Free Range Naturism

Naturism => General Naturism Discussion => Topic started by: stuart on August 04, 2013, 06:18:00 PM

Title: Naturist links
Post by: stuart on August 04, 2013, 06:18:00 PM
Use this thread for any general naturist links you want to share. Here are a few that we endorse:

NOOK - a social networking site for naturists - http://www.naktiv.net/nook/ (http://www.naktiv.net/nook/)

Younger people might want to also join this forum - http://internationalyn.org/forum/ (http://internationalyn.org/forum/)

Naktiv, a site that promotes out naturist activities, and organises the annual Naked European Walking Tour - http://www.naktiv.net/ (http://www.naktiv.net/)
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: jbeegoode on September 06, 2013, 09:31:23 AM
A small community on the net, which occupies itself with the craft of secret naturism. Secret naturism is about being nude where you aren’t supposed to be. This grays into free range naturism. We are often in a world where it is believed that we are not to be naked, but in the shower, or maybe a resort. The registration is safe, the camaraderie is warm and respectful. There is a trove of knowledge found there. Members post their adventures and experience, often with pictures: http://secretnaturistsociety.org
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: Bob Knows on September 06, 2013, 09:53:20 PM
There is a web site called Experience Project where members share their experiences, pretty much anonymously.  Included in EP are dozens of nudist related "Experience" groups.   They don't allow nude photos on the posts, but don't police it unless someone complains. They don't allow sexual fantasies on the nude groups, but don't police that much either.  EP is kind of free range posting.   The management doesn't seem to have a clear direction for the site and keeps making changes. 

Here are couple sample naked groups on EP:

http://www.experienceproject.com/groups/Love-Being-Naked-In-Public/177059

http://www.experienceproject.com/groups/Like-Being-Nude-At-Home/582940

http://www.experienceproject.com/groups/Think-Nudity-Is-Natural/325303

http://www.experienceproject.com/groups/Believe-Nudity-And-Love-Of-Nature-Go-Hand-In-Hand/310837
Title: Naturist links - Singles Outdoors Club
Post by: milfmog on September 10, 2013, 06:24:40 PM
A naturist walking group, operating in the south of England, the SOC was originally set up for single male naturists, that species that is so discriminated against by clubs, but now caters far any naturists who want to walk with them.

The club runs a programme of 15 to 17 walks each year between April and October mostly mid-week to avoid the majority of clothed visitors to the countryside.

Singles Outdoor Club: http://www.soc-uk.info/

Walking website for SOC: http://www.socwalks.fsnet.co.uk/ this includes the programme and some reports from previous walks.

If anyone is interested in joining up for a walk I will be attending the walks on 17 September (Turville, Buckinghamshire) and 24 September (Hannington, Hampshire).

Have fun,


Ian.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: Pete Knight on July 10, 2015, 07:50:38 AM
The organisation, of which I am a founding member, and director,  was originally set up by disaffected BN members annoyed that BN (at that time.) made no effort to campaign for the rights of naturists. We would like to think that we are influencing current campaigning policy in BN, and have even taken part in joint projects.

The Naturist Action Group

naturistactiongroup.org/ (http://naturistactiongroup.org/)

Pete
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: jbeegoode on July 10, 2015, 10:14:53 AM
This one is a fun wholesome tumbler.

http://thoughtsonnaturism.tumblr.com/page/10
Jbee
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: jbeegoode on August 15, 2015, 12:15:46 AM
TheFreeRangeNaturist.org

A wonderful site if I do say so myself ;D
Mine. It is a continuing collection of trip reports, informing and encouraging free range naturism. Mostly occurring in the American Southwest, DF and I show you the sights, the hows the why's and daily naturism with few boundaries.
There is a new trip report each week.
http://thefreerangenaturist.org/

Jbee
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: nuduke on August 15, 2015, 01:36:34 AM
Thoughtsonnaturism is a new one for me - brilliant site.  I've just looked at pictures and scanned the odd short article so far but most of them seem to project and honest positive impression of naked people.  There's a bit of an over emphasis on well formed younger people but then, it's nice to see that there's plenty of them that appear to be bona fide naturists.  Some stunning locations.
The expressions on many of the faces are of naive recreation without guile. 

Worth further study.

John   
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: Dario Western on December 21, 2015, 10:16:02 AM
http://www.youtube.com/brisbanenaturists1 - about naturism in Brisbane and surrounding areas.  :)
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: jbeegoode on April 24, 2016, 07:53:32 PM
This short youtube music video is so sweet and candid, a couple of pals in situations that I can relate to:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVdPhv6TIhM

This website I mentioned elsewhere, but is probably more appropriate here, now that I find it. It brings out the simple joy and many aspects of naturism. Along the way there is a sign, or quip about the wisdom of nudity. The draw back is that one might get the impression that most nudity is being practiced and enjoyed by younger women (that's what swiping material from the web will get you). If it was lined up as a slide show, I suspect that it would hypnotize anyone into becoming a free range naturist:
http://thenakedtao.tumblr.com
Jbee
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: John P on April 26, 2016, 12:54:03 PM
I'm sorry to be disagreeing with a fellow naturist, but I can't let this pass. What you call a "draw back" is completely damning in my mind: this "naked Tao" site is really just an excuse to show pretty girls with their clothes off, and any claims to be following some philosophical path, or representing naturism, are completely hollow. The Internet is full of "naturist" sites that are just like this one, all about conventionally attractive young women. You can call that soft-core porn, or voyeurism, or just an enjoyment of looking at naked women, but whatever name we use, it's clear that the attraction is the babes and nothing else. Out there in the textile world, they just love nudity (oh yes they do!) but it's always pretty young women that they want to see. We claim to be naturists, but if we're still talking about seeing pretty young women, it's hard to say what progress we've made.

It would be an interesting switch to illustrate one of these web pages with real naturists, predominantly middle-aged men as most of us are. Then add some supposedly profound philosophy and see if anyone takes it seriously.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: JOhnGw on April 26, 2016, 01:31:20 PM
At this stage I suppose I should confess to enjoying looking at pretty women whether clothed or not but I wouldn't bother with such web sites for the purpose.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: jbeegoode on April 26, 2016, 05:49:52 PM
The website operator collects his material from the web and this of course creates the bias of young nude women. The young men are healthy, too. There aren't many photos of real naturist as you say. After flipping through many pages, I found that the quips quotes etc. do express an inspiring attitude understanding naturism expressing itself wonderfully. The focus of the photos, if you look at the body language and faces, express more than a girl posing. There is joy, sensuality in nature, and various activities that is better when nude, that I identify with. There are many aspects of naturism given. Peppered in with the girls are photos of families, friends and a few older groups. It expresses the act and experience of a naturist, much with photographic art. I don't doubt this persons intent, understanding of naturism and I have enjoyed that. The ratio of pretty girls is only a reflection of pilfering from the net, which is understandable. There are no sexual innuendos, like overt crotch shots or striptease.

I can understand one flipping through a few pages and getting the impression that it is only about the naked chicks. That is just like any book. You may read a few pages, missing the good stuff or general overall. If you change the number on the URL a few times, jumping into various places for a few pages, you'll find a different impression, but still it looks like mostly it is the young women who are having all of this fun. Perhaps when our hosts reach middle age or more, they will keep bagging more Monroes on film. It is not like those many other websites and tumblrs. Its photo content has been selected from what is available. There are over 600 pages of the stuff. There are many artsy photos, too.

Anyway, I enjoyed my time there. My reaction was not getting hot, it was root, root, root for the naturism mostly on the free range.
Jbee

Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: eyesup on April 26, 2016, 06:15:19 PM
As Bob frequently says, as long as more people are portrayed as having fun naked it is better in the long run to gain acceptance of that activity.

Mentioning the book analogy is appropriate, JBee. The author of a book or screenplay has no control over how the presentation is interpreted. You throw it out and see what happens.

We can't, nor should we attempt to, narrowly define what enjoying naturism means. Too many different people have differing definitions and opinions.

Duane
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: Bob Knows on April 26, 2016, 07:35:01 PM
As Bob frequently says, as long as more people are portrayed as having fun naked it is better in the long run to gain acceptance of that activity.
Duane


I have started commenting and sharing occasional nudist posts on my Facebook page.  I share the ones I like on my "Timeline" so my "friends" all get them on their FB page.

I also make political comments that Free people do not have government telling us what to do with our bodies.  Its my way of promoting the idea of legal nudity with those who otherwise would never think about it.

Its another way of letting the world know.

