Free Range Naturism

Naturism => General Naturism Discussion => Topic started by: nuduke on June 10, 2018, 03:54:18 PM

Title: Smooth Hound
Post by: nuduke on June 10, 2018, 03:54:18 PM

I just wanted to share this to find out what others do.


Over the years I have become a smooth naturist i.e. I remove all hair below the neck if I can.
Whilst I used to leave a bit of pube up to a year or so ago (wife's protestations again), I now remove all my body hair and I have to say that I love my appearance 'smooth' i.e. without any unseemly tufts of hair everywhere.  One aid to keeping myself smooth has been a Philips Bodygroom which was recommended by Nigel Nib who is (or was) also a smoothie (not to be confused with the beverage of pulverised fruit - non, no it would be very uncomfortable to have your fruits pulverised!).  I also have a shave in the shower each day which keeps everything as hairless as is practical.
What do you do, dear Free Range Naturists?  Hairy, semi shaved or smooth?  Have we discussed this before? - I don't recall if we have.
My journey to hairlessness has been one of many years.  It started with practicality.  I used to suffer from haemorrhoids which I have cured over the years by better diet and squatting to defaecate.  However I was troubled by this perianal nuisance for many years and had to put gooey ointments on them to stave the pain.  However, this was a very messy arrangement as I had hair around my anus and in my crack and this used to get caked with the cream and cause skid marks on the underpants etc.  The better pile relief preparations are oil or petroleum jelly based making it a sticky and messy perpetual chore to get the ointment on or off.  Sorry - is this too much information?  So one day I decided to trim  the perianal hair which I did by crouching over a mirror.  This led to a great improvement in dealing with the pile ointment until eventually I shaved the hair off altogether between my buttocks and across my perineum.  Not only did this improve the pile ointment problem enormously but it led to a considerable improvement in hygiene after defaecation and felt nice too!  Then one day I thought I might do under my arms.  Been doing that so long now the hair in those regions never really grows back significantly and I only need to shave them once every few weeks. 


I am not very hairy overall - never had any hair on my calves and lower leg and very little on my upper legs and only a central 'tuft' on my chest (which I never liked).  But for probably social cohesive reasons etc., I didn't want to be seen in the changing room or bedroom without pubes - it was more years before my attention turned to the pubic, femoral and torso regions!  Eventually, having discovered Nib's secret the Philips Body groomer, I started to shave any remaining hair from my legs and chest and a 'Number One' cut on my pubes (i.e. the shortest length with the clippers).  And over time and particularly in recent months I have cast away my wife's preference for me having pubes (she says I look like a baby without!) and I now shave everything I can find regularly and the pubes daily to be as smooth a smoothie as I can and I have to say I find not having any body hair a perpetual pleasure in appearance and convenience.

I do have long hair on my head (I can just about gather it in a small pony tail at the back) and a gohti beard (clipped to number 1) so I feel a bit of a hypocrite re smoothness.  However, I'm told I look a trifle more wise and distinguť with the beard (particularly by Mrs N) and I am somewhat afraid of the radicalness and possible regrowth consequences (all grey?) if I have a clippered haircut or a shaved head.  That aspect of smoothness about the head to match the body bothers me hardly at all although I am slightly envious of the many males of my acquaintance who have shaved heads - less bother with hairdressers, shampooing and time saved in the morning brushing it.  But perhaps more bother with shaving preparations and razors in the shower.  Can one shave one's own head without craning in the mirror and risking lacerations from the razor? I have to admit that if I'm not careful I can get a blaze of barber's rash (I get this on face from wet shaving so I always use an electric although, for no reason apparent, the electric tends to irritate my groin regions whilst being better for the face).

Enough from me!!
Any comments?
Smoothie John
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: BlueTrain on June 10, 2018, 04:33:33 PM
I shave my face and do not have a beard or sideburns. I visit the barber once every four to six weeks. Anything else is too much trouble.

