World Naked Bike Ride 2014 In Pictures

Londoners dared to bare at the weekend during the country’s largest annual nude protest: World Naked Bike Ride. The fleshy flotilla stopped traffic as it toured around the West End on a route that took in Trafalgar Square and the Houses of Parliament, saluting Nelson’s Column and Big Ben as they passed by. What they were protesting about ranged from cycle safety (more secure helmets?) to anti-fracking to the freedom to strip off in public on a hot summer’s day. Intrepid Londonist photographer Jose Farinha stripped off to join the ride and covered it — using a long lens, of course.

All photos copyright Jose Farinha.

Tags:

josefarinha

Article by José Farinha | 15 Articles | View Profile

  • http://www.HYHOI.com Nina at HaveYouHeardOfIt?

    Oh wow! Think I’ll stick to indoor spinning classes WITH my clothes on! This is my fave, Psycle: http://hyhoi.com/2014/05/psycle-spinning-workout-interior-design/

  • Lila Pavlerou

    Really nice photos, what a great day it was for a naked bike ride.
    Shame about the shameless plug below.

    • George F

      The person below is right. There are parents with kids up London. Some of those kids that haven’t yet been educated about adults bodies, and/or adult bodies of the opposite sex, because they’re very young. And with this lot are irresponsibly riding around naked for a cheap thrill, kids aren’t left much choice but to see their display of indecent exposure.

      • Areyoukidding

        There’s nothing indecent about this. If anything it would give children a more healthy understanding of the world and themselves.

        • George F

          It’s known by the law as indecent exposure. Don’t you think other peoples and their children should have a choice? A little selfish on the cyclists part to say the least isn’t it?

          • http://www.facebook.com/george.forth George Forth

            Two parts to this: indecency and exposure. Exposure in this case is clear. Indecency is far harder to quantify. Given the fact that this is an annual event (ie nothing new) and that they were being cheered on by the crowds, I’d hazard a guess that the law would noyt consider this indecent.

            Remember, just because *you* thinks it’s indecent, doesn’t mean the law does.

          • George F

            Just as, because *you* think it’s not indecent, or rather, disorderly conduct doesn’t mean the law doesn’t. Hence there’s been cases where people have been arrested for it. And right so, I say.

      • Jason

        Your kid would be just fine. Again, get over yourself.

        • George F

          My kid will be educated on matters in good time. Not when a cyclist seeking a cheap thrill decides to force the issue.
          Would you pick your child up from school wearing nothing? You’d expect other parents to accept that as well?

          • Guest2

            Whether a cheap thrill or not, your child isn’t going to judge a human body based on the motive of the naked person. Moreover there are clearly situations where you may tolerate or accept something but may not emulate said thing or action. For example I wouldn’t dream of repeating half of the things I hear in Hyde Park Corner but I respect free speech. Hence no I wouldn’t pick my child up from school in the flesh. But would I tolerate others being nude in a well publicised annual event. Yes.

  • GUEST

    WRONG IN SOOOOO MANY WAYS!!! YES NAKED IS NATURAL BUT WHAT ABOUT IF YOU WERE OUT WITH YOUR KIDS? COMING ACROSS A WHOLE LOT OF NAKED PEOPLE AIN’T FUN

    • George F

      Exactly.

      • Betolerant

        Tolerance just be tolerant……what’s the problem? And seeing people drinking or taking drugs its nicer and more educative than seeing people naked for a reason????……open your mind :)

        • George F

          You’ll never reach an understanding with that thinking.
          For example, who the hell are you to “tolerate” me? And who the hell am I to “tolerate” you?
          As for “open your mind”, that’s summed up well here – http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/O…. In particular ” “you’re not going to like this, but I want to subject you to it anyway” (The cyclists attitude all over when it comes to parents going about their day in London).

    • nicola branch

      Actually the parents are irresponsible – it’s attitudes like that that lead to problems of sex and sexuality, as a child I saw naked bodies from day one – four generations living under one roof going in and out of the bathroom in the morning. Naked is normal.

      • George F

        The parents are irresponsible because their YOUNG CHILDREN haven’t yet had anything to do with sex explained to them? Who are or anyone else to decide that?
        Everyone’s brought up differently. But children that saw that display of indecent exposure would’ve had NO CHOICE.
        Naked is normal on the streets of Britain? Go out naked and see how long it takes you to get arrested then.

