Pedophilia problem?

[barmonkey]

Has anyone seen this website?

http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/NudistHallofShame/

After reading through the articles, I'm still not going to have a problem taking my kids to a nudist resort. It's just like anywhere else you take your kids, you have to keep an eye on them. I'm sure that there's just as many pedophiles at the public swimming pools or any shopping mall. Clothing doesn't protect your kids from pedophiles.

While I'm sure there are pedophiles in nudist venues, there are more apt to be far more in non-mudist places. They can blend in more easily among the textiles who don't watch their children as closely as nudists do. Yes, things do happen in nudists places, but far more frequently in non-nudist places.

We recently had a man kicked out of our resort who was getting too friendly with kids. He was being watched and didn't know it. He was touching them inappropriately. We, the regulars, get suspicious of anyone who gets too friendly with the kids.

This week we have the Junior MSA convention, and we have a lot of teens and younger kids. You can be sure we will be watching for anyone who might try to get too friendly with them. Of course, since I'm not married and live here alone, I wouldn't too surprised if I'm one of the people being watched.

[BackpackerBrian]

I found that website to be a bit disturbing, and was disappointed that it was not better balanced. In general, it painted nudists to be ignorant, self-centered people at best, and pedohhiles at worst.

Unfortunately some people go to nudist clubs searching for something which they won't find there. Fortunately, there tends to be either a formal (club-initiated) or informal (people-iniated) screening process that takes care of any problems in the bud. You tend to get known pretty fast in the nudist community. That is good for those who are there for the right reasons, and good for everyone else in that those there for the wrong reasons eventually leave.

While I don't have kids, if I did, I would feel safer taking them to an approprrate nudist venue than most textile equivalents.

I would like though to hear from more parents on this issue . . .

[jon71]

Some people are just determined to put naturists in a bad light. With enough research we could find plenty of examples of child abuse at a church camp, band camp, or anything else and then start painting with a broad brush. I never let me daughter out of my sight anywhere we go, no exceptions.

[shãybare]

http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif
I, too, feel children are safer at a nudist venue, although I don't have statistics. In any gathering, even church gatherings, parents should watch their children and teach their children about improper sexual behavior.

[Naturist Mark]

Originally posted by BackpackerBrian:
I found that website to be a bit disturbing, and was disappointed that it was not better balanced. In general, it painted nudists to be ignorant, self-centered people at best, and pedohhiles at worst.

That website is designed to defame nudism. Nikki Craft is a former nudist and women's topfree rights activist. She also was involved in a relationship with Naturist Society founder Lee Baxendall which apparently ended badly - that may or may not be what triggered her vendetta against naturism.

There is nothing wrong with her warnings about pedophiles and the need for nudist organizations to be alert to the possibilities - every club I know of takes this very very seriously (the opposite of what Craft claims). Her many 'case studies' are alarmist and at times only very tenuously connected to nudism (if at all). Her aim is defamation not education.

-Mark

[KirkOntario]

Unfortunately pedophiles are drawn to nudist resorts and most resorts that I know are vigilant in this regard. Why are they drawn? Kids are naked of course and I think they cannot resist and hope to sexualize children or photograph children through innocent nudism. Of course most nudists are oblivious to this but owners are not.

[Bob S.]

If you want to go by statistics, children are more likely to be abused in their own homes than anywhere else--by a large margin.

Mark is corect that Nikki Craft is on a personal vendetta against organized nudism. Somewhere I wrote about this, but I can't find it so here goes again.

Anyone can publish a list of stories about any specific industry or group of people who abuse children. Heck I can list off the number of women teachers who have sex with their students and suggest that it is epidemic with a well organized website.

Pedophiles are going to go to places where they can have access to children. In only 10-20% of the cases will it be a stranger who abuses them. The vast majority of cases are going to involve friends or family.

And as Jon-Marc and others pointed out, watching children and having a community of eyes on the children does tend to stop abuse before it happens. And the thing is that this community lookout is very strong in nudist parks. This is the reason why I say that nudist parks are one of the safest places a child can be.

"I'm sure that there's just as many pedophiles at the public swimming pools or any shopping mall."

But the thing is monkey, that nudist parks are privately owned and can and will ban people from their grounds, as well as blacklisting them from other nearby nudist parks/groups.

"Clothing doesn't protect your kids from pedophiles."

That is an argument that I have used a lot in the past so thank you for using it.

Bob S.

[KirkOntario]

Originally posted by Bob S.:
If you want to go by statistics, children are more likely to be abused in their own homes than anywhere else--by a large margin.


Bob S.

Yes but non-nudists and nudists have that in common. There is added risk with nudism but then if nudists are aware then unlike the situation with clothed children they are being extra vigilant. Talking to a cop recently in a small town he told me how many known pedophiles there were within blocks of his house. Quite shocking really to know the info on an average community. Problem is these guys are out of jail more than they are in jail.

[nudeM]

So, are kids at risk more at nudist ventures instead of neighborhood playgrounds? The author clearly has a vedetta against nudists, but does that make nudism a 'risky' lifestyle?

I agree, kids are more at risk while at home or at neighborhood playgrounds. You have to admit, the pedophiles are those who are the most trusted to be with kids. I, too don't know the statistics, but I'm sure there is more wrongdoing at homes and playgrounds, than at nudist resorts. Again, I cannot provide any stats. It would be interesting if someone could provide that. As parents we have to keep close watch on our kids at all times.

I remember when I was a kid, my friend and I were able to to ride our bikes for miles to play basketball, football, swim, or other activities with no problems. It's a shame today's kids cannot enjoy those same activities without having the fears of someone stalking them. Today's world is much more dangerous, especially for our kids. http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

[Ben_m]

Today's world is much more dangerous, especially for our kids. Or do we simply choose to get all worked up over media that creates hysteria with these issues and causes us to live in fear of our own shadows?

I'm not suggesting pedophilia isn't a problem, clearly it is, but I'm not convinced that it ever wasn't a problem, just more ignored and swept under the rug than it is now. I happen to have a number of fairly close family members who are victims of this - and just as suggested, it was an "inside" (family) thing that happened. Many years ago it would have more than likely gone unnoticed, now people go to prison (probably rightfully so). But, unfortunately, in addition to that, mass fear and hysteria is also created (and often in somewhat irrational ways). Not sure the fear of the possible is a productive force beyond motivating us to vigilance.

Hmmm, didn't know I had so much to say about this subject, and it probably doesn't make sense anyway,

[P.J.]

Originally posted by jon71:
Some people are just determined to put naturists in a bad light. With enough research we could find plenty of examples of child abuse at a church camp, band camp, or anything else and then start painting with a broad brush. I never let me daughter out of my sight anywhere we go, no exceptions.


I've found that plenty of your views are contrary to mine, but then I sometimes find a few which make a lot of sense.
When it comes to dealing with pedophiles, one can't be too safe!
Wherever innocent children are, some low-life vermin who could be mistaken for human being could be lurking.
We might not be able to catch them and take them off the street, but we all can...and should...do whatever we can to keep all children safe, whether it's at a church camp, band camp, anywhere and everywhere else.

Pedophiles have probably almost always been around. They certainly were when I was little since I was "fondled" by two different men in the early 50's. I remember one but not the other.

[nudenwv]

yes! it's a shame and only takes a few to ruin this great lifestyle for everyone! i wouldn't worry about taking children as long as the place i was visiting was aanr approved! one complaint against anyone and they're out! i am more concerned with home visits where there are children! even-tho the parents say they participate - do they really because they want to or have to! be careful everyone!!

[Sauna]

Let's send this back to prudes. In Finland every child sees his/her parents, sisters and brothers naked when child. Maybe this is the reason of the lowest pedophilia numbers. Prudes do all to generate forbideen fruit taste in everything. The pages are good/bad information about their ideological program results. To protect a child to see naked flesh is just the wrong way but the seeing must happen natural and safe way at home.
Good luck in changing attitudes

To prevent children from seeing nude people is the wrong way to go about protecting them. They need to be informed about what bodies look like and that it is not their fault if someone touches them inappropriately. If children are used to seeing nudity and being nude around others even of the opposite sex the mystery is taken away. That's why this country probably has the highest rate of child molestation--because of people's phobias about nudity. Children are taught from infancy to hide their bodies from anyone's view, and that certain body parts are "dirty" or "nasty". My daughter always took the baby into a bedroom or the bathroom and closed the door to change his diaper for fear his sister would realize that boys were built different from girls, and she would have to answer some embarrassing questions.

There are also the times when a child likes what's being done to him. He might feel guilty about liking something he's been told is bad and believe he's to blame for it happening, or he might not even realize it's wrong. Also, in the case of the child liking it, he won't report it for just that reason. Let me give you an example from my past.

I was too young when this supposedly happened and don't remember it. I only remember what I was told later.

When I was very little a man supposedly fondled me in a theater. Many years later a conversation with my sister caused her to mention that incident. She said that when we got home I mentioned about what the man did, and I was asked why I didn't say anything at the time. I supposedly said, "Because I liked it." I'm sure I'm not the exception and that many children like what's done to them as long as it isn't painful but pleasurable, and there's no threat made to them or loved ones. Believe it or not pre-puberty children CAN enjoy non-painful sexual fondling that is done in a nonchalant, non-threatening way. That's one reason why a lot of what pedophiles do to children doesn't get reported.

[Fresh Air]

Seems more like a pedophile links page masked as an antipedophile site. http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Dan

[jon71]

Silence and secrecy is the enemy. While I do believe there is a place for age appropriateness I think hiding and secrecy breeds distrust and creates problem and nudity is only one subject where this is true. We try to hide kids from death too much too. Bambi is always a to do because of Bambi's mom dying. The thing is kids deal much better with it than we give them credit for IF we are straight forward.

[Bob S.]

"There is added risk with nudism but then if nudists are aware then unlike the situation with clothed children they are being extra vigilant."

There is no added risk with nudism, Kirk. The added risk comes from parents who are not vigilant, do not recognize red flags, or do not know who their kids hang out with.

"Talking to a cop recently in a small town he told me how many known pedophiles there were within blocks of his house."

That is his job. All convicted sex offenders must register with the local authorities.

"You have to admit, the pedophiles are those who are the most trusted to be with kids."

nudeM, I am going to make a slight change to your statement here. The pedophiles are those whom the kids trust a lot (not necessarily the most). If the parents read some of the red flags, they would be the ones who are least trusted.

"Today's world is much more dangerous, especially for our kids."

