Like a Thanksgiving turkey...
...or a dog thats wants is tummy rubbed!
I've notised there is a trend for "True Nudists" to post pics of them with legs spread so wide, they should need a lower body cast. If nudism is normal part of society, shouldn't the pics represented, be the same poses as a clothed person, rather than a dog who want's their tummy rubbed? Less genitals and more full body nudity? Just wondering?!?!?!?!?
I agree that these spread eagle poses should be banned. I have been to several nudist venues and I don't ever remember seeing a woman sunning herself like this. When a new person comes to this site, one of the first things that they see is Miss Spread Eagle and they immediately assume that this is just another porno site. These are probably the type of nudists that we want to have as members of TN but because of the misconception, they move on.
As a side note: Please change the title of this thread to something more descriptive of what's it really about. It'll get lost with that title.
...or a dog thats wants is tummy rubbed! I've notised there is a trend for "True Nudists" to post pics of them with legs spread so wide, they should need a lower body cast. If nudism is normal part of society, shouldn't the pics represented, be the same poses as a clothed person, rather than a dog who want's their tummy rubbed? Less genitals and more full body nudity? Just wondering?!?!?!?!?
If one were to click on Nudists at the top of the page you would find that the profiles are listed in order by the number of pictures posted. Its quite obvious that the site owner encourages the posting of nudist pictures on his site. There have been posts, recently, which advocate limiting the number of pictures posted or eliminating pictures entirely. Im sure that these well-meaning attempts to change site policy were made in good faith .Yet ,imagine what would happen to the circulation of National Geographic or People magazines if they adopted a no picture policy.
While its certainly difficult to dictate "good taste", the photo guidelines, if strictly adhered to by all, do give some ground rules which would eliminate some of the tacky displays which we have been subjected to, as of late
The so called nudist who has a picture taken in the bathroom with their pants dropped to their knees or spread eagle on a chair should give serious thought as to whether the snapshot belongs on this site or in the computers recycle bin. Remember, a True Nudist , really has no interest in seeing a picture of your crotch. More than likely, its the least attractive part of your body. A good nudist photo does not necessarily include exposed genitallia or breasts. [Implied nudity]. Conversely, the site saviors who take an unhealthy zeal in finding something to flag should consider artistic merit and other factors before they mash the flag button. The selection process for the front page photo should be refined to include the best photos from the site rather than the worse.
...or a dog thats wants is tummy rubbed!I've notised there is a trend for "True Nudists" to post pics of them with legs spread so wide, they should need a lower body cast. If nudism is normal part of society, shouldn't the pics represented, be the same poses as a clothed person, rather than a dog who want's their tummy rubbed? Less genitals and more full body nudity? Just wondering?!?!?!?!?
Agreed! Agreed! Agreed!
...or a dog thats wants is tummy rubbed! I've notised there is a trend for "True Nudists" to post pics of them with legs spread so wide, they should need a lower body cast. If nudism is normal part of society, shouldn't the pics represented, be the same poses as a clothed person, rather than a dog who want's their tummy rubbed? Less genitals and more full body nudity? Just wondering?!?!?!?!?
If one were to click on Nudists at the top of the page you would find that the profiles are listed in order by the number of pictures posted. Its quite obvious that the site owner encourages the posting of nudist pictures on his site. There have been posts, recently, which advocate limiting the number of pictures posted or eliminating pictures entirely. Im sure that these well-meaning attempts to change site policy were made in good faith .Yet ,imagine what would happen to the circulation of National Geographic or People magazines if they adopted a no picture policy.
While its certainly difficult to dictate "good taste", the photo guidelines, if strictly adhered to by all, do give some ground rules which would eliminate some of the tacky displays which we have been subjected to, as of late
The so called nudist who has a picture taken in the bathroom with their pants dropped to their knees or spread eagle on a chair should give serious thought as to whether the snapshot belongs on this site or in the computers recycle bin. Remember, a True Nudist , really has no interest in seeing a picture of your crotch. More than likely, its the least attractive part of your body. A good nudist photo does not necessarily include exposed genitallia or breasts. [Implied nudity]. Conversely, the site saviors who take an unhealthy zeal in finding something to flag should consider artistic merit and other factors before they mash the flag button. The selection process for the front page photo should be refined to include the best photos from the site rather than the worse.
Just needed to bump off spam
I agree,I have never, nor would attempt to post pictures of myself or wife that are not in the context of naturism. I have however attempted to post a picture of a close up piercing (nipple) which has been declined on three occassions.I guess nipples are now classed as outlawed? This being so much more tame than the female genitalia pics that are accepted.
Actions
Back to TopicsReply to TopicShare this topic
Get paid just by sending us users/traffic.
Signup takes seconds, start now!
Signup as an affiliate!