I am fond of saying that men who claim to have an axe sharp enough to shave with always have beards.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: nudewalker on June 10, 2018, 05:14:39 PM
I don't know if I noted it here or not but here is my quick story. When I became an avid cyclist like the rest of the guys I began shaving my legs. Soon after that I began to train for triathlons so shaved most of the rest of my body hair for swimming. Joking, or so I thought, the wife made the comment that I should just shave the rest off. On a day when I worked the early shift (6AM to 2PM) and she was going out for the later shift (3PM-11PM) the time was used to become a smoothy. She loved it ans since she had done some before for bathing suits she also followed  my lead. With my cardiac episode in November I was given a blood thinner so I let things return to their natural state. Neither of us was happy with the result so now I carefully remove all body hair except for the top of my head. Mother Nature is doing that job for me, slow but sure.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: Bob Knows on June 10, 2018, 06:10:55 PM
Body hair is there to serve some evolutionary purpose.  Hair is both beautiful and functional.   I don't enjoy seeing the ugliness of those who shave off all their beautiful hair on any part of their body.  It also looks perverted in some fundamental way.  Of course, you have freedom to be as ugly and unnatural as you want, but don't expect me to enjoy seeing it.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: BlueTrain on June 10, 2018, 08:07:09 PM
That's what other people say about naked men, isn't it?
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: nuduke on June 10, 2018, 09:13:20 PM
Body hair is there to serve some evolutionary purpose.  Hair is both beautiful and functional.   I don't enjoy seeing the ugliness of those who shave off all their beautiful hair on any part of their body.  It also looks perverted in some fundamental way.  Of course, you have freedom to be as ugly and unnatural as you want, but don't expect me to enjoy seeing it.

As you have illustrated, Bob, opinion is divided as to what is most appropriate/desirable/attractive.  I would agree that being a smoothie is a perversion in some respects as it does go against nature and is something that has to be maintained against the natural propensities of one's body (for hair to grow).  However, amongst perversions, it's a fairly benign one I hope you will agree.  As you have opined many times in the context of prosecutions and news articles supporting the position of naked people that have fallen foul of the law or others' idea of hegemonic social norms, even if I were to expect you to enjoy seeing it you have the option simply not to look rather than restrict or prevent my right to do it (always provided it harms no one)! 
John
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: BlueTrain on June 10, 2018, 11:43:13 PM
I don't think it's a perversion as long as it is common to shave your face or to allow your hair to grow. As far as not looking at something that disturbs you, it's usually too late and you can't "un-see" it. On the other hand, we have a highly developed sense of not seeing things, just the same. We don't see homeless people living in the woods behind the 7-Eleven or shuffling along the street pushing all his worldly goods in a shopping cart. We don't see panhandlers. I'm almost certain it was even more highly developed when I was little in the 1950s. Yet it was all there all along. The girls who dropped out of school because they got pregnant. Mysterious mention of "goof balls" by nosy neighbors. The sight of someone staggering down the street on Saturday evening coming home from the tavern. Someone at school being called names that you had no idea what it meant. When the only social disease ever acknowledged to exist was athlete's foot.

And we think the 1950s was fabulous.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: John P on June 11, 2018, 01:59:48 AM
I wouldn't put it as vehemently as Bob did, but basically I agree with him. The human body naturally has hair on it, and if you like bodies, you like the hair. I don't point out "the ugliness of those who shave off all their beautiful hair" but it does occur to me to wonder what anyone finds wrong with the natural state of their body. It would look fine with no change made to it, so why make any changes? Now I'm starting to sound more like Bob-we're naturists, we think the body is acceptable, and none of its parts are shameful or ugly. It's all good, and nobody needs to remove anything. And yes, I do accept women's body hair as much as men's! If I see a woman who visibly hasn't shaved some part that society says ought to be shaved, I think "Good for you, lady. Keep it natural."

My attitude extends to disliking tattoos, although they're very common these days. A friend of mine asked if he ought to get one, and of course I said no, the body is fine just as it is, with no need for any improvements. And he said, "Look pal, I've had a heart operation and both knees replaced, and you're going to hassle me over a lousy tattoo?" Well, that shut me up good and promptly.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: jbeegoode on June 11, 2018, 03:32:24 AM
I don't. I prefer natural.. Butt hair is a hassle, I'm glad to be rid of it. But shaving and whiskers are rotten. Sometimes I pull the hair out to smooth the butt. I don't have anyone to wax it off.

Natural hair, I like but prefer it combed. So, I don't like sloppy unruly, piles of pubs to look at. I like the pubic tuft, but I like DF's less hirsute smooth, better.

