Those who think that individual expression rises above everything are as much purists as those of us who want nudism and naturism to be no sexual in nature.The nature of genital jewelry is sexual and any pretense that it isnt designed to draw attention to sexual organs is just that pretense and gaslighting in order to pursue an individual agenda regardless of how is seems to anyone else. This kind of toxic individuality is why societies and institutions no longer have any clout and we no longer have any interest in the common good.As to nudists being tolerant they are no or less tolerant than any other segment of society. The attempt to shame those who simply express their opinion and view that nudism/naturism is non sexual in terms of public expressions of sexual behavior is nothing but a false flag and paper tiger meant to silence our voices. So the same people who say they must be allowed self expression turn around and attempt to quell the same when it doesnt serve their purpose. We seeit in the broader society and we see it in what now passes for nudism online.I wish everyone would just be honest and be transparent about motives and intentions. That is not the world we live in however so we are left with the muddle of comments that have been shared here. It is no longer that society as a whole is moving away from nudist acceptance. In countries like Germany and the UK where naturists have worked hard to define public social nudity as non sexual there are many more opportunities for social and solo public nudity. While in the US clothing optional spaces and venues decline every year. But maybe that is what the individuals want because then their individual expression will stand out.
The problem here is that you are not using any research. You do not have the relevant sub cultural experience. You dont read what is written you dismiss it because to you, anyone who has any interpretation of something you have branded obscene according to your values is some kind of pervert. Bravo. No, that is not acceptable, it is fascist and I won't have it. If you want to hold forth on a topic this broad and with a history and a HUGE body of literature, then read some of it. I have been watching, studying, interviewing and writing about these practices for thirty years. You may not understand this but a lot of what people do to their bodies isnt about you at all they don't care. Peircings and tattoos are narratives of the self, interrogations of the persons own flesh and those usually start as the first steps to resolving trauma and pain, and trauma and pain that you, naturism, no one has dealt with or cared to. This is the established baseline scientific explanation and I will gladly supply you with citations and an enormous reading list but perhaps, since you're just offering what is in your head based on your own prejudices, sit down? One of the people in this thread messaged me to share the reasons. Showing off had nothing and I mean nothing to do with it, and that is that cause its none of your business. Women who have had radical mastectomy get peirced and tatooed often...the trauma of losing a breast is huge. A friend has large rings and a lock over her labia and its because that is her rape guard and her stories are harrowing. She can go out in public this way because she knows the key is home and she's safe. It empowers her. She asks no one for comment and again, since the police failed to arrest and the courts failed to convict and her therapist a man blamed her the first time around, she did the best she could and THEN became a nudist. Are there exhibitionists? Yes. You are one with this song and dance routine. Its non sexual, and its non appealing too but it is all the preaching of the evangelical prudery one comes to expect here.
I want you to notice, nowhere am I advocating for sex anything to do with it, just using the correct words from the scientific and anthro literature to describe to you what you don't understand and don't want to. Who made you the judge of what others can and cannot do and why they do it? I am not stupid I know what the initial question was about its silly titiallation but, some of us chose to ignore it and answer honestly and with some perspective past "he's a witch, burn him". I can tell you with every bit of certainty that i have that it is obvious who is being a show off or sex pest and who is just hanging out. Again, peirced ears are a sexual symbol and even more than the genitals. Look it up and see why orthodox women dont do it. That literature is quite clear. Its just that ladies you think are nice and respectable do this so you overlook the context and don't see it because they are nice and the earring is ok. I don't disagree. But the jump to genital peircings are always about sex is simply not based in fact. For trauma, to remember, for ownership of self or of another over, for adornment in aesthetic terms for spiritual or class/service/military reasons, for medical reasons (yup there are medical peircings dude) for healing for adapting and because our bodies belong to us and not you and not your ideas. Your home your club, your rules. You dont set the agenda in any given space nor are you qualified nor worthy. None of us is. But here's the big boy challenge. Instead of being a total chore here, do go up to the next person you see on your gilead like travels and denounce them. Say what you say here to their faces and not throwing pique from behind your scanner, darkly. Oh what's that? You don't have the nerve? Naturism isn't fascism but this is fascist.