Bob

Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: jbeegoode on April 27, 2016, 05:15:35 PM
Healthy young people, pretty girls is akin to glamour in advertising. In this case naturism is the product, so maybe so many babes isn't such a bad thing, when the pics are accompanied by plenty of honest naturist philosophy and propaganda? After all there is plenty of porn, mild to hardcore, out there rather than this.
Jbee
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: John P on April 27, 2016, 07:29:44 PM
I'm sure the people who run Tumblr would deny that their site is intended for large-scale violation of copyright, but of course that's what the users fill it with. Endless anonymous images, stolen over and over again from one page to another. You can be curious about where a photo was taken, who's in it and what the circumstances were, but you'll never find out. No thief will ever tell you what he stole and from whom!

So Tumblr is a pretty rotten system, and it's not much surprise that so much of its material is trash. There's plenty of porn indeed, sometimes honest and sometimes not. At least if it's called porn, the viewer isn't fooling himself about what he wants! But when it's delivered by fake naturist websites, what's happening is a presentation of naked women for men who'd like to believe that they aren't consuming pornography. It's nothing to do with naturism, and if anyone searching for "naturism" finds these sites (and they are legion!) they'll think exactly what we try to deny, that it's all about sex.

I thought I might find pages on Tumblr with nude couples, to try and prove that there are naturist images which aren't wall to wall babes. So:
http://nudecouples.tumblr.com/archive? Nope, they're all young women in pairs and groups.
http://nudistsnudistcouples.tumblr.com/archive? Same.
But here are some that look OK on a quick glance:
http://graymark52.tumblr.com/archive
http://nudegroup.tumblr.com/archive
http://kenuur.tumblr.com/archive

So, there is some variety out there. I'd much prefer that the locations and photographers were identified, and nothing was stolen off other sites, but it does seem to be true that naturists aren't always women in pictures and men in real life.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: jbeegoode on April 27, 2016, 09:05:41 PM
These examples are filled with people posing. There is little action and expression other than the polite photo smile. It is just naked people. The sensuality of the experience and human relationship to the natural world is rarely depicted. The one with people "doing stuff" seemed more okay, but just images.

What I liked about this Zen site is that it is not one of these. Someone stands in a wave, or on a mountain top, and I can relate to the splash on the naked skin, or the air all over, the chill. Many expressions are captured that are genuine reactions to the experience.This is expression and some of it could be called photographic art. There are also comments and quips, signs that I might want to printout and post, poems and essays on naturist experiences. There are more than 600 pages of this stuff. Someone put sincere effort into the site, not just a collection of naked bodies from 2013 to recently.

I figure that if we grabbed a naturist porn freak and used tooth picks to keep his eyes open, strapped him down and made him watch that Zen site (a la Clockwork Orange), that he would turn into a wholesome naturist.

Yea, I have looked for the "whose photo" going back a few times, and images are taken from one site to the other to the other, again and again. I found a pic of my friend's and DF's butts standing at a book sale at a naturist resort online. I wanted to trace the provider. I knew who had done this and wanted more proof of the violation. No way, it goes on and on. There are tons of websites.

One reason we don't put our faces on our website (actually an after-thought, byproduct, it IS another reason) is the other connotation the unscrupulous might use to exploit the photo. One day I'll end that hide, in the meantime, I consciously try to make the photos there reflect the naturist moment of experience and hard to exploit. I don't know if that is the plan, but Stuart and Carla do a good job of posting photos that are hard to recognize as porn and destroy the intent of posting, ie naturism, humanity and art. On the other hand, whose eyes are looking at the same image will have different reactions. I posted a copyright spiel on my site, but....
Jbee
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: nudewalker on April 28, 2016, 05:07:27 AM
It reminds me of visiting the Andy Worhol Museum. After the pop art sections there was a more darker place; highlighted by a copper sheet signed by celeberties who urinated on it. I will admit to signing my autograph in the snow but that is another story from long ago. There were comments made about various exhibits to which my brother in law quipped, "Made you think didn't it?". That is all we can ask, that the seed be planted, that it becomes mainstream and that nudism becomes accepted. Even if there is no conversion at least a degree of toleration.

Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: stuart on April 28, 2016, 09:17:15 PM
I'm sure the people who run Tumblr would deny that their site is intended for large-scale violation of copyright, but of course that's what the users fill it with.

This is one of the things that really annoys me about these galleries. None of them create their own content, they just rip off other people's. When I hear that one of our photos is on a tumblr site I always have it removed.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: JOhnGw on April 28, 2016, 10:05:22 PM
I'm sure the people who run Tumblr would deny that their site is intended for large-scale violation of copyright, but of course that's what the users fill it with.

This is one of the things that really annoys me about these galleries. None of them create their own content, they just rip off other people's. When I hear that one of our photos is on a tumblr site I always have it removed.
Quite right too.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: jbeegoode on April 29, 2016, 12:07:44 AM
There are so many. How do you ever hear about violations?
Jbee
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: nuduke on April 30, 2016, 12:17:48 AM
Quote from: John P
I'm sorry to be disagreeing with a fellow naturist, but I can't let this pass.
I posted my similar opinion to John P's in the other topic with thenakedtao mentioned.

I can see Jbee's point about the 'recreational' nature of the site and others' comments about it being on the whole a positive portrayal of naturism but it still feels a bit voyeuristic and 'posed'. 

John
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: Peter S on May 04, 2016, 10:23:43 AM
It seems to be the norm on the Tumblr sites that they all feed off each other for their content, but presumably the content starts life somewhere. Some of the sites are purely of the pretty girl variety, so I don't think they qualify as naturist - they're just voyeuristic. Some try and largely succeed to be naturist and have a mix of males and females and 'normal' physiology (look in the mirror for an example); sometimes even these have pretty young girls creeping in, but sometimes a pretty young girl might actually be a card-carrying naturist as well. We're not all middle aged white men!!

Peter
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: eyesup on May 04, 2016, 04:22:24 PM
Quote from: pjcomp
We're not all middle aged white men!!

Thank God!

Duane
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: nuduke on June 12, 2016, 12:55:23 PM
I was adding a couple of boring utilitarian links to my favourites / bookmarks today and idly happened on my saved bookmark to Paul Midnightrider's website.
Now either I'm more geriatric than I think or Paul has updated and massively extended his site since I last looked quite a time ago.
I think he has, by the way.  My confidence in my faculties is not that low!!

Anyway, it's a fantastic treasure trove of naturist stuff and a whole lot higher quality of presentation than most.
I now know why Paul posts only occasionally here - he's been too busy with his own website!

I recommend a look if you haven't already got it bookmarked!

http://www.mynaturism.net.tf/

John
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: Peter S on June 12, 2016, 05:35:32 PM
Back to the Tumbler sites - http://wnbr2016.tumblr.com/ this one is very straightforward if you want to see how the naked bike ride went in the UK

peter
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: John P on June 12, 2016, 07:45:13 PM
Back to the Tumbler sites - http://wnbr2016.tumblr.com/ this one is very straightforward if you want to see how the naked bike ride went in the UK

peter

No no no! Peter (and everyone) please don't keep making me get so upset!

You're sending us to YET ANOTHER Internet board which gives nudism a bad name and makes us worry about each others' motivations. Babes, babes and more babes--is that what we're interested in? This is stuff we need to denounce (I hereby do so) and not keep presenting to each other as if it's all perfectly fine and realistic and will help the cause of body freedom. When there's a nudist event and photographers go there to get images of the women, even if the women are in a small minority as they usually are, then spread them all over the Internet, they're giving a pretty strong message to women that they should expect to be on display. If we actually think naturism is for everyone, we'll do our best to present it differently.

As it happens, I went to one of the assembly points for yesterday's WNBR in London, and I took a lot of pictures of (O the shock!) mostly men, because those are the people who (O the shock, all over again!) were there. I'll put together a posting for this site as soon as I can.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: eyesup on June 12, 2016, 10:23:40 PM
I understand your point, JohnP. We can certainly discuss this type of coverage, on which I would be opposed to any kind of restriction, all day yet if I want to see a photo record I can go look it up.

But positive of negative aspects of public nudity for everyone demonstrated by the ride could be debated solely on the the predominance of males present. Apparently the prevailing belief is that women don't participate at these kind of events.

I've never been to one, even the one held here yesterday, so I am unfamiliar with the levels of participation by women. What is the general attitude by those present to the lopsided representation? Or did anyone really care one way or the other?

I know others here have participated in rides elsewhere. The only one I recall mentioning it, is Bob.