That is false. Today's world is much safer for kids. In the past, abuse such as this was hidden, not talked about, even in some cases, accepted (marrying off young daughters for dowry).

But since the Women's movement, the focus on child abuse, particularly sexual abuse has erupted, reching its peak in the 80s, when there was a seeming pandemic of sexual abuse allegations (many of which were proven false).

The comparisons of today's report and those of 50 years ago is vastly different but only because the abuse of yesteryear was rarely reported and today, the victims are given much more sympathy.

Since the onset and proliferation of the 24-hour news stations, it seems like abuse is again pandemic when in fact, it is rare. There is also the media's "white girl abduction syndrome" that only makes it worse.

Children are much safer today than ever before, the only problem is that everyone thinks they are in more danger.

Bob S.

[Bob S.]

"To prevent children from seeing nude people is the wrong way to go about protecting them."

Jon-Marc and Sauna, you are both correct. In fact, simply take out the "from seeing nude people" and insert most other things also makes this correct.

Death, civil arguments, anything that is natural parents should not protect their children from. They merely should allow as much as is appropriate for the age.

But clothes, in the way textiles use them with their children, actually gives the abuser more leverage over his victim. The chidlren will have more guilt about letting someone else see him/herself naked so they will be that much less willing to tell their parents about doing something wrong.

"There are also the times when a child likes what's being done to him."

That is an excellent point, Jon-Marc. And yes, that added pleasure will add to the guilt. So parents who demand modesty from their chidlren and scold them for playing with themselves are creating the best victims for pedos, thos who will be most unwilling to share what is being done to them.

Bob S.

My dad did his worst to try to instill guilt in me about "playing with myself". I don't remember if I felt guilty or not, but it felt too good to stop! http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[jon71]

Part of what has been said here I think is correct but phrased poorly so I'll have a go at it. Trust in someone gives them opportunity. That means if a pedophile is trusted they have more opportunity. We warn our kids about strangers but that's not necessarily enough. What if the person molesting them is a relative, pastor, teacher, doctor, dentist, babysitter, neighbor, ad infinitum. While most of the people in those categories are genuinely trustworthy those who are dangerous have a lot of opportunity.

[DeathKnight]

I have visited that a few years ago and I was not impressed with it whatsoever. It's tied in with a radical feminist website.

[NudistGuy47]

There have been many comments as the nature of the website, all of which are based on the views of the poster.

In society, there will always be those who prey on minors for their own sexual gratification. They exist in all walks of life. We, as parents, must instill a good sense of what is right and wrong with our children. We set the example for our children. We openly discuss the topics of the day's news with them and how they feel about those stories. We are watchful when our children in unfamiliar settings. When we, as parents, are involved in our children's lives and communicate well with them by listening, as well as sharing our views, we help them develop their own moral codes.

Some have stated that the pedophiles are drawn to nudist venues. I agree with those who stated the abuse occurs most often in the home or at the playground. I do not believe there is a higher incidence of pedophiles hanging around the nudist venues, especially the clubs. I am not saying this does not happen there, I just am saying the incidence is no higher than across society. As long as nudism/naturism is a human activity, the cross section of nudists/naturists will reflect society.

All of that said, let me close with the fact that what our children see, do, and engage in is our parental responsibility to know those who our children interact with and what they are doing and where. When we procreate, we assume that responsibility. Unfortunately, some parents do not take on that responsibility and our children get harmed.

[BackpackerBrian]

While there's been a lot of discussion about the problem of pedophilia, where it can be found (clergy, family, etc.) and how to protect children from it, there's been little discussion on how pedophilia is perhaps not the disease in itself, but a symptom. Once we identify the disease, we can then figure out how naturism can cure that disease.

I understand that like rape, pedophilia is not a sexual crime in itself, but rather a manifestation of a need for control over others. Of course, kids are vulnerable and easy to control, so they are perfect "targets".

So my question then is, how does naturism contribute to a reduction in the need to control others, and increased self-control?

It would also be informative to learn if the likliehood of being a pedophile or rapist is lower is individuals who were raised in a naturist or naturist-friendly environment.
Any thoughts??

quote:
I understand that like rape, pedophilia is not a sexual crime in itself, but rather a manifestation of a need for control over others.



Having studied this over the years I can't say I've seen this to be true. Could you tell me where you read this?

[Sauna]

.

So my question then is, how does naturism contribute to a reduction in the need to control others, and increased self-control?



Naturism or nudism do not help very much because it is normally then too late. The shameless life must start from birth and be normal and natural. If you are adult the time to educate has passed long time ago. So I mean that the attitude education must happen in families which are in happy case nudists but who at least are naturally naked at home as an example when going or arriving from shower or sauna. If the family habit is to sleep naked even better.

[Bob S.]

"We warn our kids about strangers but that's not necessarily enough."

In part, jon, that is because we don't really explain to them what a stranger is, who he looks like, or how he'll act.

There have been so many TV newsmagazine hidden camera specials about stranger danger and how, even if a child has been taught to stay away from strangers and not talk to them, they will do so anyway, from young children to older teens (the only difference is the lure).

Also in studies, most young children, when asked to draw a stranger, usually draw a scary looking person or monster. Rarely do any of them draw a normal person. As a columnist in my paper wrote, it is wrong to tell children not to talk to strangers. Sometimes in life, it is required. Instead, we must teach our children what to do and not do with a stranger.

Bob S.

[Bob S.]

"I understand that like rape, pedophilia is not a sexual crime in itself, but rather a manifestation of a need for control over others."

Pedophilia is not that simple to pin down, Brian. There are many types of pedophiles (which according to the DSM-IV--Diagnostic and Statistics Manual-Vol. 4-- is sexual fantasies or urges about pre-teens and young teens {not in the same age group as the fantasizer} for at least six months).

The first type are the fantasizers whose outlet may be everything from mere pictures of children (clothed or unclothed) to more erotic pictures (clothed or unclothed) to sexual pictures (real, artistic or computer generated) to stories about sexual situations involving children. These pedophiles may have the same feelings everyone else has for people who actually abuse children, that those who touch children are repugnant and scum. Sexual chat with children online is possible with these people, but actual meetings are rare.

The second are situational molestors. These are people who are fully functioning in society with normal sexual urges, but who may also molest a child during times of weakenss or vulnerability. These people may suggest that the child was flirting with them or wanted it.

The third are the preference molestors. These are people who prefer children as their sexual partners. They usually have an age range/body type. These are the types who will actively "romance" a child, gaining his or her trust as well as that of the family's. This is also the type that will most likely be cruising the chat rooms for a real-life hook up with a child.

The last are the child rapists. These people may have an age range, but it is more about the power and the violence than the sex itself. although the sexual aspect of it is important. These are the ones who will be most likely to kill their victims afterward.

"how does naturism contribute to a reduction in the need to control others, and increased self-control?"

Having studied both nudism and pedophilia, I just don't see a connection between the two and how a child being raised as a nudist could prevent him/her from being a pedophile, but I could see the empathy factor of family and social nudism as a potential factor in reducing the chance of raising a rapist.

Bob S.

[John Spooner]

I noted that Ms. Craft had a contact link, so I tried an experiment and without making mention of any group or source of the material, I copied the text only of a post discussing her past and agenda and asked her if it was correct.
She actually replied to me, copy below. I will not contact her further and reserve any opinions. John S.

"Could you advise me if the points discussed in the att article are correct.


att article? How should i know what article you are talking about?
What you sent me is not an article. Who wrote it? You? Send
appropriate citation, then I will respond to tell you which points
raised in the scratched out text were correct and incorrect.

Thank you, Nikki Craft"

[BackpackerBrian]

Originally posted by Cyndiannaked:
quote:
I understand that like rape, pedophilia is not a sexual crime in itself, but rather a manifestation of a need for control over others.



Having studied this over the years I can't say I've seen this to be true. Could you tell me where you read this?

I remember that from a Deviant Behaviour class in college. It makes sense . . . it's like the "abused child" syndrome, all about control. Abused children grow up to abuse because they are trying to get that control they lost as a child.

Then again, I'm not a psychologist, and don't even play one on TV. Could a real mental health professional here perhaps give us some insight??

[Bob S.]

"t's like the "abused child" syndrome, all about control."

Brian, as I mentioned above, some abuse could be about control while other abuse could be something more. However, my line of thinking is controversial in that I believe that pedophilia is actually another form of sexuality (hereto, homo). That would go a long way to explaining the recidivism rate.

Only the "child rapists" (as in my list) or those who force sex upon their victims (as opposed to allowing the victim to "assent") are the ones who want control.

Bob S.

[jon71]

People who commit sex crimes against children are usually (upper 90 something percent) victims of abuse in their own childhood. That is not true of homosexuality, rates of abuse are identical between gay people and straight people, although a few still try vainly to argue otherwise. Orientation is inborn while pedophilia, at least in most cases, in a result of abuse, making it that much more necessary to stop the cycle. Therapy would be beneficial for victims. Obviously I am talking about kids, not teens. At some point a person can consent and know what it means even if they are technically underage, but kids can't say yes with a full understanding of what it means. Therefore it is always wrong.

[Bob S.]

"People who commit sex crimes against children are usually victims of abuse in their own childhood."

According to the Public Health Agency of Canada (http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/ncfv-cnivf/familyviolence/html/nfntsxagrsex_e.html) (the first website I found from Google), it stated that more than 40 percent of convicted child molesters were sexually abused as children. That is far less than 90%.

But numbers aside jon, it only explains the number of people who have abuse in their background. What about the others? And what about the ones who are abused but do not develop pedophilic tendencies.

There is some research that people are born with tendencies toward hetero-homo sexuality. The researchers created a scale from 0-6 with 0 being totally hetero and 6 being totally homo. I believe there could also be a scale for normal sexulity being a 0 and total pedo being a 6 (of course a spearate scale--absolutely no inferrences meant).

And I think it has to do with body types mixed into the equation. After all, some men like BBWs, others like the waif look, some like Dolly Parton's chest while others like a smaller bust. So from there, I can see how a certain body type (in this case, prepubescent or barely pubescent) can be attractive to a certain population. And realize that a lot of men with that propensity do lose interest in the child when they grow up and their bodies change.

But as I mentioned, it is controversial.

Bob S.

[johny]

RE: Bob S.
Posted July 25, 2005 07:08 PM
""If you want to go by statistics, children are more likely to be abused in their own homes than anywhere else--by a large margin""

Sure. Ive been read such statistics too. Means the Governments should make an efforts preventively stop it. Them ought insulate all children from their parents. No compromises!

