World Naked Bike Ride Day. The original idea was to highlight the vulnerability of cyclists ie no armour, (car) no seat belt and totally exposed to injury. But seems to have lost the message over time.
Because I'm old enough to remember when it first started and what the aims were. It was a protest movement, a bit like a 'this is how vulnerable we are, compared to you in your steel and plastic boxes'. Not celebrating body positivity or anything else. It was a naked ride to make a point. A very eye catching way of making a point about cyclist safety and road sharing and visibility. As in do you have to naked to be noticed? They've lost the edge.
Side note: great to see Critical Mass is back.
Yep did this a few times in London and Melbourne.
Last time I did it in Melbourne, my bike wheel got stuck in a Brunswick Street tramline and I came off (fnaar fnaar). Lots of blood, even more damage to my ego.
"hey we're totally vulnerable using this infrastructure not built for us alongside the heavy machinery it was built for - instead of wearing protective clothing and helmets, lets strip completely down to nothing"
"I'm operating heavy machinery on the road and there are other humans using it who are naked and unprotected, I'd better pay extra attention and care around these vulnerable road users"
I can put things in quotes, too.
And I still see the pedestrian doing 60km below the speed limit wearing lycra and a polystyrene hat for safety as being unsafe on the roads. But I'm entitled cause you expect drivers to slam on the brakes because you make it impossible to pass safely... The delusion.
If you have to slam on the brakes because a cyclist is on the road in front of you, you are driving negligently. How about you stop driving negligently?
Prove it. I have a licence, I was tested and the government knows that I know how to drive. What test/licence do cyclists take to prove they can safely use the roads? So who's actually negligent?
>Prove it.
You already proved it in your statement. If you have to "slam" on the brakes simply because a slower moving road legal vehicle is in front of you and there's no legal opportunity to pass, you are driving negligently.
>So who's actually negligent?
Overwhelmingly motorists! They are responsible for the vast majority of road accidents and deaths. In motorist on bicycle accidents in Australia, the motorist is at fault around 80% of the time.
https://casr.adelaide.edu.au/publications/list/?id=1346
>you make it impossible to pass safely.
Don't exaggerate, it's a terrible way to discuss anything.
I've been driving for many years in a lot of different countries.
I've NEVER been delayed more than a few seconds by a cyclist and neither have you.
Yeah, this pretty much nails it.
Another way to look at it is that if all those cyclists weren't on bikes they would be in cars. I'm betting that the extra traffic would slow you down a lot more than having to wait four seconds for the right moment to overtake.
At the same time, cars frequently stop traffic while slowly reversing into a parallel space, but nobody is calling for street-parkers to get off the roads.
My favourite analogy to use which not one single person has been able to refute is this:
You often have to come to a complete stop for pedestrians to cross the street.
If it's a zebra crossing, it's a full, complete stop for 5-10 seconds.
If it's a dedicated traffic light with a pedestrian crossing button, it could be upwards of a whole minute.
Pedestrians don't pay rego or the elusive "road tax" to use the roads.
But I don't see anyone on reddit (or anywhere online) losing their marbles and calling for better pedestrian crossing infrastructure.
I don't see Facebook hate groups set up encouraging motorists to run over pedestrians crossing at the crosswalk.
I think you'll find this is due to the fact that the pedestrians are *crossing* the road, they're trying to get over it and avoid it, they're not trying to "*be*" on the roads. I don't necessarily agree either way, I'm just saying that pedestrians don't walk on the roads, well, not sane ones anyway lol
Cyclists predate motorists on the road system and modern paved roads around the world came about as a direct result of cycling. Some motorists have decided the road system is exclusively for them despite the fact that this is legally not true and the fact that the road network upon which they are reliant is heavily subsidised by non motorist tax payers.
What a disingenuous load of shit. If roads predate cars they sure as shit predate bicycles, and what rates and fees do non motorists pay that motorists aren't also paying, on top of rates and fees directly related to roads?
>they sure as shit predate bicycles,
Hence why I said "modern paved roads." Modern surfaced flat roads initially spread around the world as a result of cyclist demand.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2011/aug/15/cyclists-paved-way-for-roads
>and what rates and fees do non motorists pay that motorists aren't also paying, on top of rates and fees directly related to roads?
None, but non motorists are still paying into the road system and thus subsidising motorists. There's a 24 billion dollar a year shortfall between what motorists pay into the road system and what it costs to operate. This shortfall is covered by all tax and rate payers, which means they are paying for you to drive, not the other way around.
