Free Range Naturism

Naturism => General Naturism Discussion => Topic started by: John P on August 07, 2019, 07:48:24 PM

Title: People who've given up washing
Post by: John P on August 07, 2019, 07:48:24 PM
This isn't exactly a naturist topic, but then again, it relates to the way we think of our bodies, and the extent to which we intervene in the way they function. If we don't need to cover them up, then do we need to remove anything from them with hot water and solvents, and what happens if we just let nature deal with our skin? Just as with the microscopic residents of our intestines, it's starting to be apparent that not all bacteria are harmful, and some of them may actually be partners with us. It wasn't so very long ago that people didn't have daily baths, and didn't put many substances on their skin; did that hurt us?

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/aug/05/i-dont-smell-meet-the-people-who-have-stopped-washing
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 07, 2019, 09:09:38 PM
Makes you wonder why some birds and animals spend so much time grooming and why the ones that don't, stink.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: John P on August 07, 2019, 11:38:04 PM
What a strange thing to say, Blue Train. Horses don't do anything in the way of grooming, but I don't think they smell much. Even a dog isn't especially smelly, as long as it hasn't rolled in anything recently! Pigs are notorious for smelling bad, but would even that be true if they were allowed to roam around freely? I think you just made that up as an emotional response.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 08, 2019, 01:47:37 AM
Are you saying there are no birds or animals that don't groom themselves? Dogs smell like dogs, horses smell like horses. If you like the way they smell, good for you. Haven't been close to any pigs (animals, that is) lately. But my wife claims that dogs love to roll in stuff. Maybe it's to cover up their smell.

I'd say it was a naturist thing.

My father thought a once-a-week bath was sufficient but he washed just the same and shaved every morning. I realize that at one time people may not have taken baths at all, even though a book I have written in the 900s said to bathe as often as necessary. It was written by an Englishman, so it must be true. But people also didn't used to always live as long, either. It might be difficult to say whether one's lifespan was lengthen by regular or frequent bathing or washing or if it was in spite of it. Or if it made no difference at all. To say that people didn't used to put stuff on their skin is a mistaken idea. Even the ancient Egyptians did that, some of them. It should not be inferred that everyone at any given point in history is doing the same thing.

What other habits do people have who do not clean themselves?
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: MartinM on August 08, 2019, 08:57:45 AM
Dogs love fo go in water, cats spend a lot of time grooming themselves, licking their fur (and getting hair-balls). Birds especially wash and preen to keep their flight feathers in top condition.

What none of them do is wash with soap and other products, dissolving the natural oils etc, or use manufactured anti-bacterial products on their skin.

I have almost entirely stopped using soap and shampoo, except some for my hands. I noticed when bathing regularly in a clean lake, or even the sea, how good my skin and hair felt. Having often heard about the problem of washing natural protective oils out of the skin, rather than start regularly using body lotions I just took the natural, naturist approach of bathing in clean water with no soap. It seems to work a treat.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 08, 2019, 01:45:21 PM
In reading the article, the individuals all mentioned washing, so the original premise (of not washing) is false. Likewise, the premise that it makes a big difference is dubious, although no claims were stated that those who did not wash (much) were going to live longer, healthier lives and would go on to realize their life dreams. In other words, just how much difference does it make? It's like saying brown eggs are better than white eggs--unless you're one of those who wouldn't eat eggs under any circumstances. They are the true believers, of course.

It's a pretty personal thing. I mentioned how my father did not bathe everyday (we didn't have a shower) and managed just fine. But he and some of my other relatives did use cologne or after-shave. That may have contributed to his early death at 83. But an uncle of mine, who was a welder by trade (my father was a truck driver), also did not bathe more than once a week and did not, I think, use cologne, only made it to 64, same as his wife. But they both smoked, even though tobacco is a perfectly natural product. Maybe smoking isn't, although American Indians smoked. That's where it all started. If primitive people like Indians did it, then it must be OK.

I never felt clean after being in the ocean but that may have been a dirty part of the ocean. Bathing in a clean lake or better yet, a river, would be fine except there aren't any here. There have been claims that allowing your beard to grow will protect your face. Even though it has been practiced for a very long time, it can't be claimed that shaving is really natural. Shaving anything, for that matter.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: John P on August 08, 2019, 04:32:38 PM
I think they make a distinction between "washing" and "rinsing". If they don't use soap or scrub the skin, then it's just "rinsing". But I think the issue isn't how much cleaning a person actually does, but to get us to question the need for daily showers with soap. To turn your point around, does the modern convention allow us to live longer, healthier lives and  realize our life dreams, or could it be that rising expectations have made us slip into a state of hygienic mania? To the point where if there's a suggestion that we don't need to spend so much time and resources on cleanliness, we respond with an immediate "Oh, I could never do that" and a string of obviously false reasons why it would never work.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: Bob Knows on August 08, 2019, 06:13:35 PM
Very interesting approach to natural life.  In my personal life I've cut way back on showers.  I shower only every few days and then I don't use soap on most of my body.  Mostly I'm just rinsing off and washing my hair. 

Reading the article they referred to "the importance of the gut microbiome" in the 3rd paragraph but farther down still insist that washing hands is important.  They really haven't thought that through.  Our gut microbiome is supported by acquiring widely divergent bacteria with our hands. Washing all the good things off runs counter to the whole theory this article promotes.   

All those toxic chemicals in lotions, scrubs, makeup, soap, wash, etc., can't be doing us any good, and apparently are doing us harm.  I'll take the forest bath and be happy. 

On a related topic I rinse off my behind after taking a dump, using my hand with the warm water and without soap. That keeps me clean enough to sit on furniture without a towel.  If I'm out in the woods and have to poo it dries and flakes off naturally like all the other animals. 

I saw a thing from Levi Strauss that said you don't have to wash jeans every time you wear them.  I don't wash shirts and such every time any more either. Our microbiome is important.  Being overly clean with toxic chemicals is not healthy
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on August 08, 2019, 06:55:32 PM
If I wear clothing, or the heat AND humidity is up, then I bathe more often. Nude, I have less need. I just need to rinse off the dust sometimes, instead of washing clothes. My body hasn't needed soap that I withhold from it for many, many years, other than crotch and arm pits, again, nude makes a huge difference.

The skin removes a great deal of toxins, mineral build up and crap. These things migrate from inside the body in places like organs. We have discussed how vitamin D is manufactured in the body and sources of the process come from without and through the skin. Skin is a major organ. Clogging it up, covering it up, can be harmful to its natural functions.

Exercising the skin will help its function. So I sweat. It likes sweat. Optimizing function is a good health practice. Sweat is exercising the skin.

Eating a supportive diet will maximize the quality of life, how one feels. Doing things for the body will increase feel good chemicals, and give positive confident attitudes, which affect biology significantly. I could say that using some of these chemicals is an act of love to the body and good for it, but doing more natural things even better. Just the act of thinking that one is healthier for doing something for the body will make a body healthier.

So, natural is better. The new weird food habits , lack of exercise and chemicals never before seen in history are not to be trusted for quality of life and longevity. Just look around and it is obvious, apparent that people are sluggish and over weight, moving like they are aged, earlier than they should. The statistics will tell us that certain diseases are becoming more prevalent and they are all lifestyle issues. There has been a change.

It is true that some people live longer no matter what they do to abuse their bodies. Most don't.

Do what you want, but I'll be taking more natural measures for my health. Chemicals can change a body, enter a body, either orally, or through the skin. Then, my body has to deal with them. My body has other natural, normal things to be occupied with. Dealing with chemicals is using up its energy and resources. Then, there is the issue of building up chemicals, storing them to toxic levels.

We are probably just scratching the surface of skin knowledge. Many people have reactions to these new chemical products. Long term affects are not known. They are obviously not necessary. This article is about researching natural body care, something that is necessary.

DF has problems from work, because she is required to wash her hands so often with anti-bacterial soaps. Not just soap, anti-bacterial. Anti-bacterial is everywhere and we now know what it has done to people's gut. We, know how mouthwash kills bacteria wholesale, including beneficial bacteria. We know that the body has balance and will maintain and heal itself in conditions. We know that many of these chemical interfere and we haven't figured them out until it was too late. If it works don't fix it. See what will naturally happen. The body is certainly more wise than the human mind's concoctions.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 08, 2019, 07:04:40 PM
How much time do people think other people spend on their personal hygiene anyway? Fifteen minutes? That was always enough for me in the morning when I was getting up and going to work. And that included a shower and shaving. A few minutes more at night to brush my teeth and that was it. I spend somewhat less time now because I only shave about every day and a half. It varies according to the weather, though.

We're in the middle of summer and with temperatures in the 80s and 90s. The official temperature at the closest reporting point for me is 88 degrees and 47% humidity (which isn't bad). But when I go out for my usual walk in the woods, about two miles there and back, I am soaked when I get back. I don't take a shower when I get back, though, but I do change clothes and let the damp ones dry out. I'll wear the same pair or two of pants for a couple of weeks before laundering them. But everything else only gets one wearing, except my socks. For some curious reason they are dry and so are my feet when I get back. But summer doesn't last forever. Not here anyway.

The reason for soap or detergent (or 'washing up liquid') is to reduce the surface tension of the water. In other words, it makes it wetter. The water in some places feels soapy coming out of the faucet. It isn't; it just feels like that. It feels like you can't rinse off when you take a shower. I suspect water like that is better for washing. There is no need for any fragrance in soap but I doubt there is enough of anything in bath soap to cause anyone harm, unless you were of a weak and delicate nature.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on August 08, 2019, 07:36:24 PM
Very interesting approach to natural life.  In my personal life I've cut way back on showers.  I shower only every few days and then I don't use soap on most of my body.  Mostly I'm just rinsing off and washing my hair. 

Reading the article they referred to "the importance of the gut microbiome" in the 3rd paragraph but farther down still insist that washing hands is important.  They really haven't thought that through.  Our gut microbiome is supported by acquiring widely divergent bacteria with our hands. Washing all the good things off runs counter to the whole theory this article promotes.   

All those toxic chemicals in lotions, scrubs, makeup, soap, wash, etc., can't be doing us any good, and apparently are doing us harm.  I'll take the forest bath and be happy. 

On a related topic I rinse off my behind after taking a dump, using my hand with the warm water and without soap. That keeps me clean enough to sit on furniture without a towel.  If I'm out in the woods and have to poo it dries and flakes off naturally like all the other animals. 

I saw a thing from Levi Strauss that said you don't have to wash jeans every time you wear them.  I don't wash shirts and such every time any more either. Our microbiome is important.  Being overly clean with toxic chemicals is not healthy
Washing hands has an immediate effect on the viruses that go around each cold season. I wash when I'm around more people and their habitat. I wash less when I'm at home, in retreat, more alone. When I'm out camping, I am less clean about my hands. I don't like being sick. The more unnatural environments that people frequent, I think, have to be mitigated.

