Puzzling Experience?

[whitestokes]

http://premium1.uploadit.org/whitestokes//legs.jpg Awhile back ago I had a puzzling experience, where I was visiting a naturist resort down here in Florida. It was one of those typical weekends, where the majority of the people there, was just hanging around by the pool and letting time slip away.
I was also just sitting back and watching people get in and out of the pool, when I over hear a conversation beside me. At first, my natural instinct was why are these two older women talking so loud, where as I can definitely over hear them. Until I grasp, what the topic of their conversation was about. I eventually realize they were talking about a young couple across the pool area, where the young lady of that couple, was sitting in such away where as her legs was ajar wide open.
For some reason or another, this young lady (somewhere in her mid-20's), really bother and disturb these two old women beside me. They just went on and on about this, where as I don't think anybody gave it much attention. Although, eventually the young couple went into water of the pool, but by then I have already tune out the conversation, that was going on beside me. Which was pretty much the end of it. So I throught.

Now at first, this experience really didn't bother me, but later on I started to think about it more and more. Trying to figure out, why in the world was them two old naturist ladies, by the that pool was so upset? It didn't make any sence to me? Considering, there were men sitting around there too, with their legs wide open and they didn't say a thing about that.
Then I started to realize, the ages of them two old ladies and that they probably been nudists, for many years. Furthermore, they probably believe in old fashion ladies etiquettes, where it is not proper.

So I decide to bring this puzzling experience, to the forum and find out what you the forum readers think about, this situation. <span class="ev_code_RED">Especially</span>, from the female members. Is there suppose to be some kind of modesty, for nudist?

whitestokes.

.

[whitestokes]

http://premium1.uploadit.org/whitestokes//legs.jpg Awhile back ago I had a puzzling experience, where I was visiting a naturist resort down here in Florida. It was one of those typical weekends, where the majority of the people there, was just hanging around by the pool and letting time slip away.
I was also just sitting back and watching people get in and out of the pool, when I over hear a conversation beside me. At first, my natural instinct was why are these two older women talking so loud, where as I can definitely over hear them. Until I grasp, what the topic of their conversation was about. I eventually realize they were talking about a young couple across the pool area, where the young lady of that couple, was sitting in such away where as her legs was ajar wide open.
For some reason or another, this young lady (somewhere in her mid-20's), really bother and disturb these two old women beside me. They just went on and on about this, where as I don't think anybody gave it much attention. Although, eventually the young couple went into water of the pool, but by then I have already tune out the conversation, that was going on beside me. Which was pretty much the end of it. So I throught.

Now at first, this experience really didn't bother me, but later on I started to think about it more and more. Trying to figure out, why in the world was them two old naturist ladies, by the that pool was so upset? It didn't make any sence to me? Considering, there were men sitting around there too, with their legs wide open and they didn't say a thing about that.
Then I started to realize, the ages of them two old ladies and that they probably been nudists, for many years. Furthermore, they probably believe in old fashion ladies etiquettes, where it is not proper.

So I decide to bring this puzzling experience, to the forum and find out what you the forum readers think about, this situation. <span class="ev_code_RED">Especially</span>, from the female members. Is there suppose to be some kind of modesty, for nudist?

whitestokes.

.

[MJ_KC]

These two women were being impolite to stare. They should have gone on about their own business instead of being busy bodies.

Overly prudish behavior by long time nudists has puzzled me for a long time as well.

[nacktman]

Whitestokes, you said you were in Florida and the two ladies were "older" ladies and that is the answer to your question.

While Florida is considered a Yankee state by most Southerners it is in the south and the code of proper modesty and decorum is expected to be followed by everyone especially the ladies even if they know nothing of the code. The older the generation the stricter the adherence to the code is required in their minds.

The unpardonable breech in proper modesty and decorum committed by the "younger" lady in your story was that she did not sit with her legs together if not crossed and the "older ladies would go on about it for days (literally). However it has nothing to do with any of the ladies being nudists, the young woman would have been the subject of discussion even wearing full formal attire, if she was noticed to sit and her ankles not be crossed.

As to the men sitting with their legs open, well they weren't even "seen" by the older ladies because it is allowed that a man may sit in just about any manner he chooses following the code ( I now its a double standard, but that is the way of it I'm afraid).

Before the questions: The code I am refering to is written in all those books on the bookstore shelf that have you sticking you pinkie out when drinking tea. It is just that in the South there are a lot more rules of the code that are unwritten and only being raised in the South in a native Southern family will you learn them all.

[whitestokes]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nacktman:
Whitestokes, you said you were in Florida and the two ladies were "older" ladies and that is the answer to your question.

While Florida is considered a Yankee state by most Southerners it is in the south and the code of proper modesty and decorum is expected to be followed by everyone especially the ladies even if they know nothing of the code. The older the generation the stricter the adherence to the code is required in their minds.

The unpardonable breech in proper modesty and decorum committed by the "younger" lady in your story was that she did not sit with her legs together if not crossed and the "older ladies would go on about it for days (literally). However it has nothing to do with any of the ladies being nudists, the young woman would have been the subject of discussion even wearing full formal attire, if she was noticed to sit and her ankles not be crossed.

As to the men sitting with their legs open, well they weren't even "seen" by the older ladies because it is allowed that a man may sit in just about any manner he chooses following the code ( I now its a double standard, but that is the way of it I'm afraid).

Before the questions: The code I am refering to is written in all those books on the bookstore shelf that have you sticking you pinkie out when drinking tea. It is just that in the South there are a lot more rules of the code that are unwritten and only being raised in the South in a native Southern family will you learn them all. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://premium1.uploadit.org/whitestokes//BAR.JPG

That's what I thought. I appreciate that comment, <span class="ev_code_RED">nacktman</span>. Although, I came under the assumption that, why would any true nudist/naturists care about that kind of thing. Due to the fact, that naturism teaches body acceptance, where as the genitals are just another body part.

http://premium1.uploadit.org/whitestokes//legs1.jpg Now, the two ladies was pretty old (maybe in their 60's or 70's), but you would think that they would understand that reproductive organs, on a female or not is just the same as a hand, arm, leg or face. So why should that young lady, cross her legs.


whitestokes.



.

[FireProf]

A simular topic was discussed a while back regarding etiquette while sitting, bending over, lying on lounges, etc.

We, my wife and I, don't see anything wrong with the way the woman is sitting in the picture. We don't see anything wrong with a woman sitting, laying or bending in anyway that makes her feel comfortable.

My wife would try and get out of her lounge chair, or her low beach chair....in a "lady like" fashion and I could see that it was difficult for her and she was probably going to wrench her back trying to do this. I explained to her that she should just get out of the chair or lounge just as if she had clothes or a bathing suit on and not worry about what some is going to see........"they've already seen it!"

