10:57:49 AM

Evil Mackerel: Why is it always the ugly ones?


It's one of the rules of life: the only people who you'll ever see naked in public are the people you don't want to see naked in public. Nudist beaches are the most obvious example; another is the fact that women can legally go topless on the New York City Subway (indeed, it's legal for any person to ride the train with naught but a loin cloth and flip-flops) but you'll never see Mila Kunis or Jessica Alba exercising this right, it's always women who could pass as body doubles for Mick Foley.

/likewise, if you see a man on a beach wearing a Speedo, chances are he looks more like Foley than like Michael Phelps
 
2012-07-21 10:58:15 AM

Chariset: chaddsfarkprefect: If he's acquitted on indecent exposure charges, then what exactly is indecent exposure?

Opposite of decent exposure; duh.



Ok, sorta like flammable and inflammable?
 
2012-07-21 10:58:18 AM
This is why we can't have needles in our sammiches...
 
2012-07-21 11:00:11 AM

King Something: Evil Mackerel: Why is it always the ugly ones?

It's one of the rules of life: the only people who you'll ever see naked in public are the people you don't want to see naked in public. Nudist beaches are the most obvious example; another is the fact that women can legally go topless on the New York City Subway (indeed, it's legal for any person to ride the train with naught but a loin cloth and flip-flops) but you'll never see Mila Kunis or Jessica Alba exercising this right, it's always women who could pass as body doubles for Mick Foley.

/likewise, if you see a man on a beach wearing a Speedo, chances are he looks more like Foley than like Michael Phelps


So the desire to be a nudist is directly connected to the gene expression pattern that makes you look like Mick Foley?

Good: I see a grant to study this comin' my way!!!

Bad: And a lot of naked Mick Foley.
 
2012-07-21 11:07:36 AM
Yeah, I'm guessing that despite the acquittal he's not going to be pulling the same stunt again.
 
2012-07-21 11:07:58 AM
Lady Godiva -> shouldn't that be Lord Godiva?
 
2012-07-21 11:08:49 AM
I mean unless his wife married down.
 
2012-07-21 11:09:15 AM

Fark Rye For Many Whores: Lady Godiva -> shouldn't that be Lord Godiva?


You know your wiener is small when everyone has seen you naked and still calls you "Lady".
 
2012-07-21 11:10:11 AM
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-07-21 11:16:52 AM

Evil Mackerel: Why is it always the ugly ones?


Show us your picture.
 
2012-07-21 11:17:27 AM
I'm waiting for the Facebook page organizing a national nude protest of the TSA's egregious assault on our personal rights and liberty.

/and we need hot celebs to join up
 
2012-07-21 11:21:37 AM
FTFA:

"We continue to focus our attention on TSA's primary mission of keeping our nation's transportation system safe from security threats."

Someone at the TSA owes me a new monitor.
 
2012-07-21 11:28:00 AM
I think the TSA is a complete waste of time and money. I'd thrilled if they shut it down tomorrow.

Having said that - I don't see how this can be innocent. Right or wrong - we live in a society where we don't want our children staring at some 50 year old dude's junk when we go out in public. We have laws that help ensure we don't have to deal with that. This guy broke that law....to make a point. Good for him. Point made.

But he still broke a perfectly valid law.

Since I also dislike the TSA - can I walk around naked everywhere I go? Or only in airports? Seems a slippery slope.
 
2012-07-21 11:32:06 AM
www.allstarxray.com

/hot like Mars
 
2012-07-21 11:33:04 AM

Fark_Guy_Rob: I think the TSA is a complete waste of time and money. I'd thrilled if they shut it down tomorrow.

Having said that - I don't see how this can be innocent. Right or wrong - we live in a society where we don't want our children staring at some 50 year old dude's junk when we go out in public. We have laws that help ensure we don't have to deal with that. This guy broke that law....to make a point. Good for him. Point made.

But he still broke a perfectly valid law.

Since I also dislike the TSA - can I walk around naked everywhere I go? Or only in airports? Seems a slippery slope.


There is no reason that nudity in a non-sexual context should be illegal. If a place of business wants to enforce a certain dress code, even if it's as basic as 'wear clothes' they should be allowed to, and be able to escort nude people from their premises, but they shouldn't be arrested or jailed just for being nude.

Seeing a naked person isn't going to harm a kid.
 
2012-07-21 11:34:01 AM
Slipper Slope?

That's racist!
 
2012-07-21 11:38:39 AM
Judge should have sentenced him to 3 months of P90X.
 
2012-07-21 11:42:24 AM

Fark_Guy_Rob: Having said that - I don't see how this can be innocent. Right or wrong - we live in a society where we don't want our children staring at some 50 year old dude's junk when we go out in public. We have laws that help ensure we don't have to deal with that. This guy broke that law....to make a point. Good for him. Point made.

