Philosophy Of Nudism And Naturism
Looking g to start a group to discuss the big questions of nudism and naturalism. I am interested in why people choose nudism. What, if any, religious or spiritual reasons are there for nudism. What is nudism and what is not nudism. What are the subtle differences between nudism and naturism? What about the ethics surrounding nudism and naturism? Let your voice be heard tell us your story.
- created by wohali
What is and is not a nudist?
Return to DiscussionsNeither exhibitionism, nor swinging, nor sex, are related to nudism. The U.S. public in general seems rather ignorant of that. But it's really not all that difficult to understand. Exhibitionism is all about shock value and getting attention by any means available. Clothed or nude, doesn't matter. And "sex" is ... well.... sex. Among other things, it involves sexual titillation which is better accomplished with revealing clothes than simple nudity. And swinging is a completely unrelated lifestyle that has everything to do with titillation and sport sex. But nudity for the purpose of sex doesn't qualify as "nudism" any more than nudity for the purpose of taking a shower does. In a nutshell, nudism is simply about the preference of being clothes free when practical for comfort and for the simple joy of feeling free and unencumbered. Luckily, nudism is also compatible with, and can add to the enjoyment of, all sorts of life's activities from gardening to sailing and socializing to skinny dipping. None of which is "related" to "nudism" but all of which are compatible and acceptable forms of open and public behavior, whether nude or textile. Same can't be said for exhibitionism, sex, or swinging.
I agree with Phil up to a point. In my mind clearly exhibitionism and swinging are way beyond the scope of nudism. Many swingers just are not nudist. Being nude in a group is not nudism if the only reason for being nude is to have sex. The same is true for Exhibitionist. Often they are only nude for the shock value, not the pleasure of just being without clothes. While I try to separate being a nudist from sex and most of the time I am nude in a non sexual way, there is a time and place for sex. I do agree that usually skimpily clad people people are much more sexy than a totally nude person. If the place is right I can see sex happening say after a nice nude shared dinner. Probably not really any different than clothed people.
Just to be clear, I didn't mean that nudists don't like sex. Everybody likes sex. I'm separating "nud-ists" (the individuals who like sex as much as textiles do) from "Nud-ism" (the lifestyle and philosophy, which is not about sex).
And also, in a real world, although nudism and swinging are totally separate and incompatible lifestyles, I think there are a few individuals in the world that know and understand the difference and are able to live both lifestyles and keep them separated. Think of an individual athlete that likes to play both football and baseball. The important thing for the athlete to remember is that trying to play football and baseball at the same time, and on the same field, simply won't work without totally screwing up both games. The two contests need to be separated in either time or space or both Same is true for nudists/nudism and swingers/swinging. It's a theoretical possibility that an individual may be able to practice both lifestyles but not at the same time or in the same space. Having said that, I suspect most individuals should choose the less complicated route and just choose one lifestyle or the other.
I am pretty much in agreement with both of you. Nudism is separate from the other activities although the other activities might happen at the same time. Too me if we keep it simply a preference to be without clothing then the other activities one might do are coincidental to the nudism. I think a good way too look at is the philosophical way of defining things. Generally they say what are the necessary and sufficient conditions for nudism. This helps to clear out the clutter.
My philosophy is that nudism is doing things that you would normally do, only naked where it is legal and socially acceptable.I also am firm in my opinion that nudists are NOT asexual. Nudists have and enjoy sex just like textiles.(Keep in mind, textiles have to take clothes off to have sex.)And for the most part both nudists and textiles behave appropriate to situations when it comes to sexual activity. Still there are some nudists, just like some textiles, that DON'T know how to behave appropriately when it comes to sexual activity.