If you don't like it this much do not go to those beaches you cloister awaits. I don't have any tatoos or rings in my body and generally its not my thing but again, I AM NOT STARING AT GENITALS LIKE YOU ARE. WHY are you staring at the gentials of others Sir? You don't need to, the work isn't needed and it is very very borderline...pervy isn't it? I am certain you aren't and that this isn't why you seem to stare at genitals but, if you stop, you will feel better and you will more importantly be closer by a fraction to following the preaching of your choir. Looking at a penis pointing and screaming "foul temptress sex demon get out" isn't not sexualizing bodies. You see how that works no? No you don't but that;s ok we have all kinds in the world and judgment kink is one of those things. You seem to exhibit this in the last excretion. I may be mistaken but it's fairly clear you like to look you like to talk and you like to shame and then call everyone else the demonpervpigwhatever. Try facts. Try research. And try the golden light of silence. It's gibberish and you are not the moral arbiter of us or anyone and it seems you stuggle with yourself so to that, be true good Sir and dont open your yap and say something stupid again.
(Rolls eyes)
I mean you're right about the question and why.I dont think anyone missed it "what about the dirty precious my question" cheap thrill drive I just can't be bothered to call them all out its the planet on the internet, its cheap innuendo all over. But eyeroll away its not the wrong response.
Nowhere in my comment did I say anything about being offended but that is what you all you have intentions that you know will be offensive project. Go back a read instead of projecting.
Bringing other cultures as relevant is an adventure in missing the point. In most indigenous cultures nonsexual nudity is not an issue because people often live clothes free. To try to make a corollary with a tribe that eats if private is a distraction nothing else.
Why not speak to the to examples I gave. Those are western cultures similar to US where naturism is growing while here in US it is shrinking.
For the person seeking research please share which of the points I made you want research to validate and I will provide it.
Here is one but regarding the growth of nudism in UK where the national organization has worked hard to get legal authorities to agree that public nudity with no sexual intent or intention to offend is legal
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/british-naturism-nudists-increase-b2203388.html
Since Wikipedia is often used to define nudism by some here is definition/description of col rings that subtitle as a sexual device.
A cock ring or cockring (also called a C ring, erection ring, penis ring, shaft ring, tension ring, or Arab strap) is a ring worn around the penis, usually at the base. The primary purpose of wearing a cock ring is to restrict the flow of blood from the erect penis to produce a stronger erection or to maintain an erection for a longer period of time. Genital adornment is another purpose, as is repositioning the genitals to provide an enhanced appearance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cock_ring
Genital piercings have a richer history and are present in non western cultures where social nudity is commonplace as an adornment. According to Wikipedia in western cultures they have sexual connotation
Like body piercings at large, genital piercings are often done for aesthetic reasons and as an expression of personal style. In addition, some (but not all) types of genital piercing increase sensitivity and provide additional stimulation during sexual intercourse or stimulation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genital_piercing
Of course, there are indigenous peoples in the Amazon rainforest, in sub-Saharan Africa, and especially in Papua New Guinea in which men wear a koteka (penis gourd) or penis sheath ( Figure 3.3 ). Functionally, it was made to protect the genitals while working and hunting in the forest, but it also serves to cover them for moral reasons. It is not worn as a sexual display element; it is made to cover the genitals in order not to become ashamed. When a man puts on a new koteka , he turns his back to the other men in order to hide his penis from their eyes. There are also indigenous peoples who do not wear anything. They also feel ashamed, but they did not necessarily develop clothes to cover their genitals; rather, they developed social rules that prohibited looking directly at the genitals. The interpretation that this is clothing in a wider sense 21 lacks any evidence. The esthetic-sexual reason: There is no evidence that humans have an instinct for adornment, and it is also not clear what role adornment plays in the context of nudity and clothing.
TY - CHAP
AU - Allolio-Ncke, Lars
PY - 2019/01/01
SP -
SN - 978-0-5676-7847-8
T1 - Clothing and Nudity from the Perspective of Anthropological Studies
DO - 10.5040/9780567678508.ch-003
ER - Clothing and Nudity from the Perspective of Anthropological Studies - Lars Allolio-Ncke
Friedrich-Alexander-University of Erlangen-Nrnberg
To summarize body adornment is a thing in many cultures that also practice social nudity and in that context there is no sexual connotation. So as I have said before context is everything when it comes to social nudity behavior vs nudism and naturism. Nudism and naturism used to have norms just like any other movement and practice. So were discriminatory and outdated and no longer apply others have been abandoned as focus has shifted from a way to life that includes social nudity to a state of being or condition of nudity.