But he still broke a perfectly valid law.


I refuse to believe that you mean this seriously.
 
2012-07-21 11:42:48 AM

chaddsfarkprefect: If he's acquitted on indecent exposure charges, then what exactly is indecent exposure?


maybe 50 is where the peg is set
 
2012-07-21 11:46:56 AM
I salute you, Good Sir.
 
2012-07-21 11:53:10 AM

TuteTibiImperes: Fark_Guy_Rob: I think the TSA is a complete waste of time and money. I'd thrilled if they shut it down tomorrow.

Having said that - I don't see how this can be innocent. Right or wrong - we live in a society where we don't want our children staring at some 50 year old dude's junk when we go out in public. We have laws that help ensure we don't have to deal with that. This guy broke that law....to make a point. Good for him. Point made.

But he still broke a perfectly valid law.

Since I also dislike the TSA - can I walk around naked everywhere I go? Or only in airports? Seems a slippery slope.

There is no reason that nudity in a non-sexual context should be illegal. If a place of business wants to enforce a certain dress code, even if it's as basic as 'wear clothes' they should be allowed to, and be able to escort nude people from their premises, but they shouldn't be arrested or jailed just for being nude.

Seeing a naked person isn't going to harm a kid.


I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you. You might have an excellent point and maybe the laws should be changed.

But until they are - we have laws against it. Society, as a whole, feels it's a crime. If your argument is 'everyone should be able to go around naked' that's a valid argument. But my problem is that we're giving this guy a free pass because he happened to get naked while dealing with the TSA. It seems like an awfully specific and silly exception to a law against nudity.

If the judge had said, 'Nudity is now okay!' I'd have no problem with it. But until that happens - I don't see why this guy should get a free pass.
 
2012-07-21 11:53:47 AM

Fark_Guy_Rob: But he still broke a perfectly valid law.


It is your civic duty to deliberately break unjust laws (so long as you do not cause bodily harm or property damage to other people). It's the reason India, Pakistan and Bangladesh are no longer British colonies; the reason blacks are no longer forced to sit in the back of the bus, forced to drink from separate but equal water fountains or prohibited from marrying whites; and the reason that the massive wealth gap in this country (1% versus 99%), and the causes and effects of the same, are now part of the national discussion.

Farking civil disobedience, how does it work?
 
2012-07-21 11:56:51 AM
fark the TSA.
 
2012-07-21 11:59:48 AM

StoneColdAtheist: Fark_Guy_Rob: Having said that - I don't see how this can be innocent. Right or wrong - we live in a society where we don't want our children staring at some 50 year old dude's junk when we go out in public. We have laws that help ensure we don't have to deal with that. This guy broke that law....to make a point. Good for him. Point made.

But he still broke a perfectly valid law.

I refuse to believe that you mean this seriously.


I meant to say 'I don't see how this guy can be innocent' but I think the gist of my point was pretty clear. And yes, I'm 100% serious.

Laws against public nudity exist for a reason (whether or not it's a valid reason is another discussion). So long as they exist - they should be enforced.

This guy clearly broke those laws. I don't see any justification, in this case, for an exception to be made because he was at the airport or near the TSA or didn't like the TSA.

He wasn't in any direct or immediate danger. He took off his clothes to make a point. Can I smoke weed in the airport because I don't like TSA? Can I jerk off in the airport because I don't like TSA? Can I carry a gun in the airport because I don't like TSA?

What laws do we get to ignore because we don't like the TSA? Can I burn a TSA poster at the airport? Is that okay because I'm protesting?

It all just seems silly to me. No, I don't think the guy is a serious criminal. I'm not calling for jail time. I'm just saying, I don't see any reason for him to be exempt from the law. Obviously the judge disagrees me, and I'll admit, the judge is more qualified than I am - but I really just don't see any reason for his ruling. Running around naked is now a first amendment right? Seems like a giant stretch to me.
 
2012-07-21 12:03:15 PM

King Something: Fark_Guy_Rob: But he still broke a perfectly valid law.

It is your civic duty to deliberately break unjust laws (so long as you do not cause bodily harm or property damage to other people). It's the reason India, Pakistan and Bangladesh are no longer British colonies; the reason blacks are no longer forced to sit in the back of the bus, forced to drink from separate but equal water fountains or prohibited from marrying whites; and the reason that the massive wealth gap in this country (1% versus 99%), and the causes and effects of the same, are now part of the national discussion.

Farking civil disobedience, how does it work?


Except he didn't break any of the laws he objected to. The law he broke was taking off his clothes. He's not protesting *that* law.

