Has it ever happened?

[connorsdad]

I have been thinking about the whole nudist thing and people's bodies in general. I go to the gym and workout when I can and often see guys and some gals in there "showing" off thier bodies as they are working out. I mean that they are "posing" in the mirrors, looking at thier muscles, walking around as thier body is the best in the world kind of attitude.

Does this go on at nudist resorts or are people not so engaged with themselves? If it does happen, are they told to "calm" down, that all people are created equal.

It pisses me off to see them do it at the gym and think man, they are beyond themselves.

Happy days.

[Journeyman]

Very good question. I've been to several naturist places in Europe and North America, and the only "posing" I have ever seen is at my local YMCA (and other YMCAs in Canada that I have visited). The mirror business is ridiculous, and of course, the 'poseur' is clothed..

Nudists are different. We know of the broad range of body types, and so there's no posing or competition from what I have experienced.

BUT. I have noticed that men with larger endowments than the majority of men at nudist resorts, do tend to walk around more, showing off, or make a concerted effort to be seen. Sadly, the majority of these men are so badly out of shape and un-physically fit, that their posings are more grotesque than attractive to those who might be into "size". But this is only in my own experience.

[NudonyII]

Well, I also frequent the local gym, and the "Oh yeah - check me out - I look GEWD!" dudes annoy me quite substantially. Personally, I save the posing for when I'm nude at home in front of the mirror; because I get a better sense of my progress if I'm fully nude - and because I'm not a show off.

But I've noticed that fitness afficionados at the beach or resort do show a sort of assertive confidence. Moving with their back straight, chest out and in a slower, more deliberate fashion. This has more to do with confidence than showing off. Nudists that show off often focus on specific body parts - and often cross the line into exhibitionism. And this usually has little to do with fitness.

[Rick_42]

I can't say that I've seen the sort of posing you're seeing at the gym at any resort I've been to, although I admit that I've only been to a few. I can't really say that I've seen a lot of "buff" types at venues I'v attended.

A lot of people go to the gym to impress others which is the opposite of why people go to nudist resorts.That's been my observation.

[David77]

At the Y that I go to, there is a mirror extending the length of one wall, where, principally, the weght-lifters watch themselves do several weight-lifting routines. Looking at themselves in the mirror helps them to know that they are positioning their bodies correctly as they are doing these exercises.

Persons who exercise, no doubt enjoy seeing that their bodies, (in the mirror) are getting more in shape and closer to what they are striving. I rejoice with them on their work and accompishments. Their showing the world what they have acheived is not resented by me in the least, as I will be happy for them.

Incidentally, I hope that they take a nude photo of themselves at their maximum physical condition, so that when they get old, (like me) they can refer to the photo and look back with some admiration at their younger fine body.
For some, their attitude about the incomparably high value of the nude form carries over into their humanistic philosophy/religious of reverence for life , which most assuredly includes the human body.

Lastly, I suppose that it is possible that some persons with a large endowment (as mentioned in a preceeding post) walk the beach to be seen, for the sexual kick. This, in a way, is his sexual gradification in public, and should not be sanctioned by nudists.
However, he may be taking a walk because he is tired of sitting on the beach. He may be taking a walk on the beach to see if there is any friend there.

[Journeyman]

Perhaps at the Y. In many gyms there are people who dedicate a lot of time and effort to defining their body. For some it is to look good; for others it is a sport. Checking out the results of many hours of dedicated hard work in the provided mirrors is a necessity to many. That is why many gyms have them. It is certainly not ridiculous to them. To label them as poseurs is rude and shows some intolerance of people not like you.



I submit that nudists are no different than other people except for the obvious. You may not have experienced enough. :) In nudist resorts, clubs and, indeed, nude beaches just look at the posing going on. Look for the wide open legs, time the "sun-time" between loungers sunning genitals-up and genitals-down, etc. The last time I was at Desert Shadows there was a woman who had just gotten a whopper of a breast augmentation. She did plenty of posing! I don't blame her! While I prefer natural breasts, she did invest a lot in her new look. If it makes her and her husband happy (he looked happy) that is fine with me!

Nudist ARE more accepting of all body types. But there is plenty of posing in the nudist world. As to competition I agree with you to the extent that I have not noticed this behavior.



I have never seen this. I am a card-carrying homosexual and notice such things. I have never even seen this at gay nudist clubs/groups (and yes, there are gay nudists who are members of AANR and other mainline groups). I have never even seen this at less strict gay nudist clubs or resorts. Sounds like a little case of adequacy to me. ;)



Being out of shape and un-physically fit equals grotesque? As an out of shape and un-physically fit man with a small penis who is into "size" (kind of), I cannot connect with your conclusions. Any man who has worked hard to develop a great body deserves to strut a bit in my opinion.

