"individuality is a very healthy part of society, nudism as a whole is a rebellion against the norm and a need for individuality"
This is a distinctly American view and perspective on nudism. One where individuality takes precedence over community. In parts of the world where nudism is growing community and connection rather than just individual expression is more the focus. So this may be why we see nudism on the decline. I respectfully disagree with you take on nudism being about individual rebellion but I understand given the distorted individualistic approach to nudism that tends to be favored in U.S. how you got to that conclusion.
This is a fundmental issue of import to this debate. If you look at most of the posts advocating the genital jewelry the focus is me my and I. I was this, my enjoyment, my pleasure. Very little action is paid to the communal culture that was for a long time the heart beat of nudism.
Once nudism got defined as getting naked and nudity of any kind became synonymous with nudism the individual libertine culture or should I say sub culture took hold and is now superceding nudism by trying to define nudism exclusively through that lens.
This is why in the US at least nudism has continued to diminish. There is no common ground for anyone in the main to suppor.t When they look at what now passes for nudist culture there is only the notion of the individual who wants to get naked whenever and whenever with what others rightly see as purely sexual overtones despite protestations of the libertines to the contrary. Brian Hoffmans book Naked - A cultural history of American Nudism does a great job at examining this change.
When the last nude beach is closed and only a few resorts remain I belive history will show that we squandered the social good will from the golden age of nudism for an exclusively individual liberty idea which has no chance of successful what so ever. Then the liberating sub culture will find another ism to attach itself to and nudism will be no more.A counter culture is still a culture with its own codes of conduct and expectations of behaviour.Just because it has one thing you like (nudity) does not mean its a free for all to do what you like culture.
It's so pleasant to read one of my own defending the attributes of individualism so adroitly! Thanks to my well-adorned bare son.
If nudists aren't anything else, they are typically people who think outside of the norm, and that includes making themselves into personal art if they have that desire. My decision to wear sandals to keep from hurting my feet on the rocks which do frequent our roads here at the resort is mine to make and no one else's. There is realistic expression of self and then there is the ridiculous and altogether inappropriate effort to make everyone conform to someone else's ideals. Being socially bare adds a level of thought to the equation which should remove some of the preconceptions which are otherwise lost to the world of cloth. By removing the guardrails, put in place by the covering up of the natural human body, this action allows us to show our truest selves, choosing to put aside the false comfort of covering up physically. A whole host of mental freedoms come along with the denuding of the skin, letting the real person show through. Like it or not, this is me, deal with it or keep on truckin'.
I've known nudists who do follow a strict regimen of nothing at all between them and the elements and the natural world, and I've watched with a little smile as they go forth without shoes, ouching their way across a field of grass which just happens to have sand spurs growing amongst the actual lawn. If it is cold we wear a robe; if we cannot handle much sun we wear a hat; if it is snowing we wear snowshoes. And if we care to augment ourselves with body art which offends someone, the external view is the viewer's to manage, not the work of art they cannot wrench their eyes away from ~ or cannot stand to look at. Nudism comes with a freedom of expression that is part of our human constitution ~ if the person doing the unnecessary assessment of someone else has too weak a constitution to handle the view, realize that is not important to the piece of artwork's sensibilities.
There are limits to this, without a doubt. Like wearing, in a public nude area, jewelry which is solely and clearly worn to bring up and out the wearer's sexual arousal, or having a tattoo that states the individual's penchant for buggering. You are what you eat, so-to-speak. Wear what you will to that adult-oriented rope typing camp, but have a little more respect for the rest of the nudist community, thank you.
For an extreme example: take a made-up person's unfortunate decision to have a swastika tattooed on one buttcheek and a Star of David on the adjoining buttock. When first sighting such a display of contradiction, one might ponder what level of alcohol did it take to reach that decision? Offense may be taken at one of those symbols, or both for that matter. It seems likely there will soon be a large ground war somewhere down the dark and scary crack between them cheeks. People seeing this may understandably judge the wearer as a racist or a self-righteous zealot, or a fool who got lost down the yin-yang highway, and they might form an opinion on that person without a word. I would move my towel away from that spot on the nude beach. Hate speech will follow the artwork - and that would be the bearer's proverbial 'cross to bear' if they bared it. The idea that by having it applied to their posterior they may in essence be saying to the viewer, "I've put all that shit behind me." Many people upon seeing this would be aghast, and in no way be the least bit interested in communicating with someone who would wear something like that. The idea that would come to this viewer's mind would include the assumption that the person wants no friends. But then again, that would be the antithesis of the desire to be socially nude, would it not?
homeclothesfree wrote:This is a distinctly American view and perspective on nudism. One where individuality takes precedence over community. In parts of the world where nudism is growing community and connection rather than just individual expression is more the focus. So this may be why we see nudism on the decline. I respectfully disagree with you take on nudism being about individual rebellion but I understand given the distorted individualistic approach to nudism that tends to be favored in U.S. how you got to that conclusion.