She has since layed out, sat and falling asleep with her legs spread. She's comfortable that way and if it bothers someone, then they are probably in the wrong place or have some old fashion ideas that conflict with the philosophy.

http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[nacktman]

Whitestokes, I don't think it was a question of body acceptence or the exposure of female genitalia that got "under the skin" of the older ladies it was just that the younger lady did not conform to the code of proper decorum for a lady.
It is ingrained into the psyche of Southerners to follow the code, but with each younger generation it is getting more relaxed.
Two ladies 60 yrs old or better are from the last generation of the truly "hardcore" adherents to the code and in their mind the young lady should cross her legs at all times when seated plain and simple no other thought would enter their minds.
Fire is right, following proper decorum can be unhealthy for a lady and sprains and strains in the lower back can happen when trying to do things "lady Like" and this is why the code is less strict in younger generations...just don't tell Emily Post.

[naturalmanwa]

I hope the ladies have something else to do next time they visit the place! I am 63 but don't consider myself "old", as I try to keep up with current events and enjoy working on cars, trucks, and bikes (I'm an old hot rodder and racer) and believe you are only as old as you feel! Maybe the ladies need to wake up and see they are in the 21st century!

[Nudony]

Nacktman summed it up pretty nicely. I have also encountered that "old school" belief in the past. Older (and sometimes not so old) ladies moving around as if there was an invisible string tying their knees together. Some go to extremes: I once noticed a woman sitting in front of me who tried to get up, turn around and bend over to pick something out of her bag; all the while trying to make sure she wasn't showing "too much". She nearly lost her balance and toppled over her lounge chair. The funny thing: if she had just gotten up and did what she had to do in one shift move, she wouldn't have caught my attention to begin with. This etiquette is so deeply ingrained in some women that they do not realize the behavior is actually pretty "anti-body acceptance."

I got caught up in it myself when I first started going to the resort, since I was surrounded by older southern nudists who practiced that etiquette, and I thought it was part of the nudist etiquette. So I would get worried when my then "carefree" wife would often just casually bend over to look through a bag or let one of her legs hang on the side of the lounge chair while relaxing. Until I ultimately realized that this particular etiquette had nothing to do with nudism, and is actually pretty silly, IMHO.

[MJ_KC]

I think it is kind of funny that these older women are actually drawing attention to themselves by their obvious attempts to not show themselves too much. It would be so much better if they just acted naturally, then people might not even notice them.

[whitestokes]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nacktman:
Whitestokes, I don't think it was a question of body acceptence or the exposure of female genitalia that got "under the skin" of the older ladies it was just that the younger lady did not conform to the code of proper decorum for a lady.
It is ingrained into the psyche of Southerners to follow the code, but with each younger generation it is getting more relaxed.
Two ladies 60 yrs old or better are from the last generation of the truly "hardcore" adherents to the code and in their mind the young lady should cross her legs at all times when seated plain and simple no other thought would enter their minds.
Fire is right, following proper decorum can be unhealthy for a lady and sprains and strains in the lower back can happen when trying to do things "lady Like" and this is why the code is less strict in younger generations...just don't tell Emily Post. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://premium1.uploadit.org/whitestokes//BAR.JPG
Well, you could be right about that <span class="ev_code_RED">nacktman</span>, but I do remember one of them two old naturist ladies saying: <span class="ev_code_GREEN">"Look at her, she don't have to show all of her stuff, to everybody here."</span> Now I am pretty sure that this stuff, this old lady was talking about was that girl private parts.
So, this lead me to believe that body acceptance or to much exposure from that young lady genitalia, did have some factor. Maybe not all, but by them saying: <span class="ev_code_GREEN">"Her stuff"</span> is a dead give away. Although, that southern proper decorum was involve as well.


whitestokes.



.

[nacktman]

Whitestokes, I have heard the "same" discussion several times and the words "showing her stuff, herself, everything, etc., " always come up but none of these incidents were in a nudist environment.
In fact the closest any came was at a church softball game and one of the players were her pants a wee bit tight and the conversations were:
Male---"wonder if she is wearing underwear"
Female--"look at her showing herself like that"
But I have heard the same conversations at Formal Balls as well.

Nudony is right the whole code is a bit silly and that is another reason it is losing favor among younger generations. Personally I would like to see a resurgence in the politeness and compassionate parts of the "code", but even as one who grew up with the full code I feel most of it is silly to say the least and have no problem with how someone chooses to sit.

Of course the two ladies talking were in breech of the code as well...no gossiping...so who is in greater violation, the sitter or the talkers?
And when all is said and done, "Just what does any of this have to do with the price of tea in China, anyway?", is what I think. People are human and humans are not the brightest sometimes, there all a lot more things in life than worrying about how someone sits.

[whitestokes]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nudony:
Nacktman summed it up pretty nicely. I have also encountered that "old school" belief in the past. Older (and sometimes not so old) ladies moving around as if there was an invisible string tying their knees together. Some go to extremes: I once noticed a woman sitting in front of me who tried to get up, turn around and bend over to pick something out of her bag; all the while trying to make sure she wasn't showing "too much". She nearly lost her balance and toppled over her lounge chair. The funny thing: if she had just gotten up and did what she had to do in one shift move, she wouldn't have caught my attention to begin with. This etiquette is so deeply ingrained in some women that they do not realize the behavior is actually pretty "anti-body acceptance."

I got caught up in it myself when I first started going to the resort, since I was surrounded by older southern nudists who practiced that etiquette, and I thought it was part of the nudist etiquette. So I would get worried when my then "carefree" wife would often just casually bend over to look through a bag or let one of her legs hang on the side of the lounge chair while relaxing. Until I ultimately realized that this particular etiquette had nothing to do with nudism, and is actually pretty silly, IMHO. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://premium1.uploadit.org/whitestokes//BAR.JPG
Hearing you mention your nudist experience, with this older southern etiquettes or proper southern decorums, <span class="ev_code_RED">Nudony</span>. I guess you can pretty much understand my situation, that I witness down here in Florida.
Although, I do have to agree with <span class="ev_code_RED">Nacktman</span> as well, that I too was raised around that code of etiquettes. Where as, I grew up watching my two sisters being bred in this southern proper decorum, so the end product of both of them will turn out to be southern proper ladies. Although, once I adopted naturism and the concepts behind it, that old code I grew up with, really felt invalid to the ideas of Body Acceptance.

The funny thing about all of this, Florida is one of the biggest States for nude recreation, especially with all of it's narurist clubs or resorts and also for the large memeberships within them. Which really makes me wonder to know, how many Floridian naturist females (young and old), who claim to really practice in body acceptance, but also believe in the old southern style proper etiquette decorum? Where as they are moving around like the woman trying to stand up that <span class="ev_code_RED">Nudony</span> pointed out.
So once again you are absolutely right <span class="ev_code_RED">Nacktman</span>, where as it would be nice to see a resurgence in the politeness and compassionate parts of it, but not to the extent of body acceptance ideas.

I just wish one day our southern values didn't conflict, where our female naturists companion can feel more comfortable and stop:
Hearing no evil, Speaking no evil and seeing no evil!
http://premium1.uploadit.org/whitestokes//CFF1.JPG


Especially, on over exposure of showing to much, of one's private parts.
http://premium1.uploadit.org/whitestokes//CFF.JPG

whitestokes.



.