And, whatever our individual feels on public nudity may or may not be - the law exists for the protection of others who do not feel it appropriate for them/their family/children to see naked people in public. So, he very much did violate the rights of others who had nothing to do with the TSA's procedures.

If he wanted to protest the TSA by NOT submitting to their search - I'd fully support that as civil disobedience. But I see no connection between stripping in public and the need to express dislike of the TSA.
 
2012-07-21 12:04:45 PM

Fark_Guy_Rob: I think the TSA is a complete waste of time and money. I'd thrilled if they shut it down tomorrow.

Having said that - I don't see how this can be innocent. Right or wrong - we live in a society where we don't want our children staring at some 50 year old dude's junk when we go out in public. We have laws that help ensure we don't have to deal with that. This guy broke that law....to make a point. Good for him. Point made.

But he still broke a perfectly valid law.

Since I also dislike the TSA - can I walk around naked everywhere I go? Or only in airports? Seems a slippery slope.


A much more dangerous slippery slope is allowing a government agency to search us without probable cause. We are allowing them to break a perfectly valid law.
 
2012-07-21 12:06:04 PM

Fark_Guy_Rob: Running around naked is now a first amendment right? Seems like a giant stretch to me.


Running around naked isn't a right (well, apparently it is in Oregon outside of Portland), but free speech is.

The judge interpreted his nakedness as his means of protest, and thus it became protected 'speech'. Basically his actions were reductio ad absurdum to the TSA - "You want to invade my privacy? Here, invade ALL of my privacy!"
 
2012-07-21 12:10:40 PM

Fark_Guy_Rob: King Something: Fark_Guy_Rob: But he still broke a perfectly valid law.

It is your civic duty to deliberately break unjust laws (so long as you do not cause bodily harm or property damage to other people). It's the reason India, Pakistan and Bangladesh are no longer British colonies; the reason blacks are no longer forced to sit in the back of the bus, forced to drink from separate but equal water fountains or prohibited from marrying whites; and the reason that the massive wealth gap in this country (1% versus 99%), and the causes and effects of the same, are now part of the national discussion.

Farking civil disobedience, how does it work?

Except he didn't break any of the laws he objected to. The law he broke was taking off his clothes. He's not protesting *that* law.

And, whatever our individual feels on public nudity may or may not be - the law exists for the protection of others who do not feel it appropriate for them/their family/children to see naked people in public. So, he very much did violate the rights of others who had nothing to do with the TSA's procedures.

If he wanted to protest the TSA by NOT submitting to their search - I'd fully support that as civil disobedience. But I see no connection between stripping in public and the need to express dislike of the TSA.


I get your point. He did break the law. The judge in this case did the same as a jury nullification. He was found not guilty even though he broke the law.
 
2012-07-21 12:11:02 PM
Fark_Guy_Rob 2012-07-21 11:28:00 AM

I think the TSA is a complete waste of time and money. I'd thrilled if they shut it down tomorrow.

Having said that - I don't see how this can be innocent. Right or wrong - we live in a society where we don't want our children staring at some 50 year old dude's junk when we go out in public. We have laws that help ensure we don't have to deal with that. This guy broke that law....to make a point. Good for him. Point made.

But he still broke a perfectly valid law.

Since I also dislike the TSA - can I walk around naked everywhere I go? Or only in airports? Seems a slippery slope.


This is only a slippery slope for white guys who think "The Law" is fair and always should be absolute.

I feel sorry for you.
 
2012-07-21 12:16:37 PM
The TSA isn't a threat to anyone, just an annoyance. Now if he wants to strip for liberty at the FBI, NSA, DEA, or DoHS HQ's, he might have a point, though he'd still be making it wrong.
 
2012-07-21 12:26:23 PM

Evil Mackerel: Why is it always the ugly ones?


The human form in its natural state is generally quite ugly. All people have all sorts of bodily defects: lopsided breasts, stretch marks, beer guts, flab, cellulite, etc. About the only time the human body is perfect is as a baby, and even then it's debatable. Personal opinions on what constitutes the perception of what is hot or not so to speak really cloud our judgement, especially if one considers that if we were all nude all the time, this would not be an issue.

As for Fark_Guy_Rob: context is important. And in this case the guy got not 'free pass' as you say but justice due to the nature and intent of his nudity. I do agree it was silly though, but the point was made that the TSA is really nothing but theater.

Nudity in and of itself is not wrong. For as ugly as it is the human body is quite beautiful.
 
2012-07-21 12:41:29 PM
Sir Godiva? That should be LORD Godiva
DRTFA
 
2012-07-21 12:46:28 PM

TuteTibiImperes: Running around naked isn't a right (well, apparently it is in Oregon outside of Portland), but free speech is.