Tattoos are permanent and change needs to always be an option. God decorates best, so tattoos are a turn off. I like natural, so tanlines are  a big turn off. It is an affront to true beauty to me.

On the other hand, do I look like fashion police in my pictures? I like to please DF, what she finds attractive, I'm more likely to compromise myself...not the tanlines...NOPE!

Jbee

Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: Bob Knows on June 11, 2018, 06:26:34 AM
That's what other people say about naked men, isn't it?

Most nudists say nudism is about "body acceptance."    That is the antithesis of rejecting your own natural body. 
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: JOhnGw on June 11, 2018, 10:35:44 AM
That's what other people say about naked men, isn't it?

Most nudists say nudism is about "body acceptance."    That is the antithesis of rejecting your own natural body.
I tend to think nudism is more about total people acceptance so, while I would never shave my body or have piercings or tattoos, I fully accept other people's preferences even though I sometimes find them distasteful to look at.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: BlueTrain on June 11, 2018, 12:24:47 PM
Nudists did not originally subscribe to the concept of body acceptance. Quite the opposite. The whole point was, as some of them saw it, was that the human race was going to seed and living under unhealthy conditions. So, in addition to having vacations at a rural location, they concentrated on physical fitness, with lots of calisthenics, swimming, athletic games and dance. The same thing was done when urban locations were established. Still, there's only so much you can do, although it seems like for some people, there's nothing you can do.

As I see it, nudism was only one thing that appeared at the end of the 19th century that reflected the idea that modern man was in a state of decline. It was an industrial age (the second industrial revolution, so say). Cities were polluted. People were living in unsanitary, crowded conditions. The nation was at peril! There were other aspects of this, too. Nobody anywhere liked immigrants. So a few intellectuals, mainly in Germany, probably where much of this was most true, decided the answer was to go naked in the countryside and to get in touch with nature again. Farmers tended not to be nudists. They didn't live in the city and were already in touch with nature.

It is no coincidence that the Boy Scout movement began around the same time, followed a few weeks later by the Girl Scout movement. You could call them naturists in the original sense, though, of course, not nudists. Likewise, the conservation movement, too. Ironically, some of the leaders of these diverse movements were, like Roosevelt, nationalists who believed man was born to fight wars. Man, that is, not women.

I have no idea what any of them thought about tattoos but the practice seems to have been prehistoric. But Thoreau said that it wasn't the barbaric practice some claim that it is, only that it was permanent. I personally don't care for the idea but I have to admit that I've seen some very artistic tattoos. It's almost like the art has advanced a lot in the last ten or twenty years. Piercing, however, are another story. But I'll bet your mother has piercings (ear piercings). It isn't so much what younger people are doing these days so much as what they're doing isn't what their parents did. Which may have always been true.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: Bob Knows on June 11, 2018, 04:04:48 PM
I tend to think nudism is more about total people acceptance so, while I would never shave my body or have piercings or tattoos, I fully accept other people's preferences even though I sometimes find them distasteful to look at.

Agreed.  Some are quite distasteful to look at.  I think I said they should have freedom to be as ugly and unnatural as they want.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: BlueTrain on June 11, 2018, 04:45:04 PM
Well, whether or not they want it, maybe they can't "hep" it.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: nuduke on June 11, 2018, 11:21:59 PM

Some interesting views here.  I guessed most of you were going to be 'naturalists' even if it's for reasons of can't be bothered to adapt the natural 'landscape'.
I make no apology for my preference although this prompted thought

That's what other people say about naked men, isn't it?

Most nudists say nudism is about "body acceptance."    That is the antithesis of rejecting your own natural body.

Is my preference for being smooth a rejection of body acceptance?  I guess it must be, in a way, although I definitely don't think of removing my hair as improving on something I believe is wrong or needs rejecting.  I just find it a nicer feeling and more practical about the nether regions and I like the way I look smooth but I don't hate myself with body hair.  The good thing about body hair is that whatever you care to do is usually reversible!  One day I might let the groin sprout again. 

