Public Nudity Ban Passes, No More Naked People Allowed in San Francisco

nakedlady kate.jpg
Kate Conger
Just a normal day at City Hall
Local nudists stripped off their clothing this afternoon after the Board of Supervisors signed off on legislation to ban public nudity citywide. The ban, which passed by a 6-5 vote, will make some exceptions, allowing for people to run around naked at permitted fairs and festivals, including Bay to Breakers, Gay Pride, and Folsom Street Fair.


Upon hearing the final vote, nudists did what they do best and got naked while shouting at the board; several of them were escorted from the chamber by sheriff's deputies, who shrouded them under blue blankets as the board took a short recess. 

See alsoFox News Thinks Everyone in San Francisco Is Naked Right Now

Here's How Nudists Would Dress if They Did Wear Clothes

The board's progressive pols -- including David Campos, Eric Mar, Christina Olague, and John Avalos -- voted against the ban. Campos, who represents the Mission District, worried that enforcing such a ban would burden police who have bigger problems to worry about in the Mission. "We live in a time of limited resources," he said. "The focus should be violent crime." Avalos took the most creative approach in voicing his objection, playing a clip about nudity from Catch-22 and closing his remarks with the statement, "I refuse to wear this fig leaf."

nakedguyvityhall.jpg
Kate Conger
City Hall mascot?
Supervisor Scott Weiner, the Castro rep who sponsored the ban, repeated his logic behind the ban, saying his constituents in the Castro had been calling on him to do something about the prolific nudity in the neighborhood.

"Public nudity can go too far," Wiener said at the meeting. "For years, it wasn't a big deal and no one cared." But now, he said "It's no longer occasional or sporadic; it's every day in the Castro."

He also pointed out that he's been fair and narrowed the legislation in response to critics. For starters, anyone busted naked in public will be facing an infraction rather than a misdemeanor. He also chided his colleagues who said the ban was a violation of free speech.

"Free expression in the abstract is nice, until naked people start hanging out in the Richmond," Wiener said.

The ban will go into effect within 30 days of its signing or by Feb. 1, 2013, whichever comes first. However, the fight to bare it all isn't over just yet. Earlier this week, nudists filed a lawsuit against the city in federal court, claiming San Francisco city supervisors are limiting their free speech.



My Voice Nation Help
26 comments
spsychosam
spsychosam

 This just looks like a jackass politician pretending to care about his constituents. How about you spend some of your precious press time and political maneuvering to help the homeless, the starving, destitute, and poverty-stricken? I think those issues are more important than getting a few old guys to wear a thong. Or are those people not important because they don't have the money or clout to help promote your political career Wienerboy?

n.radio
n.radio

It's got nothing to do with God, or religion, put your damned clothes on! Cover up your ugly bodies. If you want to look at your ugly naked self do it at home alone or with other ugly naked nasty arrogant folk ! People get old ugly and fat, thats life deal with it, on your own at home alone or with like minded people. Not in the public streets when the public has said NO THANK YOU !

mzielman1990
mzielman1990

Why should this even be on the table? This is disgusting, perverted and dysfunctional. Thank God it has been banned.

njudah
njudah topcommenter

scott is just listening to the people who are paying wayy too much for their apartment or home, and don't pay that much to see some ancient dude's gizmo while on the way to work or to lunch. I'm not sure it will hold up, but if Scott wants to run for Mayor, he just made a lot of friends.

CoralAorta
CoralAorta

@AlexxaBound naked party in...a cafe? a trolley? wherever!

ncavaliere
ncavaliere

So is topless in the ban? What does this ban concern "nude" that's what I'm wondering. Is a topless women banned but not a man? I could see a valid lawsuit coming if that is the case. 

Jan Simone
Jan Simone

Yeah. I don't need to see people's naked floppy parts as part of the scenery in San Francisco.

Geoff Nino
Geoff Nino

get your sweaty dick off public seating and out of the public eye!

Mitch Lopez
Mitch Lopez

And why is it always the most disgusting people who want to be naked in public?

Mitch Lopez
Mitch Lopez

Public nudity is sexual harassment to those who are made to feel uneasy,having to see it. It is child abuse for those underage who have to be a witness to it. Who are these people to foist their nudity on those who don't want to see it. If they want nudity let them go into their homes or back yards.

Anthony J. Fabry
Anthony J. Fabry

i thought i could be open and accepting of basically everything ...and everyone —and then this debate comes along ...and i just cannot see how bringing so much attention to oneself has to be protected by an ordinance ... even as creepy of a public spectacle this really is ... public nudity is free speech ...these people are obviously trying to say they are not ashamed of what they look like naked ... i don't know — it does seem like a kinky fetish that they would like everyone to partake in to feel more comforted in what they are really trying or willing to say ...

papacitosf
papacitosf

That weiner will never get my vote. I'm not a nudist, but i think this is ridiculous. thanks for homogenizing the city you self hating faggot.

papacitosf
papacitosf

yay San Francisco is fascist! what total bs.

mrericsir
mrericsir topcommenter

 @mzielman1990 If God is in favor of taking away people's rights to "protect" people who can't control what they look at, then it's time to reject God.

mzielman1990
mzielman1990

 @mrericsir Really? I'd like to meet the person who can control what they happen to see. I think it's time to reject the notion of people thinking they can do whatever they want without any repercussion that it may endanger someones soul and the loss of self-respect of polite society as a whole. I cannot understand how people are so stupid.

mzielman1990
mzielman1990

 @iaDF Well, actually, the character of Santa Claus progressed out of the person who was St. Nicholas from the 3rd century. So, yes, it can be demonstrated that "Santa Claus" or St. Nicholas in his human body does not exist anymore because he died nearly 1700 years ago. However, his spirit certainly is very much alive.

iaDF
iaDF

 @mzielman1990 Can you prove that Santa Claus doesn't exist ?  Otherwise, it must mean that he does, right ?

mzielman1990
mzielman1990

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm assuming you're an atheist. You claim that the notion of God is a fairy tale. If that claim is true, I'd like to know though the use of natural science and philosophy how you demonstrated that God does not exist. I would like you to explain to me how you demonstrated that absolute truth doesn't exist.

 

The part of our government that you say is great only gives you the freedom to believe what you want. That's it. However, does that mean you're not ignorant? No. We also have the right to debate and learn from each other especially to discover what truth is. The bottom line is, until you can prove that God doesn't exist, I have the right to say whatever I want in the public square.

mrericsir
mrericsir topcommenter

 @mzielman1990 No, the real world that actually exists.   Imagination is all well and good, but it has its place.  That place is NOT in politics.

 

Part of what makes America great is our secular government.  Let's not confuse fairy tales with reality.

mzielman1990
mzielman1990

 @mrericsir I think it's curious when people refuse to relate with or identify with God think that their opinions are more relevant than others only because they refuse to be open minded enough to the fact that God may exist. When honest Christians express their beliefs, they're automatically off the reservation. It is interesting that you claim you live in the real world. But, what is the real world? An atheistic utopia of moral relativism? It is clear from history that when civilizations become self-centered or government-centered they eventually collapse on themselves. I should be asking you if you live in reality.

mrericsir
mrericsir topcommenter

 @mzielman1990 "Endanger someone's soul"? WTF are you smoking?

 

Please, leave your religious bullshit out of politics.  We're talking about the real world here.

Now Trending

Around The Web

From the Vault

 

©2014 SF Weekly, LP, All rights reserved.
Loading...