First image Public Domain
Second CC BY-SA 3.0
File:COLLECTIE TROPENMUSEUM 'Twee Kenyah-Dajaks met een penis-staafje de linker heeft tevens een oorbel van houtsnijwerk Borneo' TMnr 10005628.jpg
Created: circa 1920 date QS:P,+1920-00-00T00:00:00Z/9,P1480,Q5727902
No part of the human body is inherently sexual. This is borne out by the fact that different societies sexualize different parts of the body. In some sociThe Bakairi tribe in Brazil believe that eating is a shameful activity that should only be done in private.Didnt know we were talking about Brazilian tribes? Anyway my response to the idea that part of the body is sexual is someone ole folks in my community often say. Common sense isnt all that common anymore.
You make a really good attempt at missing the point by appealing to the senility of edwardian and wartime seniors who thought ankles were slutty. The fundamental point of naturism as expounded ad nauseam on this site is that NONE OF THE HUMAN BODY IS INHERENTLY SEXUAL.
So help me here, without the whales of august, if the penis of which you or a man you know has is INHERENTLY SEXUAL then how the flipping fluck do you get a NON SEXUAL NATURISM with AN INHERENTLY SEXUAL PENIS? Don't even try, you can't. Either it is or it isnt and if the part is sexual then the whole is otherwise you detach it and leave it at home perhaps? So, no, that doesn't fly. He's a sleaze for having a penis but I am not for also having a penis is the worst kind of sophism.
Before asking why that tribe is RELEVANT. TRY READING FIRST. The point he is making is that cultural values about what is offensive and not, erotic and not, male or female and everything else is not a fixed value but something that floats and changes and is never the same for two people, let alone two cultures, so trying to make an absolute for all time and all places statement about what something means to you isnt acceptable or consistent with reality. Your belief is not reflective of anyting but your belief. You need to inquire as to whether your belief has any foundation and any scientific cultural or even pop sci cultural value before asserting it as fact for all times and all peoples. The seniles notwithstanding youd be surprised with what they get up to in those places. And you're wrong. Either that or the actual education and research and professional experience and degrees and what I can freaking read online right now from reputable research organizations and in e books? All of anthropology since Malinowsky and Mead took a tumble from the idea that they could look at a culture that wasnt theirs and know it. This is exactly that. If you dont know the language you cant understand the text.
Before asking why that tribe is RELEVANT. TRY READING FIRST.
You are correct in saying the human body as a whole is not inherently sexual I agree wholeheartedly and completely. However the OP didnt ask about the human body as a whole. And I didnt refer to the human body as a whole being sexual. I specifically referred to specific parts.
I read and we are talking about other cultures we are talking about western culture so it is irrelevant it is a distraction and an attempt to avoid responding to the actual points I have made that come from western cultures..
However since you feel it necessary to bring in other cultures I have added more research documented information about genital jewelry in indigenous cultures which is a direct connection rather than equating eating in private and genital jewelry.
So try again
Can we not just agree,body adournments are not new, each to there own, if you're gonna visit naturist sites/ beaches, you are gonna see the whole spectrum of bodies and whatever they want to do with them, be it tattoos, jewelery, piercings, you're not gonna die cos someone has a pierced cock, chill out, live and let live
I can agree with this comment wholeheartedly. However the OP asked for an opinion and I gave mine. Those who dont like it or disagree want only their voices to be heard and are trying (With no effect) to force their opinions by discrediting mine. Something common here and elsewhere online. But I can hold my own and dont feel like being cowed by anyone whose opinion may differ. I will fight for their right to have their opinion and I will have mine. Though I dont believe the reverse is true.
I have no thoughts whatsoever. The wearing of penile adornments is a personal choice, and men wear them for a variety of reasons, usually to draw attention to the genitals. Ardent, non-sexual nudists generally oppose such items, and they are also entitled to their own opinions. Life is too short - let's just love and accept everybody.
Absolutely agree.
My thought is, well why is he wearing it? So I would ask why. And I have asked, and gotten various reasons for wearing a penis ring. One guy told me he liked the weight it gave to his penis. Did he wear it all the time? Yes. Another guy stated he wore it off and on and even having sex with his wife. His wife like the feal of it in her (both in her pussy and ass he added). Why wear it on beach then? He choose to wear it that day. I also got those that said that they liked the fact peeps would look at their cock and the attention the penis ring would bring. So, it's a personal choice and my though is good for them. It's just like anything else guys do to their bodies, it's their choice from tats to shaving body hair.
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!