Tattoos are not in practice reversible and I definitely don't like tattoos.  I can't understand why people want to adopt such a permanent decoration.  Not only that, they sometimes look like clothes!  Tats are often badly drawn or are an image that goes out of fashion.  It must be awful if you get a bad one done and are faced with putting up with it for the rest of your life.  I don't oppose anyone's right to have tattoos and I am sufficiently imbued with body acceptance that I would not devalue someone with tats.  In fact I learned with some surprise that one of the people I respected and learned such a lot from in working days had tattoos.  Someone you just wouldn't think would have one had a huge design over one upper arm shoulder and halfway down the back (he showed it to a group of colleagues once).  It did not shift my esteem one jot other than to make me wonder why such an intelligent, thoughtful and clever person would not have thought twice before such a radical step.  He was someone who had a rock solid justification for everything and a solid logic underpinning all his doings.  I never managed to ask him what the reason was! Why someone hasn't invented a semi permanent equivalent, I don't know.  We used to get skin transfers as kids - they lasted a couple of days, you would think in these days of fake tans, enhanced breasts and lips pumped up with silicone that someone would have come up with a cosmetic tattoo that could be applied to any design, lasts 6 months and then taken off with a solvent or something.  I guess anything applied to the skin will slough off with the natural shedding of dead skin cells but a tat dyes the skin itself.

I feel much the same about piercings.  The only thing I ever totally forbad either of my sons to do was have a piercing when one of them declared they wanted to  (happily neither wanted tats).  He thanked me a few years later for stopping him as he realised he didn't really want a permanent modification himself that badly - it was mainly peer pressure and by then he had woken up to the fact that a lot of people have prejudices about piercings particularly prospective employers and partners! 

John



Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: BlueTrain on June 12, 2018, 01:56:39 AM
No one that goes to a gym believes in body acceptance.

Piercings are not necessarily permanent. Of course, there are those who put tubes in their ear lobes. Those are unlikely to grow back.

There are temporary tattoos, sort of. There is a Middle Eastern practice of using henna to paint or trace patterns on hands, faces and feet for certain occasions. A young woman banking acquaintance showed up one day with the back of her hand and fingers "painted," or however you would put it and I got a first hand (literally) explanation of the practice, now mostly forgotten. The young woman's sister was getting married.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: jbeegoode on June 12, 2018, 03:44:38 AM
A friend of mine made a few million on temporary Tats, a more practical adjustment. But I think that she was promoting the real deal by okaying the temps.
Jbee
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: ric on June 12, 2018, 09:37:30 AM
the skin is quite a complicated organ... perhaps its best known function is regulation of temperature by sweat.   but it also allows light into the sub surface tissues... tattoos are bound to interfere with its function,   and . a lot of them look crap

as to hair , i sometimes wonder why i shave my face most days..but logically if you dont shave you grow the full bushy setup and im no fan of them. aint prepared to spend the time shaving the rest of the body and see no need to do so.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: jbeegoode on June 12, 2018, 07:31:21 PM
Yea, I couldn't imagine hassling with shaving the rest of me everyday. I don't hassle with my face, if i can avoid it. I'm not ready for a white scraggly beard either, until the top colors in kind.

The last time I shaved a body part it was a medical thing on my belly and it grew back thicker. Too much of it, but DF likes it, so okay, rub my belly and get lucky DF.
Jbee
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: eyesup on June 13, 2018, 06:47:30 AM
For me, hair can be a nuisance. Hair on the head gets cut when I start to notice that itís there. I get comments from Mrs. E about whisker burn and Iíll make it a point to shave. I worry less about hair than I do clothes.

If someone wants to shave all the hair off their body, thatís their choice. I donít do it because it is more work and hassle for nothing more important than hair. Hair grows back so you have to keep on doing it. Iíve better things to do with my time than worry about my appearance.

Tatoos, I donít care for much.

I prefer the canvas of skin that we are born with. All the aspects and features each person is born with and the roadmap of the skin that tells a story. Freckles, birthmarks, skin tones and color changes. Skin that sparkles and skin that sucks in all the light and yields nothing. Itís all amazing.

And all the battle scars are like medals that we earn or pick up through chance in life. You donít even need to hear the story behind them. By a certain point in life, you recognize them.

Why tinker with it?

Mrs. Eís opinion is the only one I care about hearing. Iíll listen and if I think it needs addressing, Iíll consider a change. Why wouldnít I?

