What Public Nudity Would Facilitate

In American culture, a society where like most others, the majority of people do not look to reason to verify or falsify ideas (when possible) instead of words, traditions, appeals to authority, or subjective preference, it is ironically the political group of people who complain about the sensitivity of preference-based ideologies from liberals that can be extremely sensitive to unfamiliar ideas and truths.  Though conservatives might be rather obsessed with secretly seeing the naked body or thinking about it in a sexual way, which reflects their many hypocrisies as they distance themselves from things in some social circles while indulging in them whether or not the things is problematic in itself, they in another sense often talk and act as if they fear the human body, shunning or condemning public nudity in sexual or nonsexual contexts.

Public nudity is not supposed to be an ordinary thing in America except in a few isolated areas.  Yes, there is no excuse for believing in false ideas or fallacious grounds for true ideas, and some of these truths can be accessed with pure reason as opposed to being directly prompted by sensory experience (though they are still ultimately logical truths), but it is more unlikely that the typical person will understand certain truths about the body without that kind of experience to bring them to the point of forsaking assumptions.  All assumptions about all things can be avoided regardless of experience.  Still, the lack of exposure to the human body except in very limited contexts, some of them just in films or television or perhaps involving women instead of men, can be a factor that will slow some people's awareness of reality. 

There are multiple realizations that the general public would be more likely to have regarding the human body if only public nudity was actually more common, or somewhat normal in America at all in certain areas.  The idea of actually seeing the unclothed body might seem terrifying or offensive to some people at first, but after adjustment to a new kind of experience, or just after the initial unnecessary panic hopefully subsides, the philosophical discoveries and numerous possible benefits could easily come to light: that sensuality is not sexuality, that the male body is beautiful too, that women naturally have bodily features like leg hair often associated only with men, that there are not more than two observable genders in addition to the occasional intersex person, and perhaps more would be more regularly embraced by more people if nudity was more publicly normalized.

Conservatives are the ones most likely to oppose public nudity or even nudity in entertainment even as they tend to desperately obsess over the human body while mistaking it for something sexual.  They also are more likely to rightly reject the idea that there are more than two genders, even if sometimes with emotionalistic reasons in mind.  Paradoxically, they miss the fact that regular, normalized exposure of the human body to the public will not only give them the experiential chance to realize the logical truths about the nature of nudity that were true all along (such as how it is nonsexual but can be perceived or appreciated sexually), but will also help more people directly see that there are not more than two genders and intersex people as far as all available sensory evidence suggests--not that most of the senses even prove that there is world of matter in which there are other human bodies, of course.

The only opposition to public nudity is based on conscience or tradition or other arbitrary, subjective, or meaningless things.  When this is all that someone could believe an idea because of, that idea is at best unverifiable, with no one being justified in believing it, and at worse it is demonstrably false.  It is demonstrably true that nudity itself is nonsexual, which quickly refutes entire ideas about nudity and sexuality.  It is also demonstrably true that the Bible does not condemn it, which refutes another entire basis for anti-nudity ideology and its respective philosophical components.  It is true by logical necessity that there are even pragmatic benefits to this thing that has little to none of the characteristics its usual opponents assume it does.  Not everyone would need to participate or appreciate the sight, but no one's subjective preferences dictate logic and morality, and regular public nudity would indeed facilitate for the masses the aforementioned discoveries that would happen to make life easier for many people.