        • Jason

          Naked doesn’t have anything to do with sex — You made her point…

          • George F

            Naked doesn’t have anything to do with sex? I’d have thought that anyone commenting here would’ve been aware that a male and female have different sexual organs. Oh, but those sexual organs have nothing to do with sex. Erm…. right, okay.
            Try again perhaps?

          • M

            Your kids dont get the choice. They need to feel ashamed around human sexual differences that are natural because you make a big deal out of what is natural. Many kids see their parents having bath with them. Many people are going to the beach naked. They are not sexually excited and this is nothing sexual. You can make your childrem be shy about their sexualty or they will get over it – who knows but you can’t make other people change their choices. They choose to make themselves and their children feel natural and not ashamed and they will show up naked. And good. Your kid will be kept home until they meet some pervert getting naked next to school. Much worse. And seing naked man for the first time in such way they will consider naked people as a bad thing just as you, instead to just accept it.

          • George F

            I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with how people bring up their children (of course, as long as they’re not abused, goes without saying) – if nakedness is fine in the home, then that’s there’s no issue.
            But that’s a different thing to going out on public streets – unlike a nudist beach, where people don’t necessarily expect it – and leaving other peoples children with no choice in the matter, also the parents. That, is the completely thoughtless (and selfish) part on the cyclists behalf. So no, the kids don’t need to feel ashamed at all. BUT, I put parents decisions first, and how they bring up their children, before cyclists desires to display their genitals in public.

    • http://www.facebook.com/george.forth George Forth

      Why? What are you afraid your children might ask you?

      • George F

        Shouldn’t parents have a choice?

        Would you walk around a childrens school naked too?

        • hose

          Why does there need a next step?? you just say “look at the funny people not wearing any clothes” and move on. I think this is your own weird problem, don’t pass your neuroses on to your children.

  • George F

    Why wasn’t any of them arrested for indecent exposure? I seriously don’t get why they law doesn’t apply to them when it comes to this.

    • http://www.facebook.com/george.forth George Forth

      Word to the wise: the offence of “indecent exposure” was abolished by the Sexual Offences Act 2003. The only criminal offences now are about showing your parts off deliberately to shock people.

      You’re out of date, mate.

    • JSW

      I think what all this really comes down to is people such as yourself having a personal vendetta against cyclists. No need to hide your intolerance of modes of transport you consider beneath you behind a non-existent slight against your children

  • Barry McGee

    Poor Boris Bikes.. they didn’t deserve that!

  • nicola branch

    Very very sad and ignorant attitudes towards nudity.
    Get over yourselves, you’re all the same underneath.

    • George F

      It’s more ignorant and thoughtless to decide peoples children should have to see that.

      • Jason

        Oh get over yourself!

        • George F

          Get over your ignorance!

          • M

            Nobody deserve a tragedy of life under threat of some shy intolerant parents. Your kids are your problem. I rather care about elderly, animals or even weather. Why we get threatened by someone’s kids and intolerance? It’s your values not mine, keep it to yourself.

          • George F

            “It’s your values not mine, keep it to yourself.”

            You don’t see the irony of you saying that?

      • HHGeek

        “What is right for you, isn’t necessarily right for others. ”

        Quite. So stop trying to impose your personal anti-nakedness stance on others. The point of cities like London is that there should be room for everyone, and if you don’t like what you see, you can go somewhere else. Try doing that in a village.

  • Lux Lisbon

    George F is really falling apart. He’s no doubt over 50, as all the social prudes are.

    • George F

      Falling apart? Not at all. That’d be what’s known as – wishful thinking, on your part. You’re no doubt a cyclist. As for prude, not one single bit. Obviously you’re unable to tell the difference between being a prude and being a responsible adult.

      • Allan

        George – I’m not a cyclist but I completely agree with most people here. This is a standard event held every year, if you don’t want to see it (or you want to prevent your kids from seeing it) don’t go into town on that day – simple. London is a diverse place to live and I wouldn’t have it any other way – it’s nothing about being “responsible”. Perhaps you just like a little moan?

        • George F

          I should think you probably are a cyclist, but still.
          On the Londonist page, most people are disgusted by it. London is a PUBLIC place where people wouldn’t necessarily have pre-warning about those on cycles looking for cheap thrills. A little selfish on the cyclists part isn’t it, to think other people and their children should have no choice whatsoever in having to see that. It’s everything about being a responsible adult. Would you walk past a childrens school like that too?

          • http://www.facebook.com/george.forth George Forth

            I’m on the Londonist page now and it looks like your “most people” is pretty much just you and one other anonymous commenter.

          • George F

            Would you like me to copy/paste the comments?