But what about females in your scenario? Posing and such. Out of shape and not physically fit but with large breasts. They spent money and had a bunch of pain and they want to show off! Is that grotesque? Is that sad? Is it something I should be concerned about or judge?

Naw....Nudists are mostly just like everybody else; they just do it nude and hopefully don't judge the appearance and values of our brethren and sisteren.

Sometimes posing is just posing for one's own reasons. Ask my governor. Sometimes men and women are proud of their hard work and are assured and not insecure. I think they deserve to be proud. I enjoy looking at and appreciating a beautiful or hard-earned attractive body. Does that mean I think less of less attractive bodies? Surely you know I don't by now.

I try to go by this: Know the whole story before you judge someone and don't judge anyone. I fail in this sometimes, but I strive. If I have been too quick to respond to your message in an misunderstanding way, please let me know your whole story. I hope you don't take offence at anything I've said.....I mean no disrespect to you.

But as you say, this is only my own experience.

Perhaps I was too quick to write myself, but the original post struck a nerve, I guess.

I agree that mirrors are a necessity in checking to see if one is exercising properly. When I speak of a poseur I mean one who gapes at hiimself (I've not seen this with women working out), flexes and makes sure other people are looking as well. Incidentally, I am tolerant of them -- amused, maybe, too -- and admire their form at the same time. So I don't think I'm being rude; I just should have explained myself better.

Now that you've mentioned it, I have seen nudist poseurs, too, in different locations. But my experience of them is limited and I'd put them in a minority. A woman with breast augmentation is probably going to pose a bit clothed or undressed.

Re: the larger endowed guys. I'm surprised you've not noticed this in gay nudist venues. I mentioned it because I'd been approached on 2 different occasions at two different venues by "big" guys who proposed a threesome with their wives. I used the word grotesque too loosely, I guess, but that's how I felt in those two circumstances.

You made a crack about me having a "case of adequacy". Not at all; I am very comfortable with my own size.

I also try to go by the maxim "judge not lest ye be judged", and sometimes I fail. I agree that knowing the whole story helps. Now you know mine a little better, Liam.

[Dolby]

I have seen some of the behaviors described at nude beaches, etc. but it's a minority of those there. At resorts and gatherings I can't say I've ever seen anyone trying to put on a show of either their bodies or their genitals. In either case I've never been made to feel uncomfortable about myself.

[bill2me]

I have seen this at the gym but never at a nudist beach or resort.

[nudeM]

I have to agree in that most people who work out view themselves in the mirror while performing certain calesthenics. I do this myself at home to see the progress in muscle toning. And when I'm comfortable, then I'll do the usual and slow down in my routines (I've slowed down too much lately. LOL) I do believe there are those who like to show off their accomplishments, even at a nudist venture. And yes, there are those who like to show off their 'endowment', but most are proud of their bodies and like to show their achievments, especially if they are involved in body improvements, i.e. weight loss, muscle toning, tanning, etc.

The ones who really irk me are the ones who like to walk around with semi's. I'm sure it happens all the time, but to go around strutting a semi rigid is just as bad as strutting with a full staff. I'm sure it happens at nudist resorts alot, but nothing is said due to the fact the person is not fully rigid. I cannot verify if it happens as a resort for sure, but I do know it happens at the beach, at least the beach I have been to.

Just my personal opinion.:smoking:

[David77]

Liam states;
Sometimes posing is just posing for one's own reasons. Ask my governor.

Photo of Arnold Scharenegger, Govenor of California, posing nude.

http://radosh.blogspot.com/schwarzenekkid.jpg

[Naturist Mark]

The ones who really irk me are the ones who like to walk around with semi's. I'm sure it happens all the time, but to go around strutting a semi rigid is just as bad as strutting with a full staff. I'm sure it happens at nudist resorts alot, but nothing is said due to the fact the person is not fully rigid.

No, it doesn't.

There are remarkably few full size mirrors around the grounds of resorts, so people aren't working out and posing for themselves.

As for the walking around with a semi - that is public beach exhibitionist behavior, not nudist resort behavior. Trust me, no one is impressed with the care and concentration it requires, and there is no payoff (except perhaps a "talk" with management). The occasional inadvertent semi, like a regular erection, is not going to upset people - so long as it isn't flaunted, but "strutting" it not going to go over well.

-Mark

[Pete Knight]

Just got back from a nude weekend at a theme park, the rides at Alton Towers are closed for winter maintenance, but the water park and 'Splash Landings Hotel' are still open. Three men were shown the door for inappropriate behavior, one guy was warned last year, this year he got thrown out straight away.

Another guy was dancing semi erect at the evening disco, he was told to go to his room, not come back that evening. A third chap was following a young girl around, the girl mentioned it to her parents, who told the BN officials, they escorted him to his room also, this guy was told to leave first thing in the morning but he was gone before his room mates got up the following morning.

The sad truth is that we can't vet applicants for membership, but we do have vigilant officials who act quickly and decisively.