[shãybare]

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/cool4.gif
The code is definitely outdated. Unfortunately it will still live on even after these two ladies have gone. As we grow older and more set in our ways, we (except me, of course) become more prudish and judgemental. I could care less how men or women sit or bend except if they bend with their behind in my face. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/no.gif

[nacktman]

Shaybare one could interpet the bent behind in the face as an act of submission to the more dominate and higher in the social order as is done in the natural world by most social animals as a way of knowing who the bendee is and where they belonged in the social order. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/beam.gif

But with humans being, well human, there wouldn't be very much bending going on if that would be the case.

[Silverback]

Some time back there was a thread on Hippy Hollow in/near Austin Texas and a private web site about the Hollow came up. One of the complaints about the Hippy Hollow site was that the Gallery contained photographs similar to the ones talked about here plus some artistic art work on some of the people on the banner. Near of which I found offensive, but then I am in the oil patch too. All the links referring to the web site were removed by a moderator, so I assumed that either the photos or the art work was offensive to nudist. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/confused.gif

[Nudony]

I take it you are talking about pics rather than an actual person at a resort or beach. I would have to personally agree that if the pic is a purposely posed "spread-eagle", "knees-to-shoulders" shot, where the privates are the focal point of the pic, then the pic could be considered in bad taste. But other than that, the problem is with the viewer's interpretation, not the pic or the model.

[nudeinfl]

Envy can be a powerful thing. Why these women chose to belittle the younger couple is anyones guess.

However, I once lived in a condo here in Florida in my 20s where many of the older women gathered by the pool and gossiped most of the day. This wasnt a nudist facility, just a regular old Florida condominium complex. Some people simply have to make themselves feel better by putting others down. In my understanding, this goes a bit against what we as nudists promote (acceptance).

As for my opinion on the decorum, I feel that there is nothing wrong with how the girl was sitting. Acceptance of the body is key and sitting in a "less than polite" manner is all part of the natural body.

[Jackie]

Hi All,

I really don't care which way I sit. If my legs are apart so what! These women would probably complain if an uncut guy suddenly pulled back his forskin to expose the tip of his penis! I have seen a few guys do that to get more sun exposure and dry things out after a swim. I see nothing wrong with that.

Love Jackie

[carbuff]

I dont see aproblem withit as long as they are not doing to draw attentiontothemselves. Hi Jackie good to see you havent seen you onthe board in ages .

[shãybare]

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/cool4.gif
Yes, it is very good to hear from you again, Jackie. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/happy.gif Were you on Winter Break?

I am a very accepting, tolerant person. What I meant about the behind in my face is when it is in my own 'personal space', within a foot or so. I don't like that.

I have no problem with the way men or women sit stand or stoop. The acceptance of all parts of the body is appropriate as long as nothing is being done to intentionally draw attention to the 'sexual organs(?)'.

[whitestokes]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jackie:
Hi All,

I really don't care which way I sit. If my legs are apart so what! These women would probably complain if an uncut guy suddenly pulled back his forskin to expose the tip of his penis! I have seen a few guys do that to get more sun exposure and dry things out after a swim. I see nothing wrong with that.

Love Jackie </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


http://premium1.uploadit.org/whitestokes//CFF3.JPG http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/applause.gif
Thanks for that comment, <span class="ev_code_RED">Jackie</span>. It's nice to have a female point of view, on this kind of situation. Although, I havn't seen anything like what you have describe, about men issues with penis forskin. Where as, if I did witness it I don't think it should offend me at all, and that's for two reasons.

1.) A definitely a health reason, in keeping it clean after coming out the water.

2.) What I have been saying all alone, <span class="ev_code_RED">Body Acceptance</span>.

So like you <span class="ev_code_RED">Jackie</span>, I don't really care how any woman, man or child sit, stand and bend over. It have never been my concern, because it will defeat the purpose of body acceptance. Where as, it is surpposes to teach us, that the private parts is just a natural part of the human body and in social nude recreation it's just like a leg, foot, arm or hand. Nothing special at all.
So in conclusion, I usually sit in the way that feels comfortable to me.

whitestokes.


.

[Naturist4Ever]

Whitestokes, the discussion was never really about "how someone sits", but the issue of the exposure of genitals in a way that some - for good or bad - may find offending.
I guess it is not different than erections. Some do not mind, many do. That issue isn't going to be settled soon either. Going back to your original post and the image in the original post, some will think the photocomposition is just a little too obvious. Even for nudists. Maybe that "lady" in the conversation was deliberately exposing her vagina in a way that isn't any different than waiving an erection.
We will not know and it doesn't matter really. It is just a matter of being considerate of the fact that sexuality and nudism is still a controversial subject....

[nacktman]

Me thinks tis much ado about nothing.

The same 'situation' as the lady sitting with her legs "ajar wide open" can and does occur in other cultures around the globe, and believe it or not it is not associated with sexuality at all.
It is not even noticed as any different than when she were to sit with her legs together, now if she put her hand on her knee, well... http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/freak.gif

[MJ_KC]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nacktman:
Me thinks tis much ado about nothing.

The same 'situation' as the lady sitting with her legs "ajar wide open" can and does occur in other cultures around the globe, and believe it or not it is not associated with sexuality at all.
It is not even noticed as any different than when she were to sit with her legs together, now if she put her hand on her knee, well... http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/freak.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I agree that there is still a great deal of puritanism in the attitudes of a lot of nudists.

It makes me wonder why they think that clothed people would ever accept our nudity when they themselves exhibit these prudish attitudes. If we can't get past this type of attitude, it is clear that our way of life is never going to gain wide acceptance.

[whitestokes]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Naturist4Ever:
Whitestokes, the discussion was never really about "how someone sits", but the issue of the exposure of genitals in a way that some - for good or bad - may find offending.
I guess it is not different than erections. Some do not mind, many do. That issue isn't going to be settled soon either. Going back to your original post and the image in the original post, some will think the photocomposition is just a little too obvious. Even for nudists. Maybe that "lady" in the conversation was deliberately exposing her vagina in a way that isn't any different than waiving an erection.
We will not know and it doesn't matter really. It is just a matter of being considerate of the fact that sexuality and nudism is still a controversial subject.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://premium1.uploadit.org/whitestokes//CFF5.JPG <span class="ev_code_RED">Naturist4Ever</span>, if you pick up from me that my main concern was how this young lady was sitting only. Well then, you are definitely wrong on that note!
If you could please go back to couple of my reply comments in this topic, you will see that I have already mention to <span class="ev_code_RED">Nacktman</span>, about what I think the real issue was with these two older naturist ladies. Especially, by one of them mentioning that this young woman was showing to much of her stuff. So please read the entire topic <span class="ev_code_RED">Naturist4Ever</span>

Although, if this young lady was deliberately doing this on purpose. I couldn't tell, because as far as I can remember after this young couple got out of the pool and went back to their pool side seats, she didn't draw to much attention after that. So like you <span class="ev_code_RED">Naturist4Ever</span>, I too feel that we will probably ever know and you are right, what does it really matter.
http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/applause.gif
Anyway, I must agree with <span class="ev_code_RED">Nacktman</span> once again, because there are a lot of cultures and other customs around the world, that will view this situation as nothing. Where as, in naturism what sense does it makes to go completely nude in mix company and then turn around and start hiding certain body parts.

whitestokes.