Duane
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: eyesup on June 13, 2018, 06:48:04 AM
Quote
Bob Knows Ė ďOf course, you have freedom to be as ugly and unnatural as you want, but don't expect me to enjoy seeing it.Ē

BlueTrain Ė ďThat's what other people say about naked men, isn't it?Ē
If itís anyone other than my wife, I donít worry.

There is another forum I check on occasionally and there is a member that frequently posts about naked outings at the beach. It is a woman posting and as far as I can tell itís the only place where she engages in public nudity. She has written about how she has ďprogressedĒ in being nude in the public. Itís a great story about how she has gone from teen, to college, to married, to mom and has enjoyed the liberating experience with her family and friends.

What always catches my attention, though is when she talks about how she and others react to the appearance of a naked person and in particular what she refers to as, ďtheir reaction to a naked person that is Ďuglyí. ď I guess I know what she means by that but the question I would ask if I were there is, ďWhat do you mean by uglyĒ.

There are different kinds of ugly. Appearance, attitude, outlook, philosophy, etc.

Like art or beauty, that is a completely subjective observation and always gives a bit of insight to what the speaker is thinking. I catch myself doing it and have decided to correct the thought process. Itís an eye opening realization, how frequently we do that.

I can see how Bob has used it to refer to what some people do to themselves. Changing what was given to them to try and become something else. Who are they trying to convince? But thatís a whole Ďnother can of worms. :D Fortunately, ugly is in the eye of the beholder

Duane
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: eyesup on June 13, 2018, 06:48:47 AM
In some cultures, the Maori for example, the tatoo is a ritual and done at becoming a man. It has cultural and religious meaning for  them. In the west, it more a form of artistic expression or protest.

Different strokes, et.al.

Duane
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: eyesup on June 13, 2018, 06:49:31 AM
Quote
No one that goes to a gym believes in body acceptance.
You have a data set? Examples? Interviews?

There are more things in heaven and earth, etc. etc.

Duane
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: eyesup on June 13, 2018, 06:50:35 AM
Baden-Powell, founder of Boy Scouts, said he became aware that boys he used as scouts during the Second Boer War (ca.1899), had very little trail craft. Very little in the way of survival skills. He began to write articles for boys on how to fend for  themselves. The booklets became popular and he began to organize groups to learn and practice his training. So popular that the, Scouting organization was born.

Had little to do with the formation of naturism.

Duane
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: BlueTrain on June 13, 2018, 12:35:50 PM
If a body accepted their body the way it was, why would they trouble themselves to go to the gym? There was a small gym where I used to work that was utilized by a core group of very body conscious individuals. The walls were covered with mirrors. What sort of proof would you need? Who would say they go to a gym but didn't care what their body was like?

I would call Baden-Powell a naturist but not a nudist. I still believe there is a difference. I don't understand why people dislike the term nudist. Probably political correctness or something. Anyway, there was no "formation" of naturism. It was a loose grouping of several movements in the late 19th century. They were largely unrelated, mostly western European and decidedly urban. I'd also say it was largely middle and upper class in participation, less so in some forms. One of the things they all seemed to have in common was the idea that the human race was in decline and needed to reconnect with nature. One of the results was what is sometimes referred to as the golden age of camping. It was also the period when many outdoor oriented magazines began publishing, most of which were centered around hunting and fishing. Nudism, in contrast, at least in the U.S., took a while for there to be a golden age, which we now think to have been in the 1950s and 1960s. But I doubt that Baden-Powell or any of the founders of the scouting movement like Daniel Carter Beard or Ernest Thompson Seton thought of themselves as naturists as we use the term in any sense. They all firmly believed in "boyhood." They were also all writers and in a way, would-be social reformers. There are some of those posting on this board (but that doesn't include me by any stretch of the imagination).

You never know when you're in a golden age.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: Glancer on June 13, 2018, 04:28:49 PM
There are individuals who go to the gym strictly for the health benefits, but they're in the minority. Most people that go to the gym do care what their body looks like.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: John P on June 13, 2018, 09:58:25 PM
Welcome to Freerangenaturism, Glancer!