Pete Knight

[Stu2630]

A third chap was following a young girl around, the girl mentioned it to her parents, who told the BN officials, they escorted him to his room also, this guy was told to leave first thing in the morning but he was gone before his room mates got up the following morning.

How nice. :sick:

That serves to remind me why I would never consider taking my family to a nudist event - if I ever needed reminding!

And you wonder why so many people consider nudity to be indecent.

Stu

[Pete Knight]

How nice. :sick:

That serves to remind me why I would never consider taking my family to a nudist event - if I ever needed reminding!

And you wonder why so many people consider nudity to be indecent.

Stu
I knew you would have to make some pathetic comment, and I'll respond, but only once.

These people exist whether there is nudism or not, having to wear clothes doesn't stop these people, they prey on the vulnerable no matter what the attire, but at least we spotted one and now his card is marked. We have trained child protection officers and we have a better record of protecting our children than clothed lifestyle participants, its a fact that your children would be safer in a naturist environment than in a clothed one.

A case involving the social services in one area sought to ban children from a naturist swim because of perceived concerns for their safety, they were proved wrong and the right for children to attend reinstated, and now the officials at British Naturism train council leisure centre staff, that's how good they are.

Do a little research and you'll find that more child molestation occurs in clothed circumstances, priests, teachers, social workers, those in close contact with children are often drawn to the job to get close to those they prey upon, thats why we have CRB checks on anyone working with the vulnerable in the UK, and you know that.

You take every chance to attack our lifestyle, and this sickens me, it offends me, do I have the right to seek your removal from this board for offending MY sensibilities?

Moderators: I wish to make an official complaint about Stu2630 and his constant attempts to malign naturism and its participants.

Pete Knight

[Stu2630]

Pete - don't get your knickers in a twist and read what I said a bit more carefully.

I have not said that these odious characters were genuine nudists - I am 100% sure they were not. But, as your own account shows, an event such as this is open to people who have prurient interests and a unique opportunity to exercise them.

None of my children have ever been in a situation where they have seen a naked adult stranger, let alone a man with an erection. But it was even worse than that because one girl was actually followed by such a man. This is horrific! I'm certainly not blaming nudism for that: I know that the vast majority of nudists would be as appalled as I was to read what happened. But the simple fact is that nude events like this are bound to be a magnet for exhibitionists and other creeps and, with the best will in the world, one or two are going to get through security.

Stu

[Bob S.]

Stu: "But the simple fact is that nude events like this are bound to be a magnet for exhibitionists and other creeps and, with the best will in the world, one or two are going to get through security."

Stu, the fact is that anywhere children congregate are going to be magnets for pervs. This kind of thing happens everywhere, including parks, shopping malls, stores, sporting events, etc. Just because it happened at a nudist event does not mean that nudist events are any the more dangerous or risky than anywhere else.

And yes, you were suggesting such in your previous post. You used one instance of perving behaviour to condemn all of nudism. I think the fact that the incident (or rather incidents) that Pete highlighted show how protective nudists are and how serious we take security at our events.

So is the main reason you would never take your family to a nudist event due to the potential for pervs to be around? If so, then don't bring your family anywhere because they are probably being looked at by pervs everywhere they go. It's not what the perv sees, it is how the person feels about how he is looking at them. For nudists, nudity is just another outfit. If the above is the main reason, then please reconsider because nudist events are some of the most protected places for children and women.

Somehow though, I don't think that is the reason for your reticence of bringing them to a nudist event. I have a feeling your abhorrence and anxieties of seeing nudity might have something to do with that.

Bob S.

[NudonyII]

Perhaps at the Y. In many gyms there are people who dedicate a lot of time and effort to defining their body. For some it is to look good; for others it is a sport. Checking out the results of many hours of dedicated hard work in the provided mirrors is a necessity to many. That is why many gyms have them. It is certainly not ridiculous to them. To label them as poseurs is rude and shows some intolerance of people not like you.


Uno momento por favor; allow me to retort. It seems "posing" is being defined here in different ways. Perhaps "posturing" would have been a better choice of words.
As a weight lifter, of course I check my form in the mirror - particularily with barbells and dumbells because they require balance. But I don't call that "posing." In my post, as well as Connersdad and Journeyman - I was specifically talking about the ego fueled behavior of showing off (we call that "flexing"). I have a gym buddy who does that, and it annoys pretty much everyone. The attitude here is much different from checking one's progress; the "flexor" does so because he/she wants to be admired.

I submit that nudists are no different than other people except for the obvious. You may not have experienced enough. In nudist resorts, clubs and, indeed, nude beaches just look at the posing going on. Look for the wide open legs, time the "sun-time" between loungers sunning genitals-up and genitals-down, etc. The last time I was at Desert Shadows there was a woman who had just gotten a whopper of a breast augmentation. She did plenty of posing! I don't blame her!