We should organize the certain website what shows on the basis of plenty of case-studies how violent parents really are and naturally paint how disgustingly them abuse their own children. In that we have matherials enough.

We should demand loudly and uncompromissly the Governments must banish such historical relict as parenthood if it harms so much statistically.

Children must be breeded only and only by biorobots preprogrammed to be absolutely sexually inhibited.

When those robots washes the naked as* hol*s from that brown matter coming out (You know) - them must beforehand close the fireproof and bulletproof bathroom doors equipped with state-of-art locks and security systems and check the room about is it completely free of any kind of watching systems and webcams each time they enter, plus them must be preprogrammed to have a full MCEP (memory content erase procedure) every five minutes plus as entering as outgoing the bathroom doors.

Because the porn industry is not sleeping, it just only that are doing as hunting any involuntary gap of inwatchfulness into our totally totalitary society. Yes, we want our children grow safe. Thatswhy we must insulate them from ourself.

But... butt... somehow the logics says the same effect may be harvested by just simple telling the own child what are the suspicious things them must be able to give a noise before happens something bad (tell how and where and whom).

Therefore damn the logic and relay on statistics!?

Or change the attitude toward....
IF SOMEONE DO THE CRIME THEN HE IS THAT WHAT MUST BE PUNISHED INSTEAD OF HIS VICTIMS (""cach them and kill them all"").

[nikkicraft]

"That website is designed to defame nudism."

The website is designed to expose nudist and naturist pedophiles when the national organizations refuse to do so.

"Nikki Craft is a former nudist"

Just for clarification purposes I was never a "nudist". I was a skinny dipper, free beach activist. I would not have defined myself as a "nudist".

" and women's topfree rights activist."

I was arrested numerous times for removing my shirt on state and federal beaches and would have classified myself as a shirtfree rights activist decades ago.

" She also was involved in a relationship with Naturist Society founder Lee Baxendall which apparently ended badly - that may or may not be what triggered her vendetta against naturism."

Mr. Baxandall and I lived together for approx four years and I was employed at the Naturist Society during that time. The relationship ended _15 years ago_ and yes it did end badly. I have not had a conversation with Lee Baxandall for 15 years. I can assure you I'm way over it. :-)

I was involved in the issue of exposing sex offenders a full 25 years ago. "Triggered" means to bring on suddenly. My awareness of the problems of a disproportionate number of pedophiles in the nudist/naturist movement grew slowly over the years. In fact, my insistence about it was the real underlying reason for my leaving The Naturist Society.

"There is nothing wrong with her warnings about pedophiles and the need for nudist organizations to be alert to the possibilities - every club I know of takes this very very seriously (the opposite of what Craft claims). Her many 'case studies' are alarmist and at times only very tenuously connected to nudism (if at all). Her aim is defamation not education."

My aim is to get your movement, the national organizations in particular, to start publishing a list of _convicted_ sex predators who operate in your midst, and also to publicize arrests for aggressive sex crimes, trafficking in child pornography, etc, the same way major news papers do. This is a bottom line service the national organizations need to be accomplishing. They have no national policies. It's reprehensible. These crimes are hushed up and it's time for it to stop.

Thanks for reading, Nikki Craft
http://www.nudisthallofshame.info

[nikkicraft]

Originally posted by KirkOntario:
Unfortunately pedophiles are drawn to nudist resorts and most resorts that I know are vigilant in this regard. Why are they drawn? Kids are naked of course and I think they cannot resist and hope to sexualize children or photograph children through innocent nudism. Of course most nudists are oblivious to this but owners are not.

Hi Kirk,
A disproportionate number of pedophiles are attracted to nudism for access to nude children. I thought what you said about the nudists being oblivious but the owners being well aware of it was insightful and I do agree with you.

Please consider this and if you have time let me know what you think:

Unfortunately I believe the camp owners have an interest in silencing the cases and keeping the members ignorant of the situation. They can't always do this, but when they can I believe this choice is often made. The boards of some camps, during their board meetings, have voted not to inform their membership to protect themselves from liabilities in case a legal case might arise if the membership finds out. They will also do most anything to keep these instances out of the press. So even though the camp owners are aware because they inevitably encounter these men, that there are circumstances that cause them to have conflicts when trying to deal with them. Also there is the understanable fear of being sued. Therefore, often it results in letting a pedophile quietly leave only to go to another camp, or come back to that one when there is new management. There's other examples I could site here, but won't do so to save space.

Nikki Craft
http://www.nudisthallofshame.info

[John Spooner]

Dear Ms. Craft.
You seem to be caught up in the current hysteria and witch-hunting for pedaphiles and abuse of children.
While child abuse is a nefarious activity, it is NOT the only type abuse nor is it the "crime of crimes".
What about when the frail and elderly get assaulted or abused, the disabled being abused and the disadvantaged??
These people are just as much members of society as children.
Therefore could you tell us, in just a yes or no answer without volumes of justification, are children worth more than the other members of society mentioned above?
John S.

[Sauna]

Originally posted by John Spooner. South Oz.:
Dear Ms. Craft.
You seem to be caught up in the current hysteria and witch-hunting for pedaphiles and abuse of children.
While child abuse is a nefarious activity, it is NOT the only type abuse nor is it the "crime of crimes".
What about when the frail and elderly get assaulted or abused, the disabled being abused and the disadvantaged??
These people are just as much members of society as children.
Therefore could you tell us, in just a yes or no answer without volumes of justification, are children worth more than the other members of society mentioned above?
John S.

My answer to your last question is YES, because children cannot protect themselves. Look the case in France where pedophiles sold their own and neighbors children as sex slaves, raped them etc.(this has nothing to do with nudism)

[KirkOntario]

Originally posted by Sauna:My answer to your last question is YES, because children cannot protect themselves. Look the case in France where pedophiles sold their own and neighbors children as sex slaves, raped them etc.(this has nothing to do with nudism)

I don't see anything wrong either in having concerns for protecting children. Too many nudists may be concerned about bad publicity for naturism and wish to see such cases swept under the rug. That's the wrong attitude. Better to deal with it openly and be protective of children in a naturist environment.

[nikkicraft]

You don't get to tell me to reply in a yes or no. I will reply how I see fit to get my answer across.

No, I do not believe children deserve more than the elderly. Many elderly people cannot take care of themselves either and for that reason society has the obligation to respect and care for older people. We will all be there someday and too many look at a person with so much knowledge and experience as obsolete. There is much damage done by this form of disrespect.

I am aware of and have intentionally educated myself about the abuses in homes for the elderly and, even in their own homes by their own children, and I know much work needs to be done in this area to protect the elderly and to educate people about that abuse.

If that is a strong concern of yours I would encourage you to get busy and work to protect the rights of the elderly and I will support you in your efforts. However, the concern I'm working with here is this one and I really don't appreciate you negating them saying that child abuse is "hysteria and witch-hunting", nor the implication that you have the right or authority to pick people's organizing efforts and choices where they want to spend their energies and resources. You don't.
Nikki Craft,
http://www.nudisthallofshame.info

I have no problem with protecting children from predators. What I do have a problem with is making nudist resorts out to be a haven for these perverts, and making nudists out to BE these perverts. Yes, child molesters can be found ANY place where there are children, but NO place protects the children better than at a nudist resort.

While it's quite possible that a pedophile can and will molest a child in a nudist resort (I have no doubt it's been done), we watch out for any inapropriate behavior. A man was recently kicked out of our resort for his inapropriate touching of children.

All of us members are on the lookout for such behavior. When I see a man getting too friendly with children I know aren't his (and it's usually the men), I watch him discreetly so I don't make him suspect that he's being watched. I'm sure others are doing the same. They don't know they're being watched since I'm sure not everyone is told as I was, "You will be watched." That was at another resort and not this one. They did a background check on me here, for which I had to pay $95.

As a "single" man joining a nudist resort, I was under a one year probation. If I was watched, I'm sure they got very bored watching me. I now live full-time in a nudist resort.

[soundman]

Nikki you are my hero. Nudism needs a person like you to get rid of the weirdos and protect children. Thank you!!!!!

[Bob S.]

"My awareness of the problems of a disproportionate number of pedophiles in the nudist/naturist movement grew slowly over the years."

Ms. Craft, define disporportionate number. Show me where this number is more than those that exist outside of the walls of the camps (use all unknown pedophiles as well). Has this number of pedophiles grown, shrunk, or stayed the same proportionately during your 25 years?

"My aim is to get your movement, the national organizations in particular, to start publishing a list of _convicted_ sex predators who operate in your midst"

Well, you sure have disguised it well. Is there anything on your website that makes that suggestion? How often have you suggested this to the orgs or people who can bring it up in the natioanl meetings? All I see is a vendetta site.

"A disproportionate number of pedophiles are attracted to nudism for access to nude children."

The nudist movement is having a hard time getting new members with young children, so it would seem antithetical for them to come to see that which is not there. And pedophiles are just as attracted to clothed children as they are naked children. How many pedophiles can you find at a public pool? Disproportionate amount? How about coaching youth sports? Generally working with kids?

It is not the clothing or lack thereof that pedophiles go for. It is the access that makes them tick.

"I believe the camp owners have an interest in silencing the cases and keeping the members ignorant of the situation."

That is impossible in nudist parks. They are small and word spreads fast. Theya re just like small towns where everybody knows eveybody else and if something bad happens to one person, everyone will know about it fast.

The owners do not need to inform the members of everything that goes on, especially legal proceedings. Those are private between the person/family involved and the perp. What is usually done is the owners/managers will blacklist that person to other nudist parks.

And again, do you feel this practice is going on now? More or less than when you started?

johny--loved it!

Bob S.

[KirkOntario]

Originally posted by Bob S.:The nudist movement is having a hard time getting new members with young children, so it would seem antithetical for them to come to see that which is not there. And pedophiles are just as attracted to clothed children as they are naked children. How many pedophiles can you find at a public pool? Disproportionate amount? How about coaching youth sports? Generally working with kids?

It is not the clothing or lack thereof that pedophiles go for. It is the access that makes them tick.
.

You must admit there's a bit more access without clothes at least visually for the pedophile than with clothes.

[Bob S.]

I really don't appreciate you negating them saying that child abuse is "hysteria and witch-hunting"

Ms. Craft, child abuse is real and it is a worthy cause to take on, but there is a hysteria and witch-hunt going on concerning child abuse and pedophiles.