          • JSW

            I took my kids into London the other week and couldn’t believe it, there were negroes everywhere!!! They had the audacity to come out in public when I had yet to educate my kids that there are humans in the world that don’t look the exact spitting image of themselves!!! Unbelievable.

        • Jason

          Well said Allan. This event comes every year — if you don’t want your kids seeing it, avoid the area. Its your responsibility as parent to do so. People do not have to abide by George’s unreasonable expectations.

          • George F

            Not everyone would be aware it’s going on, despite what you say It’s actually your responsibility as an adult to put some clothes on.
            People do not have to abide by cyclists unreasonable demands in general – like expecting others to avoid the area, just so they can get their cheap thrills.

          • T

            George F. is a troll. Noone intelligent would post so many times.

          • George F

            If I’m replied to, I have no problem replying back. How original, calling someone a troll.

      • Jason

        What’s so “responsible” about your view? What makes you more responsible than these guys? I’d love to hear!

        • George F

          “What’s so “responsible” about your view?” You asked.

          For a start, I’d wear protective clothing if on a cycle. Is that not being responsible? Yes or no?

      • JSW

        Proving what I posted above, you are just another person with an unsubstantiated hatred towards cyclists, and you are attempting to hide that behind a non-existent moral issue.

  • Dave

    It’s disappointing to see how readily some people conflate the concepts of nudity and indecency. Small wonder that there are so many sexual crimes in this country when there are people who think that the human body is a shameful, dirty thing.

    Thankfully London is a grown-up, open-minded place that does not often get bogged down in narrow-minded attitudes like this.

    • George F

      Dave, you’re another person who is unable to tell the difference between being a prude and being a responsible adult.

      • Dave

        You’re not really making your point very well here, George. I didn’t mention the word ‘prude’, but I fail to see the reason for considering nudity to be indecent, or irresponsible for that matter. And you’ve not really been able to back up that association either (despite dragging your irrelevant prejudices about cyclists into the argument).

        • George F

          Where did I say you did said the world prude? So your attitude is – other people and their kids should see your genitals. If they don’t, they are narrow minded.
          It’s not for cyclists looking for cheap thrills – on the streets of London – to force their indecent exposure (as it’s known by law) upon others children whilst they’re going about their day with their parents, especially when those children may well have not been educated about adults bodies, including that of the opposite sex.
          Don’t you think parents should be able to educate children in their own time?

          I’ve said the way it is when it comes to cyclists. The majority of them do go through red lights, and they are generally considered a pain by other road users and pedestrians. Of course they don’t think the law applies to them here also. It’s hardly an irrelevant prejudice on my part that cyclists jump read lights constantly and I’m pointing it out.

          • Dave

            While you use the phrase “cheap thrills” pejoratively, as a literal expression I see no problem with it. In fact, I’m in favour of “free thrills”. Why pay for it?

            Of course, you’re actually using that phrase to imply that the cyclists here are doing it for some sort of perverse or sexual gratification. Of course, this is not borne out by the evidence, despite your implications.

            As far as your repeated use of the phrase “indecent exposure” goes, it is neither accurate nor legally correct. If it were, this activity would be illegal, and would have been prevented or stopped (instead of being a celebrated annual event in London).

            And when it comes to “educating children”, I’m pretty sure all children are familiar with nudity, as they have all been naked themselves from time to time. Sure, adult bodies are bigger (and hairier at times), but I really can’t see how this is would be particularly bothersome to a child (unless they had been brainwashed by their parents to find such obviously normal things distressing).

            Taking away your inflammatory and inaccurate terminology, it’s pretty clear that your argument is full of holes.

          • George F

            Yeah, I got the impression you’d have no issues with cheap thrills.

            “Of course, you’re actually using that phrase to imply that the cyclists here are doing it for some sort of perverse or sexual gratification.”

            “Sexual gratification”. Good choice of words by you (you’ll see why in a sec).
            And if you don’t think they’re getting a cheap thrill out of it then you’re extremely naive.
            It’s called exhibitionism. As follows…

            “Psychological aspects: Exhibitionism was first described as a disorder in a scientific journal in 1877 by a French physician and psychiatrist Charles Lasègue (1809–1883).
            When exhibitionism interferes with a person’s quality of life or normal functioning capacity it is considered a psychological disorder categorized by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, 4th Edition (class 302.4) as a sexual deviation called “Paraphilia”. Many psychiatric definitions of exhibitionism broadly define it as “sexual gratification, above and beyond the sexual act itself, that is achieved by public sexual activity and/or bodily exposure.
            Engaging in exhibitionism can also lead to being charged, in many countries, with a criminal offence, due to the criminal nature of indecent exposure.”

