I do understand it, I just personally just found it interesting, and amusing (hence the smiley)... and considering it's a public message board, i'm surely free to say so. Many people here give their opinion on things whether it's wanted or not, including you, fair MathNut... so lets keep it in context and not get too worked up about it.
Alas, amongst the left-liberal intelligentsia of this continent, the notion of individual freedom to maintain high standards of morality and modesty has been left behind in a rush to embrace all that is different, special and modern.
Brilliant for those who subscribe to the modern dictatorship of exhibitionism and 'freedom'. Not so good for those who would rather follow the practices of their parents and grandparents.
Isn't it lovely to have your motives challenged for daring to suggest that you might not want the world to see your bottom? Isn't it lovely to have people imply that your children might grow up sexually repressed (the sexcrime of the 21st century) because they are brought up to maintain traditional standards of modesty?
And there we have it again. If I answer you now I will obviously be taking it too seriously. In fact by having replied to you even once, I seem already to be in danger.
I have been around long enough to realize that this is a tactic much favored by serious Internet debaters - but not long enough to have a snappy comeback to it. Sorry.
Seeing as two of my grandmother's sisters were sent home from school for showing their ears ... I think I'm a remarkably modern and uninhibited young lady.
Anyway back on topic, people have been seeing each-other naked on a regular basis throughout the eras and ages, the Victorian era represents a small fraction of our history... and thank goodness for that considering how unbearably stuffy and prudish they all were. Interesting mini-read on the history of nudity on Wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_nudity
I've never seen a men's locker room (jr high, high school, or private gym) in the USA with private changing rooms. I can't imagine that the women's locker rooms are any different. Is this what the 'right/conservative intelligentsia' of the US is forcing upon it's poor beleaguered citizens?
Ahh yes of course, Greeks had sex with boys, therefore all arguments on the subject, or ability to mention them as a reference, are null and void. Ahem.
The point is that throughout history the body has quite rightfully been seen as something to be celebrated, socially acceptable, and nothing to be ashamed of. I'm not talking about cavorting around like pagan druids, but things like not balking when seeing another human being naked in an appropriate situation that has no hint of suggestion or sexuality... something that people should be comfortable with regardless of how they look. I think the Victorian era was a big backwards step in that regard.
And who determines the 'appropriate situation'? The individual, or Richdog?
It seems that you would like to dictate to others what they should consider appropriate and what they should not.
The Victorians of the United Kingdom were not and are not the only people in the world to consider modesty to be right and proper.
Or do you think that all those women from Morocco to Malaysia who choose to cover their hair for the purposes of modesty and decency should 'lighten up', 'get with it' and remove their headscarves, to their deep discomfort, just because some English bloke in Switzerland thinks it's 'appropriate'?
Hey DB, now that is a stretch. I mean, it is hardly a contentious thing what is appropriate: gyms, mountains, swimming pools, breastfeeding, that is what we are talking about.
So here's the Op who comes to a country CH that doesn't fuss about nudity. She has the choice between cleaning herself thoroughly or wearing a bikini during her bath ( I don't want to imagine in more detail). There is no force or compulsion here. So what exactly is she complaning about?
An appropriate situation is, in my opinion, where nakedness is an unavoidable result of the situation. Getting changed in a public (and optional) changing room would seem to fit that description. Thankfully, the vast majority of Western society now seems to agree, and the Victorian ways of thinking are being left where they belong. In a few generations they will hopefully be eradicated and we can all get back to not worrying about such pointless things as seeing someones bum for 3 seconds as they put their pants back on.
Hardly, since we're arguing a negative: The right of the individual not to do something, just because everybody else seems to think it's perfectly alright.
How dare you try and apply logic to an off the cuff sensationalist rebuttal.
I jest, obviously sex with children is wrong (well, at least by our own societal standards, back then it obviously wasn't), but it was the wrong example to use I feel.