Remember back in the 80s during the height of the witch-hunt, it seemed everyone and their mother was being accused. The McMartin Daycare case was a prime example. The owners and some teachers were accused and convicted of sexual abuse based on interviews of children. This was one case where the experts actually coerced the children to say the teachers abused them ritualistically.

In fact, there were a disproportionate number of Satanic cult ritual sexual abuse allegations back then and into the 90s. All of this was a result of the witch-hunt and hysteria.

The result today is that we live in a pedophilic society. That meaning people see things through the eyes of the pedophile. This is exactly what happned during two other witch-hunts, the Salem witch trials and McCarthyism. In Salem, people started to see things as a witch by viewing every unusual event as a result of black magic. They moved away from Christianity and into the realm of thatwhich they despised.

During the Red Scare of McCarthy, people were told to spy on their neighbors and figure out if they were Commies. That got people to move away from American ideals and look at everything through the lens of their enemy.

The other witch-hunts stopped for two reasons, one was because not enough people were found to be true "witches". The other was after too many or the wrong person was accused. With the pedophilia witch-hunt, we have real "witches" among us and we seem too jaded to have that "ultimate non-witch" to be accused.

So now we are, as a society, pedophilic in that we see things as a pedophile would. There are too many parents who take naked, innocent pictures of their children and are accused of child abuse and making child porn. We are afraid to allow young girls to go topless for fear of the unknowns around us.

And it becase of our thinking and fears that we have asked the government to protect the children more than ever before. But all it really takes is good parenting to prevent 90% of the abuse that occurs. And that is what you have in a nudist park, everyone watching the kids and people who surround them.

Children are safer today than ever before in history, but parents and children probably feel in more danger than ever before. That is the irony and effects of the pedophile whtch-hunts and mind sets.

Bob S.

[Bob S.]

"You must admit there's a bit more access without clothes at least visually for the pedophile than with clothes."

Kirk, I was suggesting that the lack of children we comlain about at nudist parks means there are a lack of or less access to children than at a playground.

Visually, access is just seeing children. Their fantasies work perfectly well when they are looking at clothed children. In fact, that is how a lot of them get their jollies. Playgrounds, pools, clothes catalogues, clothing advertisements, star websites, family picture websites, movies, TV shows, etc. If they wanted to act out on their fantasies, a little clothing is not going to stop them.

It is not the nudity they strive for, it is the fantasy or the sexual activity.

Bob S.

[Stevel]

Well I have to say I agree with most everything everyone is saying.. and id like to put a strong belief that PARENTS are the key.. Not nudists camps/resorts not public pools not little league games but parents.. Watch your children. Know who they hang out with and they will be safe.. Now like some recent cases were kids are abducted from bed from the homes like the 2 recent florida cases, that isnt something that you can blame on the parents or the neighborhood. You have to blame the attacker not society. I have yet to hear a major news story or allegation about abuse at nudists camps.. I have at catholic churchs though.. Should we outlaw church? I have to lean to think maybe if chruchs were nude they would be safer.. Why? because people would LOOK! and not close there eyes and be blind to things.. A funny comic strip they have on the ina site says somthing to the affect "If a naked man ran through the streets with an uzi and throwing gernades, people would call 911 and say" Help theres a naked man" ;;i know i messed it up but you get the point;; nudity is not the reason and not the outlet.

Yes, parents are very much the key. However, I see people claim there is less of a problem with pedophiles at our clubs and that could cause someone NOT to keep a good eye on their children. Why do they do that? They don't want to alarm the newbies. Honesty would hurt less children!

And Kirk, a pedophile has absolutely no problem removing a child's clothes once he has them in a private place. It's getting a child to that place that is the challenge.

I'm glad nikki is here. I would love to hear her side of this, to answer Bob's questions about what the numbers really are. She would have had access to TNS's private goings on and would hear about molestations that we never heard about.

Thanks for posting nikki, and I'm looking forward to your contributions. This is your chance to tell us where you get your figures and prove to us that things are lots worse than we've been lead to believe.

I really do think that some of it has been hidden from us.

[jon71]

An obviously serious issue this matter is actually undermined by hysteria. I see an analogy with drug awareness. While we should educate and inform people, especially young people about the dangers of drug use, if we use "reefer madness" type propaganda we lose credibility and anything productive we might say is dismissed along with that propaganda. The matter must be address is a serious, forthright, and factual basis, not flying off the handle at spectres.

[Chance]

Sorry about bringing up an old topic, but I had a few things to (try) and contrubute, and I have a question about a site that I stumbled upon while doing a search for more info about nudism/naturism.

OK..... First off, I think that Nikki left... too bad. I would have really liked to hear her side of the story.. maybe I could have gained a little insight as to why she thinks that way. It might have helped her cause a little. She could have offered some good ideas as to what we could do without loosing everybody (I think that that is what I am trying to say... I hope that you get my point... lol) Second, I am very confused... the website that I stumbled upon is http://www.angelfire.com/folk/statement/

By the way... yeah.. I am a guy (so?...), but that site made me cry.... a little.. (very little. lol) so did the "My Daughter does not smile anymore" Those (especially the latter) were very sad.

[nudetone]

Originally posted by KirkOntario:
Unfortunately pedophiles are drawn to nudist resorts

Are there actually statistics to support this statement, and if so, what is/are the source(s)?

[Caipora]

Bob S. said above:

Remember back in the 80s during the height of the witch-hunt, it seemed everyone and their mother was being accused. The <span class="ev_code_RED">The McMartin Daycare case</span> was a prime example. The owners and some teachers were accused and convicted of sexual abuse based on interviews of children. This was one case where the experts actually coerced the children to say the teachers abused them ritualistically.

One of the child accusers in the McMartin case cas just publicly retracted. The LA Times titled their article " McMartin Pre-Schooler: 'I Lied'. Here's the article:
http://www.latimes.com/travel/destinations/pacific/la-t...oll=la-home-magazine (http://www.latimes.com/travel/destinations/pacific/la-tm-mcmartin44oct30,0,285518.story?coll=la-home-magazine)

- Caipora

[fredm74]

What exactly do nudist resorts look for when they seek out a potential pedophile? I read Jon-marc's post in how he was subjected to having a background check as a single male nudist. So is a married man (or woman) with/without children not screened for a background check? I agree with the statistics that most children are abused/molested/raped by people that they know and trust. It's not always the case of a man lurking in the bushes with dark glasses and an overcoat.

As Cyndian mentioned, parental supervision is important. Not only in nudist resorts but at the parks, schools, etc. Parents are responsible for their kids. Plain and simple.

-Fred



Originally posted by nudetone:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
Unfortunately pedophiles are drawn to nudist resorts

Are there actually statistics to support this statement, and if so, what is/are the source(s)? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Dolby]

Unfortunately pedophiles are drawn to nudist resorts

I thought pedophiles were drawn to children.

It doesn't make sense that significant numbers of them are spending time at nudist resorts where children are likely to be with their parents or otherwise supervised.

I seriously doubt that the nudist factor plays a role. How many nudist priests were charged with sexual abuse in the Catholic church scandal?

While I'm sure there have been problems with certain individuals at resorts, I doubt that there is any higher incidence there than at any other venue. If someone can produce good statistics that show otherwise, I'm willing to take a look.

[Mosquito_Bait]

The recent scandals involving Catholic priests should make it clear that sexual abuse of children can happen anywhere. Pedophiles are likely to be found any place that kids can be found including church youth groups, the boy scouts, and little league baseball. The big difference with regard to nudist parks is that access is tightly controlled. The first time we visited White Tail Park, my wife was offended by the amount of information about ourselves that we had to provide at the front office. I have no doubt that the office staff did a background check on us.

[Bob S.]

Chance, we have discussed the angelfire website somewhere else before in these forums. That site should be taken as heresay. Nothing can be verified nor disproved. Could things have happened that was talked about? Sure, but those are the exception rather than the rule. And if anything indecent does happen or if you are improperly propositioned, you should report it to management. To not do so is accpeting the behaviour.

Fred:"As Cyndian mentioned, parental supervision is important. Not only in nudist resorts but at the parks, schools, etc. Parents are responsible for their kids. Plain and simple."

Yes. That is a fact. Although I would add responsible adult supervision beit parental or another trusted adult. The children who become abused are the ones who are seen as vulnerable to the abuser. The most vulnerable children are the ones who are not being watched appropriately.

Bob S.

[usmc1]

There are some very important issues coming forth in this discussion.

First. Ms. Craft and her child were betrayed and hurt by someone whom they trusted as a friend. I understand from reading her article and the comments of others that Ms. Craft has spent some time as an activist and nude rights demonstrator. If this is indeed the case, I think that part of the problem lies with the fact that such people very often have an idealized point of view, tend to think the best of people and are trusting of those who present themselves as being like minded.

It is a shame that her trust and idealized view may have set her up for the betrayal. But, one has to point out that it was Ms. Craft's responsibility to protect her child and, to some extent, her naivity caused her failure to do this. I hope that she and her daughter will get some counseling, because I suspect the greatest harm to the daughter will not be from the molestation itself, but the daughter's sense of betrayal that the one person on earth that was to protect her did not. I think that deep down Ms. craft senses this and that this explains much of her anger misdirected at nudists and nudism.

Secondly. I guess anyone can call themselves a nudist or naturist whether they are celibates, highly sexed, androgenous, asexual, multi sexual, gay, straight, pederasts, pedophiles or whatever. Therein lies the quandry--whom do you accept and trust and whom not? I think it is prudent, whether in a cloathed or nude venue, to be careful, alert and wary of how much friendship or intimacy we extend to others until we get to know them very well--certainly where children are involved.

So, I do not think that per capita there are more or less offenders in a group of nudists than there are in a group of clothed people. In fact, I suspect that since most sex offenders have a core of prudishness about them (yep they sure do--the source of their inner conflict and acting out in many cases) and most do not have great self-images, they would not be greatly prevalent in a structured, legitimate nudist venue. But, there are exceptions, and it is our responsibility to be careful and look out for each other, particularly our children.

Third. This issue of child porn and pedophilia has in many ways become the shaggy old boogie bear hiding under the bed since the demise of the red menace and A-bomb from Russia. Yes it is real, yes it is harmful and destructive, yes it makes victims of those we should exault and nurture, and yes one is too many. But, I suspect that more is made of it than is merited--it is emotional and it is inflammatory. But, as such, there has arisen a certain hysteria that has lumped in nudists and nudist families and their friends as sexual devients in the minds of many.