But I don't agree. I'm sure many people do go to the gym out of vanity, but by now everyone knows that exercise is good for you and being overweight is unhealthy, so there's mixed motivation. There was a time when naturism was seen as a way to improve people's lives (calisthenics at dawn, and carrot juice for breakfast) but now for most people it's more recreational. "Body acceptance" means that we don't make people feel bad about being out of shape; if you go to a nude beach, you'll see a pretty average bunch of people!
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: BlueTrain on June 13, 2018, 10:39:38 PM
Whenever the first American national organization about nudism was formed, it was called the American Sunbathing Society. It was clearly a euphemism. Now it called the American Association for Nude Recreation, which is a much better name, I think.

Although I still have a problem with the idea of body acceptance, there's only so much one can do with the body you wound up with, to be honest about it, and you'll never be any younger than you are now, which may be harder to accept. The roots of nudism are rather more complicated than you might think but that was over a hundred years ago. Today, you might as well get whatever you can out of it and forget the rest. It isn't 1890 now.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: Bob Knows on June 13, 2018, 11:26:32 PM
Whenever the first American national organization about nudism was formed, it was called the American Sunbathing Society. It was clearly a euphemism. Now it called the American Association for Nude Recreation, which is a much better name, I think.

I joined the ASA.  I resigned from the AANR.   

The name change demonstrated its focus on nudist resorts instead of living naked.  AANR advocates keeping nude bodies illegal except at "appropriate places" on "private property."  As a Free Range naturist I'm not a supporter of limiting nudism to a 2 week annual vacation or resort recreation. 

In the US we now see ad-hoc organizations The Nudist Revolution, Grand Jct Co Naturists, and others are leading the way toward general acceptance of nude living.   BN has moved forward in England and Wales while AANR drags their feet as hard as they can.   




Quote
Although I still have a problem with the idea of body acceptance, there's only so much one can do with the body you wound up with, to be honest about it, and you'll never be any younger than you are now, which may be harder to accept. The roots of nudism are rather more complicated than you might think but that was over a hundred years ago. Today, you might as well get whatever you can out of it and forget the rest. It isn't 1890 now.

Today is the first day of the rest of our lives.  I'm old and will never be 22 again.  I live and enjoy every day as the person who I am. 

Bob
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: John P on June 14, 2018, 12:12:31 AM
BlueTrain, when you say you "have a problem with the idea of body acceptance" you're being ambiguous. Is it that you don't think anyone can achieve such a level of non-critical coexistence, or that you think it's a good idea but you personally can't do it, or is it that you feel it implies too much willingness to let people be unhealthy?

I think the naturist ideal is to agree that certain behavior leads to unhealthy bodies, which is recognizable in a person's appearance. We support good health, but we reject criticism of people's appearance. So when we go to a resort or a beach (or a group hike, far the best thing of course) we say "Every body is a good body", although privately we might say "This person ought to be taking better care of him/her self". But if that leads to a conflict, it's body acceptance that needs to win.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: eyesup on June 14, 2018, 01:48:04 AM
Quote from: BlueTrain
. . . why would they trouble themselves to go to the gym?
Tap, tap, tap, tap!!!
For health reasons of course. Why do people jog, run, ride bikes, climb flagpoles?  ???

For the fun, entertainment, exercise, health benefits or just for hell of it. Not everyone is obsessed with themselves. Nor are we all alike.

As Mrs. E is fond of saying, :If we were all the same, what a boring world it would be.Ē
We wouldnít be here talking about all those OTHERS that are different. ;D

Duane
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: eyesup on June 14, 2018, 01:50:35 AM
Quote from: BlueTrain
. . there's only so much one can do with the body you wound up with, to be honest about it, and you'll never be any younger than you are now, which may be harder to accept.
That statement IS buying into the belief that we must do something about what we are born with, therefore we must join a club of go to the gym. I used to belong to a health club in Houston. That was a big town back in the Ď80ís. Iím sure itís even bigger now. A health club was convenient and easy to use to stay in healthy condition. Not a lot of hiking was available to a young guy working 60-70 hrs. a week. So that was my solution.

Now, I donít use or belong to a club. I go hiking when time is available and I eat better than when I was young and oblivious. The end result is the same. So my doctor tells me. Click, click!

It would be better if we concede that we, not only donít know, but have no clue to the circumstances behind a personís appearance. And any supposition we settle on is most likely wrong. A clearer picture will come from getting acquainted and maybe learning the real situation.

Although if someone is wearing 30 lbs. of piercings along with a full body tatoo, the probabilities may go up to an accurate guess.