Even here in Portland we have the annual naked bike ride.
The annual dyke march often has topless women.
I think the slut walk had some topless women.
Heck, most protests of any kind here often have a handful of people with slogans/symbols painted on their bare skin.
 
2012-07-21 12:55:57 PM
While I am probably damning myself to a 3 hour cavity search next time I fly, I think the anti-TSA crowd are a bunch of self-important drama queens. I have never had a problem with a TSA agent and notice if you are nice to them they are nice to you. If you were a TSA agent and somebody had an attitude with you for no reason other than they don't like your job, how would you act towards that person. Think about it. Plus I really don't think it is that big of a sacrifice to try to prevent from being blown up in a pressurized tube miles in the air.
 
2012-07-21 01:01:10 PM
John Brennan, and more importantly The First Amendment, win. Everyone who saw that picture, well, that is more of a loss.

Still, good job, John!
 
2012-07-21 01:02:56 PM

Hermione_Granger:
This is only a slippery slope for white guys who think "The Law" is fair and always should be absolute.

I feel sorry for you.


To be fair, it seemed to me like he was saying that enforcement of the law should be uniform. He was making no judgements on whether the law in question was a good law or a bad one.

Personally, I have a hard time disagreeing with that sentiment. If enforcement of laws is that flexible, doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of having laws in the first place?
 
2012-07-21 01:08:46 PM

DrExplosion: Hermione_Granger:
This is only a slippery slope for white guys who think "The Law" is fair and always should be absolute.

I feel sorry for you.

To be fair, it seemed to me like he was saying that enforcement of the law should be uniform. He was making no judgements on whether the law in question was a good law or a bad one.

Personally, I have a hard time disagreeing with that sentiment. If enforcement of laws is that flexible, doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of having laws in the first place?


Considering the number of archaic laws still in the books, and no effort by legislators to clean them up, flexibility seems reasonable. How many states still have sodomy laws on the books?
 
2012-07-21 01:10:54 PM

heavymetal: While I am probably damning myself to a 3 hour cavity search next time I fly, I think the anti-TSA crowd are a bunch of self-important drama queens. I have never had a problem with a TSA agent and notice if you are nice to them they are nice to you. If you were a TSA agent and somebody had an attitude with you for no reason other than they don't like your job, how would you act towards that person. Think about it.


I'm with you so far - I'm sure most TSA agents are just people trying to make a living, and being a dick to them doesn't really solve anything. Better to go after the people who actually write these stupid policies in the first place.

heavymetal: Plus I really don't think it is that big of a sacrifice to try to prevent from being blown up in a pressurized tube miles in the air.


Aaand here's where you lose me. Fark you and everything you stand for. My rights are more important than your false sense of security.
 
2012-07-21 01:19:34 PM

DrExplosion: heavymetal: While I am probably damning myself to a 3 hour cavity search next time I fly, I think the anti-TSA crowd are a bunch of self-important drama queens. I have never had a problem with a TSA agent and notice if you are nice to them they are nice to you. If you were a TSA agent and somebody had an attitude with you for no reason other than they don't like your job, how would you act towards that person. Think about it.

I'm with you so far - I'm sure most TSA agents are just people trying to make a living, and being a dick to them doesn't really solve anything. Better to go after the people who actually write these stupid policies in the first place.

heavymetal: Plus I really don't think it is that big of a sacrifice to try to prevent from being blown up in a pressurized tube miles in the air.

Aaand here's where you lose me. Fark you and everything you stand for. My rights are more important than your false sense of security.


^this
 
2012-07-21 01:25:55 PM
"Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it." -Thoreau
 
2012-07-21 01:26:18 PM

badhatharry: Fark_Guy_Rob: I think the TSA is a complete waste of time and money. I'd thrilled if they shut it down tomorrow.

Having said that - I don't see how this can be innocent. Right or wrong - we live in a society where we don't want our children staring at some 50 year old dude's junk when we go out in public. We have laws that help ensure we don't have to deal with that. This guy broke that law....to make a point. Good for him. Point made.

But he still broke a perfectly valid law.

Since I also dislike the TSA - can I walk around naked everywhere I go? Or only in airports? Seems a slippery slope.

A much more dangerous slippery slope is allowing a government agency to search us without probable cause. We are allowing them to break a perfectly valid law.


Exactly. How can a government agency require you to give up a Constitutional Right (4th Amendment) in order to use a commercially-provided service? Does having a right to be "secure in my person" mean that a government agent has the right to grope my swimsuit parts -- as long as they're covered by cloth?
 
Displayed 50 of 86 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report