Duane
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: Bob Knows on June 13, 2016, 04:33:46 PM
But positive of negative aspects of public nudity for everyone demonstrated by the ride could be debated solely on the the predominance of males present. Apparently the prevailing belief is that women don't participate at these kind of events.
Duane


In general men tend to participate more in anything outgoing.  Women tend to stay home or hang out with a few friends.  I'm glad to see that there were numerous women in the London WNBR. 
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: jbeegoode on June 13, 2016, 09:28:47 PM
There were many women participating obviously. They were all shapes, sizes and flavors. There didn't seem to be a playboy candidate, or Barbie among them, just lots of the real deal. With so many real women, none looked flawed. What a wonderful lesson and encouragement to women trapped in the commercial view of themselves, out there insecure and stuck in a competitive mode. AND think of the guys who don't realize what real women actually are. Thank God for these uppity women who do these bike rides, and I'm glad that there were so many. Otherwise, I'd think that only five of them with some semblance of commercial potential participated and got photographed. I like the joy and fun on their faces. The way that they stand upright and interact with others in confidence and friendly manner. I like those that are enjoying the attention of being a girl among boys. These women are standing naked in the street and are obviously safe and happy, which just smashes most women's fear and fantasy of the idea. I enjoyed this. I enjoy nude girls and their endless forms and fascinating bodies and their humanity. They are much more diverse and fun to observe than guys...for a natural reason. These are pics focused on females, but I notice that there are more in the background.

So, I agree with John P., but I don't feel angry. I think that this would promote and encourage women to accept their bodies and get about and feel more comfortable exposing the big secret that they have been hiding. I think that it would show guys that there is something other than porn images and objectification. It might be more honestly tittled women of WNBR?
Jbee
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: eyesup on June 15, 2016, 07:10:44 AM
As we see in other events, there is a slow uptick in participation by, not only women, but younger women.

A good sign.

Duane
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: nuduke on June 15, 2016, 09:09:37 PM
Quote from: jbee
It might be more honestly tittled
Massive Freudian slip there, JBee!.....or was it editorial license?!  :D
John

PS Speaking of Freudian slips, we hear on the British news today that the grandson of Sigmund Freud, Clement Freud, a national celebrity, knight, chef, author, wit and dog food advertiser, turns out to have been a paedophile.  One wonders what his Grandfather would have made of that!
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: eyesup on June 16, 2016, 06:02:48 AM
Not 'have been' but is.

Abusing innocents is beyond the pale.

Duane
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: jbeegoode on June 17, 2016, 03:43:32 AM
Quote from: jbee
It might be more honestly tittled
Massive Freudian slip there, JBee!.....or was it editorial license?!  :D
John

PS Speaking of Freudian slips, we hear on the British news today that the grandson of Sigmund Freud, Clement Freud, a national celebrity, knight, chef, author, wit and dog food advertiser, turns out to have been a paedophile.  One wonders what his Grandfather would have made of that!
I did that twice that day. The first, I noticed to correct, this one...slipped by.
Jbee
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: nuduke on June 21, 2016, 11:54:15 PM
Whilst I entirely agree with the point of your last post, Duane, I have to stick to my choice of verb tense as C. Freud has been dead for some years.

John
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: eyesup on June 22, 2016, 09:04:42 AM
Ahhh! Important fact, especially to Mr. Freud.

I agree and concede the point.

Duane
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: eyesup on September 20, 2016, 05:16:01 PM
Sometimes the obvious is, well, obvious.

If you look at the avatar of each member, or where it would be if the member had one, you will see a few icons. If you were to click on one you might see their profile, send them a message or other options. One icon is an image of a sphere that means they have a website.

I was curious about that and clicked on JohnP's icon for a website and spent a few minutes reading his musings on hiking, nudity and naturism. I recommend taking a look.

John, I enjoyed the section on "Topfree Nonsense" and the perspective you present. I would ask you though about the incremental nature of beginning topless and then proceeding to full nudity as a means of sticking your psychological toe in the water.

Sorry it took me so long to "pay attention" and explore your site.

Going back to do more reading,
Duane

P.S. another way to find these is to go to the Members list. If a member has included a website in their profile it will show up there. I counted only 7 out of 132 members.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: John P on September 21, 2016, 04:24:13 AM
Well Duane, I'm flattered! That web page is woefully in need of some updates, now that I'm doing some trips with a naturist hiking group.

Regarding the topless stuff, you have a logical point. It could happen as you say, that topless leads to nudity, but how often does it work that way, really? Not often in the USA, certainly, because there are so few opportunities for women to be topless. Of course we have a few places where you can go naked, but then there's no need to play around with partial nudity. My main point though, is that we males have a blatant conflict of interest in talking about women going topless! Any non-nudist who hears naturists talk about this will just laugh, and say it's guys doing what guys do. We'd be wiser to stay out of it and let changes happen, or not.

Being in Nevada, you might appreciate this. It's from the Clothesfree Forum site, and it's about how a naturist couple went to a topless sunning area in a Las Vegas hotel. They found plenty of women there (I'm slightly surprised by that) but I wasn't surprised at all that when they talked to one of the women about nudity, she responded with complete rejection of the idea.

http://www.clothesfreeforum.com/forum/naturist-rooms/miscellaneous/548206-topless-vs-nude

"So, it is ok to be topless but disgusting to be nude... does that make any sense? They said yes, there is a HUGE difference between topless and nude. Go figure? "

As I said on my web page, these are not our people.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: nudewalker on September 21, 2016, 05:03:14 AM
I almost hate to say it but in a social situation Mrs. Walker would be in the topless ok but nude is not crowd. At least among strangers she would be that way. No argument from me as long as she is accepting of my views and lifestyle.

One of the oddest things to me are topless beaches where the woman is wearing not much more than a g-string and the guy has board shorts below the knee. Someday maybe but I have more and more doubts that nudity will ever become as common on US beaches as it is in Europe.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: eyesup on September 21, 2016, 05:01:33 PM
Well, trying to use anything in Vegas to compare with anywhere else is a fools errand. The marketing machine here works very hard to make sure that all aspects of a visit here are "exciting". Normal doesn't sell. So a topless pool at a casino resort is not a good place for everyman interviews. The comments from the tourists doesn't surprise me. They are focused on being engaged in an "experience" not trying something new in their life. But who knows, they may go back to Texas with a little seed planted that my germinate.

I haven't been to one of those because they do not interest me. If I were a psychologist maybe, but I'm not. They are to me no different than a "uberclub" were the beautiful people go to be seen and hopefully get together in order to be a beautiful couple. I agree, these are not nudists or naturists. Reading some of the comments made this clear.

With the topless debate I believe that the main point of that movement has less to do with nudity or naturism than social and legal equality. Women don't have opportunities to go topless because it's against the law in a majority of jurisdictions. Even in states that have passed topfree laws, they still get harassed by officers. It is a case of the government and agencies, outside the law, taking a moral stand in order to try and maintain order. Who's order, we're not sure?

A man can go about barechested but not a woman. I agree with their argument on that point. The law specifically states that men and women must dress differently. In this day and age, with equality flowing in so many directions, that is surprising! It is slowly changing. But you are right, topless is not nudity. But it is as Larry would say, incremental, because it makes people take a step in the right direction.

Duane
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: John P on September 24, 2016, 01:08:49 AM
I had to take a break there because of a trip to Vermont to hike the west side of Somerset Reservoir with Dan and Dan, with an initial night's camping at Grout Pond.

Back on topic, it's also possible to think of Las Vegas in an opposite way: people might think of it as a place where you go to do the things you can't do at home! That might include sunbathing topless for women, but it wouldn't change the things that a woman thinks are repulsive, like being totally naked. I really do think it shows up the divide in people's minds between skimpy clothing, and no clothing. That divide is very significant, and topless is on the "skimpy but still clothed" side.

You mention the concept of equality, but you've avoided touching my point about conflict of interest. If you're a man who doesn't think of women's breasts in a sexual context, you're unusual. I claim we wouldn't be honest if we discuss something that's clearly sexual to most of us, while failing to mention our own attraction. I certainly don't deny it on my own part, and that's why I'm calling it "conflict of interest"; I think it's best if we step back and let events take their course in this area. We don't often hear women's own opinions about it, and I wonder if a woman would tell us how happy she is about our male feminist outlook, or if she'd respond with peals of girlish laughter. Which would it be?

Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: eyesup on September 24, 2016, 06:52:05 PM
Well, so many different things to talk about here.

Quote from: JohnP
Back on topic, it's also possible to think of Las Vegas in an opposite way: people might think of it as a place where you go to do the things you can't do at home!

True enough. But another ad campaign here is that what happens here stays here. I am sure many intend to do just that, but there will be the occasional visitor that ignores prevailing attitudes and learns from experience.