I may wash less frequently, but there is something to be said for slipping into nice clean sheets with ones lover after a nice hot shower. I like clean.

I'd like to think that crotches get clean, but over and over I have been smacked in the face with the contrary. More recently, I have been practicing squatting. I have cleaned out, washed in the stream on the trail, but then squatted. The position brings one closer to the facts. I think that the position and subtle, even unconscious communication has been done with more primitive cultures. I have noticed a disturbing bouquet, in spite of my efforts. There are natural oil secretions which associate with what is in the body's pores, there is leftover, unless soap is used.

I have had many lovers. I have had my nose in a variety of places as a result. Without going into detail, I have realized that even girls have bodily stuff going on. If your home is temperature controlled and you don't exercise, you may avoid much of this. What you eat may have effect. But I'll stick to a towel on my butt, just in case. I tend to keep the same furnishings for decades and will continue to do that, protecting them with a nice soft terry towel.

As for washing clothes. I put something on. Go to a usually indoor function for a couple of hours and then done, get undressed at the front door, or sooner. Two to four hours without breaking a sweat, and I'm usually bathed before, doesn't really get clothing dirty. So they get used again before washing. Sometimes used again and they aren't dirty yet. Washing wears out clothing sometimes more than wearing them. So, why have more labor and time used, wear out and replace clothing quicker, use more water and energy, decrease the life of something I prefer and that expense, just because I have worn something and not soiled it? Underwear gets changed, each use. I'm clean, I feel and smell clean.
Jbee

Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on August 08, 2019, 07:48:47 PM
The water that doesn't seem to rinse off is soft water. I despise soft water conditioners. I can't get the soap off.  Left on soap makes me itch. Soap feels like slime on a hot day. It stuffs up my pores. I feel it in my scalp. The stuff that won't come off scrapes off some into the towel and permeates the towel with those soaps and still it can be felt on my body. I've never felt anything like it in a natural stream. I don't think that it is very unhealthy to leave soap and all the rest on the body and the results are apparent when I've been subjected to soft water.
Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: ric on August 09, 2019, 10:44:46 AM
just a few random thoughts,   40 years ago we had to use specialist industrial hand cleansers to get the oil off our hands after working on an engine, now i just use whatever cheap squirty soap weve got by the sink.. it works just as well as the industrial hand cleansers used to.
after a bath or shower my skin itched like crazy.... enough to make me reluctant to shower or take a bath ,  in recent years chlorine filters on the shower head and just rinsing ,no soap of any kind has eased the itching,  but i still only shower when i need to,   sometimes even twice a day, lunchtime and early eve if ive been toiling in hot weather. , do wipe crotch and armpits most mornings with a damp flannel though.
ive not used shampoo or soap in the shower for best part of twenty years.   last autumn i gave up shaving my face, so a wipe with a damp flannel every morning is the new routine, soap is now only used on  hands.
historically wed wear shirts for a couple of days, trousers all week maybe two, underwear would be changed twice a week, socks daily.... clothes washing was either done by hand or in a twin tub.... laundry for a family was a mornings graft,   changing clothes multiple times a day is only possible because of automatic washing machines.... which use gallons of water and pollute the planet with detergents.

theres an old saying  "only dirty people need to wash"
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 09, 2019, 11:46:46 AM
That's all the reason I need.

At first when I read your post, I thought that changing clothes twice a day seemed excessive but that's what I do sometimes. When I go out for a long walk now, I will come back soaking wet with sweat. That will happen when it's 90 degrees in the shade with thick humidity (the air really feels thick). This is from being out for an hour or two for a walk from two to four miles, depending on where I go. So when I get back home, I take off the wet things, hang them up to dry and put on something else. The pants I will wear again the next day but everything else goes into the laundry basket. I mentioned already that for some curious reason my feet and socks do not seem to get wet or even damp. It does not trouble me ethically to do laundry as often as necessary. I eat meat, too. I have two chain saws, too, and you know what they're for. Where I live, things grow so well that in two weeks a house will look abandoned. It is a sub-tropical climate. Unless you're in a windy spot doing nothing, sweat simply will not evaporate. Those who live in the Southwest may not understand that.

A funny thing is the descriptions of all the things that were considered necessary before WWII for hiking and camping. Apparently, a neckerchief, Boy Scout style, was an essential and sure enough, lots of people wore them in the old photos. Likewise, breeches ("foot breeches") were popular for outdoor wear, if not essential, as were high boots. Long underwear all year long and nothing but wool was also recommended by experienced woodsmen, none of whom seemed to populate desert places. Home-made insect repellants suggest that insects were more of a nuisance than they are now, too. On the other hand, most books on camping seemed to have assumed that the only reason for an outing was to hunt or fish, so there were always chapters devoted to gear for that. Although canoeing is usually mentioned, there was never anything remotely resembling thrill sports like mountain climbing (not in my collection of books, anyway), white-water kayaking and the like. But Nessmuk said we go to the woods to smooth it, not to rough it. And by the way, L.L. Bean in his little red book said to wear from home (to your camp) your heaviest business suit and to bring a dozen doughnuts.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: Peter S on August 09, 2019, 03:42:32 PM
Quote
Washing hands has an immediate effect on the viruses that go around each cold season. I wash when I'm around more people and their habitat.

I know it's widely reckoned that the winter germs spread mostly via things like door handles - sneeze with hand over mouth, open door, next person picks up germs, etc - so hand washing can undoubtedly lessen the spread. But as someone whose work took me into possibly four or five different homes a day, I recommend wide exposure to bugs as the best way to build up immunity. In all that time I rarely got more than a short sniffle in any bug season thanks - I believe - to multiple low-level exposures. Since retirement I find the bugs can be a bit more invasive.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: Bob Knows on August 09, 2019, 04:28:18 PM
The water that doesn't seem to rinse off is soft water. I despise soft water conditioners. I can't get the soap off.  Left on soap makes me itch. Soap feels like slime on a hot day. It stuffs up my pores. I feel it in my scalp. The stuff that won't come off scrapes off some into the towel and permeates the towel with those soaps and still it can be felt on my body. I've never felt anything like it in a natural stream. I don't think that it is very unhealthy to leave soap and all the rest on the body and the results are apparent when I've been subjected to soft water.
Jbee

Seattle used to have very "soft" water.  Meaning water without dissolved minerals.  Seattle water comes from a large area on the west side of the Cascade mts where it rains 100 inches per year.  The water was so pure, "soft" that they had to add some minerals because it was dissolving their iron pipes.  It also felt different than washing in hard water.  There may be other places that also have very soft water.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: Bob Knows on August 09, 2019, 04:36:40 PM
I know it's widely reckoned that the winter germs spread mostly via things like door handles - sneeze with hand over mouth, open door, next person picks up germs, etc - so hand washing can undoubtedly lessen the spread. But as someone whose work took me into possibly four or five different homes a day, I recommend wide exposure to bugs as the best way to build up immunity. In all that time I rarely got more than a short sniffle in any bug season thanks - I believe - to multiple low-level exposures. Since retirement I find the bugs can be a bit more invasive.

Agree completely Peter. Over washing reduces our natural immune system response and makes us MORE susceptible to viruses.  The often advertised "Flu Vaccination" also causes more flu than it prevents for the same reason. 
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: Bob Knows on August 09, 2019, 04:49:52 PM
I have had many lovers. I have had my nose in a variety of places as a result. Without going into detail, I have realized that even girls have bodily stuff going on.

I have always loved female bodies. They are very biological.  YUM.


Quote
If your home is temperature controlled and you don't exercise, you may avoid much of this. What you eat may have effect. But I'll stick to a towel on my butt, just in case. I tend to keep the same furnishings for decades and will continue to do that, protecting them with a nice soft terry towel.

I use the same furniture for years also.  When I was quite young my grandmother had little white cloths on the tops of her chairs that were called an antimacassar, An antimacassar is a small cloth placed over the backs or arms of chairs, or the head or cushions of a sofa, to prevent soiling of the permanent fabric underneath.  Supposedly men used creams on their hair which soiled chairs. I never use those either.  If I come in all sweaty from mowing the lawn or something I will throw a towel over my chair, but day to day around the house its not needed.  Of course our bodies produce natural oils, skin cells, etc., but the oils evaporate from chairs and the other brushes off.  My every day TV chair is close to 10 years old and still appears like new.  They sell fabric cleaners for chairs if it ever becomes a problem, but It's just more myth than problem.

Younger women have leakage underneath part of the month but we no longer send them away as apparently was once done in some places. Of course her bleeding will take more concern with chairs and such, but men don't have that problem. 

Bob
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: eyesup on August 14, 2019, 10:34:23 PM
Quote from: JohnP
. . it's starting to be apparent that not all bacteria are harmful, and some of them may actually be partners with us. It wasn't so very long ago that people didn't have daily baths . . did that hurt us?
Hurt, no. Change, yes.

I doubt the modern hygiene market flowered because of some health issue inherent to human physiology. Cramming thousands of people into larger and larger cities probably produced health problems due to overcrowding. Infestations of insects, vermin and bacteria that flourished in such a rich biological environment were likely the motivation that made such a market necessary.

But a one size fits all solution seemed to be the answer. Rural communities didn’t have the same biological load of people that cities did.

There is a parallel discussion about naturism and laundry here (http://freerangenaturism.com/forum/index.php?topic=1104.msg11587#msg11587) on the forum, look for the link “A Short History of Bathing”. And another discussion of body cleanliness on this website here (http://freerangenaturism.com/forum/index.php?topic=827.msg12605#msg12605), about bacteria and dirt. Select the link “Let Them Eat Dirt”, shown there.

With so much here about cleaning and cleanliness should we worry about becoming obsessed over stubborn stains. Out, out damned spot!

Duane
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: eyesup on August 14, 2019, 10:35:11 PM
Quote from: Bluetrain
. . . and why the ones that don't, stink.
Stink ? ? ?  Stink is subjective and relative.

Which raises the subject of a relative, a distant cousin;
Ron D. Cart, a bit of a rural philosopher, who once famously said,

“I stink, therefore I am!” ;D

Duane
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 15, 2019, 02:27:48 AM
Body aroma, shall we say, of course is both relative and subjective, but there is no way it can be defined out of existence. One does get used to it, which is not to say one comes to prefer it.

The difficult thing here is to put one's self in someone else's shoes, especially when they lived in a different era. Large, even very large cities existed in the past (and which are mostly still there). Various degrees of success was achieved in different places in coping with the problems of urban living. Nowhere have they really solved them but at least they managed. There are more problems than you might imagine, too. Think of the problems when draft animals were the principal means of transport and that was the case up until about a hundred years ago and to a lesser extent for another thirty years. The chief means of dealing with that problem was a man with a broom, a shovel and a large bin on wheels. The original street sweeper. One of my neighbors when I was little did that for a living and another neighbor kept horses. He even plowed our garden. But there are no men sweeping the streets, no horses and no vegetable gardens now.

