The article with picture originally appeared in the local paper, I see, when I click "Here" for full article. No nude pics would be in that rag. The office is on Main Street, I notice. Nude ribbon cutting is illegal there, I believe.
The "12!!!" employees 12! being dressed, I suppose gives a less casual more business impression to others, that nude. They do each have a private office, perhaps there is some leeway? I would think that they would be with that old ANNR frame of mind. It is all about recreation. It is not so much about lifestyle or better health (the next article is about melanoma and staying out of the sun). Recreation is done in "places for recreation" which is at resorts, etc, where they make commerce. They are a business organization supporting businesses, and business people, which is about money and looking busy and responsible. To them nude is just recreation, not having anything to do with work. Free range is a bit much for many of the staff.
There are like three or four people being paid by TNS and lots of support by volunteers. I would figure that they are dressed during business meetings with outsiders sometimes, too, to be practical. Their offices are in freezing Wisconsin, too.
These people in the picture might be found at the local naturist resort the next weekend, nude. I'm pretty sure that that is Bev Price in the pic. Could any one help me out with that? It is blurry and I've never seen her with her clothes on.
She has been on the board of both TNS, ANRR and Canyon State Naturists' and done some naturist business ventures, too.
I see ANRR as old school, and doesn't represent my interest in a lifestyle, truth , justice and change as it should. There is just too much energy being focused on the concept of being penned up and making a buck.
To balance, it must be said that the latest issue of "N" magazine tells how ANRR was also involved in a forest service ruling procedure in Oregon. I believe that a local naturist business was on the Fed property which was potentially being threatened.
Apparently the TNS rep said what was needed to save the day, like the facts from the TNS polls.
And while I mention that article, may I drift completely off topic and mention that it told how lax the Forest Service and BLM, ie. Feds are about nude in the parks and Fed lands. It sounds like, as with my conversation with our local ranger, that mere nudity is defacto legal away from the main campground areas, because they don't have time nor inclination for the hassle. I suspect that I'm going to be more relaxed in the Fedlands this year than last year.
If I was to go on TV to put my points out on naturism, I'd probably wear clothes. I might show pictures of me and/or others in the nude doing something. People would make a circus out of me otherwise. They wouldn't be listening. I would look out of place. They would project all of their fears on me. Most wouldn't identify with me, just the opposite blocking their thinking. I would become an easy target to the opposition. Some things just need to be done incrementally, carefully. Even Mahatma Gandhi wore clothes for practical reasons, but other times opted out. Like that, I suppose that I could see them wearing clothing. BUT, I still haven't figured the reasoning for resort employees to be wearing clothing.
So, my take...maybe that clears something up for someone.
Jbee