.

[ncnudlady]

I have to put in another woman's two cents here, I agree with Jackie and I don't care how I or any other person sits as long as they are not sitting on me.

Whitestokes you are right, I think nacktman is on the ball on this one, I too grow up with that "damned" code and took me years to get it out of my head about "that invisible thread that tied my knees together must not be allowed to break".

[Nudony]

I may be off-base, but I think two issue are being rolled into one here. Exhibitionism is exhibitionism, be it male or female. Two years ago at Sandy Hook, there was a woman sitting a few feet away from me who remained in "eagle-position" the whole time she was there; not just that, but her actions as a whole clearly indicated that she wanted to be noticed. Even I found her behavior offensive; and she was eventually thrown off the beach when she ultimately went too far.

We can't put someone who is just trying to relax and be comfortable on the same level; it's not fair to the person and is actually pretty "anti-body acceptance" IMHO. And being able to tell the difference between someone who is just being practical and someone seeking attention is not really that difficult.

As far as pictures, we can never be sure of the true intent behind the pose. It's too difficult to draw a conclusion based on that medium.

[tinner666]

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/happy.gif I've seen quite a few wide open poses by men and women. I've sat that way. Reason; We were all trying to tan "difficult to tan" areas. Certain areas of the body just don't get much sunlight without a conscious effort. Just my 2-cents worth. Looking around the pool area with that in mind, you might be suprised at the positions assumed by sun worshipers.
http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/happy.gif Of course, it may not be the only reason for the pose, but I feel it's the most prevalent one.

[Petrus]

I cannot see anything wrong in the slightest if a woman shows her vulva whether by accident or deliberate, as long as she is not behaving in an offensive manner. Why shouldn’t she be proud of her body? Would it be considered indecent to grasp your hands behind your head and show your armpits? I am annoyed if somebody blows smoke towards me or chews gum near me!

[nacktman]

Ok, so we've all seen 'exposed poses'.
The only one I can recall in a nudist environment is the one where I was playing horseshoes in a foursome and the lone lady playing in our game just bent from the waist and picked up her horseshoes and 'exposed' herself each time.
She didn't do so just to 'expose' herself, she did it to pick up her horseshoes just as we fellows did.
The only reason I remember it at all after all these years is this thread and the fact that my team was winning but her team came from behind to win and we were knocked out of the tournament because they won.

Again, big deal. I think tinner you have a point there, I have a friend that lays on the slope around the lake here facing downward on her back quite often and her reason is to "Get a tan on the underside of my ****..." to quote her.

[missouriboy]

Gee, I wonder what the cyber-censor blipped out this time! Could it be that word that means "small bird"? The one used as slang for "teats"? http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/rolleyes2.gif

[NudistGuy47]

I am coming in on the side of accepting how people sit, lay,or stoop. If it is comfortable and not intentionally drawing attention to the sexual organs, then is okay with me. Getting sun to that last bit of skin can take some contortions!

[missCarol]

Sit how you want to. If someone has a problem with it, it is their problem, not yours.
Fretting about things like this is what kills people, strokes are not for the squemish.

[whitestokes]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nudony:
I may be off-base, but I think two issue are being rolled into one here. Exhibitionism is exhibitionism, be it male or female. Two years ago at Sandy Hook, there was a woman sitting a few feet away from me who remained in "eagle-position" the whole time she was there; not just that, but her actions as a whole clearly indicated that she wanted to be noticed. Even I found her behavior offensive; and she was eventually thrown off the beach when she ultimately went too far.

We can't put someone who is just trying to relax and be comfortable on the same level; it's not fair to the person and is actually pretty "anti-body acceptance" IMHO. And being able to tell the difference between someone who is just being practical and someone seeking attention is not really that difficult.

As far as pictures, we can never be sure of the true intent behind the pose. It's too difficult to draw a conclusion based on that medium. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://premium1.uploadit.org/whitestokes//CFF6.JPG I am sorry, you had to deal with that kind of situation, at Sandy Hook <span class="ev_code_RED">Nudony</span>. In your case that was definitely exhibitionism, as well very bad behavior for a naturist settling, but in my situation that I witness down here in Florida, it was more like this young girl was trying to be comfortable and relax.
As far as I can remember the only thing this girl seem to care about, was spending some quality time with her sufficient other, by the pool side. Although, I must add that this young lady seem to be very practical in the way she was position, because even though her legs was ajar wide open, where you could clearly see her private parts. She did so, because of the card game, she and her companion was playing and she was basically lying her deck of cards on the pool chair, between her wide open legs.

So, unless I was just born yesterday, I pretty much think that was a practical position for this girl.

whitestokes.



.

[Nudony]

Actually WS, my post was in response to Naturist4ever's input about the fine line between personal comfort and practicality and exhibitionism. I was pretty much trusting your judgement that the lady you are talking about was just being practical.

So she was playing a game of cards? That's no different from the situation Nacktman described with the horseshoe game, the game of Twister depicted below or any physical activity done nude. But there are indeed people who still frown upon seeing that...

[Sandi]

I wouldn't care how I sat either. If I go nude somewhere then I am going to move around and sit just the same way I do if I have clothes on. If I go nude people are going to see my vagina, I have absolutely no problem with, if I sit with my legs open they will see a bit more of my vagina, so what! I'm a nudist. I have no problem with men spreading their legs either!

[tinner666]

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/happy.gif Spoken like a true nudist, Sandi. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/happy.gif

[DoctorSurferDude]

Well.... there is overlap. I've seen ladies sitting that way obviously on purpose to attract attention, but I've seen far more ladies who were just going about their own business and simply in a position of comfort.

I think it's important to be comfortable. And it is also important to consider the comfort of those around us.

If our actions make somebody around us uncomfortable, we should taylor them, that's just being polite.

If somebody is judging somebody else's actions without knowing them or their motivations, they should stop that, it's unfair and immature behavior.

May the token of peace be awarded to the kindest heart http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/wiseguy.gif

[Naturist4Ever]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Sandi:
I wouldn't care how I sat either. (...) I'm a nudist. I have no problem with men spreading their legs either! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of course! On the otherhand, if you were to do so in an obvious and on purpose way it isn't different than for men going around with an erection. And while some may not mind at all, some do. We can argue endlessly whether going around with an erection is simply natural or a display of uncontrolled sexual motives, point is some people - a majority in fact - do mind.

Is it just "their" problem? Maybe, maybe not.

Whitestokes: I didn't take the exaxt words of your 1st post as a reference, afaik it could just a story. (that's the way it reads!!). That is why I said that the subject isn't necessarily exactly that what youd described in your post (there could the 1000's of variatians on the theme), but the issue of genital exposure. There is a fine line between the trivial and the just-a-bit-too obvious (?)

[chadnude]

WOW I love this forum.
AS many have said, it doesnt really matter how you sit, stand lay as long as the personal space- unless that extends to visual personal space also - is OK.
The "old ladies" in the story should grow up maybe.