Animals and humans shared living spaces in some places, mostly in the North, and in Europe in the distant past. Having spent time in barns and stables, it isn't as bad as it sounds but it does make for more housekeeping chores. I couldn't say if having a cow at one end of your house with you at the other end is any worse, health-wise, than having dogs with a run of the house. But I knew several people who had dogs that were not allowed indoors. They weren't exactly pets.

The hygiene market isn't just modern. It's been around for a few thousand years, with its ups and downs. Hardly everyone was able to avail themselves of everything that was available but the desire certainly allowed a flourishing trade in hygiene products. Things like hair spray are of more recent origin. Taking an ordinary bath has been customary for just as long, although it was something only a few could do. I understand in some places, it became a social occasion. However, when you have to carry the water and heat it all by yourself, I can assure you that bathing will become a once-a-week or less event.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on August 15, 2019, 06:19:03 PM


Quote
If your home is temperature controlled and you don't exercise, you may avoid much of this. What you eat may have effect. But I'll stick to a towel on my butt, just in case. I tend to keep the same furnishings for decades and will continue to do that, protecting them with a nice soft terry towel.

I use the same furniture for years also.  When I was quite young my grandmother had little white cloths on the tops of her chairs that were called an antimacassar, An antimacassar is a small cloth placed over the backs or arms of chairs, or the head or cushions of a sofa, to prevent soiling of the permanent fabric underneath.  Supposedly men used creams on their hair which soiled chairs. I never use those either.  If I come in all sweaty from mowing the lawn or something I will throw a towel over my chair, but day to day around the house its not needed.  Of course our bodies produce natural oils, skin cells, etc., but the oils evaporate from chairs and the other brushes off.  My every day TV chair is close to 10 years old and still appears like new.  They sell fabric cleaners for chairs if it ever becomes a problem, but It's just more myth than problem.
 
Bob
Doilies were common among my Kansan relatives when I was younger. Some of the modern furnishings that I have bought provided a doily-like attachment that were of the same fabric as the rest if the chair. They protected wear on chair arms, the first thing to go. These were designed with clothed people in mind, of course and elbows are not the areas of a body that may sweat, oil up, or secrete "stuff."

Oils don't evaporate completely. They are oils. They can permeate the fabric and not come out. The thickness, the texture, the tuft of the fabric vary and permeability will of course vary. It's kind of like the way different carpets accumulate stuff. The cleaning is only superficial. When you dig down a bit deeper, you may find a layer of still dirty carpet,, but the top looks good. So, it depends.

I had a pillow on my couch. The fabric was picked out at a fabric store and two were made. I used one and it now is a completely different color. One had a body on it for long periods during a scorching summer's heat. Again, it depends on use.
Jbee

I'm not so sure that Bluetrain's remarks are on topic, but I'll bite anyway. It is interesting stuff. I was shocked when I visited Pompeii. There was a deep track (deep enough to fall into) that was for standardized cart's wheels throughout the town. All refuse and defecation was thrown in there. The stench, I can only image. I thought of street cleaners, but the depth suggests that in was meant to fill up for a while. In Europe the pee buckets were thrown out of the windows in towns and cities. The King Of France built Versailles partly to escape the stench in the summer in Paris. Which brings us to perfume, a contrivance to bury the smells of those expensive gowns. The clothing cost a bundle, and couldn't be effectively washed. A body hung out in there. Solution was to use a perfume that would hide the smell. The French perfumes, like Joy for example, are harsh. Essential oils and Indian scents are like incense, an augmentation to the environment.

Here we are back to the condition of a body being cooped up in clothing. A body needs to breathe. A body isn't designed to be in clothing. It tolerates it. It is designed to tolerate quite a lot of conditions. The other night, I was on Mt. Lemmon sleeping in a mummy bag, with thermal underwear and a t-shirt. I stayed warm. I woke up feeling so icky. My body hat and all else was trapped in there. The release into the fresh air was remarkable, quite a pleasure. It was as though my body was cleansed by the air as I stripped. It made me appreciate my down camping quilt. I made me appreciate being naked all day in the mountains.
Jbee (again)
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 15, 2019, 09:22:40 PM
My comments tend to wander around and touch on too many subject. I'm not writing a term paper.

One point I try to make is that people will try to live as well as they possibly can. Convenience (the mod cons) are high on their wish lists. It hasn't been that long in some places, within living memory as we say, that some people lived little different than they did in pre-Civil War years. They burned wood for heat. Their water came out of the ground within a short walking distance from the house, either from a spring or a well. The well might be located in the house or just outside. Light was from an oil lamp. There was an outhouse. It wasn't so bad and people in the city had only been using more modern conveniences for a few decades longer. But no one hung onto the old ways when something better was available. It's ironic that I never knew anyone when I was little who actually had a working fireplace, although having a wood burning stove was not at all uncommon. But where I live, a real fireplace is a regular suburban fixture.

I also never knew anyone who owned a sleeping bag when I was little and they had been around for a few decades by the time I was born. When it was cold, we slept under cotton quilts that weighed a ton. Not only was that good enough for us, it was all we had. Wool blankets were for those who were better off than we were. I used sleeping bags (that is, a sleeping bag) in the army. I was stationed in cold places, hot places too. Never woke up feeling icky.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on August 15, 2019, 10:59:15 PM
Try sleeping in a synthetic rip-stop, or a plastic bag.

I grew up on military bags. They are different.
Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: ric on August 16, 2019, 12:17:18 PM
the water main came up our lane in the mid sixties, when i wasabout 10 yearsold. before that we used well water and collected rain water from the roofs. we had a tin bath on the kitchen floor with water heated on the stove. apart from the once a week bath night, we washed in cold water.   face washed before bed , hands washed before meals if dirty or after no 2s.   toilet was a drum emptied once a week and a bucket for pee if it inconvenient to trot outside and water the garden.   i still dont come into the house just to pee in the toilet,  even on occasions go out in the garden to pee rather than flush it away with 2 gallons of potable (allegedly) water.
weve even gone back to drinking pure unadulterated well water rather than the chlorinated mains water.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 16, 2019, 02:14:29 PM
What you're doing is primitive, not natural. But it's probably better than natural, assuming the well water really is pure mostly.

Use the word 'natural' with great care but it's still just a word.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: Bob Knows on August 16, 2019, 05:03:03 PM
Here we are back to the condition of a body being cooped up in clothing. A body needs to breathe. A body isn't designed to be in clothing. It tolerates it. It is designed to tolerate quite a lot of conditions.
Jbee (again)

Being uncovered and our body secretions allowed to evaporate from natural ventilation is a large part of staying healthy in my observation. 


Quote from: ric
i still dont come into the house just to pee in the toilet,  even on occasions go out in the garden to pee rather than flush it away with 2 gallons of potable (allegedly) water.  weve even gone back to drinking pure unadulterated well water rather than the chlorinated mains water.

Agreed Ric.  When I pee on my lawn it turns darker green in that place because the grass feels more loved.  Recycling my body waste back to green plants is my way of giving myself back to the earth.   As the saying goes, "The grass is always greener above the drain field." 

We live 10 miles past the end of city water so all we get is well water.  The city has their own wells too, but they add chlorine or something. 

Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on August 16, 2019, 09:35:00 PM
I have been using three sources of water. They all have too many salts. One leaves a white ring on things. One smells like a chlorine swimming pool out of the tap, one is less so. I don't drink any of them. I buy purified, osmosis and a coupe of processes water to drink. I brush, clean and sometimes cook with the other water, but is isn't so good inside the body. I can just sense it. It isn't the stuff that I grew up with.

The quality of the water and the chemicals natural and contrived are some of why I do sauna. I know that I am better purified from the unnatural environment. Cleansing like that brings about natural balance. I experience the difference. It is apparent.
Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on August 16, 2019, 09:38:20 PM
Speaking of military sleeping bags. Those old tents and denim covered metal canteens, all had that particular smell about them. New, or old. What was that? Mold? Materials?
Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 17, 2019, 12:07:06 AM
Probably it is the material that gives military things (cloth, canvas and the like) that peculiar odor, although that's probably not true of more recent items that aren't made of cotton materials. I think they're all impregnated with a water-resistant, mold-resistant treatment. It may even be the dye. New non-military cotton clothing sometimes has a certain odor, too, which comes from chemicals used in the manufacture of the cloth. But it comes out in the wash. Military gear on the civilian market probably hasn't been washed for quite a while, if at all.

Regarding water, JB, I thought you lived in the desert where any water is scarce, never mind good water.

However, Colin Fletcher, the man who wrote about hiking (include nude), also wrote a book, "The man from the cave," about his investigation and conclusion regarding evidence of someone having lived in a shallow cave not too far from Las Vegas sometime before WWI. In his inquiries, someone mentioned that it used to be wetter there several decades ago. The question arose because whoever had lived in the cave had made a bed of grass, something that was gone when Fletcher discovered the cave. So, it seems that local climate conditions can vary a lot, if temporarily. There wasn't any good water to be had around there when Fletcher was passing through, by the way.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: Bob Knows on August 17, 2019, 12:45:48 AM
Speaking of military sleeping bags. Those old tents and denim covered metal canteens, all had that particular smell about them. New, or old. What was that? Mold? Materials?
Jbee

I think the old WWII surplus canvas materials had a particular smell because of some kind of preservative used during the war. It kept the cotton canvas from rotting in the jungles but had a chemical odor.   
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on August 17, 2019, 04:13:03 AM
 I can still remember that smell, from when I was a kid. It brings fond memories.
Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 17, 2019, 12:31:08 PM
When I go into a surplus store (which are becoming scarce around here), I always say it smells like my basement. Likewise, when I go into a garage or service station, there is also a distinctive odor, mostly of grease, I suppose.

Odors or aromas, are interesting. There can be certain smells that will trigger the memory, for better or worse. And it is interesting how the memory of them can linger for so long. There are a lot of strong odors or aromas that are not that unpleasant, although some may not care for them. There is leather, tobacco (but not tobacco smoke), freshly cut grass and freshly cut wood, wood smoke, fresh paint, ground coffee and all sorts of cooking and baking odors. But a walk through the woods can reveal unpleasant odors, like rotting vegetation and other dead things. But even the smell of a creek can trigger pleasant memories of camping trips, too.