Again, this has nothing to do with the "posturing" that goes on at the gym. Fitness and the showing off that occasionally occurs at beaches/resorts are more often than not, not linked at all. Because it's not about muscle tone, thick biceps or six-pack abs - it's about the breasts or genitals. And it's more sexually driven than ego-fueled.

[Liam C]

Perhaps I was too quick to write myself, but the original post struck a nerve, I guess.


You made a crack about me having a "case of adequacy". Not at all; I am very comfortable with my own size.

I also try to go by the maxim "judge not lest ye be judged", and sometimes I fail. I agree that knowing the whole story helps. Now you know mine a little better, Liam.

I also was a little fast to post. I do apologize if I seemed in any way rude.

The "case of adequacy" crack was not meant to be a crack nor personal. Oops! :blush:

I do indeed know more about you. Thanks for the polite reply. I think my new prescription drug that I took a while before getting on the board may have more effects than I was prepared for.

[Liam C]

Uno momento por favor; allow me to retort. It seems "posing" is being defined here in different ways. Perhaps "posturing" would have been a better choice of words..........


Quite right. Thanks for the observation!

[barenaked1]

I agree with Pete. I have stopped looking at most of the forums and don't participate in many anymore, as Stu's attempt to, I feel, disrupt, these forums and agitate fellow nudists. I feel that we are here to move towards nudism as a mainstream issue as much as gay and lesbians have also done. I am a proud member of AANR and my local resort and have no qualms about my support of true freedom and we all know that it comes with costs. Perhaps I could be offended by overt textile activity and deem Stu as a representative. He just doesn't get it and I feel that no matter what truths are presented, he will always find it offensive to HIM. Stu becomes repetitive and has constantly stated his dislike for nudity and spins every opportunity presented to his own like (or dislike). I believe he has been requested not to participate before and I, for one, feel his presence is not warranted in these forums. It is no longer a debate, but a debacle.


I knew you would have to make some pathetic comment, and I'll respond, but only once.

These people exist whether there is nudism or not, having to wear clothes doesn't stop these people, they prey on the vulnerable no matter what the attire, but at least we spotted one and now his card is marked. We have trained child protection officers and we have a better record of protecting our children than clothed lifestyle participants, its a fact that your children would be safer in a naturist environment than in a clothed one.

A case involving the social services in one area sought to ban children from a naturist swim because of perceived concerns for their safety, they were proved wrong and the right for children to attend reinstated, and now the officials at British Naturism train council leisure centre staff, that's how good they are.

Do a little research and you'll find that more child molestation occurs in clothed circumstances, priests, teachers, social workers, those in close contact with children are often drawn to the job to get close to those they prey upon, thats why we have CRB checks on anyone working with the vulnerable in the UK, and you know that.

You take every chance to attack our lifestyle, and this sickens me, it offends me, do I have the right to seek your removal from this board for offending MY sensibilities?

Moderators: I wish to make an official complaint about Stu2630 and his constant attempts to malign naturism and its participants.

Pete Knight

[Stu2630]

BobS

And yes, you were suggesting such in your previous post. You used one instance of perving behaviour to condemn all of nudism.

I certainly wasn't, Bob. I expressed a view when I very first came to this site that large nudist events would be likely to attract undesirables masquerading as genuine nudists. I have fewer concerns about regular nudist locations such as clubs, but Alton Towers is a national institution here in the UK and to hold a nudist event there is bound to generate an interest from these undesirables.

Yes, of course you get the pervs everywhere, in public parks and so on, but I would be less concerned about them than I would in circumstances where both my daughter was naked and the perv was naked - and sporting a semi-erection! In that respect, Bob, I reckon my feelings are pretty representative of the public at large and most dads would react as I did.

If I ever did consider taking my family to a nudist location (which is extremely unlikely), it would be to a proper club in which everyone present is a member and has been vetted, and where the staff have the experience to spot such characters early on. After reading Pete's account, I wouldn't take them within a million miles of the Alton Towers event!!!

Stu

[Pete Knight]

The Alton Towers event is only open to paid up members of British Naturism, unfortunately the organisation can't vet applicants, but they are judged on their behavior, fortunately we have well trained officials who deal with any situation that arises, the same cannot be said for textile events, of which there are many more at Alton Towers than there are naturist events.

Several years ago a well known actor here in the UK was caught taking too keen an interest in children at a textile swim, is this reason enough not to take your children to a clothed swim?

If the knee jerk reaction to every case of child molestation was to decry the venue and not take your children there you would never step outside your home.

Stu is just using this incident in an attempt to prove that a nudist environment is less safe than a textile environment, he is up to his old tricks of trying to discredit nudism and therefore has no right to post on this board which claims to be Promoting positive naturist values. EveryBODY is good (http://www.clothesfree.com/) or so it claims on the home page.

