Nudism and rules
I work on the assumption everything in life needs rules, but when making rules they need to be specific, not open to interpretation. If they are open to interpretation there will always be those who walk near or over the line one direction or the other. The site rules for example.
- Sexually Suggestive Topics will be deleted.
- Topics promoting Other websites or deemed SPAM will be deleted.
- Trolling or posts deemed to be rude will be deleted
- No pornographic links
- Although it is not a deletable offense, please refrain from use of profanity.
- Any members unable to follow these rules will have their account locked on the forum, or account deleted depending on severity.
Some are clear, some that may appear clear are not. For example, what is the definition of sexually suggestive topics, or Trolling.
I will take sexually suggestive topics to make my point. What people find sexual varies. I for example lived and worked many years in the Middle East where society found ANY female skin (Ankles, hands, wrists, face) sexual. Hair was a real big no, that was virtually sex on the street. I actually have a friend whos wife recieved a letter from the religeous police, translated it starts "To the keeper of the immoral woman". The lady concerned was a decent polite middle class lady who had her hair uncovered in a public place (a moment of forgetfulness." I might for instance write a peice on male erections to make a point not associated with sex but with blood pressure changes, the affects of some medication or what happens when you doze on the beach in the sun, but this could and probably will be deamed sexual. To my mind such definitions are incredibly hard to achieve, but if you make rules, they need to be specific. So a rule that forbids male erections as a topic is a rule and can be followed. At this point I want the reader to consider where rules lead. Lets say your country now has a female leader, this female leader encourages the church and mainstream religions to promote male decency. This is followed up by laws as promised to those religions. The laws start with a few specific rules some or most will agree with.
Men may not be seen naked in a public place or setting. (oops there goes social nudism, but your local restaurant will be happy)
Men must not removed or change thier clothes where they may be seen by an unsuspecting person who could or may be offended (worded like that the police do not need the stop and search law)
Men must not wear clothes that reveal physical attributes or may attract the attention of some female who may be temped by this obscene clothing. (Budgy smugglers, trousers with zips for the penis, Y fronts, lycra cycling thingies, cod pieces all gone)
Men must cover thier head so as to obscure thier virility from plain sight.
There are some nice blue and black outfits with one eye hole available in Afganistan, if you want to push the line a bit you could show both your eyes and wear one from Saudi or UAE.
Extreme laws/rules do not usually appear all of a sudden, they usually arrive by increments. Laws that imply that the sight of a male body, body part or physical shape may lead women to loose control are as rediculouse as they are when applied to women.
Laws/rules that are vague are even more dangerous as they are open to interpretation. For example, it is legal for males and females to be nude in public, so long as it is not intended to cause offence. We all know that some people out there want to be offended, others are devout in thier beliefs and would save us all from ourselves by imposing those believes, they too could use that law. But if the law lists specifically the actions and situations that could be deamed to be causing offence we could all live within the bounds of those laws or seek to change them. Vague laws do not easily get changed as it is hard to define why they should be. Any given argument can be countered by an interpretation that denies the argument.
Nudism is a belief that our bodies are natural. What we choose to do with our bodies is our business. Nothing about our natural bodies was created (insert belief system here) to offend.
I feel non specific rules that fail to detail what constitutes an infraction should be made illegal and rendered null and void within law. This act alone would remove the power of those who seek to be offended, those who are so devout they know best for us all and those who are just plain contrary for the sake of it.
I look forward to seeing the responses and feedback to this.
Nudism is a belief that our bodies are natural. What we choose to do with our bodies is our business.
Problem with the argument made which is one of the most reasonable Ive seen on here, is the definition of nudism. That is your definition it isnt mine and may not be others so the application of that definition to bolster your argument is problematic.
Everyone has a different definition of nudism those days so focusing on behavior what behavior is acceptable and what it not has become the only viable approach IMO despite the libertine libertarian ideal you espouse. Otherwise following the logic I can do what every I want with my body even if in doing so I cause harm to others.