Quote
That might include sunbathing topless for women, but it wouldn't change the things that a woman thinks are repulsive, like being totally naked.

This is true. What they are doing here is “unique” and “exciting” and has nothing to do with home or their everyday life. I have always been puzzled at the intense response by others, and the young lady in the article, by referring to be naked as disgusting, repulsive or nasty! It’s a strange over reaction to such a relatively innocuous activity.

Quote
You mention the concept of equality, but you've avoided touching my point about conflict of interest. If you're a man who doesn't think of women's breasts in a sexual context, you're unusual.

Suh!!  I take exception to the accusation of being unusual with regard to the appreciation of the female form. One of Mark Twain’s favorite quotes was, “There are three types of lies: lies, damn lies and statistics”, and that suh, is a damn lie.  ;D

. . as you are referring to this:
Quote from: JohnP
My main point though, is that we males have a blatant conflict of interest in talking about women going topless! Any non-nudist who hears naturists talk about this will just laugh, and say it's guys doing what guys do. We'd be wiser to stay out of it and let changes happen, or not.

There is no doubt that many would think exactly that. That does not mean I do not agree when I hear an honest appraisal of a situation or condition.

There is nothing more appealing and appeasing to the eye of a man (me) than the appearance of the female form. Are her breasts part of that appealing nature? Absolutely! Can they be regarded in a sexual manner? Yes! Are they always that way? No! For me it is not only about the body parts.

That is what I was speaking of. That there are laws that specifically state that one group of citizens have a common right to do a thing and another group is denied that same right for no better reason than the refusal to offend sensibilities. It is a blatant double standard and those laws deserve to be repealed. Women shouldn’t be forced to cover nor should they be forced to uncover.

Quote
I claim we wouldn't be honest if we discuss something that's clearly sexual to most of us, while failing to mention our own attraction. I certainly don't deny it on my own part, and that's why I'm calling it "conflict of interest";

Breasts are not sexual organs, we all know this. Can they be portrayed they way? Watch anything from Hollywood and you will have the answer to that. Can they be shown otherwise? Yes, and I think this is what part of the topless movement is talking about. It doesn’t have to be that way and when it isn’t, the legal aspect of how women are portrayed and treated is returned to them, by law. Which is as it should be.

Quote
I think it's best if we step back and let events take their course in this area.

If a man stands and supports the right of a woman to walk about without wearing any kind of top, that does not mean he is advancing a sexual agenda. Is he aware that his universe is about to be altered in a more positive way? Yes! Does that mean we lie and say that breasts should be covered in order to protect women from men unable to control themselves? Well, we’ve heard that line before.

If I were to state that I cannot take a stand on the issue of topless women because some people will think I have prurient interests at heart, that would merely take the women’s agenda for a more equitable place in society and culture and hijack it into a protest of how men are unfairly judged when it comes to women’s issues. When appropriate I will voice my opinion and if needed, I will take my medicine and, accept the fact and accusation that men enjoy they sight of the female breast. I will also advocate their right to show them or conceal them. It will be their decision not mine, nor some committee or cabal.

Quote
We don't often hear women's own opinions about it, and I wonder if a woman would tell us how happy she is about our male feminist outlook, or if she'd respond with peals of girlish laughter. Which would it be?

Laughter or camaraderie, as long as they know I am in support, they are free to respond as they please. I am not about to try to control other peoples reactions. And, taking my life in hand I don’t see it solely as a feminist outlook. It is a plain display of a disparate set of rules. These are intended to maintain a fading level of public control of women. In this case, the fact of the public display of female breasts being discussed, does qualify it as a feminist position. One of many.

Whew!  :P
Duane
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: eyesup on September 24, 2016, 07:15:11 PM
When Jbee posted this,
The reporter becomes more and more a naturist as the show progresses. I’d like to know what she expounding and so is excited about, toward the end. Warning pixelated genitals: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJ4NAoHqODk
here (http://freerangenaturism.com/forum/index.php?topic=850.0)

I had to watch the video in several sittings as it is over an hour long. The only downside I see to the whole freebody movement, involving all aspects of it, i.e. Topfree, Free the Nipple, WNBR etc., is in that video Jbee posted. The section about Cap de’Agde is an excellent example of how something can be taken and turned 180 degrees from it’s original.

What had been a place for people to go and spend time sans clothing has been changed into a swingers hangout. What many people fear will happen in all such endeavors. The other venues discussed in the report have managed to maintain their origins by carefully regulating access.

Public nudity, OK! Public sex, NOT!

The lines keep moving!

Duane
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: jbeegoode on September 25, 2016, 10:16:41 PM

You mention the concept of equality, but you've avoided touching my point about conflict of interest. If you're a man who doesn't think of women's breasts in a sexual context, you're unusual. I claim we wouldn't be honest if we discuss something that's clearly sexual to most of us, while failing to mention our own attraction. I certainly don't deny it on my own part, and that's why I'm calling it "conflict of interest"; I think it's best if we step back and let events take their course in this area. We don't often hear women's own opinions about it, and I wonder if a woman would tell us how happy she is about our male feminist outlook, or if she'd respond with peals of girlish laughter. Which would it be?

I'm writing as DF makes comment on John's "conflict of interest" remark. Pretty much quote unquote, she wanted me to eliminate the F words, but I think that it makes for a clearer understanding and explanation. She is addressing men in a more general context, not John directly:
"So, F*** that! That's your problem. Just because men see women's breast as sexual objects, that's a reason for us to cover up? To be controlled and confined, not just to cover up? You wear those f**ing bras that were designed by men. It's a cultural thing. It's a whole cultural mass media programming that... A nude doesn't turn a guy on, but a swim-suited on does."

There's a women's stance for ya. No giggles.

Personally, I have never been particularly fired up by women's breasts. They can be fun, so can mine. I get excited about butts more, and those are everywhere, thonged, and legal territory. Breast are no more sexual that some women's back shapes, some women's legs, knees, dimples, faces, skin, or hair. Any part of any woman may stand out and captivate. Any part may be a turnoff, too. It is a whole package and it is the person and affection that can be a turn on, too. If you want to cover those sexy things up, you'll need a burka and a total dehumanization. Breasts as sexual objects IS a cultural thing that changes when they are liberated and seen.

This reeks of the ol' thing where a raped woman was asking for it. It IS the beholder's eye's problem and not the woman's problem. We are correct about this body liberation that we chorus about. It goes for both men and women. We deserve body acceptance and if you don't accept it, it is YOUR problem, not ours. DF is correct in her stance, as all of us. It doesn't come to mind presently how to say F** off politely to someone who is so outrageous as to impose and insult MY God given body. It is just plain wrong and extremely rude. Sometimes, aggressive, rude and crude has to be stood up to with a similar tact.
Jbee & DF

Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: John P on September 26, 2016, 04:17:19 AM
Please note that I didn't say women's breasts should stay covered up, only that naturists shouldn't be the ones advocating women going topless. Instead, we should be trying to get total nudity legalized, and ignoring skimpy clothing. What revealing garments do is to fetishize the body parts which are covered, and the ones which are exposed. I'm all for nudity and I think we should all be! What the textile people wear is their business, and may it bring them joy.

Here's a  pretty reasonable article on the topic, but take a look at the picture that illustrates it. One woman, and plenty of men with cameras. No doubt they're all supporters of equality and freedom, recording the scene for archival reasons! Are we in that crowd?
http://bangordailynews.com/2012/09/19/opinion/the-wonderful-world-of-breasts/

JBG, please inform DF that the bra was invented by a woman, not a man.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: jbeegoode on September 26, 2016, 07:51:40 AM


JBG, please inform DF that the bra was invented by a woman, not a man.
There have been bra-like articles of clothing found through history, but we don't know the origins.

A quick wiki and google search also tells that 50% of bra patents are held by women and of course 50% by men.

 Men dominate the fashion world and dictate those rules.
 Men were in control of the sexist business world back in the seventies, when women began to be stuck in bras again for employment and success reasons. Women started wearing them again however in all other instances all by their insecure peer pressured selves.

Personally, I have known no women who actually like bras, except those that wear clothing to hide their true selves.

I don't think that I would put the blame on either sex exclusively. But I'm sure that DF will be interested in those findings.

Incrementally, when I was in Europe in the 60's, the topfee beaches were a new thing. It has since grown to acceptance as bottoms have diminished. The notion that my breast are okay free has grown to give suspect that the rest may also be okay freed. Topfree is a bridge in thinking to breaking the full nudity barrier.

