clothing is really bad

[F.BareSoul]

I can see that our nude selves are natural for us, clothes are not, but entirely cultural.  There are places in the world where people live without there being clothing, and there are no problematic issues there because of it. Taboos we know of with nudity are learned, not universally but in the cultures where we are, and our societies are not better off having these taboos, even where clothes may be of really important use. I was seeing it where first experiencing being on a nude beach, where someone brought me without me knowing that was what this was, where certainly everyone there were acting in normal ways anyone might at a beach besides being nude. I had already read of there being such places and nudist clubs, and other things that did not make it such a surprise, and I was not at all really against it already, and willingly considered it more. It came about that I started being nude at home more generally, and eventually I acknowledged to myself I was nudist once I heard myself called that. And after that I was seeking out where I would be nude with others who were freely nude. I grew to understand how Natura it really is for us, being against it really isn't, and doesn't help anything.

[nuduke]

Taboos we know of with nudity are learned, not universally but in the cultures where we are, and our societies are not better off having these taboos

Couldn't agree more.  Where and why societies developed such a fear of nudity is locked in the mists of the distant past but for sure the Abrahamic religions had a lot to do with it in the west since the dawn of the current era. 
What depresses me is the hegemony of believing that being clothed is the only option leading to crushingly strong societal pressures to be clothed and to believe this fiction.  Any suggestion that nudity should be an option in company is greeted with a mixture of derision, embarrassed giggling and or out and out hostility.  Take public swimming pools for instance, where peoples' bits are covered with a shred of material which, in the case of women's swimming attire, often hides nothing. Why then is nude swimming never an option?  It can't be hygiene - if there are any unhygienic things about a body they will surely wholly or partly dissolve in the water irrespective of any swimming attire.  Can it be some sort of sexual protection - or avoid 'frightening the children'?  I can't think how such a thing would be needed in a public place.
It makes me angry that our choice as naturists is totally ignored even though you can't really produce a cogent reason why clothing should be compulsory.  I go weekly to a gymnasium - the word being derived from the ancient Greek for naked (gymnos) yet nobody's naked in there.  Given the huge difference in pleasure of the experience between swimming naked versus wearing a small garment about the loins, it is surprising more people don't demand the nude option....but then again they've never tried naked swimming because of the predominant textile hegemony -  so it's a vicious circle.
John

[jbeegoode]

So, clothes are not just really bad. Clothing is generally jus' plain dumb.
Jbee

[Peter S]

Where and why societies developed such a fear of nudity is locked in the mists of the distant past but for sure the Abrahamic religions had a lot to do with it in the west since the dawn of the current era.

Leaving aside the protective issue (keeping warm and other environmental factors) clothing seems to have begun as a status statement. Going back to the early civilisations even Egyptian pharaohs don't appear to have worried too much about covering up, but assorted clothing-type adornments would be worn to demonstrate position in society. Egyptian slaves were naked, so even rudimentary clothing would be a mark of one's standing in society.

Once status got in on the act, it was probably a short journey to fashion moving in delineating the strata of social classes. And aside from environmental protection, so much of clothing to this day revolves around being fashionable and wearing not just clothes but "the right" clothes. Yes, society affords covering-up a moral dimension, but once it's taken for granted that normality is clothed the real power is in the hands of the fashionistas.

Of course the religious angle centres on sex. A monotheistic religion requires a complete focus on the god; since the procreative impulse is the human's strongest urge it must be tamed by hiding temptation and covering everything with cloth. This continues in some religions with the requirement for women, in particular, to be completely hidden lest men lose control of their desires!

[jbeegoode]

 Yup. Jus' plain dumb. It is ridiculous and a waste of time and energy!

Covering up makes for a tease and curiosity, which leads into changes in sexuality. Sex without the clothing and culture is generally two people taming each other, getting involved emotionally, foreplay and lots of touchy feely.  Going out on a limb, with no science, merely my observation, I'd say that  people without the clothing, seeing genitals, or nakedness is a learned perversion of natural sexual response. 
Jbee

[Yorksmark]

Yep. For protection against heat/cold/sharp objects etc it makes sense. Otherwise there is not a lot of point. Sadly there will never be a time on my lifetime where it will be socially acceptable to go shopping without clothes or to pop into the bank etc etc.