The family owned a beach cottage for several decades, up until three or four years ago. It sat empty for most of the year (which is ultimately why it was sold) and when you first went inside, there was the strong aroma of juniper, which the front rooms were paneled with. But you stopped noticing it in ten minutes. Then you started noticing the salt air.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on August 18, 2019, 05:28:04 PM
Yup, olfactory is amazing. When I was sleeping up on Mt. Lemon this week, I noticed the smell of something. I was waiting to place it. It wasn't a bear, I somehow know a bear's scent. It dawned to me that it was a close skunk. I have never been that close to a skunk, but a de-scented pet. I certainly know the dead skunk in the middle of the road smell. But, I knew that this was similar enough to that and toned way down. I had an no clear idea how close it was as I lay in my net tent. Rustling confirmed my sense of direction and distance. Maybe, I heard it subtly, maybe not. But, I knew that it was a skunk.

Incidentally, I made some sleeping bag rustling sounds and mumbled talked to myself, nothing too threatening and it left...and covered my head and prayed.
Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: Peter S on August 19, 2019, 06:26:16 AM


‘I don’t smell!’ Meet the people who have stopped washing
https://amp.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/aug/05/i-dont-smell-meet-the-people-who-have-stopped-washing?__twitter_impression=true
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: John P on August 19, 2019, 03:52:33 PM
Thread drift reaches its logical conclusion. Or rather, continuation, since a circle has no end.

BlueTrain, you're up next. The topic is geometry.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 19, 2019, 05:27:38 PM
Oh, dear!
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on August 19, 2019, 07:02:07 PM
I watched "Stink" on Netflix last night. It's about toxic chemicals in everyday substances. Stuff that gets into pores, you breathe it in, unlabeled fragrances, buyer beware, unproven safety. The guy bought his kids a pair of pajamas online and they smelled too strong. He had them analyzed and discovered a bunch of toxic soup. Digging deeper, he got business run around, political coverup and corruption, multi-100 million dollar lobbying, misinformation and a USDA and EPA that is just a marketing arm of irresponsible corporate greed.

80,000 chemicals that haven't been studied, and those that have been and deemed harmful and banned are still being used flagrantly and unregulated. Fire retardant chemicals are wrapped around kids every night.

Out of a list of thousands, just five chemicals had been found harmful. In the EU however, 1200 have been banned from teh same list. There are different products for USA and then much of the rest of the world, gets the safety that we don't. Some businesses are effectively and literally using USA as a dumping ground. Even China has more chemical safety regulation.

The jobs, economic argument that government just gets in the way and is inefficient has gone hog wild.

It is just a huge experiment and we are all guinea pigs.

USA babies are born with as much or more of the toxic soup in their bodies as their mothers.

Is all of this just a freakout where over-regulation would not allow innovation and kill business? Most of this stuff in our bodies is harmless trash? Well it builds up, much of it is affecting cell balance and some actually affects DNA. The documentary puts emphasis on scents. All products have scents to sell their stuff. There is no disclosure required for scents, but it is a major source of the thousands of chemicals, which are not natural fragrances, but petroleum products faked to smell nice.

In the EU, GMO is banned, hundreds of these toxic things are not given the benefit of the doubt, the milk and cheese are not slammed with antibiotics, PCB, everybody gets good healthcare, baby leave, vacation time, and multi-party systems make for often real democracy and representation. It isn't on its way to being another third world country. It still isn't where government doesn't really care about people, just the power and economic interests of an elite. AND much of Europe is now reasonable about nude bodies, where people and social interactions control a body, so the government stays away from the freedoms of individuality.

Last night, I was actually considering a move to sunny Spain. When I visited there in the 1960's, it was a place where the water was dangerous to drink, and turds floated around a break to the beach area. Times have changed. I'm sticking to sweats, exercise. The best that I can do is to use "7th Generation" products, not eat meat, except wild and get home grown foods. Now, where's my old copy of "Mother Earth" mag?

I've been swimming at a club (with a Speedo!). I get this chemically treated water all over me. I feel a layer, but I feel somehow antiseptic clean. I wash that off in a water that is obviously unfit to drink (I can taste that). Then, there is the water treatment in the jaccuzzi there, where heat opens my pores to...

So, people don't wash. I think that that is a half measure.
Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 20, 2019, 02:16:17 PM
There was an article in the Washington Post this morning about letting your kids play in the dirt and creeks. The idea was that children need exposure to things like that to build up their immune systems. It still said you need to wash them when they get dirty or smelly. It likewise pointed out that in times past, kids who grew up in unsanitary conditions had higher rates of infectious diseases and did not physically develop as well as children did otherwise. What is not recognized today, I think, is the slum conditions that some people lived in, mostly in large cities but in shantytowns everywhere. Of course, that didn't bother most people who were living under those conditions and generally believed that it was their own fault for living in such places, an attitude still common. The general opinion was that those who grew up on farms and in rural areas were healthier than some of those living in cities, although to suggest that no one live in the city is not helpful.

This all goes back to the origins of nudism and naturism, which was based on the generally correct belief that city life was not particularly healthy. That was especially true in the more industrial cities, which probably included most of them, when there was zero pollution control. Those who could do something about it didn't care and the rest had to put up with it. That and the fact that draft animals were still commonly used and produced solid pollution in abundance. It was tolerated. Although we don't have streets littered with horse manure now, there are still problems with water in places. Again, those who can do something about it don't care and people have to live with it. The so-called progressive era of a hundred years ago is not even a memory. There used to be more of a civic pride and engagement that dealt with issues like that and got hospitals built. Local civic leadership is now too weak to make a difference (if they care). Big business runs things now. "Let them drink bottled water."

The article still said the healthiest are those who get their vaccinations.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: eyesup on August 27, 2019, 04:34:37 PM
One of my uncles was career Army. He gave my brother and me one of those old 2 pc. 2 man pup tents (https://armysurpluswarehouse.com/us-pup-tent/). That was back in the early 60’s, it was that green canvas and heavy. I remember that smell.

Duane
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 27, 2019, 05:19:45 PM
Skimming over the posts in this thread, I notice that there are so many exceptions made by those who claim to have given up washing, more or less, that it ends up being no different from my family in the 1950s. We had no shower, a bath was a once-a-week event and we somehow managed to survive, although with all the usual childhood diseases of the day. Neither of our two children had most of them. But not to worry. It may be claimed that cleanliness is next to godliness but it's usually next to impossible.

Although it is certainly possible that people can have a bad odor, it is just as likely that it's the clothing that has the bad odor.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: ric on August 28, 2019, 09:26:21 AM
body odour is also affected by diet,  generally the more crap you eat and drink the worse the odour.    on the other hand eating raw garlic is reputed to keep insects away :)
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 28, 2019, 03:03:29 PM
Well, we don't all have the same tastes, you know, or level of tolerance, especially the latter.

Circumstances vary but one's tolerance of dirt and odors usually depend on what you're doing or have been doing (and will be doing), where you are, the company you're with and what you can do about it. Sometimes you can't do anything about it and you have to tolerate it for a while. If you're in the back and beyond, there may not be any water around to spare for washing and the baby wipes have been exhausted. You won't die, to be sure, but as soon as the opportunity presents itself, you might like to wash something.

Thoreau said that it is not necessary to earn one's living by the sweat of his brow, unless he perspires more easily than he did. I perspire profusely but I don't live in Massachusetts. I did, however, spend a summer working on a farm in Massachusetts and I have no memory of sweating very much. Who would remember that, anyway?

Somewhere I may have made mention of a nude hiking trip in the mountains (hills, to be honest) last year. I don't remember sweating like I do when I go for a long walk around here--clothed. Was it because of the higher altitude or the lack of clothing? What I carried was exactly the same. I do recall that I didn't drink much water; never do. Was I perspiring as much and merely not noticing it? Here at home, I notice mainly the sweat on my face (the sweat of my brow, you might say), which literally drips. But not so on those trips (there have been several such trips). It's really just a matter of curiosity, nothing of much importance.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on August 28, 2019, 06:15:29 PM
 I always carry water when hiking, dehydration is a matter of great importance. When there is less humidity, and the sweat dries away, it can fool a person and they end up dead, around here.  :'(

Where you live, I grew up in. I remember dad having to move to desert New Mexico to treat his paraciditus (sorry, serious illness, but I can't figure out how to spell it). Summers can be sweaty, like the southern USA in Falls Church, especially down in the hollers and the swampy coastal tributaries. Those eastern hills (some call them mountains ;D ::)) are less humid and have some elevation.

I'm sure an occasional rinse or dip would needed in such conditions to get rid of some of the toxins on the skin, but maybe no soap. It makes no sense to wear clothing in wet heat...or any heat for that matter.

Although, I'm sure that ancient man and Indians in the south has screens on their porches for bugs...maybe lots of smoke? ;D
Jbee

Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 28, 2019, 06:30:29 PM
Nice reply. I just got back from my almost usual two-mile walk or hike over the creek and through the woods. Overcast here today and while not as hot as it's been, it's still pretty humid, which it usually is until it gets down to freezing. The insects can be a nuisance in some places, totally absent in others. They're usually where you expect them to be but never really as bad as they're made out to be. But one little critter buzzing around your face is very annoying. I stopped on the way back to finish my peanut butter & cracker lunch, pausing in a clearing where there were several down trees, using one for a seat and table. No insects about. Walking through the woods on one of my usual paths, though, spider webs are the annoyance, especially right across the face. But most of what there is are gnats here and there, just enough of them to let you know they're there. Usually no flies or other insects.

Up on Skyline Drive, along the Appalachian Trail, it's usually about the same, with swarms of gnats that appear the minute you step out of the car but they stay there (and will be there when you return). Along the trail, there seem to always be big flies in the sunny spots for some reason. There can be deer ticks, too, which you have to watch for. But I don't remember the last time I picked up a tick around the house, even though there are plenty of deer around here. They eat my wife's flowers.

My wife's uncle, who grew up in Chevy Chase, moved to Phoenix sometime in the 1940s also because he had trouble breathing. The dry air was supposedly good for health problems like that. He died with polio in the epidemic in the early 50s.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on August 29, 2019, 10:18:22 PM
What do you wear on your walks? Could you down size the wardrobe, a kilt or smaller loose shorts? Get more of a naturist experience of it, without social, or legal hassles?
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 29, 2019, 10:44:58 PM
Me, around here I wear long pants and some kind of shirt. I push through too much brush to wear shorts. In Shenandoah National Park and the nearby George Washington National Forest, I have worn, in moderate to hot temperatures, anything from long pants and shirt to nothing. Opportunities to hike nude up there are fairly good, particularly so on parts of some trails. I've made several trips on which I've hiked most of the time on the trail nude, including a few times when I met no one and there was no need to cover up. In fact, a couple of times my cover-up shorts were inside my pack. This includes trips to other, more distant places, too. On trips when I've planned to hike nude (most of them, except in the winter) I have only taken a pair of shorts and sometimes a t-shirt, too. The shorts are old-fashioned skimpy gym shorts. They have always been minimalist outings but I've never been dogmatic or a purist about it. The pack I use is an L.L. Bean "Stowaway" pack, the old model. It's perfect and weighs less than 14 ounces, although it won't do for cold weather trips when I take more stuff.