 At the sweat women sometimes come to us and wear only bottoms at first. It can be justified because those women in Europe do it and it is okay. In time, most drop the drawers, too. They learn. They see others topfree and then others bottom free, as well. They follow that lead. I think, like Eyeup, that the strategy should be to conduct support in all effective and incremental arenas. People need to see other people of all body types around them nude and normal. They need to see others topfree, so things like what is in that silly picture can't happen, because it is no longer unusual. There were similar photos when bikinis were introduced. It can also work as a coalition politically. The braless need our support. 

Clothing should be an option, regardless of its reasons, or merits.
Jbee
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: Bob Knows on September 26, 2016, 04:13:14 PM
Please note that I didn't say women's breasts should stay covered up, only that naturists shouldn't be the ones advocating women going topless. Instead, we should be trying to get total nudity legalized, and ignoring skimpy clothing.


Yes, I agree with that.   Nudists should be advocating naked, not pants or crotch covers.

Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: Bob Knows on September 26, 2016, 04:16:47 PM
Men dominate the fashion world and dictate those rules.

That sounds like a load of feminist cowshit to me.  The fashion industry provides what women are buying.   Women totally dominate and are the market place for women's fashions.


Quote
Men were in control of the sexist business world back in the seventies, when women began to be stuck in bras again for employment and success reasons. Women started wearing them again however in all other instances all by their insecure peer pressured selves.


Women, in my life long experience, dress to please other women, the heard.  Women generally ignore the desires and requests of men, including husbands. 

Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: jbeegoode on September 26, 2016, 06:49:44 PM
Men dominate the fashion world and dictate those rules.

That sounds like a load of feminist cowshit to me.  The fashion industry provides what women are buying.   Women totally dominate and are the market place for women's fashions.


Quote
Men were in control of the sexist business world back in the seventies, when women began to be stuck in bras again for employment and success reasons. Women started wearing them again however in all other instances all by their insecure peer pressured selves.


Women, in my life long experience, dress to please other women, the heard.  Women generally ignore the desires and requests of men, including husbands.
If you google "do men dominate fashion" there is plenty of statistical information. Majority, something like 2/3 to 60%/40% of top designers and controllers are men. Most of them are gay.

Women generally wear bras in the workplaces to be seen as professional as fashions dictate. Enforcement of this comes from other women as much as men. They want to be judged on their work merits, not so much as having nipples being a distraction, or morals looking anything less than stringent, aka conservative. It is akin to uniformity, too. They get used to it and mitigate with lighter bras and outside coverage, or they are unsnapping on the ride home and slipping them off at the door.

Yea Bob, women do take their cues from other women, as men do, too. But, if you point out how something exaggerates something that they feel some insecurity about, they will listen. Women are often more knowledgeable than men about fashion trends, but that doesn't mean that they have better taste. None of this indicates that women don't care what men think and don't want to feel attractive, or are not concerned about being unattractive to men. Many women compete for the opposite sex, as do many men. I don't see it as the generality that you state. All of this stuff is cultural. Culture here and there varies, like workforce to outside of work, picnic, pool party, out on the town. There are many devious ways that people are sold things that they do not need, especially fashion.

This is about stripping away the requirement for clothing. To me, any incriminate is a victory. The places that will unravel textiles first, and then ripple out across the boarder pond are where to make progress. This has been the case historically as we have slowly as a culture allowed more and more skin to be exposed and then an acceptable norm. The beach is the most dramatic example. Trends and changes don't generally flip over night, or even in one swoop. There is an avante guarde which gets notice, then it is picked up in fashion and reaches a broader acceptance, in degrees among the others. The hippies thing changed fashion, the hiphop thing did too, as two examples. Identity and symbols of it are important and must not be overlooked. We need to use this principle, because it works.

Freeing the breast particularly the nipple is important. It started in France and has brought significant changes, including more complete nudity acceptance. The buttocks are another piece of taboo that has been liberated to an extent. When these converge and one is nearly naked, one will see how foolish covering the last vestige, genitals are. People will drop the rest easier. Nude is probably before its time, but if we keep pumping away at it, others will catch up as they near the precipice. Advocating topfreedom as a naturist, isn't advocating for covering the other body parts.

How to make any process/progress work quicker is the key. Advocating body freedom and naturism, people seeing it is a different front in the same war. You weaken the supply line as you assault the front.

Bras are uncomfortable, oppressive, cumbersome, and gender unequal, as anything and more so. It is a weakest link in the chain. It is a good place to start change. The young women that I knew in the early seventies, loved getting rid of the bras. It isn't much of a step further to consider that it is wrong to confine the rest. Some stopped there, some went further.

Yea, we must work toward dropping nudity restrictions, but picking on a weakness toward that goal here and there and lending some support to topple that increment doesn't require so much energy.
Jbee


Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: eyesup on September 26, 2016, 07:13:30 PM
Quote from: JohnP
. . . only that naturists shouldn't be the ones advocating women going topless.

I am certainly glad that being a naturist doesn’t involve membership. I am extremely selective about joining groups, see here (http://freerangenaturism.com/forum/index.php?topic=664.msg1759#msg1759).

What should we or anyone advocate? When did membership in any group or affiliation have any bearing on whether speech of any type should be allowed? I will be extremely interested in why anyone wants to limit what I should vocally support.

Do you believe that the very people that don’t want to allow women to go topless should be the ones advocating for them to do so? That doesn’t appear likely to happen. Some people may only want to go topless and don’t give a hang about nudity, but that doesn’t mean we exclude their efforts or support. If I choose to support a group’s efforts doesn’t mean I want to join their group.

Choosing to limit your options by planning in advance to only participate if certain well defined parameters are met appears to be self-limiting. Demanding full blown capitulation is one way to get what you want but it shouldn’t be the only tactic. A little here and there and before you know it you’re where you wanted to be.

How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time. It will take time.

Duane
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: jbeegoode on September 26, 2016, 11:54:08 PM
Social nudity supports women's lib. The situations tend to be more friendly, many other social barriers are forgotten. Things get out front and honest communication to some extent. Like the economic ques dissipating with nudity, so goes the place of men and women. Women's bodies are less sexualized and objectified in socially nude situations. Guys are nicer, and angry women are nicer. We get down to being people without so much cultural context, which is anti-equality. It follows that Breast-free equality supports women's lib. Anti-bra is women's lib. If women see nudity as the equalizer that it can be, it is attractive. We need collaboration with other groups. They need to see nudity as their issue, too. Women, half the population and the fire in the belly of libbers are good allies. Women get things done. Supporting topfree is a hand extended. It is also an opportunity to educate, verbal/written, but also just as an educating experience. It is body freedom in multiple aspects. It just doesn't go far enough.

Body acceptance is an issue for many women that enslaves them and manipulates them. Women are attracted to men in a less visual sexual context than men to them, often. Social nudity, body acceptance, changes that in men to an extent. All of our "flaws" are out there. it is seen that we all have "imperfections" hidden under our clothing. That's liberation. Women's breast are extremely varied, and it's all good, just like the rest of bodies. Topfreedom teaches that, just like nudity.

I just can't see how a woman looking for true liberation and social equality can ignore body freedom. There seems to be a few leaders who are coming from their old repressed hangups, thinking that men will objectify them more if they bare their true bodies. The opposite is true. Certainly not coming from a construction site while walking down the street, but with other nudist, naturist, at a beach, or social event. Eat, drink, play and pray together, naked. It works.

Male naturists ignoring women's issues is a mistake. All naturist supporting topfreedom as liberation AND proposing that it is the same as bottom freedom is a positive message to people that are currently taking the time to think.
Jbee
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: Bob Knows on October 01, 2017, 06:24:11 PM
If you google "do men dominate fashion" there is plenty of statistical information. Majority, something like 2/3 to 60%/40% of top designers and controllers are men. Most of them are gay.
Jbee

Its an old political argument.  Does the market control industry, or does industry control the market. 

My understanding of marketing, economics, and industry is that the market rules.  An industry can "create" a market by providing new or innovative products people didn't know they needed, but the market soon ignores products they didn't want.  Industry panders to the market, what customers want to buy.

In women's fashions the industry tries really hard to figure out where women are going and provide what they want.  Clothing designers, manufacturers, and retailers who guess wrong about what women will want to buy (next year) very soon vanish from the industry.  The industry responds to the market, they do not control the market.

Quote
60%/40% of top designers and controllers are men

Businesses are mostly run by men who risk their wealth hoping to guess where the market is going.  That does not imply control of the market, the buying choices of their customers.

Women buy bras because WOMEN choose to do so.  Shirts and/or boob covers have not been required in New York for over a decade, maybe two decades now.   How many women choose not to buy and wear them?  Not enough to notice any on the streets.