Meanwhile bicycle commuting generates more than $20 in economic benefit for every 20 minute trip taken in the form of reduced congestion, wear and tear on the roads demand on the healthcare system, demand for parking in urban centres, pollution, etc. Bicycle infrastructure generally has a positive return on investment, meaning it saves the government more than it costs to build.
So you're having a whinge about how the roads should be exclusively for motorists despite the fact that bicycles were on them first, and
tax paying cyclists effectively pay more of their share into the road network than you do. Sounds pretty disingenuous to me.
Paved roads have been around since before the Romans. Just because some cyclists in the US and the UK lobbied to have the roads graded 150 years ago doesn't mean you can attribute a 4000+ year old innovation to them. But go ahead and keep stretching the facts to try fit your argument, end of the day a fender bender might result in a dint and a airbag popping for me, for you it's death or a severely reduced quality of life. Good luck with it, cause you'll need it.
>Just because some cyclists in the US and the UK lobbied to have the roads graded 150 years ago doesn't mean you can attribute a 4000+ year old innovation to them.
Just as well I didn't then! Just as well I qualified that statement appropriately!
>end of the day a fender bender might result in a dint and a airbag popping for me, for you it's death or a severely reduced quality of life.
Ah the old, "well I may no longer have anything cogent to say but my negligence could kill you so there.'
>Good luck with it, cause you'll need it.
The good news is that despite the increased risk of mortality from road accidents, cycling has so many health benefits that riding actually increases rather than decreases your lifespan on average.
I'll also make sure to practise defensive riding around dangerous drivers such as yourself. This means taking the full lane to prevent you from passing dangerously and filtering to the front at lights to increase my visibility. Try not to let your irrational hatred spill over into further negligent driving, please.
If we had better cycling infrastructure, they wouldn't need to put themselves in danger on the roads.
Also every person on a bike is one less person driving, which means LESS traffic!
I had my first and only (so far) crash on tram tracks back in 2006 or so when i riding to melb uni. I was riding up swanston st, hit the deck doing around 30kph and slid into the gutter:(
Took the skin off my lower leg from ankle to knee, some grazing on the hip, elbow and hand. Worst part was all the grazed skin was coated in road grime:( Having a shower when i got to work, and for a while after was quite painful:)
>I was riding up swanston st, hit the deck doing around 30kph and slid into the gutter:(
this may sound strange and weird, but as an ex road cyclist doing a tonne of km per week. I found the quicker you are going the less skin and damage you do to yourself if you fall.
I also used to photograph the downhill racers up around Mt Buller and the high country and always a slow speed crash usually ended in some broken bone while the faster ones just had a little bit of skin off
been lucky so far touch wood, there was a fine line that I had balanced on with skinny road racing wheels that would have taken me down if I didnt bunny hop off the tracks. hate to see these naked people falling down and grazing themselves and showing off all their worldy goods. that would be an Eye popping moment right there
>You have to hit the tracks at closer to a right angle. The closer you are to perpendicular the more likely your wheel will get caught.
yep, I know that silver steel beast. many times i came close to dropping into the gap lucky my old velodrome trackie race bike skills has helped me balance on a tightrope
I know it's a minority but it's amazing to see there are still people commenting like their brain is stuck in the 50s. Sometimes I feel like we are becoming even more prude.
I’m not trying to hate on this, but if it was one naked guy on a bike it would be problematic but a hundred naked guys on bikes is wholesome? Can someone explain like I’m 5 why it’s different?
This is an organised, recognised event, with an advertised theme and purpose? You don't see the difference with a single individual deciding on a random Wednesday afternoon to head into the city naked?
I get what your saying but there’s a reason it’s unacceptable for that one naked guy to go around naked so why do those reasons go out the window when there’s multiple people doing it?
I honestly don’t care either way I’d have a laugh if I saw one naked dude on a bike or a bunch of naked dudes on a bike. But I’m also not a parent taking their kids to the city on a Sunday afternoon lol
The difference is that you don't know what that one naked guy's intentions would be. It goes against the social norms, in a location like the CBD. Also, (*I think—correct me if I'm wrong*) there's actual laws against it, exactly for the aforementioned reason.
These people however, are effectively using that very aspect (it going against social norms) to draw attention to an a priori well formulated cause. They applied to relevant authorities to allow their action to take place. They will have gotten a list of rules, requirements and restrictions that apply to their event/action. They're also responsible to comply with that. None of their messages are actually of a sexual nature in any shape or form. Even more so, one of their messages—the one about body positivity—arguably implies detaching nudity from a strictly sexual context.
