Do you feel that there is possibly a sexual side to nudism?Actually, I think wearing clothing is more sexual, because it creates mystery as to what's underneath it. That's why seeing someone naked for the first time can feel sexual, because you're finally getting to seethe naked bodyafter all the suspense. But with nudism, there's no suspense. Everyone's already naked, and you're seeing them do all these everyday things that aren't sexual at all. Over time, you wouldactually de-sexualize the human body to an extent as you get used to seeing it all the time.
As somebody said, why girls can be in a specific position, reading sexual magazines, and mens, if we do the same, for sure we can get aroused. And it's obvious that people will be able to notice it. Something is growing up on our body.
But it is natural to get aroused, no ?
It is normal when watching to people to find a girl pretty, no ?
So, our body can react, without thinking we want sex with her...
I am nude at home only (in an apartment, so not outside), and I had been in Europe in some sauna or naturist section of thermal bath complex. I started to be semi-erect once, and tried to hide a little, not being directly in front of the others. And this is my fear on a clothing-optional beach to have people making bad comments about it, and having pervs taking pictures and publishing them on the net. For something at the end which is natural.
And I know, with what I read on different websites, is that some naturist don't care, and some others said is a no-no !!!
So, what's your opinion of being aroused ?
See, this is where the fine line is drawn. For me it is equivalent to being clothed. In other words, if you are single and attracted to a girl while clothed, you might talk to her to get to know her better and things might progress down the line at the appropriate place/time. Same thing goes with being nude. You should view your actions as no different in either scenario.
The issue is that due to how our culture is, especially in the US, people view nudism as not a preference in clothing, but as a constant invite for sexual experience. These rules/stigmas of no sexual association what so ever were set up because a vast number of people are not looking for what us nudists are looking for which is simply a change in clothing lifestyle and to instead intermingle with people with the same views.
As for the erection conversation, it follows the same suit. Those with erections are stereotyped into being men with sexual and not nudist intentions, so rules were made to weed them out. Every male nudist gets an erection from time to time and due to the many males that are not here for nudism, but instead sex, we have to follow the rules to help weed those guys out by hiding it. It is really seen as a necessary evil by the nudist culture to help maintain an environment of like minded people and not just guys looking for sex. Is it a fair rule? Not really, but it is the best that we have to discourage those that are joining for just hooking up from tainting the culture and the experience of nudism.
It's hard to say with, "Sexual side," and, "Nudism," not being defined, but I would have to say yes. Humans are sexual beings, and that cannot be separated from who we are because of our lifestyle any more so than being spiritual, emotional, etc. We are very complex creatures.
Note everyone, he did say, "Nudism," and not, "Naturism," but what I said, I believe, hold true either way.
You don't, "Normally," have sex and normally have it nude? Sex is a normal, beautiful, natural part of life unless perversion is involved, and the original post didn't ask, "Is there something perverted," about nudism.