I actually prefer going to G.W. National Forest rather than SNP because it's closer (that is, the trailheads are closer), there is no entrance gate and there are nearly always fewer people around. But SNP is better for the views and good places to stop, even though the trails are no better. I can only think of one trail in SNP on which I would feel confident enough to leave my shorts inside my pack, only it's almost straight up and down and the up part is on the way back.

I have been "caught" nude on a few occasions with no trouble but I've always covered up with shorts anyway. I think that hiking nude is a very good thing to do when it is possible to do so without undue risk. And the only real risk is legal troubles of the worst kind.

I count all of my hikes winter and summer as naturist experiences and sometimes they are nudist experiences, too. I think I've mentioned somewhere already that I have fair skin and formerly red hair. But on all of these trips, the trails are about 95% in the shade and I don't have to worry about the sun. Trail conditions vary wildly, though, from nice and soft pine needle covered trails to boulder hopping. They're also mostly hilly, not quite mountainous by Colorado standards. A couple of my most memorable hikes have been when it was snowing.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: nuduke on August 30, 2019, 11:46:54 AM

Quote from: BlueTrain
I count all of my hikes winter and summer as naturist experiences and sometimes they are nudist experiences, too.
Now, Blue Train, I have a question about your meaning here.  Is that usage of 'naturist' because you are always naked at some point on every hike or is this a nuance of meaning of 'naturist' e.g. naturalist i.e. a student and appreciator of nature?  Can you elucidate further?
With my best pedantry cap on...
John
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 30, 2019, 02:03:08 PM
I take "naturist" to mean being out in the woods, hiking. I also use the term to include conservation but I don't do anything in that regard. It usually means an activity out of town, although when the big city and the big suburb includes as much wildlife as there are in the rural woods, I don't think that restriction holds any water. But nudist means without clothes, even though the term has been used in the distant past to include those who weren't totally nude that much but were otherwise no different from those who were sometimes. These different distinctions are all in the nature of recreation, in the sense of re-creating. All the same, I realize that the term 'naturist' has been co-opted by actual nudists as a politically correct term, the same way that German nudists began using "Free Body Culture" instead of "naked culture." However, I don't think one has to live nude all the time to be considered a nudist nor even to belong to any nudist organization, including this one. In the broadest sense, probably, a nudist just thinks that it's okay to be nude and sometimes even better.

There are also terms I dislike, as you probably already realize. To me, "body acceptance" means "let yourself go," because it's okay to be fat. Likewise, I don't care for the term "textile." If anything, textile is the norm. Finally, in spite of the fact that the name of this forum (that is, organization) is "Free Range Naturism," belittling nudist clubs and commercial resorts is not helpful.

That may have been more than you wanted to know.

You must also understand that none of these distinctions over words and means has ever made the slightest difference in my life.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on August 30, 2019, 07:55:21 PM
I think that it is best that we all attempt to speak the same language.

Your description of naturism looks more of a definition of naturalism. "Naturism" needs some naked body in there some place. Otherwise, you are just a naturalist who might take a dip in a swimming hole on a hot day, or participate in a naturist activity deep in the woods in a practical manner, once in a while. Those naturalists are generally less threat to us naturist. Naturist can have nude social engagements.

Textile is not the norm. It is the more usual. How can anyone who is threatened by a naked member of his own species "normal." Nude is the natural and original state. Clothing  and fashion is an addition to the baseline.

When resorts undermine body rights instead of protecting free range body rights, then they need to be belittled in defense. I enjoy a safe resort, but it is not and end. It is a temporary solution in an ongoing struggle. Free range and individual preference is closer to the end result. The social/government system creates the need for resorts by injustice.
Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 30, 2019, 08:30:56 PM
Without either threatening or being threatened, the "norm" (normal) is in fact, what is usual. I don't see how you can claim that wearing clothes is not normal when 99.99% of the world's population does so, all the time. And there you go, using "textile" again.

I specifically do not use the term naturist to mean naturalist. To me, as it us most often currently used, 'naturist' is a euphemism, in exactly the same way that the old "American Sunbathing Society" was a euphemistic name for an organization that was all about nudism. It was refreshing honesty for them to rename themselves as American Association for Nude Recreation. There should be no shame in using the term nudist. I realize that many here have problems with organizations, even the AANR.

There is no confusion in communication here. There are some differences in ideals (and not ideas). You'll just have to learn to tolerate the free thinkers. Either that or expel them from your group.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on August 30, 2019, 09:15:57 PM

There is no confusion in communication here. There are some differences in ideals (and not ideas). You'll just have to learn to tolerate the free thinkers. Either that or expel them from your group.
Sorry to know that you are feeling picked on. We generally are black sheep here.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: Peter S on August 31, 2019, 08:07:20 AM
There it is again, the problem of labels. Naturist? Nudist? Even “naturalist” now? Yet each with potentially different meanings to confuse the unwary. My mantra is that I prefer to be naked, end of. While I think that has less ambiguity attached, even the simple “naked” has attracted various definitions. Who’d have thought the simplicity of being unclothed could get so complicated.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 31, 2019, 12:53:40 PM
I don't feel picked on. In fact, to be honest, I'm probably picking on you, which is not good. I've just been trying to get my point across.

It's only as complicated as we make it, although that isn't difficult. But let's take a hypothetical example.

Let's say you and a few of your 'naturist' friends are out for a ramble. Let's even say you're in the Alps (I'll let you pick the country), because we love the mountains. You're all totally nude, except for the odd person wearing shoes. You stop for some black bread and beer, perhaps to yodel and strum your guitar as you wander. Feeling refreshed and even a little exhilarated, your group moves on.

Within the hour, another small group files up the trail and pauses at the same place for a Kodak moment and to enjoy the view. On a clear day you can see, well, you can see better. Anyway, they also lunch on black bread and lager. Oh, my! They're wearing shorts. They can't be naturists. They must be naturalists or something. And my goodness, someone's shorts has a logo of some sort. Another slave to the corporate consumer world, undoubtedly. Then they up and move on, too.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: Bob Knows on August 31, 2019, 03:01:39 PM
I don't see how you can claim that wearing clothes is not normal when 99.99% of the world's population does so, all the time.

Mass psychosis combined with herd mentality.

How can anyone claim that clothing is "normal" when 99.99% of species never do it? 
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 31, 2019, 03:31:43 PM
Okay, then, which is normal: fur or feathers? The people in the far north wore fur. Today they are more likely using feathers. Which is normal? If an isolated tribe deep in the uplands of Borneo wore no clothes, except for what they do wear, why should I take that as the norm? The word "default" is not an appropriate word. And you think everyone in the world is suffering from mass psychosis? Are you basing that belief on people you actually know and are exhibiting the symptoms? It almost sounds like you believe that anyone who doesn't believe exactly what you believe is suffering from some kind of mental illness. Could be. But it's okay. They won't hurt you. Just speak softly and don't make any sudden movements and you'll be all right. I think the whole thing might be coming from Outer Space and the government is keeping it a secret. But don't lose hope. There is an underground community in Idaho and Montana who have plans to deal with this outbreak of conformity. They're just waiting for the right moment when their leader says so. At least that's what I heard.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: MartinM on August 31, 2019, 03:54:26 PM
Wearing clothes is the ‘norm’, even for naturists in winter, even though it is not as natural. Our clothes become less and less natural, from ones that could have been woven from locally available natural fibres for thousands of years to modern synthetic ones made from petrochemicals, incorporating anti-bacterial coatings and possibly now even smart technology. Less and less natural, but may become the new normal. ‘Normal’ just describes what is usual.

Labels are equally normal, and entirely natural, for a species that has developed language. Labels are useful, essential even, until they are over-interpreted and too many assumptions made, or prejudices attached to them. ‘Textile’ is not a particularly nice term but can be useful short - hand for non-naturist, or just someone wearing clothes who may or may not be naturist.

The nudist vs naturist debate is often raised, and why we use labels. Nudist is the most straight-forward term saying very little about the person other than they like to do ordinary things without clothes. ‘Naturist’ has become the more popular term because it suggests a less ‘one dimensional’ interest or simple hobby, but more a philosophy. To many people there is at least an element of connecting to nature, and that is certainly seems true for most on this site. It originated in France in reference to living a more natural, healthy life and so nudity naturally became part of the ethos but nudity was not the main or only focus which it often now seems. So ideas of not washing with artificial soaps and detergents fit in with the naturist ethos. Several of us walk barefoot, even when there is no opportunity to be naked because it is natural, healthy and we can better connect with the earth.

A naturalist is distinctly different, although there may well be overlap. A naturalist is someone who observes and studies nature in an objective way. A naturist’s experience is much more subjective, seeking not so much scientific knowledge, but spiritual, bodily, sensory connection at some level. At it’s most basic level, it is just because the feel good when they take their clothes off to feel the sun, breeze or water on naked skin. But that, for many of us, is just the entree.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: MartinM on August 31, 2019, 04:03:36 PM
I don't see how you can claim that wearing clothes is not normal when 99.99% of the world's population does so, all the time.

Mass psychosis combined with herd mentality.

How can anyone claim that clothing is "normal" when 99.99% of species never do it?
It entirely depends on your point of reference. It is normal for people in the modern age - whether or not that’s the product of mass psychosis! Culture is one of the most prominent features of humanity, and wearing clothes is, for good or ill, part of a now near universal culture. As is exploiting the planet in a myriad of unsustainable ways. What is normal changes with all reference points - time, place, population.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on August 31, 2019, 04:47:54 PM
We've discussed labels before, though not to the point of death. The funny thing about labels is that you can be unaware of a label that fits you perfectly and which others may even use sometimes in describing you. Typically, they are accurate, though they can certainly be falsely applied. This is assuming there are things you'd rather not be labeled. But the bad thing is, they are too narrow, description-wise.

There are lots of discussions going on arguments about a number of terms, although no one is honestly confused by the different terms being argued over. In this context, nudist and naturist are generally used interchangeable, though naturist seems to be preferred of late by many people. I guess "nudist" is too in-your-face or something. And then there's "naked," which is guess is simply over the edge and too much for some folks. Nobody owns these terms.

There is something else that happens and that is the possible phenomenon of a person conforming to label and I'm sure that happens. It may be a case of someone identifying with something and doing their best to live up to the ideals of that thing. They conform. Group think. The works.