Doesn't stop me working naked when I can though lol

[jbeegoode]

That wood on the ceiling is beautiful. What kind is it?

And, what what are all of those pipes about?

Jbee

[Yorksmark]

It's a tongue & groove cladding.. Maritime pine from the Landes de Gascogne forest (Pinus Pinaster) a lot of work to line it up correctly, but worth the effort. The stone work as well has needed repointing. 3 new windows.. this used to be an open barn. But I've added a floor and built a room that I hope will retain the original feeling of a building that is over 250 years old :⁠-⁠)

[nuduke]

I've said this before but....You are so right Jbee, clothing as a barrier to sexual contact is a learned thing.  When naked, naturist people have the same proper, respectful regulation of their sexual behaviour as do clothed people.  We all know that in company, in a CO club or whatnot, normal sexuality is turned off as humans interact normally in all non sexual respects while naked.  When sex is needed, wanted and appropriate then naked people can simply turn on their sexual drive and interact sexually.  That clothes are needed to regulate normal behaviours is a total fallacy.
John

[nuduke]

Hahahahaha!!!.  In a matter of a post or two, we can jump from the ancient history of sexual taboos to tongue and groove boarding to the philosophy of sexual/non-sexual human interaction!!  That's what I love about this forum - eclectic!
John

[jbeegoode]

There's nothing that old around here. An old barn like that would give a building inspector a heart attack. Do you get stuck with building code issues there?

So, about those wires, or pipes?

I used to have a problem working nude in my house in Tortolita. Never could tell when a looky lou neighbor might stop by to greet the new neighbor, ask about strawbale construction and find my bare butt up a ladder.

Jbee

[Peter S]

JBee, pipes like that usually mean "heating" - it's something those of us who don't live in the desert often need ... 

[Yorksmark]

Yeah .. -5 centigrade in December

[Yorksmark]

Yeah, the pipes... They run to and from an old wood burning stove from the 1950s I guess. When we moved in it was the only heating source. It ran 9 radiators and at best they got mildly warm if the fire was burning hot. It also provided hot water, via a dual tank that warmed with electric as well as the wood fire. It was cold that first winter... -10 with old draughty windows and very little heating.

We now have a modern pellet burner that can be set on a timer to warm the house in the morning. And the water heater failed not long after we moved in. As a quick fix I installed a fully electric 200litre water tank for less than 200 euro, but I want  to get a dual fuel water heater back in there. They cost around 2000 euro. But will reduce the electricity bills as the wood burner runs over winter anyway and works well running 3 radiators. It also cooks very nicely as a hot plate and oven.

The wiring is for the sockets around the room that will be boxed in.

France don't worry about building inspectors. Is pretty much a free for all. But I've had electricians and plumbers do the work that I didn't want to tackle and to check what I've done. I employed a "builder" a while back but it turns out he had no qualification, had just set up in France as one. And his work was rubbish. I'm better doing it myself. It takes longer but costs less and get done right.


We haven't got any neighbours so it's not a problem with being naked outside or in .. which is nice!

Anyway


As the french would say... revenons a nos moutons

[jbeegoode]

It looked like enough new electrical conduit to run a small factory. I haven't seen a radiator since I lived in an apartment in Paris in 1965.

NO PESKY BUILDING INSPECTORS!!!!. Holy...!!! What a dream. They are so expensive and so much B.S. here. Is there no Universal Building Code? Guidelines?

I've got an inefficient woodburning pot out on the enclosed patio, that I use on occasion, but wood is very expensive and polluting in a desert. It works. We get naked out there and stand near it during sweats when it is cold and raining outside.

I had ducts and central heat-pump in my super insulated strawbale house. I have smaller rooms and just opted for mini splits here when I redid this house, which is a new kind of system for the USA. Most newer construction is ducts and now a big heat-pump and air handler. The last 50 years construction has been ducts with gas or electric heater. So, you can be comfortably nude indoors during those cold winter months?
Jbee