Very thoughtful post regardless
people who seem to want to be offended are the biggest problem, and a minority group, ( I speak from the perspective of someone living in the UK, I know laws vary country to country) as in my experience the vast majority of people are not bothered if they see someone naked, for most it's either a bit of a giggle, a talking point later at the pub,
And the reason they are a problem is because of, as you say, vague laws.
It is not illegal to be naked in public in the UK, but you try it and you'll be arrested the charge being "behaviour LIKELY to cause offence," it matters not if anyone was offended,
I have yet to get a sensible coherent answer from anyone as to what is offensive about the human body.
Just as a post script to my other post,
What I also find annoying is the miss-use of the word offensive, just being naked cannot be offensive as you are not "doing" anything, by very definition to be offensive requires either physical or verbal action towards someone,
Body language is very important in nudism. As with any language, there is a sender and a receiver. It can happen that the sender sends something non-sexual that the receiver receives sexually. It is our duty as nudists to ensure that our behavior is not perceived as sexual. At the latest when someone says "that's sexual" I've made a mistake as a sender.
The OP makes a very complex argument but the answer is remarkably simple that every single person on the planet knows it
When you belong to a society, you have culture, customs, laws and rules and by they time you get to adulthood, you are expected to know theses and abide by them. If you are a traveler then you have to adapt to local customs, laws and rules.
As naturists we live in a textile society. A naturist dose not want to conform to the custom of wearing clothes, but they still have the same culture and have to follow the same laws and rules. All naturist know this and thats why we have separate areas of a beach and special places we can go to be naturists.
It may be legal in many countries to be nude in public, but those same countries will have other laws about lewdness and lewd behaviour, this isnt limited to just nude people.
When you say, there is nothing offensive about a naked body (I agree) thats not a fact, its an opinion and opinions differ so some people will find it offensive. Thats a fact.
Its clear from the trash that gets posted here that many men think if they say they are naturists then some of the customs and rules no longer apply to them. You also cant say a rule is wrong just because you want it to be, they are for the majority not for they one guy who wants to have a wank in front of people on a beach.
"Public decency" rules are hard by nature to define and enforce. Much is defined by intention and expressed by inuendo which are subjective to interpretation. For example is Dolly Parton modest for covering her hair or sexually suggestive for wearing overstyled big blonde wigs? Enforcement of such rules by a "skin police" becomes a farce.
I believe that many US resorts are slowly making nudism a dying movement by focusing on rules discriminating against single males rather than educating, encouraging and enforcing codes of conduct built on respect for all visitors. Who says males will behave better if escorted by a woman? Maybe she is an extra raunchy one and will set a bad example. Sex abusers come in all ages, genders and other demographics.
Sex abusers come in all ages, genders and other demographics.
That is very true.
But its still vastly more men who are the abusers.
I think nudist clubs discriminate against bad behaviour and people they deem might intimidate other members. If its always single men they have that kind of trouble with its hardly surprising they arent tolerated. Its sad, but there is a solution.
I think nudist clubs discriminate against bad behaviour and people they deem might intimidate other members. If its always single men they have that kind of trouble with its hardly surprising they arent tolerated. Its sad, but there is a solution.
This is an important point some people seem to think that it is nudity itself that is the issue. If fact it is the behavior that is the issue.
Groping someone is inappropriate and sexual assault whether one is clothed or not. However some people mostly men as you point out use nifty as cover for there inappropriate behavior citing personal freedom and bodily liberty.
I think nudist clubs discriminate against bad behaviour and people they deem might intimidate other members. If its always single men they have that kind of trouble with its hardly surprising they arent tolerated. Its sad, but there is a solution.
When can you say "it is always the women that have that kind of ..." without being called sexist? How is it different with men? If nudist venues have problems with problematic behaviors, why don't they address them (such as with codes of conduct)? If people are likely to intimidate others for being heavy or tall, should they ban them too?
Sexual abuse by women is more frequent than many perceive as per this article: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sexual-victimization-by-women-is-more-common-than-previously-known/
Actions
Back to TopicsReply to TopicShare this topic
Get paid just by sending us users/traffic.
Signup takes seconds, start now!
Signup as an affiliate!