Duane
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: BlueTrain on June 14, 2018, 02:09:50 AM
I'm beginning to think that you're all alike and that I'm the one who's different. But there are sure some good discussions going here. Now it's my bedtime. Until tomorrow.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: MartinM on June 15, 2018, 08:54:48 AM
Iím in the body acceptance camp, or what I see as naturism, accepting my body as crafted by nature. I try to look after it with healthy food and natural exercise, walking, running, climbing, wild swimming, do some yoga, meditation and until recently practiced aikido. Nature gave me hair on my body as a gift (moderate amounts) which I accept and which both provides me a small degree of environmental protection and effects the way I feel the sun and breeze on my body.

I have absolutely no desire to shave my body. Ok, I was always brought up with keeping my hair reasonably short and it tends to annoy me if it gets too long so I cut it periodically. But neither do I want to shave it. Despite being thin on top, it still gives me some protection from the sun on top and protection from cold in winter (not enough!) I stopped shaving some years ago but occasionally trim which I know goes down better with others.

I do find myself looking in the mirror from time to time but largely in respect of this amazing body I have been given. I donít look at it thinking I would like to change this or that. Naturism has been critical in me getting to this level of body acceptance.

I have recently obtained a six inch scar down my belly due to an operation which I am quickly learning to accept, although keen to lose as much scar tissue as possible to avoid limitations on movement and discomfort, but otherwise I am happy it will just blend in. Not very natural, I know, but lifesaving.

Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: BlueTrain on June 15, 2018, 12:14:36 PM
I could say that nature gave me red hair but it was really my mother. Coincidentally, my wife also has red hair and naturally, our two children have red hair. In the case of my wife and I, however, it is more like we had red hair. My mother died when I was young and my father remarried. She, too, had red hair.

Having red hair has proved to be a frustration if one ever wanted to have a nice suntan. I like to say I just bleach out in the sun. Even the freckles have gone away.

I also had an operation last fall, which left only a two-inch scar. Totally painless, thanks to anesthesia (and thanks to spell-check, too). Regular assembly-line out-patient procedure. Our family doctor says an operation like that doesn't even count but I'd rather not have any more.

I attended my 50th high school reunion a few years ago and saw may friends from school days, some of whom were neighbors that I started first grade with. Regarding bodies, I didn't think anyone there looked much different from the way I remember them in high school. Most looked older, to be sure, but no one's basic build was any different, curiously enough. A couple looked no older at all, incredibly enough. They had probably never married and had children.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: eyesup on June 18, 2018, 11:47:53 PM
BlueTrain, judging from the frequency of red hair occurring in the family line and red hair being welcomed to the fold, you just might be caught in a ďself fulfilling prophesy!Ē ;D :D :)

If you read MartinMís then BlueTrainís posts you get a pretty good view of what, in my opinion, is the best way to look at what life hands us. What we have when we are born is the blank slate. What we do after that is based on our choices.

The least complicated path is to adapt as things change around you to. Some people like things complicated, so they choose options that make them happy. I like uncomplicated. Iíve run into friends from high school or college that are trying their best to look like they did way back. Thatís a fools errand and itís sad to see. You canít do anything about time or gravity.

Iíve had a couple of outpatient procedures but the scars are not visible if Iím shirtless, only when I am naked.
Plus the surgeon was very good and they arenít obvious. So I have never had a reaction to them.
Not that I would worry one way or the other.

I have a scar on the knee of my left leg that I got when I was less than 2 yrs. old. Still visible after all these years. Scars and such are just markers to where youíve been and experienced.

Tempus Fugit!

Duane
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: BlueTrain on June 19, 2018, 01:23:47 AM
It isn't that simple. A person is born into a complex set of circumstances, overlaid with a lot of social conditions that can be exceptionally difficult to overcome, red hair not being one of them, at least. Some people have more choices than others; some have no choices at all. Some people don't even have bus fare out of town. Life is not fair.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: nuduke on June 24, 2018, 11:52:47 PM

Quote from: JBee
Yea, I couldn't imagine hassling with shaving the rest of me everyday.
In fact, it only takes me a minute or two a day, when it's 'bald', to keep smooth.