I have Stu on my ignore list, but this is negated by people replying to this nuisance, please don't feed the troll, he IS a troll, he uses the age old troll tactic of baiting people with the same old garbage.

Pete Knight

[Bob S.]

Stu: "Yes, of course you get the pervs everywhere, in public parks and so on, but I would be less concerned about them than I would in circumstances where both my daughter was naked and the perv was naked - and sporting a semi-erection! In that respect, Bob, I reckon my feelings are pretty representative of the public at large and most dads would react as I did."

You would be concerned about anyone seeing your daughter naked as you do not allow that to happen in the first place. But this is an aspect of nudism that you just don't and may never get, the idea of someone else seeing us naked is not a reason for concern. The girl in question was not victimized by the perv seeing her naked, she was victimized by the man who was stalking her. This can and does happen everywhere.

Stu: "If I ever did consider taking my family to a nudist location (which is extremely unlikely), it would be to a proper club in which everyone present is a member and has been vetted, and where the staff have the experience to spot such characters early on. After reading Pete's account, I wouldn't take them within a million miles of the Alton Towers event!!!"

Again, a knee-jerk reaction. First, it is impossible to vet everyone completely. In order to discover that a person is irresponsible, they have to have done something and gotten caught. For all we know, this could have been the first problem for this man or that he was a newcomer.

The best thing was the response of management who segregated him from the rest of the party and told him to leave. And really, that is the best thing to do. Would this man have been kicked out of a normal party at the same place?

As Pete mentioned, such things happen at textile events but you would never consider saying that your child should not attend those events. What makes a nudist event so different than a textile event? For nudists, we have a much less tolerant attitude toward anyone who even shows unusual attention toward children. At a textile event, the attention may go farther before it is stopped.

Bob S.

[Pete Knight]

Bob, you're wasting your time, that person is only here to sow discord, he cannot be reasoned with, he has long since lost the argument as he has to go back over the same old rhetoric time after frustrating time. You replying to that person only feeds his troll like need to post his usual ***, don't reply and he can't come back with the same old tripe.

PLEASE DON'T FEED THE TROLL.

Pete Knight

[sdson]

Photo of Arnold Scharenegger, Govenor of California, posing nude.

http://radosh.blogspot.com/schwarzenekkid.jpg

I agree that "posers" at the gym may be checking out their form in the mirror to make sure they are doing exercises correctly. However, when a muscular physique model poses nude I think they are just "showing off." Now don't get me wrong, "Showing off" is great. Being proud of your entire body is a wonderful thing. I say this because there are no work out routines that I am aware of that result in muscle definitiion of one's gentalia (I'm not an expert, I could be wrong) leading me to believe their motive is to "show off" rather than just show muscle definition in body parts (genetalia) that would otherwise be clothed. The exceptions of course are the glutteal (butt) and pectoral (chest/breast) muscles that show muscle defintion and would be hidden by clothing. Whatever the motive; I say go for it. Be proud of your body it's the only one you've got!

[Pete Knight]

Actually there are posing competitions for body builders, I was a member of a gym club that held such a competition once, the guys were all oiled up and pumping up their pec's and were judged on artistic merit, not unlike a pageant contest.
A guy called Cliff Moyce won, he started at the gym as a 125 pound weakling, you should have seen him after working out for several weeks, what a difference.

Pete Knight

[Stu2630]

BobS

The girl in question was not victimized by the perv seeing her naked, she was victimized by the man who was stalking her. This can and does happen everywhere.

I think nudists often forget the type of feelings they had before they were nudists - that's if they were aver really non-nudists. For the typical textile. the thought of a strange man seeing their wife or daughter naked would range on a scale from unpleasant up to horrific. OK, if you go to a nudist place for the first time, you know that's going to happen so I suppose to prepare yourself for that. But if you add to that the emotions involved if they are being stalked by a man with a visible erection, and that's something which could verge on being traumatic! You say "this can and does happen everywhere", but of course it doesn't. If any man outside of a nudist environment was seen following a female with a visible erection he would be arrested and charged with a sex crime. Perverts know this and so they tend not to do it. But a nudist event provides them with some cover at least. They can always deny that they were actually stalking their victim. They could say that what they had wasn't really an erection, or that it was unintentional.

When Pete related his story, he made it seem that it was a rather minor incident overall and perhaps it was in a nudist environment. But try to imagine how most textiles would react upon hearing such a story.

it is impossible to vet everyone completely. In order to discover that a person is irresponsible, they have to have done something and gotten caught. For all we know, this could have been the first problem for this man or that he was a newcomer.

Quite right. But if you managed to persuade me to go to a regular nudist location which you trusted, then I would be inclined to trust it too. I would have faith that the managers had seen plenty of perverts masquerading as genuine nudists and would be able to spot them very early on. No way would I have such faith in the staff at Alton Towers.

And really, that is the best thing to do. Would this man have been kicked out of a normal party at the same place?