When it comes to swingers and exhibitionists, I have to say that I respect those who engage in those lifestyles as long as it takes place with consenting adults and, most important, they do NOT label their activities as "nudism". I have no inside knowledge of the swinger lifestyle, but I do have friends that consider themselves exhibitionists. Even when it comes to events like Folsom Street Fair, it's an event where people should be aware of the types of activities that occur and are therefore consenting if they attend. But it is legal and socially acceptable to be naked. On the opposite end of the spectrum, I believe that the World Naked Bike Rides are attended by both nudists and exhibitionists. And again, it's usually legal and socially acceptable for the most part to be naked at the events. Exhibitionists attending the events may get some enjoyment of having their naked bodies seen by others, but I've not heard of any sexual activities at the events.
Over all, I believe that everyone is entitled to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" . . . . AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT INFRINGE UPON OTHER'S RIGHTS TO THE SAME. People should be free to call pretty much any activity that is legal and socially acceptable to be naked "nudism" as long as they are not infringing upon other's right / desires to not be involved with the activity or putting the ability for others to be naked in the same location at risk.
Thanks for your thoughts on this. I agree nudism is separate from other activities. Why is it that others, who don't know nudism, associate it with exhibition or swinging?
I had a thought about that. If other people are only naked while in the shower or having sex than psychologically people will associate all nude behavior with sex because that is all they know.
What do you think?
If other people are only naked while in the shower or having sex than psychologically people will associate all nude behavior with sex because that is all they know.
Yep, I think you're right for most cases. In fact, I think stereotypes in general come about from the general public receiving misleading or incomplete or incorrect information without any valid information to counter it. One would think a stereotype would be a simple situation to reverse by simply putting out valid and correct information. But it just doesn't work that way. And in the few cases that it has, it doesn't work quickly. And there are many reasons for that as well. Mainly the human tendency towards shallow thinking, closed mindedness, credibility issues (who to believe) and general reluctance for change. The rest of the reasons are related to those and too numerous to list.
Not sure I understand "Militant" nudists either in "nudist camps"
or "all the time". I think of "militant anything" as just a
combative personality and a "my way or the highway" type person.
Could be a nudist that only goes to nude beaches, never a nudist
park, and only now and then when they're able to get off work. If
they're combative, I'd call 'em militant.
I like the continuum idea though. It's not always easy to
pigeon hole an individual into just one of those little categories.
Most people seem to fit in at least two or three of them. But a
spot on a continuum could be based on some sort of a point system
or something.
Ok, I have a question. My dorm in college had a shower room
on each floor for about 20 rooms (40 guys). Floor to ceiling
tile and a dozen shower heads sticking out of the wall, wide open
with no partitions. Guys would just wander in and out and use
whichever shower head was available. I remember one guy who
would ALWAYS shower in his underwear. Except for that, he seemed
like a normal guy. Where would he fit on the continuum? Seems
like he wouldn't fit on it anywhere. He'd be somewhere off the
chart at the textile end.
And I've always wondered what you would call someone who would not
consider themselves a nudist, but supports the cause (even to the
extent of contributing $$) only because they believe it's fair and
the right thing to do. And they see the nudist movement as
something good for society and worthy of their support. Kind
of like me supporting women's rights even though I'm not a woman
and don't ever want to be. Would you call that person... uh ....
maybe an "honorary nudist"? lol! (btw, I don't call
myself an honorary woman. Just a "women's rights supporter".)
You have some good points GSNPhil.
First the militant came
from the term used by Augustine Rae. I don't like it
either. Maybe something more along the lines of committed
nudist is
someone who prefers nudism 90% of the time?
Second the dorm
room shower. I think that is a case of the very first level
(limited nudism). I bet if he had a private show he would not
be wearing his underwear. I am not sure we could know for
sure without asking him. But I think this is most reasonable
explanation.
As for the supports. I wonder as
well. But I would likely just call them a nudist as
well. I think psychologically that is the only way to change
the taboo of nudism.
For an experiment I am going to
start calling everyone a nudist and see how they react. When
the protest I will give them the definition and then ask is there
any time or situation where you prefer to be nude, if even
alone? If they give any but one answer, I have them. I
will then tell them that they are a nudist. It might be more
rhetorically powerful to have them give me the definition.
But it don't
think they would be able to.