This page is for general discussion about the “Nude World Order” universe,  Permanent Nudity, this website itself, or anything else that seems relevant, including real-life nudity experiences and other media featuring similar themes.

Note: If replying to a specific comment, please use the Reply link below it to keep conversations easy to follow.

124 Replies to “Discussion”

  1. What are the rules for PN guys showing nipples? Obviously if you’re bottomless, wearing a top is required and for strict nudity nothing can be worn, but would a male with a relaxed full nudity registration be required to show his nipples? If he is, would that imply that unregistered males cannot legally show their breasts? If he is not, how could a bottomless male be differentiated from a full permanude with a relaxed registration who happens to be wearing a shirt?

    • Heh, good questions. First of all, no, unregistered men are not required to cover their nipples. Well not normally, that could make for a funny caption if some state accidentally banned male toplessness when they redid the laws or something.

      For bottomless and strict, it is as you say. The relaxed nudity one is where I’m a little conflicted. On the one hand, it seems kind of silly to insist men expose their nipples when they’re allowed to wear any kind of top at all, because male nipples just aren’t considered a big deal generally. But on the other hand, the lore for bottomless is that it was created specifically to be distinguishable from anything you could register for voluntarily, so this does present a problem.

      On balance the second consideration seems more pressing, so I guess “relaxed” registration guys are still gonna have to keep their nipples out. And it’s up to him to figure out how to make that look fashionable.

      On the issue of whether relaxed should be exactly the inverse of the law for unregistered people, I actually did a caption on that. It describes a situation where the law *was* written that way, but also female toplessness became legal without registration, which thus allowed the woman in the caption to go bottomless. This was described as a loophole which was fixed however. Exactly where that leaves relaxed-nudity men isn’t addressed, but presumably they would have been able to go bottomless too, but probably not anymore after the law was changed.

    • Assuming you’re talking about a permanent nudity registration (it’s not usually referred as a license), yes, you certainly can. Often you can even do it online or by mail, where as the initial registration has to be in person at the courthouse to prevent identity fraud.

  2. How would mainstream entertainment change in a world like this? Movies, TV, video games? How would a it influence the plot and story of those projects?

    • Good question, and not something I’ve really explored that much.

      My interpretation is that it’s legal to show nudity on TV long as the person in question is actually registered. And I suppose the same would apply to how movies are rated.

      But as far as how common it is, I donno. I’d say it’s probably not too rare for a permanently naked character to show up occasionally in a “serious” show or movie, but it might still have a little bit of a stigma so they don’t want to be seen as “over doing it”. While and trashier fare probably exploits the hell out of it. So does advertising, I’ve mentioned a few times that ads with naked people are super common, probably enough so that it’s kind of a running joke in-universe. “Oh look another car for naked people”.

      • 😋 interesting, well the reason I was asking is because there is a group called reNude world who are trying to get the rights to make a nude movie version of the musical Jesus Superstar. So I was wondering what a rated N for nudity remake of a movie would look like.

        • Huh, interesting. I think nude remakes have been brought up a couple times actually. Generally these are probably low budget affairs, but I just remembered something I mentioned once before, which was that it’s not unknown for studios to actually film a “naked version” right along side the original, which makes it possible to give it a high quality treatment without greatly increasing the cost.

            • I’m sorry to disappoint, but I meant I mentioned that as something that happened in-universe. I’ve never heard of that in real life, sadly.

        • Wow, that’s interesting! I’ve been wondering what could be done with deep fakes (imagine having nude versions of all movies ever made) but refilming things is awesome too (the resulta could be better and there would be more jobs for naked actors, lol).

          • If I understand right, deepfake techniques are usually used to put someone’s face onto a nude body. I’m not sure the technology is quite feature film quality yet, but it’s probably getting close. That could be helpful if your actor isn’t willing to do a nude scene for real. But starting with a clothed scene and inserting a nude body into it might be harder, or at least a different challenge that probably hasn’t had as much research done on it.

      • It’s probably not consistent with the world you have created, but in my imagination …

        Factual and entertainment programs will not be allowed to discriminate against PN participants, so – in theory at least – people get to appear on television based solely on their qualifications, performances, etc.

        Historic drama, on the other hand, unless you can work plausible nudity into the script, would have to insist on the actors being dressed – a ‘genuine occupational requirement’. You can’t film a costume drama in a 17th century setting with accurate sets and props and all the actors bar one in plausible 17th century costume and the other one completely naked. It would completely destroy the illusion. But, on the plus side, it would be much easier to include naked people in the scenes where they could originally have been naked – scenes in bath houses and bedrooms and when the aristocracy are alone with their servants, for example.