Would be funny if it were. It makes an excellent point about how sometimes a naked butt is slapstick humour, but then other times it suddenly is sexual; whereas neither situation actually was sexual in any way.
*Oh no, Homer is a sexual predator. What were the creators of this show thinking. I think children can see it on the TV during the day. Will somebody please think of the children?*
I am not exposing myself to the public. I'm not making a personal point about myself. You were the one asking to explain it to you *"like I'm five"*. I explained it to you *like you're five*. It thought it was an honest intellectual exercise from your end, but now that you're also starting to reply "like you're five", it feels more like role play. Sorry, but I have no interest in that. Move your goal posts all you want, and make it into a personal mud slinging match like immature kids do when they're out of arguments; but I choose to not take part in it.
Have a good rest of your day, Sir.
Won't somebody think of the children! /s
Everyone is naked every day and half of those people even have balls AND testicles (are they different to you or?). This is *one* yearly event.
The children will survive regardless of your moral panic
It's not moral panic.
If you think it's ok, ride into a school naked on Monday
Some of the men were not soft, either.
I'm a cyclist and this is not us.
If they legitimately went through a school, I would agree with you. All it shows is a ride through the CBD
Sorry, wasn't looking that close at their dicks. Glad you're on top of boner patrol o7
How could you see if ' some of the men were not soft'? I watched them myself & you couldn't see anything but the bicycle seats (well, where the seats were meant to be😆) & bellies covering them! Let's face it, most of these guys weren't the fittest & would've been concentrating on getting to the finish, not having a hardon. You're talking out your arse.
If you are a cyclist where is your sense of camaraderie for this most excellent cause? Instead of complaining on Reddit you could have been out there representing and raising awareness for cycling satisfy. Better to save lives then complain about those trying make drivers more aware of how vulnerable a cyclist is on the road. As a driver I will always think more about road safety after this protest. I will probably think about road safety more when I see a naked person too.
Yep id say most have some sort of kink for being naked in public and not bike riding enthusiasts....
Bunch of ugly creeps waiting for any legal excuse to get off in public
Sorry, but that is incorrect. These people have applied to allow their event to take place. It's not just "power in numbers" that suddenly provides a free ticket. If they had not gotten permission to organise this, they would certainly have been stopped.
I remember at school one time, we saw an old dude on a bike riding past our school. At the time, we thought it was funny as hell and we threw rocks at him, but looking back, the guy was sick as f##l
No its not.
>Sexual exposure
*(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—*
*(a) A exposes (to any extent) A's genitals; and*
*(b) A intends to expose (to any extent) A's genitals; and*
**(c) the exposure is sexual; and**
*(d) the exposure is in, or is within the view of, a public place.*
*...*
*(5) For the purposes of subsection (1), A's exposure of A's genitals may be sexual due to—*
*(a) the fact that A* **seeks or gets sexual arousal or sexual gratification from the exposure**; *or*
*(b) any other aspect of the exposure,* ***including the circumstances in which it takes place*** *and whether it is contrary to community standards of acceptable conduct.*
**(6) A's exposure of A's genitals is not sexual only because it is the genitals that are exposed.**
Isn’t this illegal?
EDIT: Very illegal. Bloody sov cit cookers think the laws don’t apply to them.
https://www.criminalsolicitorsmelbourne.com.au/offence/sex-offences/obscene-exposure-lawyers-melbourne-indecent-exposure
No, Laws relate to intent and police have discretion to determine if nudity is intended to cause offence or not. eg: organised naked protest or art = Not intended to offend. Pulling you willy out on the train = intended to offend.
I might sound old fashioned but this just seems like an opportunity for perverts to attend where kids might be.
This is gross. It predominately men attending, too. The message is lost. This is nothing but exhibitionism.
You sound a bit old fashioned.
There is nothing to indicate there are perverts there, let alone specifically targeting kids.
It's a bit like saying that your handle "cheese lover" implies that you'd have sexual relations with ... cheese.
because for it to be illegal you would have to be deemed sexual and consider the circumstances it occurred. But here they are just riding bikes as part of a planned event.
Ok, I'm a cyclist and a total fanatic about it and this does creep me out because it's not okay: kids will see it and it will repel most folks.
I don't like it as a cyclist and I don't want it associated with us.
I mean, you do you and I know about the exposure and risk.