What is the answer? First let's hope and pray that Ms. Craft, who seems to me to be a lovely, committed and thoughtful woman, and her child, get the professional counseling and support that they need to restore some equilibrium to their lives. And, we who are "legitimate" nudists or naturists, should be aware that things are more complicated than they seem and just because and individual or organization or extablishment claims to to be nudist or naturist if the behavior is inappropriate, then something is very wrong. And we should not be hesitant in speaking out against such people or venues as not reflecting the spirit or beliefs of nudists--such dialogue will not detract from nudism it will strengthen it.

Finally, speak out and/or join real advocacy or legal action groups that represent your views. Otherwise, the angry, narrow and repressive elements will complete their battle to take away our freedoms.

[Mosquito_Bait]

The following is Ms. Craft's home page:

http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/Nikki/

I especially enjoyed the big pink penis mounted to the barrel of a howitzer:

http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/PreyingMantis/dismember.html

[NudeAl]

USMC-1,

Excellent post I couldn't agree more, thank you for that. It is sometimes hard to do the right thing but right is right even if it isn't popular and wrong is wrong even if no one else says anything.

[nikkicraft]

one problem. this person doesn't know what he is talking about. I don't have a daughter and nothing else he says it true or accurate either. he needs to try doing some fact checking before making public postings if he cares anything about having any credibility attached to his opinions.

Sorry, I don't have time to post any further at this time, but I will try to stop back in this thread.

The problem with child sexual abusers have been more than well documented and the person who brings up the token case of the mcmartins is just using subterfuge. Furthermore, there is no question that pedophiles are attracted to nudism for access to children because they are NUDE and photos of them in nudist/naturist publications are their coffee table porn. People who can't get this really need to get wise and until they do children will never be safe in this nudist environments. Sorry to have to say it this way, but someone needs to. nikki

nikki craft
http://www.nudisthallofshame.info

This very misinformed person wrote:
:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:
At 5:36 AM -0800 11/6/05, ClothesFree Forums wrote:
usmc1
Posted November 06, 2005 05:31 AM There are some very important issues coming forth is this discussion.

First. Ms. Craft and her child were betrayed and hurt by someone who they trusted as a friend. I understand from reading her article and the comments of others that Ms. Craft has spent some time as an activist and nude rigts demonstrater. If this is indeed the case, I think that part of the problem lies with the fact that such people very often have an idealized point of view, tend to think the best of people and are trusting.

It is a shame that her trust and idealized view may have set her up for the betrayal. But, one has to point out that it was Ms. Craft's responsibility to protect her child and, to some extent her naivity caused her failure to do this. I hope that she and her daugher will get some counseling, because I suspect the greatest harm to the daughter will not be from the molestations itself, but the daughter's sense of betrayal that the one person on earth that was to protect her did not. I think that deep down Ms. craft senses this and that this explains much of her anger misdirected at nudists and nudism.

Secondly. I guess anyone can call themselves a nudist or naturist whther they are celibates, highly sexed, androgenous, asexual, multi sexual, gay, straight, pederasts, pedophiles or whatever. Therein lies the quandry--who do you accept and trust and who not? I think it is prudent, whether in a cloathed or nude venue, to be careful, alert and wary of how much friendship or intimacy we extend to others until we get to know them--certainly where children are involved.

So, I do not think that per capita there are more or less offenders and a in agroup of nudists than there are in a group of clothed people. In fact, I suspect that since most sex offenders have a core of prudishness about them (yep they sure do) and most do not have great self images they would not be greatly prevalent in a structured, legitimate nudist venue. But, there are exceptions, and it is our responsibility to be careful and look for each other, particularly our children.

Third. This issue of child porn and pedophilia has in many ways become the boogie bear hiding under the bed since the demise of the red menace and A-bomb from Russia. Yes it is real, yes it is harmful and destructive, yes it makes victems of those we whould exault and nurture, and yes one is too many. But, I suspect that more is made of it than is merited--it is emotional and it is inflammatory. But, as such, there has arisen a certain hysteria that has lumped in nudists and nudist families and friends as sexual devients in the minds of many.

What is the answer? First let's hope and pray that Ms. Craft, who seems to me to be a lovely, committed and thoughtful woman, and her child, get the professional counseling and support that they need to restore some equilibrium to their lives. We who are "legitimate" nudists or naturists should be aware that things are more complicated than they seem and just because and individual or organization or extablishment claims to to be nusist or naturist if the behavior is inappropriate, then something is very wrong.

Finally, speak out and/or join real advocacy or legal action groups that represent your views. Otherwise, the angry, narrow and repressive elements will complete their battle to take away our freedoms.
:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:

[Dolby]

there is no question that pedophiles are attracted to nudism for access to children because they are NUDE

Yes, there is a question. Where is your evidence to support this?

photos of them [children]in nudist/naturist publications are their coffee table porn.

I'm not aware of cases where pedophiles were arrested and hundreds of naturist publications were found in their houses, or on their coffee tables for that matter.

[John P]

Hi Nikki. We are honored.

USMC1, it looks as if you've got someone else confused with Nikki Craft. You probably aren't very experienced in naturism or you'd know enough about Ms Craft to avoid making this kind of mistake!

The McMartin case was typical of a brief period when there were a number of cases of accusations of child abuse around the USA, in which children were coached and coaxed to give false testimony, and quite a few innocent people ended up in jail. It's a good example of hysterical exaggeration of some real crimes turning into crimes being imagined, leading to real punishments.

On the other hand, we've seen Bill Peckenpaugh and Joseph Musco hauled off to jail in the last year (look them up if you don't know about them), and there have been a couple of cases in Canada too. Those cases are still pending, but there does seem to be good evidence against those two. It happens.

Given the way that our society teaches us to link nudity with sex, I can see people starting their sexual escapades with just looking, and then moving on to more. Maybe they tell themselves looking is all they want to do, and then an opportunity occurs, and where does it end? You don't have to look far to find stories of women being propositioned sexually at naturist sites; that's "normal" sex, but what happens if there's someone out there whose tastes are "abnormal"? It could go just the same way, first looking, then trying to do something. And maybe succeeding. Let's not think like the idiot prosecutors in the McMartin case, but let's not ignore the fact that a fair number of naturists have sexual objectives of one kind or another, and not all of them are just innocent voyeurs or swingers.

[nikkicraft]

thanks john p i really agree with your posting and for others who have responded respectfully about my website and related issues on this forum i thank you as well.

additionally, to the man who wanted to know about the site "This thing called nudism"... it is simply a site that is listing a series of links and I don't know why it would be considered rumor. it is a resource for information and research and opinion. I have found the information to be accurately portrayed by the web manager. However, I will tell you personally I don't give a lot of credibility to chat room discussions because one never knows who is on the other end of that internet handle, and often it might even be law enforcement...hopefully : ).

now when i read Chances post I'm realizing that the man who posted that I had a child, that i had betrayed due to my irresponsibility and that I needed therapy was getting it from reading "my daughter does not smile" which stated quite clearly who the author was, and it was not me. So that is how uncarefully and disrespectfully that man read anything on the site to arrive at all his crazy accusations and perceptions. I at least understand now where his mistakes came from.

This gentleman can only be thankful that with his sloppy research techniques that he is not running a site that exposes sex predators because he would have been sued or closed down long ago for the extreme type of mistakes he just made in this forum. I can say that for all the nudists false accusations against me, saying the information on my site is not true, that I have been operating the site, and making these releases for over a decade, i have named names and I have never been sued or taken to court for any reason. That is not to say I have not made mistakes, but I do try to retract things and keep them as accurate as I possibly can and I am committed to that. You can trust the information you get on my site and if anyone in this forum ever knows of any cases they would like to share, or information that is not listed on my site, I would appreciate you writing me via private email off the front page of my website.

thank you. nikki craft
http://www.nudisthallofshame.info

[nikkicraft]

hi john, your post is intelligent and informed about the issues and subtle particulars. thanks. nikki


Originally posted by John P:
Hi Nikki. We are honored.

USMC1, it looks as if you've got someone else confused with Nikki Craft. You probably aren't very experienced in naturism or you'd know enough about Ms Craft to avoid making this kind of mistake!

The McMartin case was typical of a brief period when there were a number of cases of accusations of child abuse around the USA, in which children were coached and coaxed to give false testimony, and quite a few innocent people ended up in jail. It's a good example of hysterical exaggeration of some real crimes turning into crimes being imagined, leading to real punishments.

On the other hand, we've seen Bill Peckenpaugh and Joseph Musco hauled off to jail in the last year (look them up if you don't know about them), and there have been a couple of cases in Canada too. Those cases are still pending, but there does seem to be good evidence against those two. It happens.

Given the way that our society teaches us to link nudity with sex, I can see people starting their sexual escapades with just looking, and then moving on to more. Maybe they tell themselves looking is all they want to do, and then an opportunity occurs, and where does it end? You don't have to look far to find stories of women being propositioned sexually at naturist sites; that's "normal" sex, but what happens if there's someone out there whose tastes are "abnormal"? It could go just the same way, first looking, then trying to do something. And maybe succeeding. Let's not think like the idiot prosecutors in the McMartin case, but let's not ignore the fact that a fair number of naturists have sexual objectives of one kind or another, and not all of them are just innocent voyeurs or swingers.

[nikkicraft]

i apologize for the double posting. I thought i was sending a private email. nikki

[Sauna]

Nudims and naturism is good curtain to hide your real goals. Please test it with Google and using those words you get enormous amount of real pornography.

Still I believe that most of nudist are honest in their lifestyle, but the world was showed that think twice before you trust to somebody even he/she says to be a christian one. In every flock of sheep there are also black ones. This do not explain anything.

[krcNY]

Originally posted by nikkicraft:

Furthermore, there is no question that pedophiles are attracted to nudism for access to children because they are NUDE and photos of them in nudist/naturist publications are their coffee table porn. People who can't get this really need to get wise and until they do children will never be safe in this nudist environments. Sorry to have to say it this way, but someone needs to. nikki

nikki craft
http://www.nudisthallofshame.info

:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:

I agree with you to a degree.

From information that I have learned over the years. I feel pedophiles are looking for places where they can be alone with kids, without parental supervision. These abusers are usually trusted by the parents of the victims. Most cases I have seen, the victims are close to the abuser.

I also know of quite a few families who hide their bodies from each other and they had an abuse case. A friend of mine did not find out for almost 6 months that this was going on at the babysitters until the kid sister finally saw a bruise and told Mom. The kid is a mess, this was a trusted family friend.

