Using attractive young women to "sell" nudism.

[Nudony]

I was reading the post "What is this?", and a thought occurred to me as I saw that calendar cover with three attractive young nude women on it. Isn't it overly frequent that an attractive young woman is used to illustrate the cover of a nudist magazine or a resort brochure? I have many magazines and Bulletin editions, and I'd have to say that the vast majority of them have a young woman (or several) on the cover. I have brochures from several reputable nudist resorts, and the majority of them also have a young woman on the cover. I have a couple of nudist videos from a reputable nudist organization, which are both hosted by a woman who would have no trouble finding work at the Playboy mansion. Russians have taken this concept even further by using teenage girls to illustrate nudism. Of course, thankfully, once you get past the cover, people of all shapes and sizes are illustrated.

I took a couple of marketing classes in college; I particularly remember "product development." One of the key components of product development is packaging: the product must visually appeal to the potential customer. So I can understand that nudist organizations are using a basic rule of marketing. But shouldn't we be "beyond" these practices? Or is it a "necessary evil"; to appeal to people's esthetic sensibilities and draw as many people as possible, in the hopes that some or many will get past the cover and into the heart of the matter? Or are these nudist organizations contradicting their basic message of body acceptance?

Questions, questions...


(Below is the edited cover of the first nudist mag I ever purchased...not really the average nudist...)

[Nudony]

I was reading the post "What is this?", and a thought occurred to me as I saw that calendar cover with three attractive young nude women on it. Isn't it overly frequent that an attractive young woman is used to illustrate the cover of a nudist magazine or a resort brochure? I have many magazines and Bulletin editions, and I'd have to say that the vast majority of them have a young woman (or several) on the cover. I have brochures from several reputable nudist resorts, and the majority of them also have a young woman on the cover. I have a couple of nudist videos from a reputable nudist organization, which are both hosted by a woman who would have no trouble finding work at the Playboy mansion. Russians have taken this concept even further by using teenage girls to illustrate nudism. Of course, thankfully, once you get past the cover, people of all shapes and sizes are illustrated.

I took a couple of marketing classes in college; I particularly remember "product development." One of the key components of product development is packaging: the product must visually appeal to the potential customer. So I can understand that nudist organizations are using a basic rule of marketing. But shouldn't we be "beyond" these practices? Or is it a "necessary evil"; to appeal to people's esthetic sensibilities and draw as many people as possible, in the hopes that some or many will get past the cover and into the heart of the matter? Or are these nudist organizations contradicting their basic message of body acceptance?

Questions, questions...


(Below is the edited cover of the first nudist mag I ever purchased...not really the average nudist...)

[Buzzer]

http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gifYes, I think we want to appeal more to the female population if any particular market. Actually, all people, both male, female, young & old should be the main target.

The problem I have with using only young attractive people to advertise nudism is that many of us are NOT all that young or attractive. Many of us are old or getting there. We may have a pot belly or other things that make our bodies less attractive than those beautiful young people.

If the crowd they're trying to attract are the young, then I can see using only the young, but that is what keeps many older less in-shape people away when all they see are the young, shapely bodies, and they think, "I don't look like that, and I'd be too embarrassed to be seen nude."

I think advertising for nudism should include people of all ages amf body shapes unless only a certain age is desired.

[Buzzer]

http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gifYes. Just the male market should not be the target.
To me, all ages and both sexes are the important targets. Naturism is most about health and self confidence. Displaying pretty, young girls may tend to disuade a lot of women from at least trying it out.

[Naturist4Ever]

Exactly Nudeony & Buzzer, that was what I was getting at in the other topic.

There's nothing wrong to show that young *people* also participate in nudism, quite to the contrary!, but when there is a systematic bias wrt to gender it all becomes rather suspicious. It becomes even more ironic when on one hand we see a continous stream of pretty women on photo and on the other hand have to read endless complaints from men who cannot get into nudist resorts etc.

Especially a magazine like H&E (which claims to be THE naturist magazine for the UK and beyond) and videomakers like Parafotos (Charlie Simonds) are very typical examples. Just check http://www.parafotos.co.uk and follow some of the links and you know exactly what I mean; see below).

[Croydon]

This is an interesting question.

Should "beautiful" women be used to sell nudism? That is tricky question.

I majored in marketing in college and one thing that comes to mind is target market. What is our target market. Until we can identify our target market, we can not figure a source of solution.

