edit to the wiki page on social nudity in Seattle

I have edited the wiki page on social nudity in Seattle.  I have tried to use the generally aceepted wiki rules of using more or less official news sources and/or court filings as references.

Here are my additions to the page . . .

Whether someone else will edit them out, I do not know. . . .

Between 2004 and 2010, there were a number of attempts made by various groups or individuals in various ways to establish one or more areas as an officially recognized clothing optional park in Seattle.[2][3][4]

During this same time, Howell Beach Park and Denny Blaine Park have become generally recognized and known for being clothing optional.[5] The clothing-optional excellence and fame of Denny Blaine Park has become nationally known, considered by some to be one of the top five semi-secret clothing optional beaches in the USA.[6]For a number of years as well, Howell beach park being clothing optional was semi-secret and also somewhat known or guessed at–often being referred to as “the secret beach.”[7]

The gradually increasing awareness of and use of these two parks as clothing optional venues may have resulted in fewer requests that Seattle act in some way toofficially designate some areas as clothing optional. In practice, at this point, it is completely accepted at these venues. Other parks are finding a standard that may work for them.

Thong-wearing (including wearing a g-string as a thong, with or without the visibility of pubic hair) by either sex has gradually been occurring with increasing frequency and acceptance at Greenlake Park and Madison Beach Park. This practice and how the RCW 9A.88.010 would apply to wearing wearing a Brazilian or a thong or a g-string, with or without pubic hair being visible, was the subject of a lawsuit in King County Superior Court in 2014, court case #14-2-08225-8SEA, after a fellow was threatened with arrest for walking in a near-thong. The plaintiff Zaitzeff originally alleged that the RCW 9A.88.010 was unconstitutionally vague as applied to these things, in the context of Greenlake walking. The case did not go to trial or discovery; it was dismissed on the motion of plaintiff and with the agreement of all parties.

In the process of research and discussion, comments from the general public came up that indicated that wearing a thong, a Brazilian with or without visibility of pubic hair would not be considered a cause of reasonable affront. As a result, Zaitzeff alleged in final court filings, RCW 9A.88.010 could not be properly used to prosecute the wearing of a thong (or g-string), with or without visibility of pubic hair, in the context of walking at Greenlake.

The state and the city did not directly agree in court to this contention, but in practice they have chosen toleration.

In September 2014, an email was sent to Zaitzeff in response to an inquiry to the Seattle Parks Department. The email states:

“Over the years, Seattle Parks has had a number of requests about nudity in parks: some requesting that we designate one or more ‘clothing-optional’ beaches, and some requesting that we create a rule against nudity. Seattle Parks has declined to either support or prohibit nudity.”

When people ask, we explain that nudity per se is not illegal in the state of Washington, and quote RCW 9A.88.070 that for behavior to be considered “indecent exposure,” there must be a determination that a person has caused “affront or alarm” to another person.–Laurie Dunlap, Superintendent’s Office, Seattle Parks and Recreation.[8]

Since the conclusion of the lawsuit, if not before, men and women at their choosing have worn thongs and g-strings at Greenlake.[9][10]

Gals doing protests for PETA have gone topless, in thongs at Westlake Park without police hindrance.[11][12]

It is still undecided and unknown how police and the public will accept topfree gals at parks such as Greenlake or Madison Park.

A smattering of individuals have, over the last several years, posted that they wished to do something for or on topfree day in August, in Seattle. In every case, the events or protests consisting of a woman or women sitting or standing topfree for a while have apparently not taken place. Other organizers may have better results.

Reporters at mynorthwest including Stephanie Klein observed in August 2014 a woman riding a bike topless in the street, who seemed to be not a part of a parade, event or any larger group. When they called Seattle police to check on how the indecent exposure law would be enforced in that situation, Sean Whitcomb SPD spokesperson said, “A woman riding through a neighborhood topless is probably not going to cause that much alarm.”[13]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *