Come on, Richard Whitehouse, you are taking your objections to the nude cyclist protest (Letters, June 27) to the extremes of foolishness.

For you to say, "unsolicited open nudity on our streets in front of the general public, which obviously includes children, is legally an act of indecent exposure and clearly comes rather close to a paedophile crime" is just ridiculous.

These protesters were not going up to people or children and flashing themselves.

They were in a group and I'm sure if my grandchildren had been witness to the event they would have laughed or giggled.

I'm sure I would have squirmed, too, but only at the thought of how uncomfortable it must have been. For goodness sake, it was done to attract attention, which it did, not to shock.

It was done in front of the public, not hidden away in the manner most paedophiles prefer to commit their awful crimes.

There is so much nudity about now - why should it shock us unless it is done in a threatening way?

From the photographs, it all seemed to be done with good humour, harming no one.

-Pam Bennett, Worthing