Irony of Naked Rambler advertising clothes!

 

 

This page was created because Stephen Gough (the Naked Rambler) and his supporters hijacked the campaign name “The Freedom To Be Yourself.” They distorted the idea of Skin Freedom for Every Body. When I was in contact with the Naked Rambler in 2002/2003 he always called himself “Steve” not “Stephen” so I will mainly refer to him as “Steve.”

 

Thankfully after Steve’s release from prison on July 17th 2012 it seems he’s stopped hijacking the slogan The Freedom To Be Yourself, which I Vincent Bethell created, but Steve continues to cause damage to to the issue of public nakedness.

 

The main argument of the page can easily be deduced but in this draft state you may need to fill in the dots slightly. I have however written some blog-posts which can compensate for any inadequacies in this draft-page:

 

Initial blog-post about Steve. A response to his July 17th release from prison: http://srhsp.posterous.com/146985317

 

Is my criticism of Steve “sour grapes?” http://srhsp.posterous.com/sour-grapes-regarding-stephen-gough

 

Press Release regarding Steve: http://srhsp.posterous.com/vincent-bethell-condemns-naked-rambler-39962

 

I think Steve Gough is a attention seeker.

 

My main objection to Steve is based on a strong possibility he’s merely using public nakedness to seek attention. Instead of public nakedness being a basic human rights issue for Steve, I think he sees it primarily as a “job” (according to the Daily Mail) thus Steve is very similar to the countless celebrity wannabes who strip for money. Stephen is nothing more than a glorified stripper, or perhaps an ethical stripper because I do fully recognise he presents his attention-seeking in a human rights context but ultimately I believe his attention seeking is the principle motive. I think fame and attention are his prime motivations despite his clear desire to change perceptions via being able to be naked in public.

 

WikilLeaks has demonstrated how mainstream journalists do not value truth or cutting edge news. It is all an issue of manufacturing consent, (manipulated, artificial consent, effectual brainwashing via omission of facts) profits and compliance with businesses/industry/Governments trumps journalistic accuracy. Profits trump truth thus a serious portrayal of nakedness issues such as SRHSP will be less likely to be mentioned in the media. Surely the facts regarding the history naked protesting which inspired Steve, facts which include a unanimous jury verdict and legal history regarding the first ever defendant to be naked throughout the trial, surely these issues deserve at least a footnote, but instead of acknowledging the highly organised and very effective campaigning of The Freedom To Be Yourself, instead of acknowledging the powerful ideas of Stop Racist Human Skin Phobia, journalists throughout Steve’s rambling (up to July 19th 2012) have ignored these issues.  

 

Steve represents a safe or less-contentious portrayal of nakedness issues because via his attention seeking presentation, which is devoid of the real meat regarding the ideas behind public nakedness. Akin to turning punk-rock into a corporate money making venture. Steve’s ideology is rambling, fundamentally lacking in clarity thus his half-baked rambling is a more attractive for the mass media which often prefers banality instead of serious though-provoking issues. Steve represents a way for the media to neutralise public nakedness via cosigning the naked body to one eccentric rambler, but the truth is nakedness applies to every-BODY, these issues are bigger then any one person therefore anyone who tries to make public nakedness relevant to only themselves is distorting the issue. This is why I, Vincent Bethell, have always strive to put the campaign first whereas Steve puts himself first, he misappropriates the strenuous effort of other activists.

 

I believe Stephen is the "Daniel Domscheit-Berg" of public nakedness but you probably won't hear this truth via mainstream media. Via using TFTBY campaign name without crediting the hard effort and progress made by other campaigners, and via continuing to remain silent regarding the history of naked rights activism, Steve has effectually stolen intellectual property. Similar to how Daniel Domscheit-Berg sabotaged the WikiLeaks submission system I believe Steve Gough’s self-centred portrayal of nakedness sabotages the wider issue of skin-freedom for every-BODY.

 

Daily Telegraph Newspaper Fashion Shoot - 2nd February 2004:

 

►   “He is happy to model suits by the Prime Minister’s favourite designer...”

_________________________________________________________________________

 

 

● Steve Gough (Stephen Gough) is notorious for his Naked Walks but what are his real motives?

 

● Why would someone trying to gain the right to be naked in public take part in a fashion shoot? Surely this seems somewhat hypocritical.

 

● Why would someone campaigning for “nakedness-rights” endorse the fashion industry?