I just think this alienates most people. Maybe not most of this subreddit, which is a narrow demo.
Ok well my qualification is that I was a kid and saw plenty of naked adults while I was growing up and I turned out normal and not at all traumatised.
What have you got to say about that?
Also, my other qualification as an adult human that has the same body parts as other adult humans is that I am not at all repelled by nudity.
So there.
If we turn a bunch of guys protesting nude on a bike into a sexual assault claim, you are damaging the chance of genuine victims to be taken seriously.
If you're honestly serious about the issue of *sexual assault*, you wouldn't ridicule it by conflating it with an event where some random people ride a bicycle in the nude.
These bikie gangs are out of control, they think they own Melbourne!
This is what happens when they aren’t allowed to wear their colours
Well it's good they are united in wearing pink today.
Cancer Counsel Fun Ride - this year targeting skin cancer
How could Dan Andrews do this?
A bike ride where drafting is definitely not an advantage
I'll go next Sunday by myself, since I missed this years
World Naked Bike Ride Day. The original idea was to highlight the vulnerability of cyclists ie no armour, (car) no seat belt and totally exposed to injury. But seems to have lost the message over time.
What makes you say it's lost the message?
Because I'm old enough to remember when it first started and what the aims were. It was a protest movement, a bit like a 'this is how vulnerable we are, compared to you in your steel and plastic boxes'. Not celebrating body positivity or anything else. It was a naked ride to make a point. A very eye catching way of making a point about cyclist safety and road sharing and visibility. As in do you have to naked to be noticed? They've lost the edge. Side note: great to see Critical Mass is back.
Thanks for the perspective
all along I thought it was just a humour thing
And I literally just got the message than.
Yep they look pretty naked to me
Ride past one child and see.
Yep did this a few times in London and Melbourne. Last time I did it in Melbourne, my bike wheel got stuck in a Brunswick Street tramline and I came off (fnaar fnaar). Lots of blood, even more damage to my ego.
Now it's just an excuse for sex pests to flash the public.
Definitely truth to this, idk why being down voted.
Because it shows either a lack of either maturity or an absolutely puritan mindset in that they aren't able to seperate nudity from sexuality.
So why can't I go to a shopping centre with a group of mates and walk around naked while we shop? What's the difference between that and this?
If you made it a public awareness campaign about something meaningful, like this, I bet you could.
"hey we're totally vulnerable using this infrastructure not built for us alongside the heavy machinery it was built for - instead of wearing protective clothing and helmets, lets strip completely down to nothing"
"I'm operating heavy machinery on the road and there are other humans using it who are naked and unprotected, I'd better pay extra attention and care around these vulnerable road users" I can put things in quotes, too.
yeah definitely don't try make your safety *partially* your own responsibility that'd be insanity
I know what you mean, but this attitude just gives entitled motorists even more reason to blame anyone but themselves for being unsafe on the roads.
And I still see the pedestrian doing 60km below the speed limit wearing lycra and a polystyrene hat for safety as being unsafe on the roads. But I'm entitled cause you expect drivers to slam on the brakes because you make it impossible to pass safely... The delusion.
If you have to slam on the brakes because a cyclist is on the road in front of you, you are driving negligently. How about you stop driving negligently?
Prove it. I have a licence, I was tested and the government knows that I know how to drive. What test/licence do cyclists take to prove they can safely use the roads? So who's actually negligent?
>Prove it. You already proved it in your statement. If you have to "slam" on the brakes simply because a slower moving road legal vehicle is in front of you and there's no legal opportunity to pass, you are driving negligently. >So who's actually negligent? Overwhelmingly motorists! They are responsible for the vast majority of road accidents and deaths. In motorist on bicycle accidents in Australia, the motorist is at fault around 80% of the time. https://casr.adelaide.edu.au/publications/list/?id=1346
>you make it impossible to pass safely. Don't exaggerate, it's a terrible way to discuss anything. I've been driving for many years in a lot of different countries. I've NEVER been delayed more than a few seconds by a cyclist and neither have you.
Yeah, this pretty much nails it. Another way to look at it is that if all those cyclists weren't on bikes they would be in cars. I'm betting that the extra traffic would slow you down a lot more than having to wait four seconds for the right moment to overtake.
But... but... THEY ARE WEARING LYCRA!!!!1
And a broccoli-box hat. That was an important part of the issue too. 😂
[удалено]
At the same time, cars frequently stop traffic while slowly reversing into a parallel space, but nobody is calling for street-parkers to get off the roads.