Yes. But his nakedness reveals his aroused state and the nakedness of his "victim" emphasises her vulnerability, so you can't compare it to a textile event. In all the years I have been involved in managing my local leisure centre, only once has a man been kicked out for stalking a female, yet there were two or three such episodes from a single event at Alton Towers!

To see my comment here as an attack on nudists is ridiculous. I know genuine nudists would never dream of behaving this way. But perverts are eager to satisfy their proclavities and extremely devious. Just as a department store is a magnet for shoplifters, so a massive nudist event at a generally non-nudist venue is bound to be of interest to exhibitionists and that's why there were problems at Alton Towers. I would be willing to bet other similar events have experienced similar problems.

Stu

[Bob S.]

Stu: "I think nudists often forget the type of feelings they had before they were nudists - that's if they were aver really non-nudists. For the typical textile. the thought of a strange man seeing their wife or daughter naked would range on a scale from unpleasant up to horrific."

Ok, let me scream: AAAHHHH! Done. Typical textiles do not come to nudist events. You still do not seem to understand this. Do not attribute textile reactions to nudists. It would be like comparing the reactions of an average citizen with that of a seasoned coroner while watching an autopsy. How we felt before we were nudist does not matter any more.

Stu: "But if you add to that the emotions involved if they are being stalked by a man with a visible erection, and that's something which could verge on being traumatic!"

Reread Pete's message. He gave two scenarios--one which involved a man dancing with a semi-erection. The stalker was not described as such. All Pete mentioned was that he was following the girl around. For nudists, it doesn't matter the rigidity of a man's penis, but rather his attitude and behaviour. From what Pete wrote, it seemed as though the girl was not traumatized or that it affected the rest of her time.

Stu: "I would have faith that the managers had seen plenty of perverts masquerading as genuine nudists and would be able to spot them very early on. No way would I have such faith in the staff at Alton Towers."

I will defer to Pete on how the security aspects of the event were handled but these three incidents seemed to be handled well by the management. For the most part, management (and regular nudists) know the kind of behaviour to look out for. The incidents described seemed to show that the management was heads-up on the behaviour and was not allowing any negative behaviour to occur.

In your experience, has anyone ever been thrown out for merely looking bad? I highly doubt it.

Stu: "In all the years I have been involved in managing my local leisure centre, only once has a man been kicked out for stalking a female, yet there were two or three such episodes from a single event at Alton Towers!"

What it means is that, as I said above, the management has taken a zero tolerance policy on any behaviour that they deem negative. Nudists are less tolerant when it comes to many things that other textile events would allow. When it comes to erections, that is a touchy subject, but one in which many nudist venues have chosen to take a stand on when it comes to what appears to be showing it off or being a poseur. The only reason that is not a problem in textile arenas is because nobody sees the erection.

When you see more incidences reported at nudist events, just remember that nudists are generally less tolerant of behaviours that textiles may allow to a greater extent.

Bob S.

[Pete Knight]

Thank you Bob, you have it absolutely spot on, but can't you see that Stu is twisting everything to reinforce his misguided viewpoint, he isn't here to support us in any shape or form, he is here only to cause trouble. If he were merely playing the devils advocate I wouldn't mind, but he puts a negative spin on every thread he posts on, not the aims of this board at all.

The sad truth is that Stu has put a lot of people off posting here, some have left altogether, the sooner Stu is banned (Again.) the sooner we can get on with promoting nudism and having meaningful discussions, without interruption.

Pete Knight

[smoothm]

Thank you Bob, you have it absolutely spot on, but can't you see that Stu is twisting everything to reinforce his misguided viewpoint, he isn't here to support us in any shape or form, he is here only to cause trouble. If he were merely playing the devils advocate I wouldn't mind, but he puts a negative spin on every thread he posts on, not the aims of this board at all.

The sad truth is that Stu has put a lot of people off posting here, some have left altogether, the sooner Stu is banned (Again.) the sooner we can get on with promoting nudism and having meaningful discussions, without interruption.

Pete Knight

If anything, Stu keeps us all introspective with regards to our nudist personal philosophies. I love to read his posts because of that very fact and would hate to see him banned just because he disagrees.

[Pete Knight]

If anything, Stu keeps us all introspective with regards to our nudist personal philosophies. I love to read his posts because of that very fact and would hate to see him banned just because he disagrees.
I don't mind him disagreeing, but he constantly tries to deride naturism as being something evil and wrong, taking great delight in pointing out instances where nudists have been victimised.

I may end up doing the same as the others and stop posting here, and maybe not bother coming here at all.

Pete Knight

[NatureFred]

I don't mind him disagreeing, but he constantly tries to deride naturism as being something evil and wrong, taking great delight in pointing out instances where nudists have been victimised.

I may end up doing the same as the others and stop posting here, and maybe not bother coming here at all.

Pete Knight
I hesitated to respond to this, because it seems so likely that any response will just make things worse, but here I am anyway.

