WNBR UK 2009

[ewen]

It would be awesome if someone could download & zip the 2009 London pics.

[psiman99]

Copyrighted site.

Low kilobyte (150k - 190k), but a competent photographer.

It's not a gay site, but the mandatory, 'I am not a pervert photographing naked women', guilt trip manifests itself in the usual way.

hxxp://aspex.photos.gb.net/c1713184.html

[bliss]

The 2008 ride is there too.
hxxp://aspex.photos.gb.net/c1524242.html

[psiman99]

Seems like one of the most natural angles to photograph in the circs, credit to the poster - Dariusz69 -, for his daring.

Though he does normally post 1 mb + files, so the decades old battle for the vagina to be freely un-censored in the public square continues.

But the courageous few are winning. Maybe comments like this will encourage yet more of these pretty young 'protesters' to shed all their clothes . . .eh?

hxxp://www.flickr.com/photos/dariusz69/sets/72157620924787389/

Pointless to post 1 photo, so a couple of favourites, and definitive list of links you may not have.

hxxp://wiki.worldnakedbikeride.org/wiki/London_photos#2009

hxxp://wiki.worldnakedbikeride.org/index.php?title=Brighton_%26_Hove_photos#Flickr_2

Incidentaly, if anyone managed to grab the 12 photos pulled from page 8 of the below, please post.

hxxp://photonaturiste.free.fr/modules.php?ModPath=td-galerie&ModStart=gal&op=gal&galid=236

I am curious to know who it is, that thinks they can ride around naked in our capital city, and simultaneously prohibit any images of said event therafter.

Public means Public. Private means Private.

These people must understand that they do not own the 'Public' roads / spaces, when they choose to use them.

Afterall, their activity is normally arrestable 364 days a year. Not a strong point to start laying the law down to others is it?

*****WATERMARKED PHOTOS REMOVED*****

[crispus]

psiman99 - I thank you for your pictures, but as for your statements I can only say: you are quite correct in your position, but utterly wrong in taking it. Yes, by choosing to be naked in public, these women subject themselves, without any legal recourse, to whatever photographic invasion may be visited on them. If, however, that attention makes them sufficiently uncomfortable, even outraged, what they have every right to do, and what I am positive many will choose to do, IS NEVER DO IT AGAIN! Does the expression "Pyrrhic victory" (winning the battle, only to lose the war because of the battle's cost) resonate at all? What I assume we all want is to get more, not less, participants in these events, and I implore you, and anyone who takes similar positions to yours, to carefully consider what attitudes are most likely to achieve that end. Thanks, and I now leave the soapbox...

[psiman99]

"you are quite correct in your position, but utterly wrong in taking it"


Hmm . . . well thanks for your response crispus, I understand the point you make about deterring future participants, any photos are better than no photos, but is this the real choice ?

What about the other women that went there to be photographed, the 3 women in the pulled photo ? They loose out as well.

Given the opportunity, I think a % of women (and men) are hardwired for such exhibitionism.

WNBR is voluntary, and I doubt one drop of oil has been preservered due to their nakedness, in fact, the electricity used up & downloading, viewing, cropping, talking about, - etc - has increased oil usage, because it's all done on computers. Computers burn oil through electricty . . . .

The point being, I really don't think WNBR has jacksh#t to do with oil consumption.

It's about the deeply embedded carnal Human desire to be seen, and to see. A symbiotic relationship betwen the two types.

The Fisherman's recent account of the fully spread eagle chick, with a guy 5ft away staring up her holes, springs to mind.

If you do a bit of wading, you will see availabe, ulta hi -res, zoomed in, perfectly focused crystal clear images of male genitalia by the shedload.

It does not stop these men turning up year after year. The numbers get bigger each year, not smaller.

These gay orientated sites do not suffer from, 'Oh, I best keep it balanced and dedicate 50% of my site to women' B.S.

They freely and openly, express and celebrate their preferred tastes.

So I find it an injustice that hetrosexual men are discouraged from celebrating their prefered tastes, whilst gay men and women are granted unconditional freedom of expression in identical cicumstances.

This factor massively effects the quantity and quality of post, right here and now at OCC, so it's on subject.

e.g.

hxxp://www.flickr.com/photos/carlosfpardo/3621970853/in/set-72157619696255602/

But I do also agree crispus, full on pornographic photos of the ladies would probaly slay some of the Golden Geese.

So instead, we will have to make do with low res inadvertant pussy shots like this gorgeous blonde did. Zoom and imagine as it's 36k.

And photos No 2 - 7.

She is knockout, is it really worth year after year of polite, decent, 200k photos,

Or should someone be damned, and upload the hi -res, perfectly focused cristal clear 6 mb versions instead ?

And if you may have stumbled down here Ms Knockout, your participating opinion would help settle the matter.

[stevin6]

Originally Posted by psiman99

Incidentaly, if anyone managed to grab the 12 photos pulled from page 8 of the below, please post.

hxxp://photonaturiste.free.fr/modules.php?ModPath=td-galerie&ModStart=gal&op=gal&galid=236

I think these pics were already posted here. You just have to compare every posted picture at photonaturiste.free.fr with every posted pic i this thread. Those 12 pics are between all the pics which are in this thread (and coming from Flickr) and not on that website.

[Pedro the Fisherman]

photonaturiste.free.fr just trawl the net and re-post photos of anything nude. There is never anything exclusive there! Loads of my WNBR shots have been there, without any request, but hey, what does it matter.

And if you may have stumbled down here Ms Knockout, your participating opinion would help settle the matter.

If you are talking about the girl below (2008 pics here, but she rode again in 2009), she is actually a 'Facebook friend' of mine and is indeed a bit of an exhibitionist! I just wish she would stick to getting naked, instead of her latest hobby...collecting metalwork on her body!

I have ridden in several WNBR's and have found pics of myself on collections of 'gay' photographers collections on Flikr.....poor sods, they must have been a bit desperate!

It is fact of life, without the internet and digital cameras, we may have more naked females.....but none of us here would get the chance to see them! The women I know on the WNBR groups (and in person) know what riding naked entails, and to be honest, those that ride fully naked to not really care where the photos end up, as long as the guys taking photos treat them with respect and politeness...not always the case, I am afraid.

[psiman99]

"photonaturiste.free.fr just trawl the net and re-post photos of anything nude. There is never anything exclusive there! Loads of my WNBR shots have been there, without any request, but hey, what does it matter."

Please also excuse my inability to get the quote function sussed by now. But I can handle "".

I thought there were some larger versions of crappy 150k photos, and some new exclusives, like those posted here. So I posted.

I have downloaded about 4 Gig of WNBR photos this year, so keeping it all in order within a month of the event, is beyond me. And then there is the record level of Fremont photos. I do try to only post 'fresh' photos. Like the bottom one.

As the season is about finished, it probably won't happen again, due to lack of anything to post.

Totally agree with you about the 'hardwired exhibistionist', metal collection hobbyist, hope she does n't move on to tattoes . . . I prefer skin, the more the better.

[stevin6]

The only original photos on Photonaturiste.free may be those which were shot by French participants and spectators.