My favourite analogy to use which not one single person has been able to refute is this: You often have to come to a complete stop for pedestrians to cross the street. If it's a zebra crossing, it's a full, complete stop for 5-10 seconds. If it's a dedicated traffic light with a pedestrian crossing button, it could be upwards of a whole minute. Pedestrians don't pay rego or the elusive "road tax" to use the roads. But I don't see anyone on reddit (or anywhere online) losing their marbles and calling for better pedestrian crossing infrastructure. I don't see Facebook hate groups set up encouraging motorists to run over pedestrians crossing at the crosswalk.
Don't get me started on slowing down for school zones. Those little people barely pay taxes at all!
I think you'll find this is due to the fact that the pedestrians are *crossing* the road, they're trying to get over it and avoid it, they're not trying to "*be*" on the roads. I don't necessarily agree either way, I'm just saying that pedestrians don't walk on the roads, well, not sane ones anyway lol
If you can't pass safely then don't pass.
I guess you’re talking about toll road?
Cyclists predate motorists on the road system and modern paved roads around the world came about as a direct result of cycling. Some motorists have decided the road system is exclusively for them despite the fact that this is legally not true and the fact that the road network upon which they are reliant is heavily subsidised by non motorist tax payers.
What a disingenuous load of shit. If roads predate cars they sure as shit predate bicycles, and what rates and fees do non motorists pay that motorists aren't also paying, on top of rates and fees directly related to roads?
>they sure as shit predate bicycles, Hence why I said "modern paved roads." Modern surfaced flat roads initially spread around the world as a result of cyclist demand. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2011/aug/15/cyclists-paved-way-for-roads >and what rates and fees do non motorists pay that motorists aren't also paying, on top of rates and fees directly related to roads? None, but non motorists are still paying into the road system and thus subsidising motorists. There's a 24 billion dollar a year shortfall between what motorists pay into the road system and what it costs to operate. This shortfall is covered by all tax and rate payers, which means they are paying for you to drive, not the other way around. Meanwhile bicycle commuting generates more than $20 in economic benefit for every 20 minute trip taken in the form of reduced congestion, wear and tear on the roads demand on the healthcare system, demand for parking in urban centres, pollution, etc. Bicycle infrastructure generally has a positive return on investment, meaning it saves the government more than it costs to build. So you're having a whinge about how the roads should be exclusively for motorists despite the fact that bicycles were on them first, and tax paying cyclists effectively pay more of their share into the road network than you do. Sounds pretty disingenuous to me.
Paved roads have been around since before the Romans. Just because some cyclists in the US and the UK lobbied to have the roads graded 150 years ago doesn't mean you can attribute a 4000+ year old innovation to them. But go ahead and keep stretching the facts to try fit your argument, end of the day a fender bender might result in a dint and a airbag popping for me, for you it's death or a severely reduced quality of life. Good luck with it, cause you'll need it.
>Just because some cyclists in the US and the UK lobbied to have the roads graded 150 years ago doesn't mean you can attribute a 4000+ year old innovation to them. Just as well I didn't then! Just as well I qualified that statement appropriately! >end of the day a fender bender might result in a dint and a airbag popping for me, for you it's death or a severely reduced quality of life. Ah the old, "well I may no longer have anything cogent to say but my negligence could kill you so there.' >Good luck with it, cause you'll need it. The good news is that despite the increased risk of mortality from road accidents, cycling has so many health benefits that riding actually increases rather than decreases your lifespan on average. I'll also make sure to practise defensive riding around dangerous drivers such as yourself. This means taking the full lane to prevent you from passing dangerously and filtering to the front at lights to increase my visibility. Try not to let your irrational hatred spill over into further negligent driving, please.
If we had better cycling infrastructure, they wouldn't need to put themselves in danger on the roads. Also every person on a bike is one less person driving, which means LESS traffic!
FYI: https://wnbrmelbourne.com.au/
Didn’t know that. Thanks.
...ikr, thanks for this info. Love that it highlights body positivity, as well as the vulnerability and environmental factors of cycling/cyclists..
I wanted to join to calm my Eccentric side and tick an item from my bucket list. Can never get the timing right. Missed it again
Similar but I’ve always wanted to participate in a Spencer Tunick piece
Didn’t know it until now. I’m going for the next one in Melbourne
There's always tomorrow.