I am assuming, in this theoretical sceanerio, we are seeking to attract women. I can only guess we are seeking to target all women, therefore, all types of women should be used to sell nudism. We can not simply use "attractive women" because many of the "consumers" will be cheated. Assuming we used some model who is fit and attractive to sell nudism. Many who decide to try nudism, will feel cheated. When they visit nudist resort and beaches, they will see that many women are not fit and "attractive." Many are just plain Janes with plane Jane body, whatever that means. All marketers know to never make your consumers feel cheated.

The solution, ALL types of women should be used to sell nudism. These women include old, young, fat, thin, black, and white. We do not wish to alienate others. If we were to use "attractive women" am sure that Jane Doe who is 200lbs will not try nudism because she is led to believe that nudist women are fit, in shape, and attractive.

[barbararuth]

There is a deliberate effort to create an attractive front cover of any magazine..nudist or otherwise. It is designed to entice you to open and read the contents in the inside. It is no different for a home page for a web site or a front window of a store, a cover on a book or headline in a newspaper. Marketing and design experts know how to stage and format whatever elements are best suited to get the message across.

If young women are used to sell nudism, so what. It doesn't insult or bother me. I would certainly prefer a cross-section of men and women, body types and ages, but I am no marketing genius. If I am interested in the subject matter, or web site or book or what is for sale in a store, I can just as easily look past the wrapper!

[Sanslines]

If a magazine used a photo of a young attractive man on their cover I can assure you that the magazine would have limited sales potential. Marketing is marketing whether it be used to promote nudism or to sell toasters. Try using a photo of just a toaster and you will get one kind of response. If you try using a photo of some bikini clad young woman model holding up the toaster in one hand then you will get a much stronger response ie increased sales. I don't agree with it but sex (implied or otherwise) sells - ie Marketing 101.

[David77]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">If a magazine used a photo of a young attractive man on their cover I can assure you that the magazine would have limited sales potential. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The cover of the N magazine this month from TNS has a young <u>man</u> on a bicycle as the prominent centerpiece, and two smaller images of young women both to the side and behind him on bicycles.

[Ben_m]

Yes, sex sells, and it would seem suspicious that is a part of what is going on here. The irony is that how does it really work to use sex to sell something that is being specifically touted as "not about sex"? http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif I think the movement at large probably has some room for improvement in this area.

As noted, David, that is the cover of the latest N and I do not recall noticing this kind of bias for N. Personally, and as presumably a part of the "target market" (however small of a part), I would tend to strongly avoid naturist material marketed under a sexy cover as it would seem suspect to me right off the bat.

[DoctorSurferDude]

Youth, vitality, fertility.... those have always been big sellers to mankind, as far back as our earliest history.

Sometimes I wonder too if the line has been crossed and who their target audience is?

But then, how shall we sell it? Would it be better to place the average nudist (an older single potentially overweight gentleman) as our mascot? Who would that attract to nudism?

Even AANR sells the nudist package in a younger, more gender equal, and more energetic than the actual reality of nudism. But....then again, it could be argued that if you want to be happy, you should smile. Maybe what they are selling is who they will attract and what it will become....hmmmmm...I need to watch Matrix again.

[takeitontherun]

I say its not cool especially since the claim isnt that its about sexuality and is more meant to promote body acceptance.

[richinud]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by barbararuth:
If young women are used to sell nudism, so what. It doesn't insult or bother me. I would certainly prefer a cross-section of men and women, body types and ages, but I am no marketing genius. If I am interested in the subject matter, or web site or book or what is for sale in a store, I can just as easily look past the wrapper! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We're not marketing geniuses, otherwise more people would be into nudism, right ?-)

I have to admit that, being an average 44 year old male, I'm far more likely to pick up a magazine with a young and pretty naked girl on the front, than if there's some old wrinkly guy with a genital piercing (yek - gross!) on it.

Having said that, a cross-section of a typical gathering would be no bad thing, mixed men and women. That would be the healthier approach, I think. How hard can it be to find attractive lady figures, (I'm thinking just of the visual body here), engaging in naked activities with a group of mixed young and old (naked) people? I see this at every nudist club/gathering, and yet the magazines persist in single females on the front cover.

I believe the status-quo is a bit predictable, probably fairly safe, and a bit of a sad endictment on the state of all of us. I still like the covers though ;-)

Rich.

[Trailscout]

The ladies I have talked to seem to be more drawn to nudism by depictions of young families with children enjoying nude recreation. Youthful beauty is not the primary draw. Instead there is a deep-seated sense of naturalness to innocent family nudity. It just seems right.