[shãybare]

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/cool4.gif
I find it amazing that some people seem to have no control over their eyes. Their eyes seem to roam until they see something they find offensive and then their eyes become set on the offensive object and the owner of the eyes can't get them to move somewhere else.

Instead of the eyes just moving on to other things so the owner of the eyes can enjoy their visit, the eyes insist on staying fixed to the offensive sight so the whole experience is ruined for the owner. How Sad!

Perhaps the owners of these eyes should go to an Optometrist? Or better yet, a Psychologist?

[whitestokes]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DoctorSurferDude:
Well.... there is overlap. I've seen ladies sitting that way obviously on purpose to attract attention, but I've seen far more ladies who were just going about their own business and simply in a position of comfort.

I think it's important to be comfortable. And it is also important to consider the comfort of those around us.

If our actions make somebody around us uncomfortable, we should taylor them, that's just being polite.

If somebody is judging somebody else's actions without knowing them or their motivations, they should stop that, it's unfair and immature behavior.

May the token of peace be awarded to the kindest heart http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/wiseguy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://premium1.uploadit.org/whitestokes//CFF8.JPG http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/applause.gif
<span class="ev_code_RED">I can always count on you, to tell it like it is</span> Doc<span class="ev_code_RED">. I appreciate the comment, like always and I also definitely agree.</span>



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Naturist4Ever:
Whitestokes: I didn't take the exaxt words of your 1st post as a reference, afaik it could just a story. (that's the way it reads!!). That is why I said that the subject isn't necessarily exactly that what youd described in your post (there could the 1000's of variatians on the theme), but the issue of genital exposure. There is a fine line between the trivial and the just-a-bit-too obvious (?) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/confused.gif
Also <span class="ev_code_RED">Naturist4Ever</span>, please don't get me wrong about this, but can you tell me again what you are talk about. I am only picking up bits and pieces, of what you are trying to explain to me. I get the end, but I am sorry to say that I don't really understand the first part, because of certain words.

I would love to hear what you think?

whitestokes



.

And then there are people who take advantage of women in an innocent natural position and use the photo in a way that it was not meant to be used.

[Rabid_Clam]

As to the eyes roaming to the offensive and remaining fixed there on, just look at the news. There is much good that happens but seldom does the news report that yet they focus deeply on that which is bad.

Good must be boring. Look at any movie for example. In almost every movie of any kind in any setting there is this basic format: Good person arrives, gets in a fix, life is threatened or taken, and by the skin of the good person's teeth s/he escapes/wins.

Is always the battle between good and bad, yet the bad gets the vast majority of attention always. Gets old doesn't it !

[riptidenj]

Clothes free means clothes free, curious to know if any of the ladies find any of the mens postures offensive. Again, some people have nothing better to do than than to belittle others, they only feel good when they find someone they feel superior to.

[whitestokes]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cyndiannaked:
And then there are people who take advantage of women in an innocent natural position and use the photo in a way that it was not meant to be used. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://premium1.uploadit.org/whitestokes//CFF11.JPG OK! This is the person I wanted to comment on this subject. Thanks <span class="ev_code_RED">Cyndiannaked</span> and what took you so long. Although, now that you here, I have question about that comment you made? <span class="ev_code_BLUE">Do you think this could apply to men, as well? </span> Can someone take advantage of an innocent natural position of men too or do you feel this applies to women and sad to say children as well?

whitestokes.



.

[Naturist4Ever]

(images below, left: whitestokes, right: inf guide).

Whitestokes (and shaybare for that matter), if I look at the two images below do I simply see the same?, or am I the only one to have that (faint) impression the left image is nothing else than a sneaky voyeurpic (of which it is not clear if the person concerned actually has given her permission...), whereas the right is simply someone enjoying the nudelife in the sameway as any onlooker (it is the coverimage of the 2006 INF guide).

http://premium1.uploadit.org/whitestokes//CFF8.JPG
http://82.165.40.172:81/inf/webinf.nsf/2e3eb56fe4530cb4c1256d69002436ef/ce2bc2e1dd67778dc12570ed0077b4d4/content/0.188?OpenElement&FieldElemFormat=jpg

[naturalmanwa]

I see nothing wrong with any of the photos shown here!

[EricNY]

Personally I like the photo on the right better, because her face is the focal point of the picture. No explanation needed for the photo on the left.

[miracleman]

Am i wrong to believe that as nudists we believe in total body freedom?Doesnt that also mean we can sunbathe ,etc, in any body position?If anyone finds someone looks 'offensive' because they have their legs apart then why even be a nudist? Why not just look the other way? No one forces them to look do they? One girl I knew very well from my club once said to me she comfortable sunning that way plus you do need to get into different positions to keep the tan even.She said as a female she had no problems whatsoever with guys doing likewise in a natural manner.To someone who is 'anti'...does that mean the vagina is 'ugly,'offensive',never to be shown? Why? I just think Gods creation cannot be called 'offensive'!I agree with those of you who have stated like....we are naked....we sunbathe ,relax ,just naturally how we feel.

[EricNY]

Not totally talking about the poeple...talking about the pictures.

[Tara]

Whitestokes,

I would love to hear the comments those two ladies would have if they were watching a nude yoga class http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/beam.gif They would see some quite interesting exposure angles!

I too don't care how anyone sits, how can you logically be modest about nudity? Sometimes you just need to stretch or seperate your legs, it should be no different than doing the same with your arms. It's about being comfortable while soaking up the sun http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/happy.gif

[Nudony]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cyndiannaked:
And then there are people who take advantage of women in an innocent natural position and use the photo in a way that it was not meant to be used. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

She didn't elaborate, but I assume Cyndiann was actually talking about "voyeur pics": when someone with a cam, usually at a beach, sits behind unsuspecting women laying comfortably, takes snapshots of their crotch and then posts them on the internet.

As I stated in a previous post, posed pics are a bit of a separate topic. What was the photographer, or the model thinking? Was it meant for the pubes to be the focal point of the picture, or did it just happen to be the pose the model was most comfortable and natural with? Was the picture taken by a nudist for a nudist publication, or for some other purpose? Actually pretty hard to make a determination of the true purpose behind the pic or the pose.

[nacktman]

Just a question here, but why did a discussion on the position of one that is seated and the reaction of others to that position become a discussion of photographs and what is and is not 'appropriate' in them?

If I am not mistaken the original query also included the question 'If we as nudist promote body acceptance, then that body's parts be accepted and should not be 'hidden' for fear of 'exposing' them (it goes with the territory when nude the body's 'parts' are 'exposed'), right?

While deliberate 'exposure' to entice, encite, or an otherwise call for illicit purposes can and should be frowned upon at the very least, just going about any activity as one would do clothed or nude should be of no concern to nudists as it should not be to non-nudists as well.

Photographs can be used and misused by anyone. I did not find any photograph posted to this thread out of line as far as the photograph itself is concerned. Context is the key: all of the photographs and none of the photographs could be seen as 'pornographic'.