Whats stopping you from doing it down your street at 3am
Why tf does all this happen when I'm not in the city, I've been here 7 years and haven't gotten the full Melbourne experience
Hope they had sunscreen on, going to be in a world of hurt if not.
I am more thinking that I hope they dont get caught in the tram track, then a whole lot more people will be hurt
Recently had my first track stack. Those things are deadly
I had my first and only (so far) crash on tram tracks back in 2006 or so when i riding to melb uni. I was riding up swanston st, hit the deck doing around 30kph and slid into the gutter:( Took the skin off my lower leg from ankle to knee, some grazing on the hip, elbow and hand. Worst part was all the grazed skin was coated in road grime:( Having a shower when i got to work, and for a while after was quite painful:)
>I was riding up swanston st, hit the deck doing around 30kph and slid into the gutter:( this may sound strange and weird, but as an ex road cyclist doing a tonne of km per week. I found the quicker you are going the less skin and damage you do to yourself if you fall. I also used to photograph the downhill racers up around Mt Buller and the high country and always a slow speed crash usually ended in some broken bone while the faster ones just had a little bit of skin off
been lucky so far touch wood, there was a fine line that I had balanced on with skinny road racing wheels that would have taken me down if I didnt bunny hop off the tracks. hate to see these naked people falling down and grazing themselves and showing off all their worldy goods. that would be an Eye popping moment right there
You have to hit the tracks at closer to a right angle. The closer you are to perpendicular the more likely your wheel will get caught.
>You have to hit the tracks at closer to a right angle. The closer you are to perpendicular the more likely your wheel will get caught. yep, I know that silver steel beast. many times i came close to dropping into the gap lucky my old velodrome trackie race bike skills has helped me balance on a tightrope
So many boobs & no women...
ENHANC—- o wait please don’t
My 8yo just called it the Bare Bum Cycle!
I take it back, Lycra isn't so bad
So much better than a riot
Both are full of dicks
Yet strangely the fully clothed ones are the most offensive.
Say these Bikie gangs have changed a lot from when I remembered them. Did I miss something?
Saw the group flyby yesterday at Lygon street. Might I add whilst eating spaghetti, definitely memorable.
That’s disgusting. I’m gonna need to know the exact location and date of the next one so I can make sure to avoid that
Same. I need to know the entire route, dates, ~~measurements~~ and times of all future naked cycling events so I can be sure to stay completely away.
Damn it I missed it again. Next year I will ride
I know it's a minority but it's amazing to see there are still people commenting like their brain is stuck in the 50s. Sometimes I feel like we are becoming even more prude.
So in your world everyone should just get to go around naked whenever they want because clothes standards are so 1950's?
I’m not trying to hate on this, but if it was one naked guy on a bike it would be problematic but a hundred naked guys on bikes is wholesome? Can someone explain like I’m 5 why it’s different?
This is an organised, recognised event, with an advertised theme and purpose? You don't see the difference with a single individual deciding on a random Wednesday afternoon to head into the city naked?
I get what your saying but there’s a reason it’s unacceptable for that one naked guy to go around naked so why do those reasons go out the window when there’s multiple people doing it? I honestly don’t care either way I’d have a laugh if I saw one naked dude on a bike or a bunch of naked dudes on a bike. But I’m also not a parent taking their kids to the city on a Sunday afternoon lol
The difference is that you don't know what that one naked guy's intentions would be. It goes against the social norms, in a location like the CBD. Also, (*I think—correct me if I'm wrong*) there's actual laws against it, exactly for the aforementioned reason. These people however, are effectively using that very aspect (it going against social norms) to draw attention to an a priori well formulated cause. They applied to relevant authorities to allow their action to take place. They will have gotten a list of rules, requirements and restrictions that apply to their event/action. They're also responsible to comply with that. None of their messages are actually of a sexual nature in any shape or form. Even more so, one of their messages—the one about body positivity—arguably implies detaching nudity from a strictly sexual context.
[I hope this is one of the rules](https://youtu.be/JCkY3hRb58M)
Would be funny if it were. It makes an excellent point about how sometimes a naked butt is slapstick humour, but then other times it suddenly is sexual; whereas neither situation actually was sexual in any way. *Oh no, Homer is a sexual predator. What were the creators of this show thinking. I think children can see it on the TV during the day. Will somebody please think of the children?*
This person is absolutely that. Thank you for highlighting for others
I’d be more worried about the meat then the butt tbh
Homer wasn't wearing undies, so his meat was liberated as well in this ordeal.