        • Yeah, I don’t have the exception for PN actors to be able to wear clothes. It was something I considered, but fairly early I did some captions to the contrary and decided to roll with that version. So if an actor was permanently naked, and they would not be able to play a clothed roll. Although it’s not unheard of for producers to write nudity in after the fact if a naked actor impresses them.

          That also means it’s one of the few fields where it’s legal to reject someone for a job because they’re permanently naked. Just line in real life it’s about the only situation where you could legally refuse to hire someone because they were the wrong race, etc.

  3. A single day each year to try nudity (full or partial) need not be complicated at all. The state just has to announce that the rules will not be enforced at all for one day. Gives people thinking about registering a chance to try it out in real life before committing to a year or more. Of course, registered people can wear clothes on that day.

    • I held off on commenting because I am curious what other people will think of the idea, and I feared an “authoritative” answer might put them off, but since no one replied anyway… (which doesn’t mean you can’t still of course)

      I think it sounds like a good idea, although I would probably have it work a little more similar to normal registration. That is, you still have to sign up, probably in person, and you’d still be required to go naked if you do. The fact that you can do it for only one day seems like a good enough reason to get people interested.

      And I’m always a little cautious about sweeping changes to the setting, so I would probably rely on my usual excuse and say this is local thing some state/country is doing, rather than everywhere.

      On the part about changing topless to nude, that seems a little over-complicated. Generally my thinking is that this would be allowed anyway (can’t see any reason it shouldn’t be) and the only requirement would be that the new registration be equal to or longer than both the usual minimum and the current registration.

      • Part of the fun is to think about the real world implementation details of the various ideas. PN is allowed on civil liberty grounds: some people believe the state should not prevent them from being naked, and the state has no good grounds for denying them this freedom. But other people object to the idea that people can just go naked whenever they feel like it, so there is a political balance which needs to be made. To prevent people from just going naked on a whim, and offending the poor prudes because they didn’t think or care, the state insists that nudity is something you have to think about seriously (hence the registration) and is something which comes with a cost (hence the ‘permanent’ bit and the minimum term).

        Personally, I think you should just ignore the prudes and allow people to wear whatever they like whenever they like, unless there is an objection on the grounds of health, safety or serious cost. Personal liberty is too important to sacrifice just because some people don’t like it. But that is not the NWO world – or ours, for the present at least.

        So I’m trying to understand this “dare you Day!” or “try it Day!” idea. I see what the PN and PN-friendly people get out of it, but what is the quid pro quo? What do the prudes get out of it? Why would they allow this legislation to be passed?

        • Now, this is the kind of discussion I like!

          As you know, I’ve never really pinned down the origins of permanent nudity, and for lack of any really good ideas I’ve chosen to leave it mysterious. But, I imagine that the current state of affairs is based on trying to strike a balance much like you describe.

          But another piece of the puzzle, possibly explaining this kind of thing, is that the balance isn’t necessarily the same everywhere. Some places (broadly speaking, “liberal” ones, in any sense of the term) might have a more favorable view of permanent nudity, and even a significant contingent of people who, like you and I, would be in favor of “at will nudity” (as it’s known in the setting). So this kind of thing could be an example of pushing the bounds a bit in places where they can get away with it.

          Somehow the idea that the “cost” for this is publicly submitting a nude photo doesn’t quite resonate with me, but I suppose that could still be considered a concession to the anti-casual-nudity contingent, since it will to some extent discourage people from trying it just on a whim.

  4. This is kind of an odd, self serving comment but hear me out. I was thinking recently that I no longer have my Tumblr blog active and it’s a shame I can’t even see my own older submissions/posts easily. Then I remembered the “reblog” tag and that a lot of the stuff I posted before Tumblr’s stricter rules are there! So I can just take a trip down memory lane whenever I like it, since most of the “reblog” posts are mine. :) Just wanted to say thanks for inadvertently creating a tag that helps me find my own stuff really easily! It will of course not have anything since January, but still, it comes in handy! So thanks, NWO. :)

    • Hey, glad that tag proved to be of some use. BTW, don’t forget you can also check out your old blog via that tumbex service I talked about a while back.

      Also, to view submissions from a certain person on this blog, you can put their name in the search box just above the tag cloud. That shows up a list of titles, which you have to click to see the actual pictures though. That’s something I’d like to change, but I haven’t got around to figuring out how.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

DMCA / Report Abuse