BTW just how can a photograph be 'pornographic' anyway? 'Pornogaphy' is an invented word invented for the title by the publishers of the 19th century book of collected poems and short stories by London's prostitutes, using the Latin for the doorway in which Rome's lower class ladies of the evening conducted business and the Greek word for writing and smashing them together and viola...Pornicus and Graphica became Pronography.

[Fresh Air]

I think this is another one of those discression things. It is not the position, action or the view, it is always the intention. Essentially there is nothing wrong with a normal position if the intentions are innocent. Not everyone has the intention of carrying on in an innocent way. For example, say you have an itch in your genital area. If you scratch it, your touching yourself in public. But, nobody in the right mind will accuse you of touching yourself inappropirately.

More than half of human communication is nonverbal. Sometimes nonverbal cues are misinterpreted. Usually they are not.

Is this picture questionable?
http://www.aafp.org/afp/990315ap/1547_f8.jpg

[FireProf]

Is this picture out of a new anatomy text? I was just wondering cuz this female has no pubic hair!! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/wiseguy.gif

Sorry, just a little humor! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/wink3.gif

[FireProf]

http://premium1.uploadit.org/whitestokes//CFF8.JPG

I understand what some of you are saying about the difference between these two pictures, but here's another spin. Take is woman's postion in this picture, it also depicts a position that my wife routinely falls asleep in (usually with her head on a pillow or resting on her folded arm. So.....if at the beach, a club or a resort, should she choose another postion or that of comfort? http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/cool4.gif

[miracleman]

Right On Fireprof! I sleep exactly the same way!Isnt it just natural if its all done while being our innocent selves? I mean if a person was behaving in a 'staged' sort of manner...then that would not be appropriate behavior.Maybe its not too disimilar to the never -ending forum comments on erections...i.e .its ok if they just happen 'naturally'and not from 'self induced manual means'! Yikes!!! Where'd I get that terminology from??? Thats it....im heading back outside for some more sun!

[Nudony]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I would love to hear the comments those two ladies would have if they were watching a nude yoga class They would see some quite interesting exposure angles! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No doubt about it. I think free Yoga classes at resorts would force a lot of people out of that old mindset of what "proper" body posture is supposed to be.

I think we have all pretty much agreed that a woman should be able to sit any way she deems comfortable or convenient. But the reality is, among older nudists and some circles, that "labia-phobia" is alive and well. I also believe many women would like to not have to care how they sit, but are afraid to send a "wrong" signal. Here's the thing: let's say there are 10 women sitting around a pool; just one is sitting without her knees touching each other. There is a chance people "will talk" about it. Now, let's turn it around and say just one is sitting "conservatively." There is now very little chance anyone is going to "talk." With the expansion of the smooth trend, which makes "hiding" the vagina nearly impossible, and younger nudists, who don't want to have to worry about "who sees what", we are already progressively moving away from that old mindset. Those who still have an issue with it will eventually and ultimately find themselves in the minority.

[ncnudlady]

Ok, why the harping on photographs and particularly the one in the post above, it is its third appearance in this thread alone?

[krcNY]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FireProf:


I understand what some of you are saying about the difference between these two pictures, but here's another spin. Take is woman's postion in this picture, it also depicts a position that my wife routinely falls asleep in (usually with her head on a pillow or resting on her folded arm. So.....if at the beach, a club or a resort, should she choose another postion or that of comfort? http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/cool4.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But Fireprof, do you stand behind your wife at this angle to take her picture? I can understand laying like that, because I lay in that position at time as well. But this girls Vaginal area is the focal point of this picture. We have pictures of us and the focal point is usually the face or the whole body. This is the same issue I have with some of the male avatars. The penis ends up being the focal point of the avatar. I like to see the face of the person I am talking to or writing to, no talk to their genatalia. When people are sunbathing comfortably, I move to their head to talk to them to their face.

[Nudony]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Ok, why the harping on photographs and particularly the one in the post above, it is its third appearance in this thread alone? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think this thread has definitely veered off-topic. We went from discussing "complete body-acceptance v/s social etiquette" to "acceptable nudist photography"; which are two completely different topics. Maybe we should start a new thread? Just a suggestion... http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/idea3.gif

[nudeM]

I'm not offended at all by the photos, but the last photo (lady on a blanket), is clearly a pose. Looking at her right ankle, it is not laying on the blanket but rather being held in a raised position.

True, it is common to see others in the same position, males included, but their ankles are not raised. Just an observation. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/smoking.gif

[Petrus]

One would think that after the anatomical drawing everybody will be able to correctly name the various parts of the female genitals The vagina is internal and connects the external vulva to the uterus.

[whitestokes]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nacktman:
Just a question here, but why did a discussion on the position of one that is seated and the reaction of others to that position become a discussion of photographs and what is and is not 'appropriate' in them?

If I am not mistaken the original query also included the question 'If we as nudist promote body acceptance, then that body's parts be accepted and should not be 'hidden' for fear of 'exposing' them (it goes with the territory when nude the body's 'parts' are 'exposed'), right?

While deliberate 'exposure' to entice, encite, or an otherwise call for illicit purposes can and should be frowned upon at the very least, just going about any activity as one would do clothed or nude should be of no concern to nudists as it should not be to non-nudists as well.

Photographs can be used and misused by anyone. I did not find any photograph posted to this thread out of line as far as the photograph itself is concerned. Context is the key: all of the photographs and none of the photographs could be seen as 'pornographic'.

BTW just how can a photograph be 'pornographic' anyway? 'Pornogaphy' is an invented word invented for the title by the publishers of the 19th century book of collected poems and short stories by London's prostitutes, using the Latin for the doorway in which Rome's lower class ladies of the evening conducted business and the Greek word for writing and smashing them together and viola...Pornicus and Graphica became Pronography. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://premium1.uploadit.org/whitestokes//BAR.JPG
http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/applause.gif Amen Brother!
I really think this topic has definitely went in another direction. Although, It's really nothing wrong with all of that, but the pictures that I have posted, seem to bring a totaly different kind of subject. Even the comparison of penis erections have been throw in to the topic. Although, I was pretty sure this topic was about, a young girl who I saw and hear get judge upon, for just showing alittle bit much private area. Where as, erections have really no comparison to that female proper southern etiquette decorum, that I thought this topic was about.

http://premium1.uploadit.org/whitestokes//CFF8.JPG So, if the photos that I have been posting, is keeping this topic from the subject of dealing with the real iusse, which I felt that it was about body accepance. Well, that really sad. Although, I must confess the photograph issue didn't become a problem, until I posted this pic.
http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/sad3.gif I am sad to see, that my pic has change the subject. Now, know that it's true, that picture do say more then a 1000 words or subjects.

whitestokes.

[missouriboy]

"More than half of human communication is nonverbal. Sometimes nonverbal cues are misinterpreted. Usually they are not."

There! Three full pages before someone finally defined the point, which can also be reduced to two simple words: Body Language.

Thanks, Fresh Air. Now everybody can stop struggling to discover anew this most important aspect of human interaction... but don't rest too long: this same topic gets beat to death regularly on here.