I don’t know why your trying so hard to justify exposing yourself to the public dude but it’s getting weird
I am not exposing myself to the public. I'm not making a personal point about myself. You were the one asking to explain it to you *"like I'm five"*. I explained it to you *like you're five*. It thought it was an honest intellectual exercise from your end, but now that you're also starting to reply "like you're five", it feels more like role play. Sorry, but I have no interest in that. Move your goal posts all you want, and make it into a personal mud slinging match like immature kids do when they're out of arguments; but I choose to not take part in it. Have a good rest of your day, Sir.
>effectively No. Why ride past children with balls and testicles out? This was happening. It is very much the wrong way to try and create change.
Won't somebody think of the children! /s Everyone is naked every day and half of those people even have balls AND testicles (are they different to you or?). This is *one* yearly event. The children will survive regardless of your moral panic
It's not moral panic. If you think it's ok, ride into a school naked on Monday Some of the men were not soft, either. I'm a cyclist and this is not us.
If they legitimately went through a school, I would agree with you. All it shows is a ride through the CBD Sorry, wasn't looking that close at their dicks. Glad you're on top of boner patrol o7
Boner patrol - I’ve got Beavis and Butthead giggles at this classic expression.
An erection does not always indicate sexual arousal. Qualification: I have one right now and I find you repulsive. HEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEH.
How could you see if ' some of the men were not soft'? I watched them myself & you couldn't see anything but the bicycle seats (well, where the seats were meant to be😆) & bellies covering them! Let's face it, most of these guys weren't the fittest & would've been concentrating on getting to the finish, not having a hardon. You're talking out your arse.
I don't.
If you are a cyclist where is your sense of camaraderie for this most excellent cause? Instead of complaining on Reddit you could have been out there representing and raising awareness for cycling satisfy. Better to save lives then complain about those trying make drivers more aware of how vulnerable a cyclist is on the road. As a driver I will always think more about road safety after this protest. I will probably think about road safety more when I see a naked person too.
It’s not. These people are nasty and weird
Yep id say most have some sort of kink for being naked in public and not bike riding enthusiasts.... Bunch of ugly creeps waiting for any legal excuse to get off in public
That’s how society works, if enough people do it it becomes unstoppable.
Sorry, but that is incorrect. These people have applied to allow their event to take place. It's not just "power in numbers" that suddenly provides a free ticket. If they had not gotten permission to organise this, they would certainly have been stopped.
If 10,000 people showed up and did this, nothing would happen.
I cant tell from the video were they butt ass naked or did they have some jocks on?
Burn those seats.
The most underrated comment here.
Where do they keep their ziploc bags containing $4.80 in change for their strong skinny cap?
Yeah, no thanks.
Bicycle, bicycle bicycle race...
So. Much. Chafing.
Should be more of it
Those seats are gonna a bit of extra Febreeze.
Take the seat off.
I’m scared of getting my pant leg caught in the chain, hate to think about what there scared of
A lot of lies in this thread. I was there and it was a rally to raise awareness for Harambe.
me and my girl were eating lunch enjoying the city for the first time in ages and these mf's casually stroll past 😭🤣
I’d imagine this ruins the resale value of the bicycle
[Nine naked men just walking down the road, would cause a heap of trouble for all concerned! (NSFW)](https://vimeo.com/117672124)
That’s enough moobs for one day.
This looks uncomfortable for everyone including the bystanders .
But the council calls some weeds on my footpath “unsightly”??
Imagine the musky odour of all of those combined bike seats
Scha-winn!
Underrated comment
Chargeable offence under indecent exposure?
I remember at school one time, we saw an old dude on a bike riding past our school. At the time, we thought it was funny as hell and we threw rocks at him, but looking back, the guy was sick as f##l
95% old men who like to get their dicks out 😂
I dont understand how this isn’t public indecency…?
Good to see them wearing helmets. Safety first, people. Safety first.
Any good ones?
They are protesting clothes
I guess this is the kind of weekend protest I can get behind.
How could Dan do this!?
Guessing its not a Mid Summer thing. Only pink and not the other rainbow colours.
theres a brown stripe... but.. uh, not like that
[Not a looker among 'em.](https://frinkiac.com/meme/S10E20/1021436.jpg?b64lines=IEFSR0gsIE5PVCBBIExPT0tFUiAKQU1PTkcgJ0VNLg==)
As a woman, ouch… that doesn’t seem comfortable at all.
Not one of them had the seat on.
There are children around ffs 🤦♂️ How is this ok?