Bob
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: Bob Knows on October 01, 2017, 06:44:18 PM

Yea Bob, women do take their cues from other women, as men do, too. But, if you point out how something exaggerates something that they feel some insecurity about, they will listen. Women are often more knowledgeable than men about fashion trends, but that doesn't mean that they have better taste. None of this indicates that women don't care what men think and don't want to feel attractive, or are not concerned about being unattractive to men. Many women compete for the opposite sex, as do many men. I don't see it as the generality that you state. All of this stuff is cultural. Culture here and there varies, like workforce to outside of work, picnic, pool party, out on the town. There are many devious ways that people are sold things that they do not need, especially fashion.
Jbee

If you go to any shopping mall or strip mall you can rapidly observe that clothes stores for women greatly outnumber stores for men in both number and size.  Fashion clothes for women is a game, a toy, a dress up fancy.   Often its more about shopping than about the clothes she will wear.  Part of it is about WHO is paying for her clothes.  Women are very often spending money that a MAN earned.  Someone else's money can be easily spent frivolously on expensive blouses, fancy suits, useless makeup products, and celebrity magazines.  Men by and large spend money that We earned and have managed to keep our wives or GFs from spending foolishly.  Men's clothing dominated by being are simple, useful, durable, and inexpensive.  Feminists whine that a woman's shirt costs 4x what a man's shirt costs.  They ignore the market that makes ten thousand men's shirts all the same while making a thousand different blouses for a woman to pic through.  A big part of the market is controlled by who earns the money vs. who spends the money. 

Many women who earn their own clothing money shop at "Thrift" stores for used and discarded fashions that some wife spent her man's money on.  There is a whole industry of Thrift stores for working women.

The way women and men shop is a big part of the way women and men regard our clothes.  Men's clothes are simple, utilitarian, and durable.  Women's clothes are a symbol of her success in spending money.  Their issue is less about being body accepted as about flaunting successful shopping and spending. 

In some real evolutionary way, men are about working and earning but women are about shopping and spending.  Yes, there are wide individual difference in particular people, but the whole market at any shopping mall reflects the majority.





Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: eyesup on October 05, 2017, 02:12:30 AM
I tell my wife, “I don’t shop, I buy things”. I go in, get what I want and get out. Those big malls have begun to annoy me in significant ways. Not my idea of fun.

eyesup
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: Bob Knows on October 05, 2017, 09:53:22 PM
I tell my wife, “I don’t shop, I buy things”. I go in, get what I want and get out. Those big malls have begun to annoy me in significant ways. Not my idea of fun.
eyesup

I'm pretty sure that is a big part of why more men are nudists.  Our clothes are just a chore we have to buy and do.  Shopping is not a pleasurable activity for most men (except at Home Depot)

Bob
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: jbeegoode on October 05, 2017, 10:36:23 PM
If you google "do men dominate fashion" there is plenty of statistical information. Majority, something like 2/3 to 60%/40% of top designers and controllers are men. Most of them are gay.
Jbee

Its an old political argument.  Does the market control industry, or does industry control the market. 

My understanding of marketing, economics, and industry is that the market rules.  An industry can "create" a market by providing new or innovative products people didn't know they needed, but the market soon ignores products they didn't want.  Industry panders to the market, what customers want to buy.

In women's fashions the industry tries really hard to figure out where women are going and provide what they want.  Clothing designers, manufacturers, and retailers who guess wrong about what women will want to buy (next year) very soon vanish from the industry.  The industry responds to the market, they do not control the market.

Quote
60%/40% of top designers and controllers are men

Businesses are mostly run by men who risk their wealth hoping to guess where the market is going.  That does not imply control of the market, the buying choices of their customers.

Women buy bras because WOMEN choose to do so.  Shirts and/or boob covers have not been required in New York for over a decade, maybe two decades now.   How many women choose not to buy and wear them?  Not enough to notice any on the streets.

Bob
I've been hanging out at the mall working and observing again. I suppose that I have to respond to your opinion.The fashion industry and much of the mall culture is a dictate, a con, or sheep to slaughter. The consumerism psychology is not a grassroots leading people to choices. There is a sales which assumes that people want to be lead to choices. They like the attention. I see people buying crap all day for implanted reasons, herd mentality, recognition and they are not all women. The men at malls are just as weird and now the children, too. Buying stuff, first on the block, bigger, better, I'm the groovyist one, many other reasons drive people to buy, and let alone impulse, the icing on the cake. Women are no longer coddled, sitting at home spending daddy's hard earned money. It hasn't been that way for a long time. Modern women deserve to be given more respect than that.
 
The controllers are manufacturing new trends everyday, and adapting to changing circumstance to a point that it is hard for the trendy to keep up with it. They manipulate the market, as much as the market drives them. Fashion is all unnecessary, silly stuff. Not everyone heads to the mall to shop. Most people can't afford such slavery. We are a nation with a significant number of single moms and working women, two paycheck households and partnerships and tight budgets.
Jbee
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: Bob Knows on October 06, 2017, 12:05:12 AM
Not everyone heads to the mall to shop. Most people can't afford such slavery. We are a nation with a significant number of single moms and working women, two paycheck households and partnerships and tight budgets.
Jbee

Yes, lots of women can't afford mall shopping as their entertainment. Those women shop at Walmart and thrift stores.  Malls in general have suffered a serious loss of business.  So have big stores like Sears and JCPenney.  Macy's is closing stores.  Demographics are changing. Young women send nude selfies.  Maybe there is hope.

Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: jbeegoode on October 06, 2017, 01:39:05 AM
I think that that anti-fashion trend that started years ago, where new clothes looked all torn and worn out was an indicator. More people are not into sparkly and prosperous trendy looking as they used to be. The consumerism seems to be geared to teenagers, more, too. They may grow out of it, many rebel. There is hope, among a larger percentage of the population, I suspect. Hope that I'm correct.

Lately, hope feels like all I got in a lot of my life. Hope goes a long way.
Jbee
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: nudewalker on October 06, 2017, 02:24:37 AM
As much as we would like to think that maybe there could be a shift it will happen slowly, if it all. Demographics change all the time but the demise of big stores and malls is due to online shopping.   I have had to spend much time in the big city lately and despite the fact it has been like summer here I have seen no indication that there has been any kind of cultural change. Yes, women are wearing leggings that leave little or nothing to the imagination and are showing a lot of cleavage but most guys are still wearing shorts well below the knee and oversize shirts.  I'm not expecting much anytime soon.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: BlueTrain on April 11, 2018, 11:16:33 PM
Malls have been around for a hundred years, you realize. The original idea was to get everything under cover and out of the weather. The first malls around where I live only go back to the 1950s. Everything that has been said here about malls and shopping could have been said (and probably was) about the downtown business area of my small hometown in the 1950s. And everything said about both Wal-Mart and on-line shopping was being said about the Sears catalog before WWI. It would ruin the local economy.

Some comments were made that smaller and smaller garments covering only certain areas of the body creates fetishes. Perhaps, but with "real" nudists, the opposite is true. If it's too cold to be entirely nude, you're allowed to put something on, like a t-shirt. Then a sweatshirt. The last thing you are allowed to cover is your genitals. Nudism, one might conclude, is all about the genitals.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: John P on April 12, 2018, 03:03:22 AM
Some comments were made that smaller and smaller garments covering only certain areas of the body creates fetishes. Perhaps, but with "real" nudists, the opposite is true. If it's too cold to be entirely nude, you're allowed to put something on, like a t-shirt. Then a sweatshirt. The last thing you are allowed to cover is your genitals. Nudism, one might conclude, is all about the genitals.

I suggested the link between skimpy clothes and fetishes. But BlueTrain, you have that last point entirely backward, and you're basing it on made-up data. In fact no naturist says "The last thing you are allowed to cover is your genitals"! For naturists, all parts of the body have dignity and none are obscene. If you want to wear some clothing but not be entirely covered, you can put on whatever's most convenient, or most comfortable, or simply what suits your whims. It could be pants, or a skirt, or a shirt. If someone says that a naturist who goes around bottomless must have an urge to show the genitals, then it seems to me as if that observer doesn't understand the naturist's logic, or lack of logic. Could it be that the observer is the one who's obsessed with genitals?
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: eyesup on April 12, 2018, 06:41:54 AM
Nudists and most certainly naturists are not "all about any particular" part of the body. The intent is to experience the surroundings, wherever that is, while naked. Getting rid of the barriers (in my case, clothes) that prevent that from happening is what I focus on.

I am not a doctoral psychologist. My training occurs at any given moment I happen to be paying attention. :D So my belief is that any focus on a particular area or body part would tend to be a fetish focused on that.