I know every bruise, birthmark and freckle on my children. I believe there is a happy medium and people should not be close minded about nudity in their own home.

Nude Resorts, Parks...yes but any resort or park will have pedophiles. I agree with other posts on this. The kids need parental supervison and education about sexual preditors. Kids also need to feel they can talk to their parents about anything, communication is very big in our family.

This is a very interesting thread and the website has a lot of good information as well. I will still have my own opinions anyway, but look forward to reading on http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[Trailscout]

I think we should figure out what to do with the information Nikki has given us.

I have learned not to take PR brochures by naturist organizations at face value. Of course they are going to put a positive spin on things. But to what extent do Nikki's negative experiences reflect on what we can also expect?

Even if she is reporting on a few bad apples in anotherwise good setting, it justfies great vigilence on our part when we visit naturist parks or nude beaches. But I don't think we should assume that textile beaches or state park campgrounds are safe havens from those who would prey on our kids.

I wonder if some are advocating closure of all nudist resorts and nude beaches.

I have spent some time at a small family park where children are always in plain sight of their parents and actitivies for them are well-supervised for day visitors.

Summer residents at the adjoining campground are not supervised, but I never saw kids wandering alone, just older teens and even they were in groups of two or three. I don't see these settings as more dangerous for children than any given suburban neighborhood.

[John P]

Oh well, I don't believe in demons and I don't think anyone else should. I've seen people (almost) spit on the ground and cross themselves when Nikki Craft's name is mentioned, and it's pretty stupid. She's good about getting her facts right, which is way more than you can say about the people who've opposed her! Maybe she presents ancient data and has a tone of general accusation toward naturism, and those things we could argue about. But Mr Peckenpaugh and Mr Musco were still awaiting trial the last I heard, not far in the past at all. I may have even met Joseph Musco at the Eastern Gathering in June--I came home with a brochure from his resort, at least.

We shouldn't be unwilling to hear reports of trouble, nor hysterical and seeing child molesters behind every tree. As with so many things--naturism is just stuff that you could do with clothes on, but we do it naked. Nothing else needs to change. I want to think well of people, but I can't claim that everyone does good stuff all the time.

One thing we do need to keep somewhere in our minds, is that there are people who are attracted to naturism for sexual reasons. It's impossible to go far without meeting or at least hearing about them, and we have to accept the possibility that they're going to act in the way that people motivated by sex will act, and not deny it when we see it, and be prepared to deal with it.

[Chance]

to the man who wanted to know about the site "This thing called nudism"...


Sorry... not man. lol. anyway, I was not saying that anything on that site was false, but I needed a little assurance that what I had heard about nudism was not a lie.... (I think that the word for me is impressionable?)lol. Anyway, I got that assurance (sp?) from reading a few essays (positive) and comparing them with some negative essays about naturism. well gotta go.

[Bob S.]

nikki:"The problem with child sexual abusers have been more than well documented and the person who brings up the token case of the mcmartins is just using subterfuge."

I have never said that child abuse is not anything to worry about. My problem is with the hysteria that this current culture has with pedophilia. And I used the McMartin case as an example of that hysteria.

nikki:"Furthermore, there is no question that pedophiles are attracted to nudism for access to children because they are NUDE"

Nudists represent a cross-section of society at large. There will be an equal number of pedos in nudism as outside of nudism.

The question is whether pedos will be attracted to nudism just for the children or will they go the easy route and look online for naked pics or get other opportunities to look at children. As I mentioned elsewhere, it isn't the nude bodies that get most pedos going; instead it is the fantasies they create in their minds.

What did you think of the Catholic Church scandal? The priests were not running nudist activities for their abuse to occur, they just convinced the boys to get naked.

Children, in my opinion, are safest in nudist parks as they are vigourously watched by everyone there. Are they 100% safe there? No. But they are not 100% safe anywhere. Nudism, as krc mentioned, provides more support for children who have been abused to come forward. And any unusual bruising will be caught almost immediately.

Now you read my posts yet failed to answer my questions. I would really like your opinions regarding my quetions:

Has this number of pedophiles in nudism grown, shrunk, or stayed the same proportionately during your 25 years?

In response to your claim that a disproportionate number of pedophiles are attracted to nudism for access to nude children: How many pedophiles can you find at a public pool? Disproportionate amount? How about coaching youth sports? Generally working with kids?


Referring to your stated aim to: get your movement, the national organizations in particular, to start publishing a list of _convicted_ sex predators who operate in your midst: Is there anything on your website that makes that suggestion? How often have you suggested this to the orgs or people who can bring it up in the natioanl meetings?

As I also mentioned, it is not the clothing or lack thereof that pedophiles go for. It is the access that makes them tick. And vulneralble children are few and far beteen at nudist venues.

Bob S.

[hm0504]

I think it is sensible for nudists to assume that their organization, clubs, beach, or whatever might be particularly attractive to pedophiles because of the presence of nude children. And as such, they should take the proper precautions and remain vigilant.

I would also emphasize that it is not just nudists who ought to be vigilant. From what I've read, there seems to be an unusually disproportionate number of pedophiles in various church positions, particularly conservative ones. I'm not sure what actions these churches are taking but if they hold the attitude that because they are somehow special because they are spirit-filled churches, then I'd say its time they stopped fooling themselves.

My own church (now liberal), largely as a result of a massive sexual abuse scandal from the 1920s that has gained prominence in the last decade, has brought in all sorts of tough rules including, for example, that no adult is allowed to be left alone with children -- there must always be two adults present. If one adult doesn't arrive for a scheduled church activity, then the activity must be cancelled.

Nudists, too, need to make it abundantly clear that they oppose pedophilia and will have, without becoming hysterical, zero tolerance for it.

[nikkicraft]

john p wrote:
"I've seen people (almost) spit on the ground and cross themselves when Nikki Craft's name is mentioned."

hey john, not sure about it yet but would you mind if i quote you on this? if it's okay how should it be credited? Is an English nudist alright? if not can you email me the proper credit? i don't know how to wite you in private email. I might use it on the front page of the Hall of Shame.

nikki craft
http://www.nudisthallofshame.info

[jon71]

Two things to mention. I would assume the spitting and crossing is just a metaphor. Secondly Nikki the problem with you is that you seem to relish painting with a broad brush. We all have seen in the news stories of pedophile priests. However most of us when meeting a priest do not assume that he is a monster pervert preying on kids. We keep our eyes open for red flags and use appropriate caution. Incidentally those rules do not apply exclusively to Catholic priests but accross the board. The same would be true in a naturist environement. We should watch out for bad apples without hysteria or any nonsense like that. Case in point would be the naturist summer camps for teens in Va. and elsewhere. I will guarantee you there is far less hanky panky in the naturist camps than the Christian camps I went to as a teen. I am kind of speaking from experience, although far less so than some could.

[John P]

You can have the quote, but please without my name or any identifying details. If anyone says what a dissident I am and adds "There's even a quote from him on Nikki Craft's board", I can point out that it only says how naturists instinctively regard her as an enemy! Although apparently Nikki Craft herself thinks that isn't much of a problem.

How about "A naturist who often attends social events"? That's reasonably accurate.

As people say, a certain amount of vigilance, good. Hysteria, bad.

[Caipora]

Nikki Craft said: the person who brings up the token case of the mcmartins is just using subterfuge.

Token? Two of the McMartins died before they were cleared; another spent years in jail. The prosecution cost fourteen million dollars, for a crime that never happened.

That's just one of the satanic ritual child abuse cases. There were dozens of inoocent people falsely accused nationwide in that witch hunt.

And that's not even getting into "recovered memory", the child-abuse witch hunt that followed satanic abuse in day-care centers.

I'm afraid I don't have the sort of detachment that lets me dismiss innocent people accused, imprisoned, and ruined as being somehow "token".

- Caipora

[soundman]

Nudist resorts are very guarded. Pedos would have a very hard time getting alone with kids to do their damage as apposed to churches, boy scouts, etc.

I also agree with Nikki. We have to be very aware that some pedos are attracted to nudist kids because of the nudity.

[tinner666]

Originally posted by soundman:
Nudist resorts are very guarded. Pedos would have a very hard time getting alone with kids to do their damage as apposed to churches, boy scouts, etc.

I also agree with Nikki. We have to be very aware that some pedos are attracted to nudist kids because of the nudity.

Well put. I never saw anybody ID'ing the visitors at a church social, or little league game.

[PascoDoug]

Originally posted by soundman:
I also agree with Nikki. We have to be very aware that some pedos are attracted to nudist kids because of the nudity.

Yes but they are really attracted to kids simply because they are kids. Merely looking at nude children doesn't hurt them any more than looking at them while they are clothed does.

As has been said, a pedophile can really only abuse children by putting themselves in circumstances where they will be alone with them. That's less likely to happen at a nudist resort, unless the pedo is (as is typical) a trusted family friend or a relative. If such is the case then nudity/nudism really isn't going to be a factor or increase the odds of abuse taking place anyway.

What it all really boils down to is that alert parents and informed/educated children are the best deterrant out there, whether in a nudist or textile environment.

[John P]

Earlier I mentioned Bill Peckenpaugh and Joseph Musco. In Peckenpaugh's case he's accused of molesting his adopted son. In Musco's case there doesn't seem to have been a real child involved at all--he's accused of crimes committed over the Internet where he dealt with a detective impersonating a child, and that's in spite of the fact that he not only attended a resort, but owned one. So yes, those cases support the idea that resorts are pretty safe, but children are vulnerable to the adults whom they trust.

[Naturist Mark]

Originally posted by John P:
Earlier I mentioned Bill Peckenpaugh and Joseph Musco. In Peckenpaugh's case he's accused of molesting his adopted son. In Musco's case there doesn't seem to have been a real child involved at all--he's accused of crimes committed over the Internet

So neither one has anything to do with preditors going to a nudist resort to prey on nudist children.

Why, that sounds just opposite from what we were being led to believe. Perhaps there is more information that we lack that shows nudism had a role.

-Mark

I played pool with a boy of about 8 or 9, and his parents both kept checking on him. Also, I was at the lake at Turtle Lake Resort feeding the fish and sharing my bread with a girl of about 12. Her parents were in a boat and rowed over and tried to get her to go with them, but she didn't want to go. I chatted a while with the parents, and hopefully they realized that I wasn't any threat to their daughter. However, I learned that day not to socially interact with other people's kids. People are too suspicious of single men. They (the children AND the single men) are watched too closely for anything to happen (not that I would EVER do anything to a child). I understand, though, that there have been times when a child was molested in a nudist resort, but such times are rare. We had someone in these forums who said she was.