[FireProf]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by krcNY:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FireProf:


I understand what some of you are saying about the difference between these two pictures, but here's another spin. Take is woman's postion in this picture, it also depicts a position that my wife routinely falls asleep in (usually with her head on a pillow or resting on her folded arm. So.....if at the beach, a club or a resort, should she choose another postion or that of comfort? http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/cool4.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But Fireprof, do you stand behind your wife at this angle to take her picture? I can understand laying like that, because I lay in that position at time as well. But this girls Vaginal area is the focal point of this picture. We have pictures of us and the focal point is usually the face or the whole body. This is the same issue I have with some of the male avatars. The penis ends up being the focal point of the avatar. I like to see the face of the person I am talking to or writing to, no talk to their genatalia. When people are sunbathing comfortably, I move to their head to talk to them to their face. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am certain we are on the same page krcNY, just on different paragraphs! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/beam.gif Let me explain.

As far as the "picture" goes, I agree with what you are saying, I don't take pictures of the Prof in this postion, she wouldn't allow it and I don't need the picture anyway, I've got the living work of art. I was distancing my reply from a "picture" standpoint to a "real life" standpoint.

My reason for my reply was more aimed towards..."is this a position that a woman at a beach, club or resort should refrain from getting into because some nudists think it's too provocative.

Taking posed pictures with someone intentionally in this position to focus in on their genitalia is not something we condone. This picture can take on several different meanings used in different contexts.

After several minutes of discussion with the Prof, we seem to have a slight difference of opinion on this "position" not "the picture." The Prof feels that she would not allow herself to be in this position in a real life, non picture taking, situation. If she is ever, she wants me to tell her so she can reposition herself. If she falls asleep in this position, she also wants me to either wake her up or cover her. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/wink3.gif

I just felt from a "real life" standpoint that this picture could reflect a common position for any nudist/naturist woman to be in during the course of a day in the sun or at a nudist venue, and was looking for opinions on whether or not this position, in a "real life" situation, was still too provocative for some.

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/happy.gif

[nacktman]

Fire, yep, the position the lady is in is too provocative for some and always will be as long as they were raised in the culture we know a Western European Culture where nudity and sexulaity are linked. The ingrained psyche is hard to alter after the fact and some will never completely record over the intial programing they received.

[FireProf]

Sounds pretty close to what the Prof said to me! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/wink3.gif

[MJ_KC]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by krcNY:
But this girls Vaginal area is the focal point of this picture. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Why is it any more the focal point than any other body part in the picture?

[krcNY]

IMO, it is the angle the picture was taken.

If someone stood to her front or back, I think it would be a very pretty picture. I think her face should be more the focal point and it would still come across as a nude sunbather.

I used to think I was liberal in regards to nudity , but some of these pictures make me seem old school. I would not want my picture taken at that angle.

[Tophatfrog]

Okay I had to go way back to find what this topic was about, but really is it that much of an issue with people who are spose believe idea of nude is not lewd. However one would sit. I get hot sometimes when I am in the sun, I would be women get hot too, so to cool the boys down I will sit with my legs open to allow more air flow, why would a women in a area that believes being nude is ok, would open her legs too to cool down....I side with the logic, ladies sit how you are comfortable,(not trying to state it as if you have permission from me because you don't need that) I just don't care legs open or closed, it is your comfort I care about. Top

[puffledud]

I know that I don't frequent the forum as much as some others and my perspective may be skewed since I only read the posts that interest me. However, I have rarely read a thread this long that wasn't about erections or shaving.

As far as what position a person should be in I am reminded of the words of my father-in-law; "whatever floats your boat."

Dave

[nacktman]

Since this thread has woven itself over to photographs...how about this one that combines the original query with the current trend.

Is the man's sitting position objectionable? After all he is exposing himself with that position.
More to the fact, is it comfortable? You know that had to hurt sometime.
Is the photograph in violation of whatever code? It was taken after all.
What is the woman's opinion as to the 'exposure' she is seeing? She is looking at the man after all.
And the granddaddy of all the questions...is this really worth the time and effort we've put into it?

[FireProf]

Only objectionable to me..........if both legs are behind his head!! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/laugh.gif

That can't feel good!! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/wiseguy.gif

[MJ_KC]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nacktman:
Is the man's sitting position objectionable? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It would be if I tried it. That looks really painful to me.

[Jason Lee]

She should cross her legs when playing card games nude. (discretion)

http://premium1.uploadit.org/whitestokes//CFF6.JPG

[SunnyB]

I think he is "the man in the box" just been released... http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/idea3.gif

[tinner666]

This thread has about run it's course and nobody ever commented about the woman on the blanket sunbathing in the 'shade', under the trees, not in an open area. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/laugh.gif
Just an observation. We need to be more accepting of each other without the debate. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/laugh.gif
Personally, I had no objections to any of the poses. I do wonder about some pics or avatars I've seen that appear to be " not flacid", because we have no control over the age of surfers looking at this site. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/embarassed.gif

[SunnyB]

Of course....I think he has been in a very cramped place and now he is a nude free man, grateful to be released...but he has some problem with his right leg I admit...Satisfied with the explanation..Jason Lee?

[tinner666]

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/laugh.gif http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/laugh.gif Really good answer! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/applause.gif

[Jason Lee]

the nude woman on blanket got sexually aroused.

[nacktman]

Jason, how do you know that? Were you present when the photo was taken?

SunnyB, that allusion of yours to the "man in the box" is a funny one.

[tomkojohn]

I think any guy who can get both legs behind his head should be allowed to enjoy it while he can! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/wink3.gif

I used to easily be able to get into the lotus position, now I can still do it (just barely) but it is not at all comfortable. If you don't work at flexibility I guess you lose it. I wonder if you work at it a lot can you get it back?

[Ewan M]

This all quite educational about females, seen things now never knew of or even crossed my mind before.

I must be so innocent

[krcNY]

I have no problems with the way a woman sits or lays down while nude. I will sit "Indian Style" or what ever way is most comfortable at the moment or to get the best tan. I have seen women on the beach in many positions as well and have never seen SO MUCH as I did in the picture of the lady laying in the shade. It is just not a normal position...it was adjusted to portray what it does.

I have no problems with any of the other pictures...they show the whole body from a usual photgraphic angle. That last picture is great, I cannot do it, so all the more power to him.

[whitestokes]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by krcNY:
I have no problems with the way a woman sits or lays down while nude. I will sit "Indian Style" or what ever way is most comfortable at the moment or to get the best tan. I have seen women on the beach in many positions as well and have never seen SO MUCH as I did in the picture of the lady laying in the shade. It is just not a normal position...it was adjusted to portray what it does.

I have no problems with any of the other pictures...they show the whole body from a usual photgraphic angle. That last picture is great, I cannot do it, so all the more power to him. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I am the one who posted that pic. I am also very surprise in all the reply comments I receive on it, because that was not my intention to this topic. Atlhough, I have learn one thing from posting that picture, not everyone is open minded to body acceptance to the level that I am on. To me, just as the young girl that was judges at the pool site, and that picture of the woman on the blanket, there is nothing wrong with the positions. I have came to the realization, that a woman private area is nothing different then her face, arms, hands, legs and feet. It's all apart of what make her, to be who she is.

http://premium1.uploadit.org/whitestokes/CFF13.JPG

So I have to agree with <span class="ev_code_RED">Fresh Air</span> for two reason. One is for the young lady down here in Florida, that was wrongly judge upon, and two for the picture I posted.
The reproductive organs are a very special body part of us all, because they bring life in to this beautiful world we live in. So why hide or even talk down upon this type of thing. Is This True Body Acceptance, To do So?

whitestokes.



