In These Modern Times We're Not Always So Forward Thinking

San Francisco, home of free love, hippies, the people society spurns and everyone in between. The city is accepted as the most liberal, the most tolerant of all US cities; perhaps even the world. Yet  its lawmakers voted to ban nudity in public places. On the same day back home in London, the General Synod, governing body of the Anglican Church, voted against women bishops. Now I'm not a nudist (I can't think of anything worse than going out in public with my dangly bits for all to see) nor am I a Christian but it seems to me that a few naked people and a few female bishops will neither corrupt society nor destroy faith.

The Danglies

The first time I heard about the nudists (sadly usually men) who regularly hangout on San Francisco street corners, I was only surprised that it went on. I was not appalled, insulted or corrupted. I was made aware of this phenomena in SF by a friend who passed by them each day as she went about her business and had to change from a bus to tram right by where the danglies hang. She told me with great glee what she saw. She's a happily married mother of two.

In fact the only thing that's offensive about the oldies is their direct insight into Mother Nature's ravages on the human body.  Age comes to us all and while we all know things tend to go south as we age, I now know that  a man's nutsack and elements held therein seem to grow both in density and depth as time goes by. On the plus side, at least it's the one place no one notices any new wrinkles. This offense though doesn't seem to deter the tourists who pose for photos or the majority of locals who just walk on by. So who really is offended? In recent years there's been a precedent of vocal minority in the US holding greater sway in the public debate than their tiny support base justifies. Yes, Tea Party, I'm referring to you.

True, there's an argument that nudism in unhygienic, which is understandable. Currently the city law states that a piece of cloth must separate their nakedness from any public seat. Sounds fair. Who wants skid marks on a bench?

Protesters against the ban outside City Hall

As of February 1st 2013 anyone '...exposing his or her genitals, perineum or anal region in the listed public areas" will be breaking the law. But are a small group of men hanging out in their birthday suits, reading newspapers, drinking coffee, chatting and happily posing for photos with tourists really doing any harm? San Fransisco has a chronic homeless problem with many addicted to drugs, denied medical care, unable to feed themselves and struggling to live day to day. There's significant crime in the city too. Both issues should be the focus of the city's attention and not a group of people who frankly look ridiculous but amuse many, baffle a lot and offend very few. 

Trolleys are a common on the streets; used by the homeless to transport their worldly goods

In the 21st century people still bicker about and are offended by the the naked human form as if the story from the Garden of Eden and its serpent was true. Whatever finally happens, the city has chosen to ban nudity but appeals may be successful, ultimately that's the way democracy works and people should accept its decisions. 

However, in the case of the Church of England, banning women bishops is ridiculous. It is backward thinking, small minded, sexist, misogynistic nonsense. It is an institution that has a woman, The Queen, as its head. It is an institution who's numbers are dropping dramatically year on year and who's very existence  or at least relevance is under threat. It is an institution that maintains its role in the government of the United Kingdom as bishops still sit in the House of Lords. For this reason alone, the Church should be obliged to admit women as bishops. 

The Archbishop of York speaks in the House of Lords

Most of all it is simply for sanity's sake that the Church should admit women bishops. It already has female vicars. There is no other group that denies women the right to progress amongst its ranks, at least none that will openly admit it. The West condemns extremist muslim regimes for its treatment of and its restrictions placed on women. This is not a dissimilar, albeit far less less extreme, oppression. 

It is ironic that on the same day in the 21st century,  one city decides to revoke its liberal tolerance of a small minority who are happy to exist in the world as God intended whereas another, supposedly representative of God on Earth, once again choose to endorse the suppression of women. Man was made in God's image. If that is literal and doesn't include women, then I challenge God on his wisdom. After all if we were all made in God's image, we were, according to the Bible, naked and unclothed. God's image is not a hipster in tight jeans, a golf pro in sports jacket, a rapper draped bling or  James Bond playing poker in a swanky Monte Carlo casino. The only image that unites as all is the gangly, dangly one that we all share, whether we're male or female. 

 

 The Castro Theatre manager objects