            Not to mention it’s a bit stupid to say the least , considering protection should be worn on cycles. It comes across as nothing other than attention seeking by complete idiots to a lot of us. And yes, cheap thrill seeking. Why can’t they go to a nudist beach if that’s their thing rather than going to public places where it wouldn’t necessarily be expected. Parents, taking their children out for the day, for example. Kids, passing by on a bus.

            All I’m seeing is you trying to justify this. Do you really think it’d be perfectly fine for you, exposing yourself – a stranger – in front of other peoples young children? Obviously you do. And yet that shows you have absolutely no thought whatsoever for the way other people live. It’s completely and utterly ignorant on your part.

            No holes whatsoever in my argument. Can’t say the same for you. At least one of us is a responsible adult around others – who may have no wish whatsoever to see strangers getting their cheap thrills in public areas.

          • Dave

            Fine, fine. Hold onto your puritanical rhetoric and out-of-context cherry-picked definitions, if you think it helps back up your shaky logic and persistent invective. Fortunately most people (here, in modern society, and in law enforcement) can see through it.

            I imagine 21st century London must be an almost constant disappointment to you.

          • George F

            Most people here, because like I said, cyclists will flock to this article, looking for articles on their day out. Unlike on Facebook where it pops up in the average persons newsfeed.
            Perhaps you ought to understand what cherry picking means, before accusing somebody of it, unless you’re able to elaborate on how you view what I’ve said as such, and can give an example. I’ll be happy to refute it. Same goes with “shaky logic”. Or perhaps the best you can do is leave comments like the one that I’ve just replied to, which essentially says nothing. Read it again, then you’ll see. You’re attacking the messenger, not the message. Perhaps that’s because the overall message isn’t one you have a valid argument against. And let’s face it, you haven’t a valid argument against it so far.

            As for law enforcement, go for a naked stroll to your local supermarket and see the outcome. Go on, try.
            You don’t fancy it? It’s warm enough out there, so why not?

            The 21st century? Almost all people in the western world wear clothes in public. Perhaps you’d feel more at home in some of the third world countries where clothes aren’t worn so much?
            That is the way it is in the 21st century after all, isn’t it?
            Baring that in mind, I should think it is you who feels disappointment at not being born in a more uncivilised country. Oh!

          • Dave

            Nope. You’re still not convincing anyone with this.

            By the way, upvoting your own comments tends to make you look a bit desperate.

          • George F

            Yep, and other people have already made their minds up. Didn’t you see the comments elsewhere on Facebook?

            Ironic that you’d mention the word desperate why trying to defend those cheap thrill seekers (even in front of kids). And I agree with what I say. So why shouldn’t I?

  • Martin Newlan

    I was in central London with my granddaughters (four and two) at the right time but we missed all the excitement. There are a few people contributing to this who need to lighten-up a bit and keep a sense of humour! Bike saddles are bad enough clothed. Imagine sitting on one with a naked bottom!!

  • deh

    Thank you for solidarity from Turkey! All we need is just more freedom for a happy world

    • George F

      You think perverts should have freedom to do as they please?

  • Aasim Jamil

    Now what next you Londoners will demand ? Probably sex on the streets. Please wake up! do not make the world more complex by spreading vulgarism and messing it up. Whether you agree or not, it will remain as what it seems-an indecent act of frustrated pervert minds. Its a plea to be a bit traditional, when the whole world is struggling to make their ends meet, you guys have got surplus time to indulge in such hooliganism. Defecating and urinating are also natural, then go and do it on the streets.

    • http://www.facebook.com/george.forth George Forth

      You’re so right – traditional. Like, um, horses instead of cars, loincloths instead of designer clothes, throwing sewage into the street, lepers with bells on… Any other traditional practises we should be following?

      • Aasim Jamil

        @George… yes a bit of rational mindset please and respect of human race and its heritage would b a big favour to the world. When i said “traditional”, it meant moderate. I am afraid you failed to understand my point of view. I love technology, this new world and all the comforts & luxury however there is a fine line between a healthy world and a screwed up 1. How would you feel if your children see you naked or having sex ?? For me that would b the most awkward moment of my life. Now this fake freedom attitude is reaching its threshold, Very ALARMING…….

        • George F

          He’d most likely be fine with his children seeing him naked.
          However, he seems unable to differentiate between how he brings up his children, and how other people do. Very thoughtless on his part.