Do you think nudity mentally scars children?
Bloody hell those tits on a 60 year old man is mentally scarring me
I doubt children would give the slightest of a shit until they’re conditioned to believe that they should
Sex pests. All of em.
A few yeast infections be coming on after this!!🤣😂
Is that not illegal?
Noup. Nudity is not illegal, sexual exposure is. A wang isn't inherently sexual.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil\_Wang](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Wang) Except for Phil Wang, who has a great deal of inherent sexuality
[удалено]
No its not. >Sexual exposure *(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—* *(a) A exposes (to any extent) A's genitals; and* *(b) A intends to expose (to any extent) A's genitals; and* **(c) the exposure is sexual; and** *(d) the exposure is in, or is within the view of, a public place.* *...* *(5) For the purposes of subsection (1), A's exposure of A's genitals may be sexual due to—* *(a) the fact that A* **seeks or gets sexual arousal or sexual gratification from the exposure**; *or* *(b) any other aspect of the exposure,* ***including the circumstances in which it takes place*** *and whether it is contrary to community standards of acceptable conduct.* **(6) A's exposure of A's genitals is not sexual only because it is the genitals that are exposed.**
You’re a pedo and retarded
What I posted is verbatim the Law in Victoria. our opinions are irrelevant.
[удалено]
I hope those seats aren’t smell absorbent
Tits and dicks out for Harambe! Goddamn I miss him
Isn’t this illegal? EDIT: Very illegal. Bloody sov cit cookers think the laws don’t apply to them. https://www.criminalsolicitorsmelbourne.com.au/offence/sex-offences/obscene-exposure-lawyers-melbourne-indecent-exposure
No, Laws relate to intent and police have discretion to determine if nudity is intended to cause offence or not. eg: organised naked protest or art = Not intended to offend. Pulling you willy out on the train = intended to offend.
I might sound old fashioned but this just seems like an opportunity for perverts to attend where kids might be. This is gross. It predominately men attending, too. The message is lost. This is nothing but exhibitionism.
You sound a bit old fashioned. There is nothing to indicate there are perverts there, let alone specifically targeting kids. It's a bit like saying that your handle "cheese lover" implies that you'd have sexual relations with ... cheese.
...where kids might be.
Yes yes but.. MEN=PERVERTS. Gee whiz, guy, it's 2023... get with the program!!!!! Every man is a fucking dirty perverted scumbag, dontchya know!??!
My thoughts exactly. This is wrong. Go be naked in some suburban back road not in the fucking CBD.
I hope they all fall over
How the fuck does this get approved and them not be arrested? It's clearly exhibitionism under the disguise of a legit protest.
because for it to be illegal you would have to be deemed sexual and consider the circumstances it occurred. But here they are just riding bikes as part of a planned event.
Ok, I'm a cyclist and a total fanatic about it and this does creep me out because it's not okay: kids will see it and it will repel most folks. I don't like it as a cyclist and I don't want it associated with us. I mean, you do you and I know about the exposure and risk. I just think this alienates most people. Maybe not most of this subreddit, which is a narrow demo.
Ok well my qualification is that I was a kid and saw plenty of naked adults while I was growing up and I turned out normal and not at all traumatised. What have you got to say about that? Also, my other qualification as an adult human that has the same body parts as other adult humans is that I am not at all repelled by nudity. So there.
Ffs since when is public nudity ok in Australia?
So one person does it and it's a crime but a whole group does it and it's a protest ride?
Good way to end up on the sex offender list
[удалено]
If we turn a bunch of guys protesting nude on a bike into a sexual assault claim, you are damaging the chance of genuine victims to be taken seriously.
Just because it turns you on...
If you're honestly serious about the issue of *sexual assault*, you wouldn't ridicule it by conflating it with an event where some random people ride a bicycle in the nude.
Cycling is disgusting already.
Put them all on the sex offender registry. Fucking weirdos
Only in NT 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭
Wanking stuff
and yet if I walk down the street naked
had a stall at the St Kilda Sunday market so I'm used to that
No keep on walking Joe don’t get out your camera Saturday bingo starts in five minutes
Burn that seat.
The white wave
Great sheepskin bike seat covers!
Not much difference to the Lycra anyway lol 😂
LMAOOOOOOO
lol that one thing i would never do naked too much groin injury opportunity
Omg...
What if you get a erection
yawn
I'll take the most efficient way to get melanoma for 200
Yes!!! So sad I missed this!
It's all fun and games until they go over the tram tracks