[fredm74]

What if a child is molested or fondle by a married man? I get frustrated when the single men are the prime suspects for pedophilia. It's not right..........



Originally posted by Jon-Marc:
I played pool with a boy of about 8 or 9, and his parents both kept checking on him. Also, I was at the lake at Turtle Lake Resort feeding the fish and sharing my bread with a girl of about 12. Her parents were in a boat and rowed over and tried to get her to go with them, but she didn't want to go. I chatted a while with the parents, and hopefully they realized that I wasn't any threat to their daughter. However, I learned that day not to socially interact with other people's kids. People are too suspicious of single men. They (the children AND the single men) are watched too closely for anything to happen (not that I would EVER do anything to a child). I understand, though, that there have been times when a child was molested in a nudist resort, but such times are rare. We had someone in these forums who said she was.

[UpstateNYBill]

What if a child is molested or fondle by a married man? I get frustrated when the single men are the prime suspects for pedophilia. It's not right..........

Both married men and single men have charged with child sex crimes. Don't know the ratio at all. That Joe Musco that was charged operated a camp only a few miles from the camp I attend. He operated Bare Bones with his LTR (long term relationship) girlfriend. In AANR speak, he was not single. I met the guy. You would never have expected he was into that kind of trash. After he was charged, it was found out that he had a complaint filed against him for inappropaite behavior toward a student at a local school he substituted at.

In the past couple of years there also have been lots of women (usually teachers) who have been charged with child sex crimes. Parents should always have an eye on their kids no matter where they are. Whether at a church dinner, a nudist venue, whatever.

Do a google on the names of Nicki Craft's website. These cases really happened. She just didn't make up these cases and fictionalize them. Though some of the people she named were never convicted and apparently still active in nudism.

[Bob S.]

Doug:"Yes but they are really attracted to kids simply because they are kids. Merely looking at nude children doesn't hurt them any more than looking at them while they are clothed does."

Thank you Doug. That is what I have been saying. Nudity is not the attraction per se. The pedos' fantasies are what drives them. And they can get their jollies with children in their winter outfits or in their skimpy swimsuits.

And of course, the threat to children from strangers is seriously overrated. 80% of the pervs go after children who are either part of their family, have an authority role to the child, or are friends of the family. That leaves only 20% of the pervs who go after children whom they do not know. Now assuming 5% of the population are dangerous pervs, that leaves only 1% of the population who would be a threat to children.

And of those 1% who are a threat, most give out red flags way before they start to abuse. And they go after the vulnerable children.

Bill:"Do a google on the names of Nicki Craft's website. These cases really happened."

Yes, I believe that these cases really did happen. However, Nicki Craft is stating that there is a disproportionate number of pervs in nudism, which she cannot prove. Anyone can come up with a lot of news stories and claim a pattern that isn't there.

Bob S.

[charlieau]

Originally posted by barmonkey:
Has anyone seen this website?

http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/NudistHallofShame/

After reading through the articles, I'm still not going to have a problem taking my kids to a nudist resort. It's just like anywhere else you take your kids, you have to keep an eye on them. I'm sure that there's just as many pedophiles at the public swimming pools or any shopping mall. Clothing doesn't protect your kids from pedophiles.

There are plenty of places child sexual abuse occurs like churches and sporting teams. I very much doubt it goes on more in nudist resorts but no more than in other places. Generally in all these the sexual abusers know the child victims very well.

[Caipora]

"The smug mask of virtue triumphant could be almost as horrible as the face of wickedness revealed." – Terry Pratchett, Carpe Jugulum

I, too, have looked at Nikki Craft’s site, and find it to be rather nasty.

Three problems with the site stand out:
<UL TYPE=SQUARE>
<LI>People are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Nikki assumes that anyone accused is guilty – except for Nikki Craft.
<LI>There is a confusion between words and things, between rhetoric and reality, between labels and facts. Words are twisted to put all accusations in the worst possible light. Except accusations made against Nikki Craft, which are artfully minimized by the choice of soft words.
<LI>People who live in glass houses should be afraid of stone throwers. In times of witch hunts, if accusation is accepted as equivalent to conviction; if there is no line between suspicion and proof; then those who “look like they might be guilty” are extremely vulnerable. In the current climate of pedophilic hysteria, nudists are particularly vulnerable.
[/list]
I’ll expand on each of these items in turn.

1) People are innocent until proven guilty. “Proving innocence” is a difficult task. Certainly DNA testing has proved the innocence of many men accused of rape, but that only helps where there was a real crime. When dealing with the fantasy of a child, or a fantasy that policemen or social workers have projected onto children, there is no physical evidence at all.

Nikki’s site is full of men who have been merely accused, of charges that have been dropped, perhaps because there was no evidence to sustain them.

She says, in this thread, that among her aims is to go get national naturist organizations “... also to publicize arrests for aggressive sex crimes, trafficking in child pornography, etc, the same way major news papers do.”

When I was small, I learned that “everyone is doing it” is not an excuse for bad behavior. Major newspapers used to print the names of victims in rape cases. Did that make it right? When someone is accused, it's page 1; when charges are dropped or they are found innocent, it's page 34, if it makes the paper at all.

Ms. Craft blithely prints charges that have been dropped, and doesn’t check back to see if people who have been accused have later been found innocent. Perhaps she has limited time, but if so maybe she should devote a little more of it to not perpetuating false accusations against the innocent, even if that means she will have a little less time to ruin the reputations of those who have not yet had the opportunity to defend themselves.

Note as well that if police and prosecutors were reliable sources of information, we could dispense completely with defense lawyers and judges. A spectacular charge of child abuse is a good way for an ambitious policeman or prosecutor to get her name in the paper.

2) In the rather sexist phrasing of Samuel Johnson, “Words are daughters of earth, and things are the sons of Heaven.” Things are real, while words are merely interpretations. There’s an old riddle that says the same thing:
Q. How many legs does a dog have, if you call the tail a leg?
A. Four. Calling the tail a leg doesn’t make it one.

Nikki said that: “I was arrested numerous times for removing my shirt on state and federal beaches and would have classified myself as a shirtfree rights activist decades ago.” (this thread). She also says she is “an unrehabilitated multiple offender,” and claims she was arrested for “civil disobedience”. http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/Porn/silencing.html

Does anyone think that a man in blue ever told Nikki, “We’re taking you in for civil disobedience”, or “You’re arrested for violating statue 123, ‘Taking your shirt off?’”. No, she was almost certainly arrested for “indecent exposure”.

There’s a term for unrehabilitated multiple offenders for indecent exposure who are male. It’s “Registered Sex Offender” or even “Sexual Predator”. Ms. Craft is a fan of equal rights, and her site publicizes with equal emphasis arrests and convictions. Perhaps, as a gesture of moral consistency, she should voluntarily register.

What is sauce for the gander is sauce for the goose.

Nikki was arrested for a lot of things. If not book-burning, then at least magazine-ripping. (ibid) She spent three weeks in the slammer for ripping up three copies of Esquire magazine. She could of course have spent $11.00 to buy them first and been legally in the clear, but she did not. Somehow I cannot weep for the arrest of someone who clearly considers jail time to be cheap publicity for herself or her cause.

Now, let’s get back to Dr. Johnson. Was Nikki Craft engaged in indecent exposure or shirtfree rights? Civil disobedience or bookburning? Equal rights activist or sexual predator?

That’s all merely words. The facts are that she took her shirt off on the beach. She ripped up magazines, and all old magazines go to the landfill or recycling anyway. Those are things, facts, not words. That’s the difference Dr. Johnson spoke of.

But if it is pejorative to pick words to put her acts in the worst possible light, how is it all right for her to do that to those she accuses on her site? If it is bad to do it to her, how is it good when she does it to others?

She describes on her site one man as being accused of “144 counts of child sex abuse for possession of child pornography”. Perhaps the man had a gross of nasty pictures. Does that really mean he abused children twelve dozen times? Ms. Craft’s mentor and associate, Andrea Dworkin, had an ideology by which pornography was abuse of women. I don’t know if the idea was original to her, or merely adapted from those primitive tribes that hold that a picture captures part of the soul. Certainly, under that belief, every copy of a picture would constitute abuse. But it's a silly idea.

3) In times of witch hunts, people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

We are all familiar with the ruckus kicked up by the Virginia nudist youth leadership camp. The Virginia legislature, faced in the same summer by a state-sponsored 4H camp in which counselors placed bets on fistfights by children, and a private nudist youth camp, took immediate, bold and courageous action, passing a bill requiring parental presence at nudist youth camps.

One genuinely courageous posture of INA is included pictures of naked kids on the site. Most internet hosts won’t allow such pictures. They’re not illegal. But it’s “best to be safe.” And if no one allows such pictures, pretty soon people will think it’s because they’re illegal. And maybe soon after, they will be illegal.

And if pictures of naked kids are illegal, shouldn’t naked kids be illegal, too? How about exposing kids to naked adults? Wouldn’t it be safer to keep kids away from naturism altogether? Wouldn’t proposing a law like that generate favorable publicity before the next election?

Ms. Craft feels that the best way to fight the problem of pedophiles is to do so publicly. She has in the past taking a strong position on rape, including helping publicly post the names of men accused – but not convicted – of rape. Rape is, as Ms. Craft correctly points out, one of the most underreported of crimes. It is, however, also one of the crimes with the highest rate of innocents wrongly convicted, and of false accusations.

Would a web site listing women who have made false accusations of rape be a good idea? What is the test – if the man is acquitted, the woman's name is posted? I can see all sorts of problems with that, and imagine that Ms. Craft can see many more than I can.

Yes, it's a good idea for organized nudism to keep a list of undesireables. It's also a good idea for the list to be circulated privately, and not to the world or the news media.

