"i control if you can be nude or not" is a weird thought

Yes...simply order excretory end points to be covered sufficiently enough prevent direct contact between them and public surfaces/ other people. Cover the health concerns of it and just let the prudes stew in the anger that they so yearn for.

Sure but I think if you allow nudity you should require people to carry a towel to sit on benches with, people are not consistently hygienic enough for me to be ok with unwashed buttholes rubbing all over chairs and whatnot.

Being naked is different from dressing in sexualized clothing. However, I'm all for people to wear what they want.

Why would you see this as a solution when burkas and face coverings are being argued about even more than nudity?

I gotta say thanks for that question. It lead me down a rabbit hole of exploring the laws and rules of nudity. It's quite interesting

Nope. Whether nudity is acceptable and whether clothing I don't like is acceptable are two different questions, not two sides of the same coin. In particular the latter seems to be always rooted in xenophobia, which makes it more or less independent of how one feels about the former.

in a utopia yeah, but we're savages

As far as I know there's no such thing as a perfect law or rule. It's per se arbitrary where you draw the line. So the rule of not being nude, or having an exact percentage of your bodies skin covered (which for women in certain Islamic interpretations is a thing) is exactly as stable a rule as the nudism you propose.

That being said, I think that it should be up to everybody to wear what they like, but there is a surprising admit of people that cannot deal with those kinds of liberty and that cling to societal framework for those kinds of decisions. And also a great many that can't seem to deal with the concept of nakedness.

I see nothing wrong with "just allowing nudity", there are no rational arguments against it. It's not "already happening some places", so much as it's been going on since forever. Social acceptance has waxed and waned, but those who see the wisdom of going nude have been with us always.

I think it's the opinion of most rational people who aren't in the business of controlling large groups of people for their own personal gain, that everyone should wear whatever the hell they want, wherever and whenever they want to.

We all look the same, when nude. You can't tell the "landed gentry" from the poors. That's the whole problem for the oppressors, they need an easy way to sort us quickly by sight when the thugs with clubs are released (the thugs with clubs having their own uniform). Skin color works beautifully because it doesn't wash off. But, what about all the folks with the same color skin as the oppressors? That's where clothes come in. Also, tattoos, whether by choice, or forced upon us.

The Dress Act 1746, also known as the Disclothing Act, was part of the Act of Proscription (19 Geo. 2. c. 39) which came into force on 1 August 1746 and made it illegal to wear "the Highland Dress" — including the kilt — by men and boys in Scotland... The landed gentry were also exempt, being exempt from the entire Act of Proscription.

How Dressing in Drag Was Labeled a Crime in the 20th Century

Sumptuary laws have been with us for thousands of years. Laws made for the purpose of restraining luxury or extravagance, particularly against inordinate expenditures for apparel, food, furniture, or shoes, etc. Historically, they were intended to regulate and reinforce social hierarchies and morals through restrictions on clothing, food, and luxury expenditures, often depending on a person's social rank.

"How people can dress"??? You may want to think again: Nudity is when people do not dress... ;-)

complaining that they should be allowed

That is just a modern form of anarchism = wanting to be exempt of any and all rules.

It doesn't have to be taken seriously in every case.

Nope, keep clothes on. I simply do not want to deal with how trashy some people would react to legal nudity all over.