I've been participating in this forum for just under a year and a half. I noticed Stu right away when I started, and my reaction then was, wow, what a great group if they can incorporate this voice of dissent in their midst. I've disagreed with much of what Stu has to say, agreed with a little of it, and felt fairly often that folks were overreacting to him.

For a valuable poster such as Pete to leave the forum because of Stu's posts would be a sad outcome. But to ban Stu because he consistently points out what he considers the dangers of nudism would also be a sad outcome. For what it's worth, coming from a relative newbie, I'm against it. Banning ought to be reserved for folks who are clearly attempting to cause personal hurt to specific forum members, by insulting them or spreading lies about them. Even taking the worst possible interpretation of Stu's behavior, you could say he insults nudism or spreads lies about it (I don't think so, but your interpretation may differ), but I haven't seen him go after anyone personally.

If nudism as a whole can't withstand what Stu has to say, it's a pretty fragile movement. I think it's a lot stronger than that.

If you personally find his posts to be too upsetting to tolerate, ignore them. I realize you can't automatically ignore posts that quote him, but you can skip reading them. I urge anyone who finds themselves getting emotionally fraught over something they read in this forum (be it Stu, or a political post, or whatever) to step away from the computer and take a few minutes to relax, preferably nude. Breathe deeply. Imagine Stu naked. (It will remind you that were are all humans together in this world, and it also potentially annoys the hell out of him, so it's a win-win for you.) Then come back and post something nice about the nudist experience.

I expect if everyone did this, we'd win more new, happy nudist members than we lose by not banning Stu.

[Pete Knight]

I appreciate your comments, but I know Stu of old, back when he called himself Brutus, and he wasn't quite the nice person he portrays here most of the time, although his mask did slip a little recently. This man has actively sought to cause upset and generally spoil any attempt that nudists made to enjoy life.

I wouldn't mind if he stuck to facts, but he presents information dishonestly in order to demoralise us, he claims that an overwhelming majority of people feel as he does about nudity, whereas those of us who have walked naked in unexpected places have received a warm welcome. I walked with Steve Gough on several occasions and never once saw an irate citizen confront Steve, quite the opposite in fact, indeed on one occasion we were given cool drinks by a lady who then wanted her photo taken with us (Wish I'd managed to get a copy.).

Reasoned debate I can live with, and a fair presentation of the facts is all I ask, but the shear delight he shows when he can dig up some report on nudists downfall is deplorable.

He has spent many years in policing and presents the law from his point of view, he fails to acknowledge that nudity in the UK is not illegal, he side steps to catch all laws that could be stretched to cover a situation where someone is nude in public.

He expects us to remain hiding behind the fences and gates of nudist clubs and make do with second rate beaches, and for us to be happy that he is 'supporting' us in that.

He has learned from the past, when he has been banned from groups, and manages to remain civil while spreading discord, apart from a recent outburst where, as I wrote, his mask did slip a little. He has called the police to complain about gatherings of nudist when it was occurring hundreds of miles from where he lives, when there was no possibility of him seeing nudisty, or being offended.

He is not a friend of the nudists.

Pete Knight

[RalphVa]

The only time I've ever seen anyone posing themselves was at the nude beach at Valtur in Bruccoli in Sicily. Think she was just stretching enjoying the sun and/or doing some sort of Yoga stretches, but I was enjoying watching her.

[barenaked1]

I agree. He abhors nudity and has made that statement many times. My personal opinion is he's here just to hear himself think.
As Pete has mentioned about people leaving, I now only lurk and really don't care to see Stu's rants in most of the posting that goes on here. I think he taunts us about the freedoms we don't have. He was banned before for this same behaviour and is now at it again. It is too much 'What I want' and 'What I don't like', with too much emphasis on the 'I'.

Thank you Bob, you have it absolutely spot on, but can't you see that Stu is twisting everything to reinforce his misguided viewpoint, he isn't here to support us in any shape or form, he is here only to cause trouble. If he were merely playing the devils advocate I wouldn't mind, but he puts a negative spin on every thread he posts on, not the aims of this board at all.

The sad truth is that Stu has put a lot of people off posting here, some have left altogether, the sooner Stu is banned (Again.) the sooner we can get on with promoting nudism and having meaningful discussions, without interruption.

Pete Knight

[dakref]

I don't know why people continue to take the bait and even enter into a discussion with Stu. He loves to be contrary and stir things up. Why help him by responding. Ignore the ***.

[JeepNude]

Stu is here first and foremost to argue, which he admits he enjoys. Second, he is here to get his jollies. He uses our discussions as some sort of soft-core erotica. He has admitted to cross-dressing in the past and other sorts of odd behavior, which he believes is perfectly 'normal'. It is disgusting, indeed. I seldom drop by anymore because of him.

[KNude]

Putting Stu on the ignore list helps reduce the emotional surges from reading his BS.