If anyone is bothered by the weather, there is no rule about what to put back on in order to stay, warm, dry or protected from the sun. I agree in general with JohnP's post.

Duane
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: Peter S on April 12, 2018, 06:55:27 AM
If we accept TV judgements as the arbiter in such things, nudity (in the UK at least) seems to be defined by the groin area. That’s the one physical area they fight shy of broadcasting, while breasts and buttocks are OK. Radio, of course, let’s you see everything ...
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: BlueTrain on April 12, 2018, 11:49:19 AM
There is no "made up data." Those are club rules. I don't write the rules. But based entirely on observation as well as reading through this forum, it seems to be an obvious conclusion. While it could be that the observer is obsessed with genitals (and perhaps even female breasts), it's hard to prove one way or the other. There is always an element of taking the moral high ground, what with referring to people who wear clothes (the unnatural 99.9999% of the world) as "textiles." They aren't pawns of the corporate fashion world, which is obvious when you see how people are dressed, nor are they obsessed with clothing. It is we who are obsessed with nudity and I freely admit that I am included.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: Bob Knows on April 12, 2018, 04:22:11 PM
Malls have been around for a hundred years, you realize. The original idea was to get everything under cover and out of the weather. The first malls around where I live only go back to the 1950s. Everything that has been said here about malls and shopping could have been said (and probably was) about the downtown business area of my small hometown in the 1950s. And everything said about both Wal-Mart and on-line shopping was being said about the Sears catalog before WWI. It would ruin the local economy.

I was in Paris and happened into a covered place with small shops on both sides.   The sign said it was the "First indoor mall."   I think it opened in the 1700s.   But then I remembered that Imperial Rome had a shopping area which was about equivalent to modern malls.  Ancient cities all had "the market" which was characterized by a narrow street lined with merchants.


Quote
Some comments were made that smaller and smaller garments covering only certain areas of the body creates fetishes. Perhaps, but with "real" nudists, the opposite is true. If it's too cold to be entirely nude, you're allowed to put something on, like a t-shirt. Then a sweatshirt. The last thing you are allowed to cover is your genitals. Nudism, one might conclude, is all about the genitals.


Interesting observation.  It really is all about the genitals.  You can uncover the rest of your body any time you want and nobody would blink.  Nobody would call you a nudist.   Nobody would arrest you for going downtown with the rest of your body uncovered.  Only when you uncover your genitals does it become public concern, and only then does it become nudist.    Common culture requires covering of body "bits" that produce poo, pee, sperm, babies, or milk, normal biological processes that everyone does, but isn't allowed even to talk about. 

Nudist farms reverse the covering.  You expose to public view your "bits" that produce poo, pee, sperm, babies, or milk, but even the  factory farm nudists still react in horror if you are seen actually using any of those parts.  Many nudist parks have common washing areas where men and women wash their bodies together, but still have separate rooms that have separate stalls for any such common body functions as poo or pee.  Nudists are all about having their "bits," seen, but not seen while being used.  And sit on a towel so your bits don't touch our chair.  They have to be seen, but can't be allowed to touch anything.   

And, of course a big use for "bits" is physical sexual pleasure, expelling and/or sharing body fluids from our "bits."   OMG! We want to see your sexual bits, but any use thereof is "not what nudism is about."  That's not what nudism is about.   (yea, it really is).   

Often in winter I wear a fleece jacket, like a hoodie without the hood.  It leaves my crotch, penis, balls, and anus uncovered.  People do the same at "nudist" resorts in cold weather. 

Bob
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: JOhnGw on April 12, 2018, 05:02:33 PM
In the cold covering the trunk or core of the body gives most benefit.
In the UK postmen often wear shorts throughout the year with the upper body clad in clothing of appropriate warmth for the weather.
If one feels cold when naked a sweat shirt gives far more benefit than warm trousers and the average nudist wouldn't bother to put trousers of shorts on is the upper body garment did the trick.
It so happens that most upper body garments these days are of a length which creates a willy-dangler or fanny-flasher. If shirts were six inches longer as they were in the early twentieth century then the genitals would not be exposed.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: BlueTrain on April 12, 2018, 06:24:01 PM
Given that for me, for the cold season, that's how I dress around the house when possible: bottomless. But it's entirely a private thing. Seeing and being seen is not something I do, although I'm not saying there's something wrong with it. Seeing and being seen, especially the seeing part, does not necessarily have anything to do with nudity. People enjoy people watching no matter what. It's a social thing, just like hanging out on the corner with your buddies. Just because the people are dressed in a certain way or not dressed at all shouldn't matter, although I imagine that it does.

Sorry to divert the thread like this.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: jbeegoode on April 13, 2018, 06:54:43 AM
I like naked, as naked as comfortably possible. I want to be fully naturally alive. It isn't focused on any one part of my body. I enjoy free feet use as much as free crotch, if not more.

When it is chilly, I cover my trunk and the rest is still comfortable. Just covering up my crotch or putting on pants isn't practical for warmth.

None of these have anything to do with anyone else, as far as I'm concerned.

It does affect others, but these others are generally not accustomed to being around naked, exposed or socially nude people. I don't go to be with others nude because I want to be seen. I enjoy seeing, but then I enjoys costume parties and fashion displays, too.

I see the body, curiosity is finished and I am done looking, generally.

All of this is the reports that i have always heard from people experiencing social nudity. It ain't mysterious, edgy, or sexy like it was before being around social nudity and this change happens within a matter of minutes, "usually."

Any focus on genitals and concerns of other people are generated by living in a textile world. What Blue train is supposing comes from a perspective of experience of the textile world. It would be odd if he didn't find the nudist's truth if he gave it a try. It is perfectly understandable, Bluetrain. When I have been away from socially nude situations for a spell, at times, my eyes have sometimes darted and it has a lot to do with triggers like genitals, then poof, the textile crap is gone again and I am sane again.

 Rules?
I don't know of any club rules other than some banning swimsuits, like at the pool, that you could be talking about. The naturist or nudists farms will demand nudity, meaning no covering. It doesn't mean uncover specific parts of the body, it means be nude, all over. The textile has made this thing about genital focus, clear down to shaving the clothing of pubic hair, as more naked, exposed, explicit.
If someone is sitting around covering a part of the body, particularly genitals, then they are focused on genitals. There is something wrong, nasty, sexy, shameful usually in their perspective or attitude. If they see their body as that, then what are they thinking about my body? Sometimes that makes me uncomfortable, and many others get much more uncomfortable than me. Who wants that poison in the well? Who wants to be looked upon as any of those things? So, that is one reason for those rules, which are very rare.

Bottomfree?

I confess that I often find a bottom free look tantalizing, sexy. But, take the cloth off and I'm back to my better balanced humanity. Nudity allows unlearning of that kind of thing. Bottoms free is just a cute look, for some reason, after that. I was trained to those reactions along the line. These things all have to do with me. The other person is trying to ward off a sunburn or keep warm. The crap is my crap, not theirs.

Obsession?
I'm reluctant to claim that I am obsessed with nudity. I love nudity. Nudity is as Bob says, the natural default. Nudity should not be a problem. Textile obsessions make it a problem. A body is a matter of fact. Textiles make a big deal of nudity in a negative way. They would destroy lives and punish people for not fitting in with their obsession. You may see a casually dressed slob on the weekend, but I'd bet that they will likely be "dressed for success" on Monday. People are made to feel afraid to not fit in by their costumes, or have a complete ego identity wrapped around "the clothes that make the man". That is obsession. Living nude is natural.

One might call living nude and my activities in concern, an obsession. I put time and energy into it. The current social-cultural take on nudity is an outrageous wrong. I would call my activities a passion, not an obsession. I can't do much about much else in this world, but  can do some activities to right this wrong. I can live free. That feels good! I have been nude nearly all the time for so long that it is odd and uncomfortable to be dressed. That is not obsession, that's uncomfortable. If I'm not distracted, or busy when wearing clothing, I don't like it, sooner or later. That isn't obsession and to feel uncomfortable is because of an imposition of an unnatural lifestyle.

I don't think that nudity is an obsession here for the better part of us. I think that nudity for most of us here is similar to me, comfortable, alive, fun and freedom to strike out at an unjust situation. We did a poll years ago as to why we do what we do. Feeling compelled, passionate, these are healthy drivers. Camaraderie on a street corner, or the internet, we feel that, too. That doesn't have to do with being seen, we're like anonymous and on the radio. We're not seen...well...except Bob mowing his lawn...DF and me...uh...maybe so, maybe not. It is about standing up and being ones own truth.