I think we would all prefer images that tend toward youthful attractive people, but having an occasional photo of a smiling grandpa or grandma as part of a promotional magazine or brochure might help attract people to the movement showing that it really is a family thing.

[hm0504]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Buzzer:
http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gifYes. Just the male market should not be the target.
To me, all ages and both sexes are the important targets. Naturism is most about health and self confidence. Displaying pretty, young girls may tend to disuade a lot of women from at least trying it out. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Anyone notice that men's magazines typically have a pretty young woman on them...AND SO DO WOMEN'S MAGAZINES. Seems to me that pretty young women work for marketers in all sorts of situations.

[Fresh Air]

I think in this aspect, nudism is a bit two faced. Most nudists believe in universal acceptance and not judging someone by the outside. However, when it comes to showing others what nudism is (magazines, videos, etc.) and promoting the cause, what is often put forward is the same social drone that all other oganizations put forth. The artificial reality of an idealized eutopia. It sells...that's nice. I don't know that it does much to portray nudism for what it really is.

Dan

[Sammyboy]

Seems to me that whether it works or not would depend on what you want to achieve. Existing naturists are, I think, not specially drawn by the pictures or naked people. Why would we be, we see more naked people on a beach day than you get in 5 magazines, right?

But, if your magazine exists to get the interest of people who AREN'T currently naturists, well......

A picture of an attractive young lady will grab the attention of men, but you better make sure that the rest of the mag is more representative, or he may go to a beach for the wrong reasons, or, whatever reason he goes for, come back disappointed.

As was mentioned, probably visuals of families together might attract women more. I personally don't object to using a cover image of something attractive to get peoples interest. If you made a truly representative image for a mag about naturism in Britain, then no matter who the people are, there is a high chance that it should be cloudy of raining. You gotta make it look nice, I think.

[blackrebel]

This is what is DEAD WRONG about the PR in nudism. These people need to be removed and people who get it need to be on top and in charge. TH BIGGEST objecting to getting more women involved is that fact that most have this perception that you have to be fit, trim, white, and at least VERY ATTRACTIVE to attend or to participate. So, while the lifestyle is trying to attract more people, they are also scaring away many more who would be a greater foundation for the lifestyle. We preach how we all are acceptable, yet, want to attract those who are vain and more likely to be into being model material? Think of the idea that we'd be attracting more of the pain in the butt, boys who want to find 'naked hotties'. I have friends who think that nude beaches are actually breeding grounds for the 'Girls Gone Wild' candidates.

No, this is a stupid idea that goes against what we are all about.

[Chance]

I do not like those covers... all of them had young, attractive women, and most of them had "sexy" or "sex" or "hot" and the words were like the starburst censor things on pornography magazines because they all covered up something. I think that they SHOULD have more families (mom, dad, kids etc...) on the covers because it would appeal to many people as being a "family activity, so it must not be sexual". I also think that a lot of people are going to see those covers and think "oooh goodie... porn" and "Oh... I have to look like that to be a nudist/naturist". But what do I know... I am only 14.

[Danee]

I did like those covers for the same reasons that have already been expressed. Youth and Naturism, if they are to mean something positive, must portray just that. Yes, so many 'nudists' forget the root of the lifestyle being fitness and health, and I think portraying both youth and naturism + fitness, is something positive on both counts. I don't think they shout "Sex!" at all, no more the cover last year of the boy in the tree at a Quebec resort shouted something else. (The Quebec Naturist Org.).
They imply nature and normalacy and happiness.
-D

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chance:
I do not like those covers... all of them had young, attractive women, and most of them had "sexy" or "sex" or "hot" and the words were like the starburst censor things on pornography magazines because they all covered up something. I think that they SHOULD have more families (mom, dad, kids etc...) on the covers because it would appeal to many people as being a "family activity, so it must not be sexual". I also think that a lot of people are going to see those covers and think "oooh goodie... porn" and "Oh... I have to look like that to be a nudist/naturist". But what do I know... I am only 14. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Trailscout]

It's not that the photos of attractive women are bad, the problem is that they exist to the complete exclusion of children, families, men and more senior adults. I can understand a strong emphasis on female beauty, but I don't understand monopoly to the extent of a girlie magazine.

[NudeAl]

I also think a balance is needed.

I have no problem with the use of the young attractive bodies on the cover but to do so consistently to the exclusion of all others all the time sort of puts the wrong idea in non-naturist heads. N magazine, the quarterly publication of the Naturist Society, has no problem showing every body type all ages all shapes on their covers. They have even had older women who have had to under go mastectomies as their cover models. Now this is sort of like preaching to the choir because generally it is made available to members with their membership.