By the way we all know what a BS degree is, but did you know that MS is more of the same and PhD is piled higher and deeper.

[Bob S.]

Jeep, I have no idea what you are talking about. Stu had a medical condition when he was a child and his doctor and parents believed him to be a girl. He was raised as a girl, wearing all of the appropriate girl clothes.

That is the extent of his feminine side. He has never said anything about wearing women's clothes as an adult.

Please everyone, I understand if you don't like Stu, but be civil. Do not attack him or flame his opinions. The only thing to do with people like Stu is to show them the light. If they want to accept it, that is their decision.

Bob S.
Moderator

[Boreas]

Thanks Bob. That was what I thought. I have never seen anything where he said he was cross dressing, nor have I had any reason to believe he is using this site as erotica. He has been pretty open about his opinions. Nothing hidden there.

[barenaked1]

I don't think Stu wants to see the light. I agree with Pete as he really doesn't want to promote a positive side of nudism and only wants to present his resentment of being naked. I find that to be somewhat of a issue.

Jeep, I have no idea what you are talking about. Stu had a medical condition when he was a child and his doctor and parents believed him to be a girl. He was raised as a girl, wearing all of the appropriate girl clothes.

That is the extent of his feminine side. He has never said anything about wearing women's clothes as an adult.

Please everyone, I understand if you don't like Stu, but be civil. Do not attack him or flame his opinions. The only thing to do with people like Stu is to show them the light. If they want to accept it, that is their decision.

Bob S.
Moderator

[Duneman]

I don't go to too many gyms these days as you can tell from my photos!

Most of my nude times are spent on beaches, and of course there are no or few mirrors there. I don't think I have ever seen any individuals flexing their stuff, although one of my friends is a retired body builder, pushing 70, and he still puts most youngsters to shame.

He just works on his tan, and walks the beach talking with his friends.

On the more crowded nude beaches, we have seen the odd "well endowed" male making a display of himself, (very obviously) usually in front of the groups of young females! (rarely with an erection though)
But this seems to be part of the beach scene.

You rarely see this though at the local c/o beach that we go to near where I live.

Duneman

[Naturist4Ever]

Bob S. >> Please everyone, I understand if you don't like Stu, but be civil. Do not attack him or flame his opinions. The only thing to do with people like Stu is to show them the light.

The only thing that IS certain is the one who will be last person here to switch off the lights.

You must be joking, at any decent club the likes of stu would have been shown the gate for lightyears ago. There was a time - a good old time - we had several reluctant spouses here on the forum, honest people who were reluctant to accept nudism. Some never got to grips about it, some actually did. Now THOSE were interesting discussions. The forum blossomed. People got engaged instead of outraged. Can you tell me when the last reluctant spouse aired her (/his) voice on this forum and asked for advice? In the meantime we have a zillions of iterative posts by mr "brutus" stu and you keep telling us how a great addition his opions are to this forum.

Why don't you invite mr stu over to MNL, afterall, among the banned he would fit in right away I reckon. I am sure cindiann will be able to educate mr brutus about the delights of a nude life, in the dungeon that is.... oops wasn't THAT a reason to get banned on CFF.

Good luck.

[barenaked1]

Touche!!!!

Bob S. >> Please everyone, I understand if you don't like Stu, but be civil. Do not attack him or flame his opinions. The only thing to do with people like Stu is to show them the light.

The only thing that IS certain is the one who will be last person here to switch off the lights.

You must be joking, at any decent club the likes of stu would have been shown the gate for lightyears ago. There was a time - a good old time - we had several reluctant spouses here on the forum, honest people who were reluctant to accept nudism. Some never got to grips about it, some actually did. Now THOSE were interesting discussions. The forum blossomed. People got engaged instead of outraged. Can you tell me when the last reluctant spouse aired her (/his) voice on this forum and asked for advice? In the meantime we have a zillions of iterative posts by mr "brutus" stu and you keep telling us how a great addition his opions are to this forum.

Why don't you invite mr stu over to MNL, afterall, among the banned he would fit in right away I reckon. I am sure cindiann will be able to educate mr brutus about the delights of a nude life, in the dungeon that is.... oops wasn't THAT a reason to get banned on CFF.

Good luck.

[Archaewok1]

Some people at the gym do watch themselves in the mirror for form, but some also pose in the mirror because they have low esteem, and seeing themselves with a good body helps them to feel better about themselves. I don't necessarily think its that big of a deal- especially because if society as a whole was promoting healthy views of the body and people were saying nice things about other people in honesty, they wouldn't have a need to look in the mirror to try to fill that void.

As for exhibitionism as a nudist resort, if they are just posing in the mirror and staring at their muscles, i dont think its an issue. If they are purposely flaunting their stuff around others, especially their genitals, then i would think that it should be dealt with, because that can cause people to not want to be around nudist resorts.