MALLS!
Is "Seven Corners" mall still there? I remember the grand opening, like 60 years ago. The first big regional mall in the D.C. area.
Jbee


Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: BlueTrain on April 13, 2018, 10:22:28 PM
Oh, my! Seven Corners Mall! Well, it's still there but it's no longer an indoor mall. Tyson's Corner has been completely remodeled and sparkles with affluence. I live five or ten minutes from Springfield Mall and it, too, was remodeled. But this is all another subject.

Personally, I'm hard pressed to come up with perfectly sound and logical reasons why I enjoy being nude, especially out-of-doors when the weather is cooperating, which is finally is today. But instead of giving me opportunities for nude hiking, it means work on the yard, work on the deck and so on. Work, work, work. I did go hiking today, fully clothed and in compliance with all federal, state and local ordinances. Most of them, anyway. After a half-day's work around the house, I really don't have a lot of energy left over for fun. Someone said the secret is to keep moving. That's fine as long as the trail is level and smooth and hopefully dry. My usual long hike (about two miles out and back) takes me through brush, sometimes mud and sometimes even wading the creek, and always up and down hills. It's remarkable that I can take a walk that far and stay mostly in the woods but houses are still very close by.

Now, if I could only do that nude.

By the way, Don Beyer passed away. That's where we used to buy our cars.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: John P on April 14, 2018, 12:09:05 AM
As usual, JBG has expressed things perfectly, on the topic of clothing and partial clothing. Shopping malls, well, a part of the modern world, no better or worse than what came before as far as body acceptance is concerned.

Maybe there was a club somewhere that had a rule that if you had a shirt on, you had to cover your crotch too. A rule like that doesn't seem like good naturism to me: fixation on genitals and whether they're covered or not is a concern of the textile world. It goes along with the rule that if there's dancing, people have to be clothed, or mustn't touch. All to prove that we aren't doing anything sexual! The modern attitude is that we do don't change our activities just because we're nude. Do what you normally do, but do it naked.

Speaking of times when those awkward parts are in actual use, I know a naturist couple who had a baby (who is now a teenager, how we're getting old). The woman told me that they went to a naturist resort and she was nursing the baby, and she noticed that people were moving away from her, as though she was contagious in some way. I think it's a feeling that there's too much intimacy going on there, and it makes people uncomfortable.

It's interesting to ask who's got the fetish, the naturist or the textile? Well, all of us naturists grew up wearing clothes, we're used to clothes and we still wear them most of the time, and we don't think much about it. But a person who's compulsive about clothing gets really agitated if they see someone naked, and especially if they're naked themselves! So I'd say the adaptable people, the ones who can go back and forth between clothed and nude, are the naturists. The ones who give huge importance to a state of dress are the textile people.

I also went on a hike today, and it was warm and humid enough that I worked up a sweat. Walking naked would have been perfect! But not very welcome with the people out with their dogs.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: BlueTrain on April 14, 2018, 04:39:46 PM
Those who are compulsive about clothes, and there certainly are such people, seem to be more concerned with their idea of style than anything else. But they don't seem to be that concerned with what other people wear except in a very negative way. You have to wear your clothes in a certain way or you're just not with it. You have to wear slim blue jeans with the bottom turned up just so, for example. Otherwise, you're just a dork. I don't really know what that word means but it sure coveys a lot of meaning.

Of course, there are those who expect you to be decent and think everything depends on it. The ultimate form of that is to be covered head to toe and I do occasionally see such people. Only slits for the eyes and the hands are okay and curiously, the feet. Some communities have supposedly passed ordinances against exposed underwear or sagging jeans. Hitch up them overalls, boy!

All of this is far outside most people's hierarchy of worries.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: eyesup on April 16, 2018, 11:58:07 PM
I see people dressed in a manner that looks distinctly painful, but I make no comment. We all have the right to go about dressed or undressed as we please. No matter how much discomfort we’re in.

Is a puzzlement!

Duane
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: Safebare on April 17, 2019, 08:50:08 PM
I am traveling today. Attending a family function in Key West this weekend. I packed light but had to consider those I will be interacting with to choose the right wardrobe. Flip-flops, shirt and shorts for five days. I brought a sarong instead of a towel.  Then chose what to wear on the flight. Why not wear the sarong?
Maybe for the trip home. 😉
Shorts, shirt (buttons & collar) & loafers. Socks, of course. There is plenty on social media about how discusting bare feet are on the plane.
 Give me a break!
I roll up the hems on my shorts, but this is not the fashion of today. Shorts should reach the knee, or lower. I glance back to the sarong.
The TSA guy stops me after passing through the pre-transportation acceptability device. He asks about my socks. "Where did you get them?"
They are the disposable, try on socks at Academy Sports. I thought it stupid to throw them away after just one use.
I want to fit in, but the social rules are so stupid.
~Safebare
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: BlueTrain on April 17, 2019, 09:16:17 PM
Rolling up the hem of shorts? Those would be "Bombay bloomers!" You may have to look that up. I must confess I have so far missed all the complaints about disgusting bare feet, though. But women don't seem to wear socks with their dress-up shoes. Hose perhaps but I've never read how any women actually liked wearing hose, either.

But if there is any item of clothing that conveys a comfortable feeling, it has to be "loafers." Don't have any myself. Wonder why?
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: nuduke on April 17, 2019, 11:28:04 PM

I haven't got anything to add to this discussion but just wanted to observe that sometimes we can't half produce a fantastic deluge of words!  I last visited on the 14th, and here we are 3 days later with a wonderful melee of discussion logged on about 10 topics and numerous whole pages of content.  What a great bunch we are! Long may it continue.
John
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: Bob Knows on April 18, 2019, 02:29:01 AM
I roll up the hems on my shorts, but this is not the fashion of today. Shorts should reach the knee, or lower.  ~Safebare


A couple of months ago I was waiting for my wife to arrive at the airport.  Standing there watching passengers come down the ramp i counted 12 women wearing very short shorts.   Just long enough to cover their buns in back and wide enough to cover their crotches underneath.  Little or no leg covered at all.  They had no hose, tights, or stockings either, just bare legs.   There were so many that I started counting.  Some older and some younger women.

I guess the fashion must be way different for women. 
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: MartinM on April 18, 2019, 07:24:02 AM

I guess the fashion must be way different for women.
In the same way that on the beach, women can wear the skimpiest of bikinis (although not topless) while men wear board shorts. The equivalent speedos are even banned in some places eg Alton Towers and I believe more widely in the US.

Of course, having to wear anything on the beach is a imposition.
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: nuduke on April 18, 2019, 07:55:05 PM

I hate the modern fashion for swim shorts and board shorts.  Speedo style swimming trunks - brief and figure hugging have all but disappeared and seem to be the preserve of the unfashionable old man (into which category I guess I fall!).
When you dive in, Swim shorts get full of air and when you climb out they are saturated, never dry, drip everywhere and make you cold.  When you are swimming they are a drag and all in all lack comfort.  Swim trunks are no trouble like that, hold no air or water and dry off quickly.  Why is my wife against them?  She will not get her way on our upcoming holiday.
Whilst I entirely side with the observation that nothing at all is the very best swimwear, where you are forced to be textile, at least allow people to wear what they want, you fashionistas and stock them in stores.  I shall pay no attention to the dictates of fashion and endeavour to wear the garment that to me is the least worst when swimming.
John
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: jbeegoode on April 18, 2019, 11:06:46 PM
When I go to the gym to swim, I wear my old threadbare Speedo. It is still fashionable to wear one for competition and preparations for that.

At the club, at textile friends with granddaughter, I have a pair of tan through trunks that are more porous. They are short, remember Sean Conroy in early Bond, James Bond, movies? Not as tight. They are a tad tight between the legs and my junk will slide out when sitting, if I'm not careful, but...

...I think that the shorter leg swimming shorts are still fashion correct, if you get them from a tan through, tan-thru, business.

The tan-thru, by the way means that you must wear sunscreen to compensate for the slighter tan that you get from the swimwear. The straps, seams and bands don't tan through. It doesn't feel natural or practical, either, if your wife tries to use one as an excuse to ban your genitalia from the nude beach.

Much to do about silliness.
Jbee
Title: Re: Naturist links
Post by: nuduke on April 30, 2019, 11:09:02 PM

Kitting myself up for holiday I managed to find a couple of pairs of the short leg (but not briefs) spandex style speedo type trunks which are a good compromise -when forced to wear swim trunks- between something brief but proprietous and reasonably in fashion but avoiding the wet, flappy, air or water-retaining horribleness of swim shorts.  Why the hell those are so universally fashionable beats me (as I think I already said!).
John