I don't know if self-identified naturists really try to connect with nature or not. I don't. How could I not be part of nature? But those who in their everyday life are most closely associated with the earth tend to be fairly conservative all the way around. I mean farmers and others in agriculture. Nobody but grave diggers get closer to the earth than farmers. Yet they would find all of the things that we've talked about to be pure nonsense. Maybe so. But we'll all return to the earth someday. It's a closed system.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: ric on August 31, 2019, 09:07:39 PM
naturist , naturalist or nudist.... everyone can have their own take on it.

for me ill use my orchard ,   the grass under the trees is getting long , the naturalist would leave the mower in the shed and spend a few hours watching  the insects on the flowers and rotten fruit, the nudist would get out the petrol powered ride on mower , shed their clothes and mow the lot so it looks nice and tidy.  the naturist would get out the battery electric mower , charged up from solar, mow a few paths for easy access but leave the patches of flowers for the insects and butterflies, then wonder where hed left his shorts.
 ;D
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: JOhnGw on August 31, 2019, 10:48:29 PM
naturist , naturalist or nudist.... everyone can have their own take on it.

for me ill use my orchard ,   the grass under the trees is getting long , the naturalist would leave the mower in the shed and spend a few hours watching  the insects on the flowers and rotten fruit, the nudist would get out the petrol powered ride on mower , shed their clothes and mow the lot so it looks nice and tidy.  the naturist would get out the battery electric mower , charged up from solar, mow a few paths for easy access but leave the patches of flowers for the insects and butterflies, then wonder where hed left his shorts.
 ;D
Got it in one - may I have permission to use this elsewhere.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on September 01, 2019, 12:02:43 PM
How many people here have an orchard, farm, or ranch?
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: ric on September 01, 2019, 01:43:57 PM
naturist , naturalist or nudist.... everyone can have their own take on it.

for me ill use my orchard ,   the grass under the trees is getting long , the naturalist would leave the mower in the shed and spend a few hours watching  the insects on the flowers and rotten fruit, the nudist would get out the petrol powered ride on mower , shed their clothes and mow the lot so it looks nice and tidy.  the naturist would get out the battery electric mower , charged up from solar, mow a few paths for easy access but leave the patches of flowers for the insects and butterflies, then wonder where hed left his shorts.
 ;D
Got it in one - may I have permission to use this elsewhere.

feel free .

weve got a couple of mobile homes in the orchard , our bedroom is in what was the end lounge area of one , lying in bed with a cup of tea weve a 12 foot wide window onto the orchard , spent an hour or so early this morning watching 3 squirrels gamboling around, upsetting the wood pigeons. probably got another 6 weeks or so till we move into a flat in the village for the winter.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on September 01, 2019, 06:54:23 PM
Wearing clothes is the ‘norm’, even for naturists in winter, even though it is not as natural. Our clothes become less and less natural, from ones that could have been woven from locally available natural fibres for thousands of years to modern synthetic ones made from petrochemicals, incorporating anti-bacterial coatings and possibly now even smart technology. Less and less natural, but may become the new normal. ‘Normal’ just describes what is usual.

Labels are equally normal, and entirely natural, for a species that has developed language. Labels are useful, essential even, until they are over-interpreted and too many assumptions made, or prejudices attached to them. ‘Textile’ is not a particularly nice term but can be useful short - hand for non-naturist, or just someone wearing clothes who may or may not be naturist.

The nudist vs naturist debate is often raised, and why we use labels. Nudist is the most straight-forward term saying very little about the person other than they like to do ordinary things without clothes. ‘Naturist’ has become the more popular term because it suggests a less ‘one dimensional’ interest or simple hobby, but more a philosophy. To many people there is at least an element of connecting to nature, and that is certainly seems true for most on this site. It originated in France in reference to living a more natural, healthy life and so nudity naturally became part of the ethos but nudity was not the main or only focus which it often now seems. So ideas of not washing with artificial soaps and detergents fit in with the naturist ethos. Several of us walk barefoot, even when there is no opportunity to be naked because it is natural, healthy and we can better connect with the earth.

A naturalist is distinctly different, although there may well be overlap. A naturalist is someone who observes and studies nature in an objective way. A naturist’s experience is much more subjective, seeking not so much scientific knowledge, but spiritual, bodily, sensory connection at some level. At it’s most basic level, it is just because the feel good when they take their clothes off to feel the sun, breeze or water on naked skin. But that, for many of us, is just the entree.

Thank-you for saying that all so well. I was going for something like that and tried to find a language double checking in Merriam-Webster's. I tried naturalism, naturism, natural, nudism, normal and usual and none of them gave a solid use in this discussion. Webster has some homework to do to catch up with the use of these terms and referee this game of semantics. It leaves me without language if I go with their garbage.

I have often defined people wearing clothing on a hot, or perfect day as insanity. We have called it unnatural. Perhaps it is being so unaware as to be stupidity. According to Webster, it is normal to wear clothing and the APA wouldn't call it insanity, of course. Stupid is defined: "given to unintelligent decisions or acts : acting in an unintelligent or careless manner
c : lacking intelligence or reason : brutish
2 : dulled in feeling or sensation : torpid still stupid from the sedative
3 : marked by or resulting from unreasoned thinking or acting : senseless a stupid decision
4a : lacking interest or point a stupid event
b : vexatious, exasperating the stupid car won't start"
 By golly, I believe that I have found the dictionary definition that smacks the nail on the head. Stupid is a highly offense thing to call others world wide. People equate being stupid, that is slow of mind generally with "an act" of being stupid. They over simplify that people who are not generally stupid will do stupid stuff, as if a mass psychosis, believing an illusion. They just don't think something through, or jump to a conclusion without a sound intellectual effort. They do stupid sometimes.

Believing that one should better define oneself, do ya like to be called textile or stupid? ;D

So, is it stupid to seek shelter in a structure, or something more portable when it is cold? No, of course not. But to be so obsessed with clothing as to need it otherwise is being stupid. Is it stupid to not recognize that there can be repercussions for not conforming to being stupid in a society filled with people being stupid in mass? No. Do I have a vocabulary to explain this nicely? :(

As is part of the definition of naturist and nudist Webster's, AANR, and online excetera, it keeps coming up that both are only practiced in designated areas. The "movement" is cooped up according to them. I am a free range naturist, free range nudist, but I should not have to have a caged definition placed on me by the few, or the ignorant, and especially by the stupid. I may have to write to Webster's etc. because they are getting it wrong, the the work is sloppy, and it is damaging to us by framing us in and pigeonholing us.

I'm not at home today, but I'll have to get my 1948 Webster's out and check all of this out.
Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on September 01, 2019, 07:53:18 PM

Our natural state is nude, we evolved from nude. We evolved from conformity to tribal ways. We evolved from nude tribes. Our body's adaptations prove that nude is our natural baseline.

A majority used to figure slavery was natural, that certain races were inferior, that certain religions should control, that royalty came from divine order, that majority will make better decisions, that thyroids were useless, that virus comes from devils in the trees and all of this was normal.

Our behavior has been manipulated into a clothing obsession using our tribal instincts against us and usurping our individuality and natural state for profit and control. The idea that we necessitate clothing at all times and that viewing another member of the species without clothing is dangerous, harmful, or weird is utterly stupid. If one calls that normal, one can, but it is still stupid. Not the insult stupid, but the definition above by Webster's. The semantic game goes on.
Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on September 01, 2019, 09:22:11 PM
We evolved from being very hairy and strictly speaking, not exactly nude, which is neither here nor there. And today, there are those who shave everything because, well, just because.

Now that you mention it, I do feel incredibly enslaved when I wear a t-shirt, even one without a graven (printed, actually) image on the front or back. I often hear arguments about slavery (an institution based on kidnapping) that are clear, logical and wrong. If slavery is not to be objectionable, then anyone can be a slave. That's the way it has been in some places. Most of your other comments are really only true sometimes. Even kings were elected in some places. And clearly some individuals are inferior, while others are superior. The real issue is not even who are inferior and who are superior but rather, who gets to decide?

Just remember that deep inside every reformer beats the heart of a dictator.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on September 01, 2019, 09:50:56 PM
We evolved from being very hairy and strictly speaking, not exactly nude, which is neither here nor there. And today, there are those who shave everything because, well, just because.

Now that you mention it, I do feel incredibly enslaved when I wear a t-shirt, even one without a graven (printed, actually) image on the front or back. I often hear arguments about slavery (an institution based on kidnapping) that are clear, logical and wrong. If slavery is not to be objectionable, then anyone can be a slave. That's the way it has been in some places. Most of your other comments are really only true sometimes. Even kings were elected in some places. And clearly some individuals are inferior, while others are superior. The real issue is not even who are inferior and who are superior but rather, who gets to decide?

Just remember that deep inside every reformer beats the heart of a dictator.
Please, don't be contrary just to be contrary.

I don't know where that quote comes from about reformers being latent dictators, but is sure isn't true. I know that it came from an age when reformers were going every which way and what they were talking about were reformers and their movements about 100 years ago.

I could be called a reformer, that is I want some reasonable change. I'm not a dictator, or an authoritarian. I know others like myself. It just ain't worth the screen that it is printed on.
Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on September 01, 2019, 10:53:33 PM
You want me to stop posting? It's the only solution I can think of, aside from you not reading.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on September 02, 2019, 01:50:30 AM
No comment. :-X
Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on September 03, 2019, 02:27:07 PM
I second that comment.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: nuduke on September 05, 2019, 12:03:02 AM

Now, now, gentlemen, moderation in all things including language and mutual regard.  Personally I value all points of view, dismiss none (at least without offering rational justification and sound reasoning!) and would be most upset if anyone stopped posting because they were not happy with a bit of academic debate and others' views here.

I've been reading this voluminous intellectual interchange and airy persiflage and it's got a bit too pedantic even for me (and that's saying something!).  The discussion (amongst many, many) about the terms nudist and naturist has really made me think and take a step back.