.

[nunne]

I now see exactly what all the discussion contained in this thread is about. It is very clear that the offense taken by the two elderly ladies was an anti-educational stance.

We all know that the genitalia of females is a mystery to all of us, especially males, since it is all virutally hidden from view. This is clearly the way that God intended it to be.

Men are only attracted to things which challenge their imagination and once they have discovered ways to master that imagination, they quickly lose interest and move on to other
issues.

Thanks to Whitestokes, I have now discovered so much about the mystery of female genitalia, that I will no longer be attracted to it, and can move on to other, more interesting, areas of discovery. I confess that, while I have been married for 42 years, and have had a rather close and intimate relationship with my wife, I would not have been able to say exactly where the Skene's gland orifice, or the Hart's line, or the posterior fourchette were located. (BTW, where is the anterior fourchette?) And, while I have long known where the frenulum of the scrotum is, I wasn't even aware that there was a frenulum of the clitoris.

Clearly, then, a female who either inadvertently or intentionally exposes her gentitalia to others, is merely trying to educate us all as to the complexity of the female organs. If this is done, then males will no longer find anything mystical or, therefore, attractive about them.

The conclusion is this: the two elderly ladies were simply trying to prevent education along these lines, and thus keep males interested in the female genitalia. Those who expose men to this type of education are part of the gender war being perpetrated by females against we males in the hope that by this familiarity, we will lose all interest in sex, and will leave them alone.

I, for one, believe that we men must lead a counter-offensive, by demanding that women keep their legs tightly closed in any nude environment (even the bedroom) so as to prevent this female conspiracy from succeeding.

[nacktman]

Dry and wry humor still exist. Thank you nunne. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/rofl5.gif

[krcNY]

Whitestokes..

You missed my point...You had a young females point of view, but it does not matter. I guess I am done here.

[missouriboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I have came to the realization, that a woman private area is nothing different then her face, arms, hands, legs and feet. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Then why, do you keep, calling it a, private area? http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/confused.gif

[shãybare]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by tinner666:
nobody ever commented about the woman on the blanket sunbathing in the 'shade', under the trees, not in an open area. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/laugh.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/cool4.gif
She may not be "sunbathing". Maybe just resting and enjoying the day. I don't get in the sun a whole lot myself.

Thank you, nunne. Very good post.

[whitestokes]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by missouriboy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I have came to the realization, that a woman private area is nothing different then her face, arms, hands, legs and feet. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Then why, do you keep, calling it a, private area? http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/confused.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/disappointed.gif
See that what's wrong with this topic, I posted. There is always some kind of nit-picking going on. <span class="ev_code_RED">Missouriboy</span>, who care what I call it, that's not what this topic is all about. If I call it private area or vagina, what in the world does that matter. What's more important is how someone view and feel, about someone showing to much of it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by krcNY:
Whitestokes..

You missed my point...You had a young females point of view, but it does not matter. I guess I am done here. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wait a minute <span class="ev_code_RED">KrcNY</span>, there seem to be alittle confusion between us. I was quoting you, because I acknowledge what you said and I was trying to explain why I agree with you.
Maybe I should have gave you one of these http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/applause.gif

Thanks anyway for your comment.
whitestokes.

[MJ_KC]

Considering how many medical scans and doctors exams that I have had in recent months, I don't feel that I have any private areas remaining.

[missCarol]

All this reminds me of a story I read were it was normal to be nude and it was the mouth that was considered "private" and needed to be covered and to expose ones mouth even to ones spouse was considered the gravest of societal and moral sins.

Its all in the perception and as one has said before, "tis much ado about nothing here...".

[missouriboy]

missCarol, that was the story of Oobat. Good story. For those interested, Google should find it easily.

[shãybare]

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/cool4.gif
Yes, I remember the story and while I thought it a good story, I was a bit concerned about having the little girl in the story "diddling" herself. I realize it was used to show the innocence of the nude body, but as a grandfather, I just found that particular "scene" disturbing.

Call me a prude.

[missouriboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">If I call it private area or vagina, what in the world does that matter. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I know my post was off-topic, but here's why I made it: the anti-nudist factions of society use "private parts," and many other assumptive euphemisms, as derogatory epithets to disrespect the lifestyle choice of nudists. We don't know how many of those antis are reading all these messages every day. When you use words that are in agreement with their negative arguments, you only lend further credence to those arguments. Is this what you really want to do? I'm guessing No, you do not. So I'm suggesting that you, and all of us, stick with simple, honest words that speak only the descriptive truth to your (our) readers. This shows sophistication above the sometimes "baby talk" words used by our detractors.

Also, your writing would be much more pleasurable to read if you'd ditch those extraneous commas.

Cheers! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/happy.gif

[Fresh Air]

I just posted the anatomy picture to make a point, ambiguous as it was. The topic is fine. But does any nudist really need photos to explain/display what we're talking about? No.

I think because of some of the poses and lighting in some of the images that their original origins are questionable (nudism vs softcore pseudo-nudism). Does it bother me personally? No, I don't care. I am only bothered because some average joe might wander in and misinterpret the intentions of the posted images.

[Darwin]

After spending 20 min reading all these post, well most of them. It seems like this tread has jumped the tracks. Pictures and people are two separate issues, when you look as someone you chose the focal point. you can choose to focuse on the face or the feet. With pictures the photographer has chosen the focal point. Simple rule, the focal point is in the center of the shot. The picture of the woman laying on her stomach could be changed just by adjusting the center of the photo. If the photo centered on a peaking smile over the shoulder it would change your reaction to the photo. If the focus was on her face you could infer the photographer was focusing on her emotion and not her body.

I have to agree with Fresh Air, nudist photos should be about the person and not the body. This keep photos from being mired in relm of softcore voyeurism.

Cheers,

[whitestokes]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Darwin:
After spending 20 min reading all these post, well most of them. It seems like this tread has jumped the tracks. Pictures and people are two separate issues, when you look as someone you chose the focal point. you can choose to focuse on the face or the feet. With pictures the photographer has chosen the focal point. Simple rule, the focal point is in the center of the shot. The picture of the woman laying on her stomach could be changed just by adjusting the center of the photo. If the photo centered on a peaking smile over the shoulder it would change your reaction to the photo. If the focus was on her face you could infer the photographer was focusing on her emotion and not her body.

I have to agree with Fresh Air, nudist photos should be about the person and not the body. This keep photos from being mired in relm of softcore voyeurism.

Cheers, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow, after spending a good 20 minutes of reading this topic, and the only thing you could comment on, had nothing to do with the original subject of this topic.

Whitestokes.



.