It's interesting how the majority of opinion seems to be against shaving the pubic region or rest of body yet trimming of head hair and shaving the face is normal. I'm not suggesting hypocrisy here, just that we all have deeply embedded norms to deal with that makes us think a lack of natural hair in one place (pubes) is unnatural but that routinely shaving another place (face) simply goes alongside as totally normal.  I am equally dualistic - I make myself smooth from the neck down yet I have quite long head hair and a goatee beard which I keep very closely clipped.  Not consistent and subject to hegemony!
Have we now come to the conclusion that to be truly naturist naked then, you shouldn't cut any hair at all?  In Sikhism, hair is allowed to grow naturally as respect for the perfection of God's creation. That's very akin to what several of you have said about accepting what we are and what body and features we are given. 
Mind you, amongst Muslims, hair removal is part of achieving general purity and cleanliness and includes the trimming of nails and the removing of armpit and pubic hair.
 
I don't know about any of this obligatory stuff though.  In my case I find it aesthetically pleasing, hygienic and a matter of choice not obligation or spiritual belief. 

John
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: BlueTrain on June 25, 2018, 01:07:59 AM
It's probably more fads and fashion than anything else, with some periods in recent history and certain places being conformist, others anything but.

No doubt you've seen the images on the plaques attached to two of the space missions depicting a man and a woman, both nude. The first one, Pioneer 10, was launched in 1972, 46 years ago. They have what might be described as contemporary hair styles, though no body hair is depicted. What would they look like if designed today, do you suppose? Would they even be nude? If they were designed in 1900, the hair styles would at least be different. The man would invariably have a mustache. Thirty years earlier, he'd have a beard.

In the 1950s, having a beard was not done. A mustache would be a pencil-thin style. I even remember a line from a movie, "Why are you hiding behind that beard?" (The character said he grew it to look older.) Any style that teenagers favor is usually considered rebellious if it isn't exactly like their parents, who of course, went through the same stages. It is ironic that as your body hair increases, the hair on your head sometimes begins to thin out. Women don't have the same hair issues. They don't have mustaches, except for the occasional aunt.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: jbeegoode on June 25, 2018, 03:45:01 AM
As addendum to what I wrote before, I shave my face, but for a mustache. My beard is scraggly, white and I tend to play with it unconsciously. A beard will make me look older and less romantic. I dislike unruly pubic hair on women. It has just always turned me off. A little trim here and there has been good for some. Some of my lovers have had naturally tidy pubic hair. I dislike stubble it is uncomfortable. My pubes are not so unruly that they need a trim and DF likes it. So, the bottom line for me is, what ever gets me laid.
Jbee
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: ric on June 25, 2018, 09:48:34 AM
yesterday i was watching some little bug  clambering through my chest hairs.....

it prompted the thought that perhaps hairs stop passing flying biting bugs actually getting to the skin......  maybe even stop stinging nettles  :)
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: jbeegoode on June 25, 2018, 07:46:00 PM
Hair is an early warning system before the dangers arrive. Hair collects critters and as per "The Naked Ape."
Jbee
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: BlueTrain on June 25, 2018, 11:34:27 PM
Don't you know you're supposed to groom one another? You could have a Special Interest Group on grooming. Or something.
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: jbeegoode on June 26, 2018, 07:06:27 AM
Yep, sitting in a circle picking bugs out of each others pubic hair and eating them for protein...,
Jbee
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: eyesup on June 26, 2018, 07:10:17 AM
I spend as little time as possible on my appearance. To my wifeís chagrin. The few allowances I make to fashion I do for her. No other. I do the absolute minimum.

I donít give a hang for fashion. When my hair begins to annoy me, I get a haircut. When my clothes begin to show their age I finally listen to reason from Mrs. E and make appropriate donations. These things are so low on my radar that it is almost just background noise.  I dress because if I didnít I would get arrested and that is far too much energy spent on appearance. That is the sum total of my attention to clothing.

To me it is a waste of time, energy and resources. I maintain my hygiene and that is it.

Duane
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: ric on June 26, 2018, 11:14:47 AM
pretty much the same here

but my hair never gets to annoy me..... i get a haircut when it begins to annoy the wife :).... she mutters about the mad professor look.... must have been frightened by one in a previous life
Title: Re: Smooth Hound
Post by: eyesup on June 26, 2018, 10:43:33 PM
Or genuinely annoyed by one! ;D

Duane