I use the terms nudist and naturist interchangeably and what I have been given by my contact with naturist discussion and literature over some years is a complete unthinking regard for the 2 words as being effectively the same meaning.  But I have been pulled up short by this interchange and reminded of the bible 1 Corinthians Ch 13 v12 "For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully".  I have been guilty of unthinking acceptance - a matter which I have railed against many times in these pages and annals!  Unwitting hypocrisy thy name is Nuduke!  I need to stop blindly accepting and do the research (which turns out to be fairly simple provided you have a propensity to accept the word of learned authority - which I know we don't all have! :D )
Anyway, the point is the word naturist.  I suddenly realise from Blue Train's point of view on the use of this word to describe when he is in nature, a usage unconnected with state of dress, that I have never questioned the that usage of the word 'naturist' could be anything other than a direct synonym for nudist, or that perhaps it does have alternative connotations for some people i.e. being a student of nature (synonym naturalist) or someone who seeks participation/existence in natural surroundings.  I looked up the Online Etymological Dictionary that gives
Quote
naturist (n.)
participant in the movement for communal nudity," 1929,
So yes, that looks like the definition I have come to accept and
Quote
nudism (n.)
"The cult and practice of going unclothed" [OED], 1929, from French nudisme (see nude + -ism). Nudist "one who practices nudism" appeared at the same time.
Again, pretty comfortable with that.  But look at what dictionary.com has to say about the definitions of the words (and note dictionary.com works by integrating the main established dictionaries such as Merriam Webster and Oxford and simply coughing out the scholarly and widely accepted definitions)
Quote
nudist
[ˈnjuːdɪst]
NOUN
a person who engages in the practice of going naked wherever possible.
"a nudist beach"
Again, no problem.  But here:
Quote
naturist
[ˈneɪtʃ(ə)rɪst]
NOUN BRITISH
1. a person who goes naked in designated areas; a nudist.
"he is a dedicated naturist"
synonyms:  nudist · sun worshipper · nudie
2. a person who worships nature or natural objects.
"naturist cults"
So we have it!  There are the two usages that you have been discussing.  Fortunately or otherwise, 'naturist' possesses both connotations that are being debated here.  So it's not either/or.  Blue Train can use it his way and Jbee can use it his.  Both are correct.
The origin of the word naturist is very recent (1929) and seems to me (and this is just a personal opinion) to be one of those typically British coinages that are cringing euphemisms.  Stuck for a term for naked people and instead of just saying it, in typically post-Victorian British prudery, an embarrassed someone invented this term 'naturist' to avoid confronting the reality that they were afraid of - that is: someone who likes to be naked and having to say the word naked.  'Nature' being the root of the word, and in my view again, describing the human body unclothed as the state of 'nature', gets -ist and -ism suffixes added to make a euphemism for 'unclothed and enjoying it'!  I wonder therefore if 'naturist' is in fact a bit of a denigrating term because it draws a bit of a veil over the reality of recreational nakedness. I certainly won't look at the word 'naturist' with quite the unthinking acceptance that I have hitherto treated it with.
Is nudist a more robust and rugged coinage?  Or is it equally a prurient euphemism?  My own feeling is that it is a rather better term as its root is 'nude' which isn't a cringing euphemism, merely a straightforward synonym for naked.

Do we have any further thoughts or have I academicked you all into a state of torpor?
 :D
John
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on September 05, 2019, 12:26:41 AM
Yes, about people who've given up washing, not to change the subject or anything.

I think that when a person has a bad odor, his breath not included, it may be his clothes that smell bad. Our clothing absorbs the secretions of our skin, both perspiration and oil and holds it, more or less. It will dry out, to be sure, but it won't have a nice smell at the end of the day. However, not all fabrics are alike in that respect. Wool does not hold odors like cotton will, which is good, although few wear wool in the summer except for dress clothing. I'm not certain about synthetics and blends. Sometimes nylon when stored will have a bad smell, although I'm thinking of tents and ponchos. It mostly clears up after being aired out.

I am assuming that those who do not wash, with all the exceptions they make, do laundry now and then.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: MartinM on September 05, 2019, 09:20:27 AM
From Wikipedia:
“It is difficult to nominate exactly when naturism started as a movement. The word 'naturism' was used for the first time in 1778 by a French-speaking Belgian, Jean Baptiste Luc Planchon (1734–1781), and was advocated as a means of improving the hygične de vie or healthy living.”

Although this concept does not seem to have been picked up again until the 19thC, it was again about living a more natural, healthy life, as an antidote to urban industrial life although beginning in Germany under the term Nacktkultur.  The use of the word hygiene above is interesting, in the context of a thread of going without washing, but seems intended in the stricter sense of (natural and) healthy living. Not washing with artificial soaps, detergents makes sense in this context, as do more natural diet and an active outdoor lifestyle ‘in nature’ - without clothing, of course, when not strictly required for protection.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: ric on September 05, 2019, 09:44:31 AM
i dont think quoting 1929 definitions is particularly helpful,  usage of words can change rather quickly.   prime example is the word gay,   i can remember when a gay person was just a happy chappy, as kids we could have a gay old time . the meaning changed almost overnight :)
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: nuduke on September 05, 2019, 05:47:22 PM

The 1929 date was etymology.  (That is the first time the word was spotted in print or manuscript in English by those who study the origin and derivation of words).  And yes, Ric, word meanings change and yes, I agree, naturist is a synonym for nudist, but it also has those other overtones that I mentioned if you accept the validity of dictionaries.  We all use naturist in its original form and original meaning so I can't see how that word has changed much or why it's 1929 origin and or its two slightly different meanings should dismiss it.  Countless words are that old or older.  You might as well say that the words man, hand and fire that have descended to us virtually unchanged for '000s of years are not good words because they are old! :D
John


 
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on September 05, 2019, 06:43:09 PM
Languages always changes from place to place, from time to time and sometimes back, or a new meaning. Hand has the definition noun or verb, like give me a hand, hand me that hammer, or your hand just got smashed. Naturist is getting a changing treatment, as its usage is among various groups of people.

I use it to distinguish from merely nude, to nude in a natural setting and didn't make it up, but acquired it years ago from someones idea of its popular meaning. I also stretch the meaning more personally, but not exclusively, to mean worship in nature instead of worshiping nature and even that is blurry.

I'd like to keep my definitions, but I have no control over it, when a non-nudist hears the term and applies his simplistic notion of nudism and assumes that both are interchangeable. Soon the whole of us are popularly using the two terms as though they have the same meaning. Soon, we have lost definition and have to add explanation to what a single word previously would suffice to say. We just can't own a word, it would seem.

I do find that if I say that I am a "naturist, not just a nudist" that it will make others stop to think, what I am saying. They will apply what they know, the word nature with the context nudity and put the two together, arriving at a inconclusive, but more accurate idea of my proclivity and practice. That has often worked for me. It has also brought the other to ask for clarity and there is meaningful discussion brought out.

I do prefer JOhnGw's definition over all. ;)
Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on September 05, 2019, 06:51:13 PM
Bluetrain, I do think that you hit upon something there about the laundry. People who sleep in clothing in heat will keep a particular smell in their clothing. When smelly clothing is taken off, the body airs out after a while.

There are however, continual humid heat situations in which people will acquire a BO and that is most often in the armpit area and where similar glands are located. Again some glands smell for a purpose.
Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on September 05, 2019, 08:58:44 PM
I remember a sign on the blackboard in one of my junior high school health classes: bad breath is better than no breath. Or was it halitosis? I don't remember a lot from school and I definitely don't remember anything else from "Health." I remember taking showers after gym in junior high and high school but I don't remember either needing one or using soap (natural or otherwise). I understand that kids don't take showers in school these days.

On the various terms we've been discussing here in this thread, I think I should mention that I've never really had the occasion to use any of them--except here. But if I were talking to, shall we say, a lay person, if I said I was a nudist, they would immediately know what I was talking about. Probably not so much with naturist. There might be some question as to whether or not I actually was a nudist or not, but that's a different story. If I said, though, on the other hand, that I was a hillbilly, they would also immediately understand what I meant and all I'd have to do to prove it would be to open my mouth, although it would help (according to my wife) if I spent a few minutes talking to someone from back home ('down home') to freshen up my accent. As it is, a few are aware of my nude proclivities, such as they have been, but it isn't such an important part of my life that I spend time spreading the gospel of nudity.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on September 05, 2019, 09:57:00 PM
Language is for communication, first. Vocabulary, accent and perspectives may differ, but the all contribute to the purpose and more effective interrelationships. Even these silly little symbols  :o >:( ;D.
Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on September 05, 2019, 11:04:31 PM
True enough and there's non-verbal communication, too, such as body language and facial expressions as well as, for some people, hand gestures (nothing vulgar, mind you). And in on-line messaging like this, that's all missing. But I don't think anyone talks the same as they might write, unless they're giving a speech, maybe.

Accent is a real variable. Some people would discount anything spoken by someone with a strong Southern or Appalachian accent as well as a few others, which is unfortunate and is prejudice of the worst kind. This sort of thing is hardly limited to American English. I believe it occurs in most languages to some extent (depending on the number of speakers). Besides that, some accents are simply difficult to understand for someone who did not grow up speaking that particular dialect. My late mother-in-law was Lynchburg, Virginia, and grew up in a private boy's boarding school where both her parents were employed. I'm not from that far away, in the very southern tip of West Virginia but I often had trouble understand all of her words. When you're among those that you grew up with--unless you've lived elsewhere for decades--you don't hear an accent.

Also, I have often heard people exaggerate their accent, too, mostly for humorous effect. I wonder if I do that without realizing it?
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on September 05, 2019, 11:22:39 PM
People adapt accent to the person to whom the conversation is with. It is partly a tribal/club thing, I suppose. I watch white people speaking with a black person with an accent and soon, they white is speaking with that black accent. Hispanic and southern accents have people doing the same thing.

People here will speak Spanglish and bond over that. Teenagers will create slang among themselves. Much of these come out subconsciously, but is very common. Even when writing, I have many voices, intellectual, conversational, etc., some conscious, some just comes out, sometimes with whim.

It all can help a communication.

 Academic speech can be so ivory tower stuck up. I would say that clothing and culture are used the same way, a controlling way.
Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on September 06, 2019, 01:27:53 AM
I suppose adapting your speech, including your accent, to the circumstances is second nature. But some people speak in such a way so as to confuse others. In other words, their intent is not communicate what they're saying but something else. I think this is typical in the tech world of computers and programming. They have their own vocabulary and slang, although that's true in other fields of work. By academic speech, I assume you are referring to research papers and books written by scientists and academics, especially in the soft sciences.

If clothes control us or if clothes are used to control us, it isn't clear to me how that is happening, Likewise, culture. Culture is whatever we are. It isn't created somewhere else and forced on us, although there are plenty of cases of a culture being imposed on someone else's culture and that has nothing to do with culture wars. When any sort of control is being exercised, it is at a very low level. And it isn't the clothes that are controlling but rather they are the manifestation of control being exercised. Take the Amish, for instance.

The Amish, Mennonites, Hutterites and similar small societies generally wear distinctive clothing, the distinction being that the clothing is plain, more or less. It is decidedly old-fashioned and the only variation to speak of is winter and summer clothing. There is also a clear delineation of male and female clothing, although not so much young and old. The clothing itself has no controlling function. The community is the controlling function and the elders make the rules. There is an underlying premise behind the clothing they wear (as with the beards--but no mustaches--for the men). It is possible, I suppose, for the wearing of plain clothes to be an attempt to eliminate a lot of un-Christian behavior in the community such as vanity, greed and so on by the use of plain, unfashionable clothing. But they sort of get stuck in time, too. The Mennonites originated in the 16th century but they sure don't wear clothes like that today.