In conclusion, then, I find Nikki’s site objectionable for the following reasons:
<UL TYPE=SQUARE>
<LI>She seems far more interested in accusations than in convictions, in making charges than in proving them. She doesn’t seem to consider than people accused are often innocent. Perhaps I’m being unjust, but she doesn’t seem to care.
<LI>She places more weight on rhetoric than on fact, and seems to think that if one applies the right words to something, it changes the reality.
<LI> The policy she advocates: “Let’s publicize all accusations against nudists” is not fair to those accused, and likely to harm the naturist movement as a whole. In the current climate of child-abuse hysteria, nudists are easy targets. Placing ammunition in the form of unproven accusations in the hands of politicians looking for an election-year issue, or providing sheriffs and prosecutors eager for publicity with easy targets, endangers the naturist movement.
[/list]
- Caipora

[nikkicraft]

I hope this post will come out ok in formatting. if not I apologize and will try to repost it later. nikki

I will only reproduce the parts of the previous post that are relevant
to my reply from the "smug masked" poster Caipora, some unidentified
individual from Brazil:


>Words are twisted

Projection. This is where you are going with your entire post.

>People are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Nikki assumes that
>anyone accused is guilty - except for Nikki Craft.

not true. I do a great deal of research on the predators who are
listed on my website and I'm skeptical anytime i read an article or
hear a lead in email and in fact i do not list many I hear about at
all because I don't have enough information.

>People who live in glass houses should be afraid of stone throwers. In
>times of witch hunts, if accusation is accepted as equivalent to
>conviction; if there is no line between suspicion and proof; then
>those who "look like they might be guilty" are extremely vulnerable.
>In the current climate of pedophilic hysteria, nudists are
>particularly vulnerable.

the largest portions of the Nudist Hall of Shame includes arrested
child molesters or child pornographers. All articles have been
published in a newspaper and printed with links to the original
source.

>Nikki's site is full of men who have been merely accused, of charges
>that have been dropped, perhaps because there was no evidence to
>sustain them.

If you have a complaint against this policy you need to register it
with all the major newspapers in the country who print the articles
originally, who often do not do follow ups from their original
articles. If you can document one such case that exists on my
website--with actual information instead of vague accusation-- then I
will be more than happy to update it. I do seek out updates on all
these cases and always appreciate it when nudists, some on this forum,
provide me with such information.

>She says, in this thread, that among her aims is to go get national
>naturist organizations "... also to publicize arrests for aggressive
>sex crimes, trafficking in child pornography, etc, the same way major
>news papers do."

>When I was small, I learned that "everyone is doing it" is not an
>excuse for bad behavior. Major newspapers used to print the names of
>victims in rape cases. Did that make it right? When someone is
>accused, it's page 1; when charges are dropped or they are found
>innocent, it's page 34, if it makes the paper at all.

victims of rape deserve protection whereas rapists and child predators
do not. To protect a few individuals who may or may not be accused
falsely you are advocating a limitation that would turn the concept of
free speech on it's head in this whole society and limit established
patterns employed by the media to provide information to the public.

>Ms. Craft blithely prints charges that have been dropped, and doesn't
>check back to see if people who have been accused have later been
>found innocent.

there are instances of multiple charges and multiple dropped charges.
I believe the public has the right to know this information. you
apparently don't. however the law backs me not your position in this
case.

>Perhaps she has limited time, but if so maybe she should devote a
>little more of it to not perpetuating false accusations against the
>innocent, even if that means she will have a little less time to ruin
>the reputations of those who have not yet had the opportunity to
>defend themselves.

As I said, speak with the major newspapers, because in most instances
i simply archive those article while expressing my own opinion about
the case, which I have the absolute protected right to do so under the
first amendment. When I violate that I'm more than sure some fellow
like you is going to come along and sue my ***.

>Note as well that if police and prosecutors were reliable sources of
>information, we could dispense completely with defense lawyers and
>judges. A spectacular charge of child abuse is a good way for an
>ambitious policeman or prosecutor to get her name in the paper.

Your bias makes it seem like you do not much believe in the massive
numbers of children being destroyed for their whole lives by child
sexual abuse and other forms of neglect.

>There's a term for unrehabilitated multiple offenders for indecent
>exposure who are male. It's "Registered Sex Offender" or even "Sexual
>Predator". Ms. Craft is a fan of equal rights, and her site publicizes
>with equal emphasis arrests and convictions. Perhaps, as a gesture of
>moral consistency, she should voluntarily register.

>What is sauce for the gander is sauce for the goose.

talk about reaching far to try to make a biased point? Challenging an
unequal law in public planned demonstrations and sticking around to
accept the consequences of your actions for what you believe in--which
is the agreed upon definition of civil disobedience--is far different
than ethically and legally than a man pulling his dick from his pants
on a walking path when a woman walks by and him slinking away in the
underbrush to leave her afraid to walk in deserted public areas again
for possibly a very long time.

Apparently you can't make distinctions, ethically and legally, to see
that your position would have every pro-nudity activist being forced
to register as a "sex offender". The way things are going you better
be careful not to give this right wing government any ideas with your
skewed and bizarre mind screwing ideas otherwise many others among you
will then be registered sex offenders for acts of obvious civil
disobedience.

>Nikki was arrested for a lot of things. If not book-burning, then at
>least magazine-ripping. (ibid)

yes it was obvious not book burning, nor was it censorship. I was
arrested for ripping up three copies of a magazine called "your wife
an owners manual" that might light of beating women and subjecting
them to sexual servitude and forced housework. I would rip them up
again, btw and I stayed in jail in Bellingham Washington for three
weeks for ripping up three magazines back in the early 1990s. It was
civil disobedience as much as pouring blood on a missile or banging a
hammer into it, which i would do as well.

>She spent three weeks in the slammer for ripping up three copies of
>Esquire magazine. She could of course have spent $11.00 to buy them
>first and been legally in the clear, but she did not. Somehow I cannot
>weep for the arrest of someone who clearly considers jail time to be
>cheap publicity for herself or her cause.

>Now, let's get back to Dr. Johnson. Was Nikki Craft engaged in
>indecent exposure or shirtfree rights? Civil disobedience or
>bookburning? Equal rights activist or sexual predator?

Civil disobedience. public political protest and ripping up three
copies of a magazine that prints hundreds of thousands of copies
throughout the world is not book burning or censorship. it's political
protest.

>That's all merely words. The facts are that she took her shirt off on
>the beach. She ripped up magazines, and all old magazines go to the
>landfill or recycling anyway. Those are things, facts, not words.
>That's the difference Dr. Johnson spoke of.

>But if it is pejorative to pick words to put her acts in the worst
>possible light, how is it all right for her to do that to those she
>accuses on her site? If it is bad to do it to her, how is it good when
>she does it to others?

>She describes on her site one man as being accused of "144 counts of
>child sex abuse for possession of child pornography".

I would imagine that is a quote from a newspaper article and not me,
but we don't know because you don't tell us information about the case
so we can look up the other particulars about what that man did or
didn't do. However even if the guy has 30 pictures of nudist child
pornography then parents in the movement need to know about him and
the law defends my right to tell them despite men who would censor the
website, like you.

>Perhaps the man had a gross of nasty pictures. Does that really mean
>he abused children twelve dozen times?

Since he has taken an otherwise wholesome activity and lifestyle it
means, whether he is a nudist or naturist, or not, and exploited the
children in it, as has the photographer and the distributor who have
all broken laws too btw, then he has abused nudists and the children
in the camps as well; and yes I mean every one of them.

>Ms. Craft feels that the best way to fight the problem of pedophiles
>is to do so publicly. She has in the past taking a strong position on
>rape, including helping publicly post the names of men accused - but
>not convicted - of rape. Rape is, as Ms. Craft correctly points out,
>one of the most underreported of crimes. It is, however, also one of
>the crimes with the highest rate of innocents wrongly convicted, and
>of false accusations.

>Would a web site listing women who have made false accusations of rape
>be a good idea? What is the test - if the man is acquitted, the
>woman's name is posted? I can see all sorts of problems with that, and
>imagine that Ms. Craft can see many more than I can.

I have in fact exposed one woman who filed false charges. However they
are minuscule in number in comparison the actual arrests and charges
and convictions, whereas you would imply they are the norm for men who
are acquitted, even though men are more frequently than not acquitted
due to technicalities in the law, not due to their proved or even
suspected innocence.

>Yes, it's a good idea for organized nudism to keep a list of
>undesireables. It's also a good idea for the list to be circulated
>privately, and not to the world or the news media.

In a society that preaches the first amendment like a religion,
regardless of how biased in enforcement and practice when it comes to
the powerless (as you are doing here), it is a fundamental right that
information is put out in the open--in the light of day--not passed
(as you would desire in this instance) privately between corrupt
leadership in the nudist/naturist movement who have kept this dirty
little secret buried for too many years. But instead put into the
hands of parents and those who are truly concerned about the safety of
children, and perhaps I am being unfair, but unlike you who stretches
too much to protect the perpetrator and not enough to protect those
who care about exposing them and the lie that child sexual abuse is
not any problem in the nudist and naturist environments.

>She seems far more interested in accusations than in convictions, in
>making charges than in proving them. She doesn't seem to consider than
>people accused are often innocent. Perhaps I'm being unjust, but she
>doesn't seem to care.

I've been putting up these names for over a decade and have never been
to court over one case and therefore I have solid evidence that I care
a great deal about the facts of the case.

>The policy she advocates: "Let's publicize all accusations against
>nudists" is not fair to those accused, and likely to harm the naturist
>movement as a whole. In the current climate of child-abuse hysteria,
>nudists are easy targets. Placing ammunition in the form of unproven
>accusations in the hands of politicians looking for an election-year
>issue, or providing sheriffs and prosecutors eager for publicity with
>easy targets, endangers the naturist movement.


At least I am not, so as to contort an utterly strange argument,
putting forth a position that would put, on a registered sex offender
list, every nudist/naturist activist who commits civil disobedience
using public nudity. You are doing that.


Nikki Craft
The Nudist Naturist Hall of Shame
http://www.nudisthallofshame.info

[nikkicraft]

I wrote:
"the largest portions of the Nudist Hall of Shame includes arrested child molesters or child pornographers. All articles have been published in a newspaper and printed with links to the original source."

It should have read:
the largest portions of the Nudist Hall of Shame includes arrested child molesters or child pornographers and most are directly from articles that have been published in a newspaper and printed with links to the original source.

nikki

[nacktman]

Pedophilia is a problem for society as a whole.

It is defect in the thought processes caused by whatever environmental, genetic, social, etc., (the factors are not truely known or studied to their fullest) a person has been exposed to.

Myself and others feel it is a problem that has not grown in proportion to the population, but that it is pretty constant, i.e., it is say 2% of the general population that have this defect.
2% of 100 is 2 whereas 2% of 1000 is 20, etc.

A larger population means larger numbers but the percentage remains pretty consistant. With ou