Inspired by the last post, about a young woman who wishes she registered naked and instead of just topless, the possibility of changing your registration is kind of an interesting background detail to consider. It may not come up in captions too often, but since I like imagine how this stuff would work if it were real, let’s think about it for a bit. Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments.
Obviously the fact that you have to commit to being permanently naked for a certain length of time (usually one or two years minimum) is a core part of the setting, so it certainly shouldn’t be easy to get out of. And if you’re received a permanently naked or bottomless sentence as punishment for a crime, then clearly the only way to change it would be to successfully appeal your conviction, same as if you were put in jail.
But there might be some cases where changing your registration would be reasonable. For instance in that caption, she’s registered voluntarily, and she wants to be more exposed, not less. In that case, I can’t think of any reason she shouldn’t be allowed to “upgrade” her registration to permanently naked. The same might apply somewhere that used the strict/standard/relaxed system. Say someone registered “relaxed naked”, meaning only their nipples and crotch actually have to be exposed, but then they find out their employer would still require them to wear a modified uniform, and they decide they’d rather just be totally naked all the time. Would that be reasonable to allow?
As for actually canceling a voluntary registration like this poor lady wants to do, there probably would be some kind of process, but it wouldn’t be easy. You’d have to prove that you’d actually been coerced into it, that your registration is causing a real significant hardship or some kind of very solid reason like that. Even in a jurisdiction that was liberal about it and willing to basically let you change your mind, I imagine you’d have to show some kind of “good cause”, like a major event in your life which you could not have anticipated when you registered. Back to that last caption, even if she’s lucky enough to live somewhere like that, I doubt if a breakup would be considered a strong enough reason. Maybe if she’d actually been married and got divorced.
Loading Likes...
Just think of it like a government would; top and bottom are separate forms. For topless you just fill out form A, for bottomless you fill out form B, for full nudity you fill out both forms.
That would be logical, but since when are governments logical?
They are treated as separate categories for historical reasons. First there was Permanently Naked, rolled out more or less simultaneously as a new sentencing option, and something people could sign up voluntarily. Later some people decided the voluntary option diluted its effectiveness as a punishment, so they created a separate category, Permanently Bottomless, to be used as a punishment exclusively. Permanently Topless came last, perhaps as sort of a compromise, instead of allowing female topfreedom across the board as some states (notably New York) have done in real life.
[Removed at user request]
Definitely. Otherwise that would be kind of a loophole. Clearly it was considered important that people have to commit to it for a a long time. So it wouldn’t do to let say a woman whose topless registration is expiring in a few days convert the tail end of her registration to naked, “just for fun”.
As you said, the new registration would have to be for whatever they’ve established as the minimum (usually one or two years). The old registration would be replaced, rather than converted.
I think it might depend on why the PN system was set up in the first place. If it was begun in a particular jurisdiction strictly as a punishment, with no voluntary option, but people kept breaking the law by streaking, so they added the voluntary registration mainly as a way to keep the courts from being overwhelmed, they might decide to restrict the ability to change the registration in any way — even increasing the exposure.
I see no reason why both versions might not exist in different jurisdictions. However, much as I like the idea of more nudity, I feel the restriction can add its own drama to the situation. In fact, I used it explicitly in my submission “Big Mistake” : http://www.nudeworldorder.net/blog/498/
That’s a good point. I definitely imagine this as something that would vary from state to state. And it makes sense that whether a given jurisdiction emphasizes the punishment or voluntary aspect is something that would influence their policy on allowing changes or not.
So just to be clear, I’m certainly not saying that caption you linked is retroactively wrong, or anything. There could certainly be places that just don’t allow any changes.
I just finished a fun story were the State of Texas has implemented the penal Permanude, but rejected the voluntary. Of course, in the three months its been on the books, 97% of all those given Permanent Nudity have been young girls! I can see that the fight to get this passed into law could end up with some crazy things, like no change for the length of the time. People are just crazy where clothes are concerned.
Gloria
I’d think upgrading a voluntary registration to something more strict or longer duration should never be a problem.
Changing an involuntary registration wouldn’t seem reasonable, as it’s not supposed to be something to be enjoyed much.
Of course a court could always decide to add to someone’s punishment for further offenses (e.g. changing a 3 year bottomless sentence to a 5 year pn sentence).