Perhaps a better example of clothing as a control factor is uniforms for school children. The idea is largely the same, to eliminate vanity, greed and jealously among school kids who might otherwise get too involved with fads and fashions. In a sense, school uniforms are to avoid having clothing be significant to the students. These analogies don't hold true for the military and police, neither of which are beyond the influence of fashion.

Did you ever notice that in so-called primitive cultures, meaning tribal societies, it is often the case that everyone is dressed exactly the same, save for the male and female differences? I don't think there is a control factor present but rather an identify factor. There is a strong and natural urge to identify with the tribe. I think that this urge is sometimes frustrated in larger, more developed and more mobile societies, though it certainly happens. Of course, at the same time, all of these things can happen without an individual being aware of it. We may not all have the same psychological needs.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: ric on September 06, 2019, 09:51:16 AM
.  And yes, Ric, word meanings change and yes, I agree, naturist is a synonym for nudist,

after asking for others opinions i think you should read them more carefully. nowhere did i say that naturist is a synonym for nudist.  in fact i have posted how i think they are different and refer to different attitudes and motivations for what to a casual observer might appear to be similar behaviour...

i would go further but im off for the weekend and the other half has just announced shes ready to go. no doubt this thread will have moved on to something else by the time i get back to it next week.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on September 06, 2019, 11:20:36 AM
On the idea of living in a warm and humid environment, such as a tropical rainforest, previously called a jungle, it may be possible that the long time inhabitants of the area (the natives) do not perspire as much as more recent immigrants (the colonists). Or so I have seen it claimed. There is a certain amount of acclimatization that happens with humans, some of which is probably psychological. But given that among the different rain forests, loosely defined, around the world, how people are different and how they react to the climate is so different, it's difficult to make hard and fast statements. One might think that, for instance, that a hot and humid climate would logically result in people wearing next to nothing in the way of clothing. But that is not the case and seems to be limited to only what might be called primitive cultures. The only two examples I can think of are those who live in the Amazon area (who developers have been trying to eradicate, same as we did with the Indians) and in Borneo. Others, though, manage with thin clothing and apparently do not suffer for it. It's worth mentioning that a hot and humid climate (or hot and dry) can have cold weather, too. At any rate, people have been living in all climates since prehistory and thriving, too.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on September 06, 2019, 09:00:49 PM
My experiences with the Amazon show it to be a multi-climate forest, depending on latitude, rains, seasons, a gully, the size of the local river, or up on a hill. It can be as varied as say Virginia in the summer, those hot sticky spots more near the coast, or a shady creek in the hills and quite comfortable. It can be hot as Arkansas when the sun beats down. It isn't a desert dry heat. The coasts of South America are oppressively humid and hot, without a sea breeze. Clothing makes no sense and wasn't used except decoration and identity. Many tribes decorated with tattoos and screw the clothing.

Most peoples, were naked in the warmer areas of the planet, or still dress very light. Primitive peoples, have been surviving well for longer than civilization, or modernization. We're destroying the world and making ourselves stress. We're exploiting each other. There is no sustainable harmony with nature. We are away from nature and don't understand it. We're often more ignorant in this world that those that live a "primitive" lifestyle, which is often very abundant.

I just looked up "primitive" in the dictionary. It is obvious who wrote the definition and they are high and mighty fools.
Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on September 06, 2019, 10:01:56 PM
Nobody I'm thinking of would like to be called primitive (as used thus far) and they aren't. Nor are they as simple as is sometimes believed. I'm thinking of people I have actually known. I've known a few South Americans but they weren't Amazonians, although one was in fact Brazilian. The people I'm thinking of would be called backwoodsmen, although they would all have resented that term. They understood nature but would not have understood a suggestion that they were apart from nature. But they did not think about things like that. They just lived their lives as best as they could, hoping that nature didn't ruin things for the season. It might be that nature (Mother Nature?) is a little friendlier in some parts of the world than it is in others.

Abundance? Well, maybe, in good years. Sustainable? Absolutely. A good life? Sometimes, not always. An easy life? Not hardly. A peaceful life, in harmony with nature? Sometimes, sometimes not. Primitive or civilized? By whose standards? Just a few decades out of date in some ways, in others, up to the minute. They lived where they were born and that was that. They never compared their life with anyone else's life, especially halfway around the world.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: nuduke on September 06, 2019, 11:31:15 PM

Quote
...and there's non-verbal communication, too, such as body language and facial expressions as well as, for some people, hand gestures (nothing vulgar, mind you). And in on-line messaging like this, that's all missing. But I don't think anyone talks the same as they might write, unless they're giving a speech, maybe.
Very true, Blue Train.  Its a bit of a handicap not having any facial expressions and hand gestures to clarify and enrich what we say here.

John
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: BlueTrain on September 07, 2019, 12:31:52 AM
It might be a good thing, too.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on November 15, 2019, 11:04:26 PM
One word, "E.Coli." It comes from somebody not washing up, raw meat, and can be anyplace. It used to be Montezuma's Revenge, but now it has found its way north of the border.

Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: MartinM on November 16, 2019, 12:04:13 PM
One word, "E.Coli." It comes from somebody not washing up, raw meat, and can be anyplace. It used to be Montezuma's Revenge, but now it has found its way north of the border.

Jbee

E Coli is widespread and may be beneficial or harmful as much variation.
https://www.cdc.gov/ecoli/index.html

You may be referring to E Coli 0157  - also relatively widespread, or a similar strain.
https://www.nhsinform.scot/illnesses-and-conditions/infections-and-poisoning/escherichia-coli-e-coli-o157

It has little if anything to do with (bodily) washing, EXCEPT for washings hands which is important to limit transmission of pathogens from faeces, infected meat etc, infected individuals.

As raw or undercooked meat is a prime source, washing up is important to prevent pathogenic bacterea breeding on leftovers.

We need good bacterea so disinfection and anti-bactereals should have restricted usage to high risk situations.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on November 16, 2019, 04:32:41 PM
High risk areas like hands?

I've been suffering from an E.Coli for over two months. It has complicated itself into several parts of my body. I don't know where it came from, maybe the swimming pool water, or the wash room at the Ethiopian food restraint and I ate with my hands, maybe someplace else. It can take a few days to incubate.

It Knocked me out, dick to the dirt, for a several days severe fever and diaria, then in the next week as I thought I would be getting over it, milder, but debilitating symptoms persisted. It is supposed to run its course, but apparently it is a long course and the illness stripped a few gears.

A body certainly develops immunities from the environment. Years ago, I ate blood sausage with my Colombian friends on the streets in Bogota. They were fine. I got wiped out with colitis. The Native Americans died by the millions, when the Europeans introduced disease. So, I'll wash hands and veggies that I eat raw and buy in the markets from Mexico and other world sources.

The soil from my garden is a healthy issue.

The last three times that I have had amoxicillin for dental work, I've caught diseases shortly after and had long recovery and severity. Now, I'm on antibiotics to get rid of this E.Coli condition. All I can do is eat fermented foods and hope to recover and balance my biome. Maybe a fast might reset my gut, but that will have to wait. MAybe, I'll make some tea from my garden soil, eat grass like a dog.

As for people in hot climates wearing clothes, yup. Clothing obsession is a major problem as you say. Our bodies are adapted to live in sun. We're better off without clothes most days. But then there are the desert sand people.

North Africans, wear clothing. Mostly it is religion, tradition, control, status, identity and ignorance from never being naked. The Arabs are wearing thin clothing. But then there are those out in the sands in black blankets.There can be some insulation value, like a Russian wool cap in the sauna, but why do these nomads make it black, when that absorbs heat? Are they conserving water, moister? When in fever, a body chills and wants to be covered. One reason is to heat and kill bacteria. What are those guys thinking?
Jbee



Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: nuduke on November 17, 2019, 08:58:18 PM

So sorry to hear you have been subjected to this really horrific infection, Jbee.  I wish you as speedy recovery as possible.
Struggling with E coli seems to have affected your spelling! 
Quote
diaria
I spell it Diarrhoea!
John
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: MartinM on November 18, 2019, 12:56:37 AM
Yes - sorry to hear about your E Coli infection. It sounds very unpleasant. Anti-biotics are something of a mixed blessing.
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: Bob Knows on November 18, 2019, 03:03:09 AM
Sad to hear about the e-coli infection, Jbee.  May you recover quickly. 
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on November 18, 2019, 05:04:58 PM
I saw that spelling mistake, couldn't remember how to spell it and spell check couldn't either. The "GI Blues", or "The Runs" seemed a bit crass, so I went with, "They'll figure it out." Sick makes me lazier.... ;)

I've felt a couple of mostly good days. It's coming along. I've done some, a little exercise with MovNAt and it is obvious that I have some recovery to do. I think I've gained back a couple of those twenty pounds that I lost. If the complications pass, then I'll be great eventually...even better...looks like I'll be eating all the fermented and pro and pri biotic foods that I can find. Maybe I can find some good soil somewhere. All of the antibiotics after the ones that I think got me into the position are something to overcome. My balance and gut's strengths have been ransacked.
Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: nuduke on December 01, 2019, 12:27:04 AM

Hope progress with recovery from here is continuous and accelerating, Jbee.  You won't miss the 20 pounds.  In fact perhaps you ought to try and stabilise at the lighter weight?  It may help the skeletal issues and the hernia.
Between August and October I lost 9 pounds (intentionally) but due to lack of discipline and a cold and various other things, my diet has relaxed somewhat and I've put on 4 pounds across November.  Dang!!!!  I want to lose another 11 pounds from where I am now but I may have to go on hunger strike to get there !!!! :D
John
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on December 01, 2019, 11:24:55 PM
Fasting is good for health, weight loss a bi-product. Just don't eat for a week or two and drink lots of water. The hunger goes away after a few days or less.
Jbee
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: reubenT on December 14, 2019, 03:14:03 PM
We don't live in Eden any more.   Even there they swam in the river daily.   But after sin happened we started to die.   Dead skin can accumulate on the surface and needs to be kept rubbed off,    then there are toxins constantly being eliminated through the pores with the perspiration,  and that happens at a slower rate all the time when we're not actively perspiring.  So for good health,  and to not offend those we live with, we wash.    But what soap or other stuff one wants to use may be extra.   And it's best not to use things that could be toxic because the skin takes up things and well as expelling stuff.      Now if we go naked a lot we may well stay cleaner than if we stayed covered.   That is; cleaner biologically.   Not necessarily cleaner visibly.  But there's clean dirt and there's dirty dirt. 
Title: Re: People who've given up washing
Post by: jbeegoode on December 15, 2019, 12:00:58 AM
Good points Reuben. I refer to the "All Things Sauna" thread. Sweat it out, scrape it off, enough "good" soap to not itch, or stink, where is counts.

I like to wash my hair clean. I use chemical soaps and have to refurbish it with conditioner. What I use isn't perfect, but it is probably okay.
Jbee