Your posts have given us a lot to think about. But I'm not sure I agree with you that the rise of "individualism" over the "common goal" is the reason for the decline in nudism unless you factor in what seems to be the general trend in society: that we are fracturing into groups that refuse to coexist with those who don't share their opinion on a certain issue. It shows up in the schisms in legislative bodies like Congress and Parliament, in the lack of serious face-to-face debate on controversial subjects, in news feeds that are tailored to your point of view, and so on. Salman Rushdie has pointed out in recent interviews how we are all becoming fundamentalists, like the one who attacked him. There is a rising trend to becoming immune to dissenting opinion and reasonable discourse, and therefore being willing to do things that are not rational.
How does that relate to this discussion? It's a matter of deciding whether you want to go for the "big tent" concept, where we decide to encompass a wide variety of aspects of nudism relying on a common love of a lack of clothing, or instead go for the "small tent" concept, where we define nudism according to our own traditions and mores, and exclude those who don't subscribe to them.
Organized social nudism in the Western world started out as a glorification of the naked body and an aspiration to purify and exalt it through exercise, diet, and spiritual connection to nature. To be a true "naturist," you had to do daily calisthenic and, shun tobacco, alcohol, and meat. There are still people who believe that, and all power to them. But I don't see many of them in the nudist venues I go to, like private house parties, resorts, and nude beaches.
Are we ready to make an accommodation for those who like the feel of cock rings on their penises, or clamps on their nipples? If it means that by including them we increase our numbers and our impact on society, then my feeling is to admit them to the club, while holding true to our common love for social nudity. I won't be wearing those things myself, just as I won't be getting a tattoo or a piercing. But I will respect their need for such things to enhance their own self-image. And I'll share a drink with them at the pool.
We are created male and female, and a lot in between. For some people, their gender affirmation is a serious thing, and they advertise it through genital jewelry, makeup, and lipstick. As for the rest of us, we don't give a damn about it. But we're all in this together, and owe each other a modicum of respect for our world-views.
Woodsman you know I respect your views, many of them are aligned with my world view, but I respect the ones that arent too.But we're all in this together, and owe each other a modicum of respect for our world-views.
Yes, this if a fantastic sentiment and one I also hold, but I think youve missed the point of what HCF, I, and others are making.
Yes we all deserve a modicum of respect, but is it respectful to turn up at a family resort or beach with disassembled Newtons Cradle attached to your cock, with the excuse, its just jewellery. who is this person giving a modicum of respect to?
If you want people to respect you, then read the room and act respectfully.
And respectfully, in my experience the guy with the cow bell hanging from his balls isnt making that many friends with his personal world view.
Exactly on point the .modern definition of naturism which is now being eschewed or supplanted has at it core the notion of respect. Respect for nature, respect for self respect for others.
With the libertine crowd respect only goes in one direction towards them and it isn't earned it is just given because in some unusual logic as long as we are both naked there should be respect. You can see it in their tendency to throw around vitriol when someone doesn't agree with them. My point has been and continues to be if you want to wear those body adornments good for you you do you but don't try to validate it by saying it is a part of nudism because you are naked. With that logic if I am standing in a garage I could be considered a car.Yes we all deserve a modicum of respect, but is it respectful to turn up at a family resort or beach with disassembled Newtons Cradle attached to your cock, with the excuse, its just jewellery. who is this person giving a modicum of respect to?If you want people to respect you, then read the room and act respectfully.
I think there's a world of difference between a simple cock ring and a cowbell or Newton's Cradle adorning a man's genitals. In the latter case, a word to the offender would be in order.
Yes, it can be a slippery slope. But as in any "slippery slope" argument, it's hard for me to adopt the logic that "since we can agree that there is somewhere on that slope that exceeds reason, we must avoid even the slightest foray down that slope."
Let's say that I would probably not look twice at a simple cock ring, any more than I would look twice at a person with nipple jewelry consisting of a piercing or a pearl on a clip, like this:
But I agree that anything more than that would draw comments.
And I agree that in a private resort where there is some sort of authority figure, that figure is entitled to set the rules, and we participants have an obligation to respect those rules. Their house, their rules.
Woodsman thank you for the thoughtful response. I can agree with you about the rise of individualism as a general social trend. Individualism and its postmodern companion anti-institutional ism are definitely social trends that have been unfolding for over 25 years. See Putnam's 2001 book Bowling Alone.homeclothesfree wrote:Your posts have given us a lot to think about. But I'm not sure I agree with you that the rise of "individualism" over the "common goal" is the reason for the decline in nudism unless you factor in what seems to be the general trend in society.
I also agree with you with regard to the to the big tent. It is something I have written about before. See here. However my question is this. What is the fabric of your big tent? The concept of a big tent anticipates some fabric (common understanding, shared values or principles) under which we gather and invite people to connect.