 

_________________________________________________________________________

 

 

STEPHEN GOUGH - NAKED RAMBLER

 

 

It is very annoying that Steve Gough and supporters have hijacked The Freedom To Be Yourself campaign name. Steve Gough seems to be an eccentric attention seeker. His bumbling rambles do more harm than good for universal Skin Freedom. He has spent an inordinate amount of time bumbling around jails in Scotland but he hasn’t yet summoned the competence to secure decisive not guilty verdict. The intense effort that I, Vincent Bethell, put into gaining two not guilty verdicts is somewhat wasted, because many people now associate public nakedness with one lone guy who rambles around the countryside frequently ending up in jails without securing a not guilty verdict. Vincent Bethell is not connected in any way to Steve Gough.

 

Admittedly Steve finally made some progress by being released from jail, on July 17th 2012, without being arrested upon release, but when I began my continuous period nakedness on 13th of August 2000 I did everything I could to ensure a decisive not guilty verdict. I took every measure possible to minimise my stay in prison, whereas Steve by focusing on Scotland, where police and courts are narrow-minded, he seems to be setting himself up for mere attention without a decisive verdict. I purposefully focused on London because people are more open-minded therefore the chances of being able to be naked in public were greatly increased, which means are more people are likely to take part in public nakedness. Injustice needs to be tackled everywhere but it makes more sense to have a few easy wins before tacking the toughest nuts, thus if Steve had focused on London, continuing where I finished after I retired due to illness, I am sure more progress would have been made regarding relating the issue of nakedness to every-BODY. It seems Steve wants to be the lone focus of attention thus by choosing the hostile justice of Scotland he deters people from joining him, which in my opinion suits his attention seeking. Have you seen Glasgow or Newcastle on a Friday night; its grim up-North. In addition the the Glaswegian Kiss I wouldn’t be surprised if they continued to burn witches at the stake in Scotland.   

 

I, Vincent Bethell, always strove to relate the issue of Skin Freedom to everybody thus I shunned personal attention. I turned down a lucrative deal to advertise sports footwear and I also turned down an offer to promote a shoe store. Advertising clothes or making money from nakedness would irreparably taint the seriousness of these issues. Steve Gough and his supporters reject the fact that Skin Freedom is a racial issue regarding racist hatred of the human race. Their inability to treat this issue seriously, in the serious racial terms it deserves, suggests they are not truly serious. The renaming of TFTBY also serves the purpose of creating distance between true Skin Freedom activists and phony pretenders. There is no excuse for willingly taking part in a fashion shoot advertising clothes to value of £8637. Stephen Gough uses the name THE FREEDOM TO BE YOURSELF contrary to Vincent's explicit wishes. There is no excuse for endorsing and publicising the fashion industry.

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

 

 

 

 

NAKED RAMBLER MODELS CLOTHES    2nd February 2004

 

►   “He Proved to be a surprisingly enthusiastic model.”

 

Total price of clothing modelled £8637!

Richard Collins (naturist, supporter, and publicist for Steve) also took part in this fashion shoot.

Clockwise, from top left

 

Steve Gough wears metallic cotton jacket, £540, short-sleeved shirt, £135 and jeans, £160... Steve wear Jubilee tweed shooting suit, jacket, and waistcoat... Steve wears cotton canvas suit, £620, and belt, £59.... Steve wears cotton canvas biker jacket, S-XL, also in black, £149... Steve wears wool/mix pinstripe suit, jacket, 38-48, trousers 30-40 waist, 29-33 leg, £199... Steve wears Prince of Wales check suit, 40-48, £1,995... Etc., Etc..

 

 

_______________________________________

 

“Let’s get ready to ramble”:

Image is from a Daily Telegraph newspaper article dated 2nd February 2004 regarding Steve Gough (also known as "The Naked Rambler") modelling clothing!

 

_______________________________________

 

 

© This image is used in accordance with "fair-use" copyright-law-regulations; whereby usage is permitted for the purpose of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, or education. Furthermore no profit whatsoever is made via its usage.

■  BACK

 

This page is being updated but considering current news I posted this draft update, last updated 20th July 2012, 08.46am. Excuse typos while I edit, I make lots during drafting process. Considering lack of media interest in the bigger public nakedness activism picture regarding Steve (note Steve’s usage of TFTBY slogan and his unacknowledged involvement with TFTBY) the updates are paused, they will continue at a leisurely pace.

Would you suspect a person's motives if someone from PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) used their PETA generated publicity to endorse hamburgers or fur coats? There’s absolutely no possibility that anyone professing to care about "public nakedness rights" can have any credibility if they willingly endorse the clothing industry.  No excuse!       ► Steve Gough should be disregarded.

■  Back                           ■  Home Page