          • Aasim Jamil

            One does not suppose to teach everything to his children. Let them learn themselves out of experience at some appropriate stage of their life cycle. There should be a democratic approach. None can teach sex, it’s a variable feeling not some sort of academic qualification or crash course. Excess of everything can make you sick, even the good can be your curse. So please stop these unnecessary campaigns. If you want to campaign then have it against: unfair wages, high unemployment, inflation, dropping university enrolment, increased shortage of Mathematicians & Physicist. Look around and analyse, how can you make a positive difference in the society rather than taking it back to the Stone Age, where humans didn’t have clothes on them. The difference between a naked and clothed person would be: the former would have a body only whereas the latter would have a persona.

      • George F

        All that stuff came later in history than the invention of clothes. ;-)

  • Gnome_Chumpskie

    taking a dump is natural too; though I prefer it not be done on the street in front of me and the little ones

    gnome sayin’?

  • Derek

    George F must have a small chopper

    • George F

      Whatever made you think that. Psychological projection on your part much?

  • https://soundcloud.com/inhead-kay/ Kay

    All my life I’ve always made sure to avoid London on WNBR days, but last weekened I was near Kings X and hordes of wrinkly saggy old folks on bikes (and WORSE on Boris bikes) attacked me in military fashion. The horror. Some things I can’t erase from mind for life. Living in London is never easy…

  • http://www.NudistDatingSites.net/ NudistSingle.net

    cool naked ride!

  • konga

    When everyone in this world choose to be naked, then there wouldn’t be a problem……..and naked becomes normal. Until then, there are multiple issues, and points of view…….whether you respect those views or otherwise.

    • George F

      “When everyone in this world choose to be naked, then there wouldn’t be a problem”

      So, rape doesn’t happen in third world countries where people walk around naked?

      Don’t be so naive.

      • Aasim Jamil

        @George F.. rape crime is happening around the world so if you are tagging it with 3rd world countries only, would be irrational. The difference is of, a large number of such cases go un-notice in western world in disguise of consensual sex. Please check the statistics and would know the exact number of sexual assault, harassment and crimes across developed countries.

        • George F

          I asked “So, rape doesn’t happen in third world countries where people walk around naked?” and yet from that, you’ve come up with “if you are tagging it with 3rd world countries only, would be irrational.”

          That was in answer to “”When everyone in this world choose to be naked, then there wouldn’t be a problem” with was both naive and absolutely not true.

  • EcoHustler

    Nifty… could this be The Solution to Pollution?http://www.ecohustler.co.uk/2011/06/03/the-solution-to-pollution/

  • amy

    With regard to some of the discussion below, i’d like to share my personal experience as a participant of this event. Growing up in a socially conservative family and culture, I was not exposed to natural naked bodies. I was also taught to feel shame at my own nudity. Children WILL and DO inevitably see semi-naked bodies exposed in a variety of ways, predominantly with sexual undertones, in british culture. I cannot overstate the effect this imbalance had on my attitude towards my own body. I felt a great deal of self-loathing for many years. Taking part in this ride, particularly the friendliness, respect and good humour of the other riders, did more than any other experience (or any amount of time spent consciously trying to feel ‘confident’) has done to convince me that I had absolutely nothing to be ashamed about. Obviously I am speaking only and completely from personal experience (as a 21 year old woman) but I WISH now that I had seen such a variety of people so visibly comfortable and happy to be nude when I was growing up. Of all the battles to fight to ‘protect’ children, I am now wholly convinced that educating them that nudity is bad and that we should hide our bodies is one of the most pointless. I have never had a strongly ingrained norm so thoroughly deconstructed in a single day, nor never felt so unashamed and happy in my own skin.

    • oliver

      Being naked in public is a moral statement – a positive moral statement. It normalises the body. Complainers are usually religious puritans or their apologists. People with clothes on are also in the business of sexual display, so that is a redundant argument. Take the niqab is probably the most sexually loaded garment in the world, in that it proposes that male desire has to be policed, and throws responsibility onto the women to prevent violence. There is no correlation between displays of nudity and sexual violence. There is no damage to children within behavioural boundaries that also apply to the clothed. Sexually conservative societies with high levels of proscription against nudity score highly in sexual violence charts. No-one was harmed by this bike ride and complainers can bore off.

  • Masiva

    We did not have clothes, your parents brought us clothes because being naked is “uncivilised”, Now the Aha moment when naked is natural. Africans knew that thousands of years ago. The burden of being so prim and proper is evaporating.

  • malik

    All people’s who likes this day nearly going to hell