As I understand your point you are suggesting that the tent is one with the flimsiest of fabric the lowest common denominator, that being the state of dress of the individuals. History see the previously referred to Hoffman book and the current situation suggests that this approach has been and is an unmitigated disaster, for nudism as nonsexual way of life that includes social nudity. History shows whenever this approach was tried it hasnt worked out for the nudist community.
What happens when making the accommodation of the most fringe of the those you want under your big tent has the effect of forcing others out from under the tent. One current example of this is the exclusion of families and children from nudism because of the sexual overtones that inevitably emerge when we "make room" in the tent for those who want to express their individuality by wear sexual adornment.
This is the very ammunition that is used to shut down public nude beach options and gets laws passed against things like the World Naked Bike Ride. So while I respect the diversity of views I reject the idea that a big tent without any underlying principles beyond nakedness is a good thing for nudism or its future. Neither history or the current state of affairs bear that out.
So my stated opinion again is this. Everyone is free to do what they want with their bodies . You can wear whatever body adornments you want, to express yourself of make yourself feel good. But I ask that it isnt called nudism simply because you do it while you are naked. Nudism is based on principles and shared values beyond just being naked I also reject the suggestion that the vast majority of people who dont subscribe to that view are somehow wrong and are gatekeepers prudes or exclusive because we dont adopt this point of view when it doesnt serve our interest experience or ability to enjoy the pleasure of a simple non sexual communally oriented principled way of life called nudism.How does that relate to this discussion? It's a matter of deciding whether you want to go for the "big tent" concept, where we decide to encompass a wide variety of aspects of nudism relying on a common love of a lack of clothing, or instead go for the "small tent" concept, where we define nudism according to our own traditions and mores, and exclude those who don't subscribe to them.Are we ready to make an accommodation for those who like the feel of cock rings on their penises, or clamps on their nipples? If it means that by including them we increase our numbers and our impact on society, then my feeling is to admit them to the club, while holding true to our common love for social nudity. I won't be wearing those things myself, just as I won't be getting a tattoo or a piercing. But I will respect their need for such things to enhance their own self-image. And I'll share a drink with them at the pool..
homeclothesfree wrote:I also agree with you with regard to the to the big tent. It is something I have written about before. See here. However my question is this. What is the fabric of your big tent? The concept of a big tent anticipates some fabric (common understanding, shared values or principles) under which we gather and invite people to connect.As I understand your point you are suggesting that the tent is one with the flimsiest of fabric the lowest common denominator, that being the state of dress of the individuals. History see the previously referred to Hoffman book and the current situation suggests that this approach has been and is an unmitigated disaster, for nudism as nonsexual way of life that includes social nudity. History shows whenever this approach was tried it hasnt worked out for the nudist community.
I haven't read the Hoffman book, but I'll look for it. As for why these approaches failed, I've seen it more as a result of external pressures from outside society than behavior within the community. But analyses of each particular occurrence would help.What happens when making the accommodation of the most fringe of the those you want under your big tent has the effect of forcing others out from under the tent. One current example of this is the exclusion of families and children from nudism because of the sexual overtones that inevitably emerge when we "make room" in the tent for those who want to express their individuality by wear sexual adornment.This is the very ammunition that is used to shut down public nude beach options and gets laws passed against things like the World Naked Bike Ride. So while I respect the diversity of views I reject the idea that a big tent without any underlying principles beyond nakedness is a good thing for nudism or its future. Neither history or the current state of affairs bear that out.
It's that societal pressure that's militating for the exclusion of children and the banning of the Naked Bike Rides, not pressures from within our community. This is what I meant by "societal" influence. I don't think I'd care a bit if my fellow cyclist has a cock ring on.If an onlooker gets offended not because he was nude but because he was wearing a cock ring, then you might have a point, but I haven't heard of any such person. The people that were objecting were objecting because we were nude.
It seems like you're saying that if we want to preserve our concept of nudism, we have to conform to those societal influences: no kids at the resort or the nudist beaches, no display of nudism on bike rides or parades or other events where nudity has been accepted. I'm not sure if I want to live in a world like that, nor would I endorse such a policy. Gay Pride parades in San Francisco show men with a lot more adornment than cock rings, believe me, but they are tolerated as long as they don't aggressively harass onlookers.
I'd rather live in a place where simple public nudity is accepted. But if we want to bring that about it's up to us to educate society that it's a good policy for them, too. They need to learn that we have rights, too, and that children aren't corrupted by the sight of nude people, and that we are as against those children being molested as the rest of society is. Our best path is to put gentle pressure on society to change their minds about nudity, just as gentle pressure has changed their minds on gay rights, a woman's right not to be harassed, or the wearing of a bikini at the beach instead of a modest one-piece. Public opinion had to change before laws could be repealed or amended to reflect that change.
But that tolerance has to come from ourselves as well. It's when we realize that a man with a cock ring has as much to gain or lose as a man without one, and the two unite to put pressure on society as a whole through national organizations and public outreach to protect their common interest, that our voices can finally be heard.
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!