Author Topic: Naturist links  (Read 30825 times)

jbeegoode

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3291
    • View Profile
Re: Naturist links
« Reply #30 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
Barefoot all over, all over.

eyesup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
    • View Profile
Re: Naturist links
« Reply #31 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

nuduke

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1423
    • View Profile
Re: Naturist links
« Reply #32 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!

eyesup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
    • View Profile
Re: Naturist links
« Reply #33 on: June 16, 2016, 06:02:48 AM »
Not 'have been' but is.

Abusing innocents is beyond the pale.

Duane

jbeegoode

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3291
    • View Profile
Re: Naturist links
« Reply #34 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
Barefoot all over, all over.

nuduke

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1423
    • View Profile
Re: Naturist links
« Reply #35 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

eyesup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
    • View Profile
Re: Naturist links
« Reply #36 on: June 22, 2016, 09:04:42 AM »
Ahhh! Important fact, especially to Mr. Freud.

I agree and concede the point.

Duane

eyesup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
    • View Profile
Re: Naturist links
« Reply #37 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.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2016, 05:19:53 PM by eyesup »

John P

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 694
    • View Profile
    • My naturist page
Re: Naturist links
« Reply #38 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.

nudewalker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 672
  • Normal is a setting on a dryer!
    • View Profile
Re: Naturist links
« Reply #39 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.
"Always do what you are afraid to do"-Emerson

eyesup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
    • View Profile
Re: Naturist links
« Reply #40 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

John P

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 694
    • View Profile
    • My naturist page
Re: Naturist links
« Reply #41 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?


eyesup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
    • View Profile
Re: Naturist links
« Reply #42 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
« Last Edit: September 24, 2016, 06:55:14 PM by eyesup »

eyesup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
    • View Profile
Re: Naturist links
« Reply #43 on: September 24, 2016, 07:15:11 PM »
When Jbee posted this,
The reporter becomes more and more a naturist as the show progresses. Id 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

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 deAgde is an excellent example of how something can be taken and turned 180 degrees from its 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

jbeegoode

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3291
    • View Profile
Re: Naturist links
« Reply #44 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

Barefoot all over, all over.