I think that the problem may be that many of these magazines are interested in keeping up their sales figures. We all know what sells in the marketplace so that is the marketing strategy they use. Also I think the target audience is the young male population. I wish it weren't necessary but maybe it is just the cost of doing business to put these types of covers on most of the time. As long as the content remains to our standards regarding nudity and body acceptance,showing many different bodies types, it may well change a few pre-conceived notions out there. So we may be doing more than just generating revenue by doing this. We may be changing the way some people think. There are many ways to look at this.

As long as the cover is not a cheese cake type shot and they occasionally show some other type of cover I think we're doing alright.

[John P]

There's a sad history of naturist publications where they've catered to non-nudists by providing soft-core porn. That means pretty girls, or the publications wouldn't sell. Times have changed a bit, but the commercial motivation must still be there.

And then there's the pervasive belief (and maybe it's right, who knows) that waving an image of an attractive woman around is the way to sell just about anything. Somehow that lures the men and doesn't seem to repel the women either. So put everything together and you've got a powerful inducement to get those pretty ladies on the magazine covers.

And when it comes to advertising, well, looking a the ads in N magazine I sometimes wonder how many resorts I'd feel comfortable in. Based on their pictures you could believe that the only people you'd ever meet there are women under 35!

[Unwired]

Blackrebel and freedom2be are right on the money.

If naturism mainly presents a "storefront" of attractive, nubile young women, then it will primarily draw one kind of person: the same kind who probably constitute the overwhelming number of lurkers on this site, a few of which occasionally emerge to try to get in contact with females. i.e. the "Girls Gone Wild" crowd.

As a guy I know that if all I ever saw of naturism was buff guys with 6-pack abs and "perfect" physiques, I would be less inclined to be part of it. It's not just women who feel more comfortable seeing a wide range of people participating.



Un

[grl66]

When I first brouched the subject with my partner we purchased some back copies of a naturist mag to read up on the lifestyle.

All five copies of the mag had front covers of the like that have been described previously. My partner looked at them with distain. It wasn't until a few days later that she looked through the mags and at that time she made the comment that she didn't feel so bad now after seeing average people with lumps and bumps on the pages inside.

My point is that she wouldn't have been impelled to pick up the mag had she not wanted to know what I was reading. If fact, had her decision on whether to read the mag been based on the cover she would have been turned off the idea. Fortunately she got passed the cover and read the mag for what it is. So you can see in my personal experience, young, slim women on the covers was not advantageous.

Being that the vast majority of society are not "perfect", maybe covers depicting the real side of nudity would encourage more people consider looking into it further.

[Chance]

By Danee
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I don't think they shout "Sex!" at all, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


If you read the covers of the link provided, most of them do say the words "sex" "sexy" and "hot" http://www.parafotos.demon.co.uk/hecovers.htm

[DoctorSurferDude]

Hmm....the lad has a point. And the link doesn't really remind me of the face of nudism I am familiar with. Then again...I wasn't a nudist in 1987, so maybe the scene then was totally saturated with healthy hairsprayed covergirls...j/k

[NudeAl]

H&E has a rep for being something most naturists wouldn't buy. They are just shy of being soft core porn. Well maybe the are soft core porn. Not a true naturist mag though they say they are. I think if you were to study their subscribers you would find less than 50% were nudists.

Remember that H&E comes from a different culture than what the US is used to. They don't freak out over sexuality like is done here.

Don't expect them to have your values. When you say "most naturists" or "the face of nudism" you can really only talk for those in the US.

[Sauna]

H&E comes from Britain, but in Europe we will also keep sexuality and nudity separate. H&E is business and there are other rules. Little naughty sex is better business than boring nice nudism.

I personally avoid H&E

[Nudony]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Remember that H&E comes from a different culture than what the US is used to. They don't freak out over sexuality like is done here. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I wouldn't be so sure. H&E was a topic of controversy in its own country. In newstands, H&E was placed amidst the porn and softcore mags (I saw this myself.)
What's interesting about Europe is that they draw a difference between nudism with sexual undertones (or overt), and familial nudism. The first is referred to as nudism, and the latter as naturism. Both are recognized and accepted; in the US, the former is brushed off.
Maybe we should do the same as the europeans in terms of expanding our vocabulary and recognizing these two tendancies? Or not? I don't know...

[Sauna]

Naturism is defined by International Naturist Federation. Nobody has defined nudism.

Therefore the naturists defined naturism as stated below, at their 1974 INF World Congress held in Agde, France:

"Naturism is a lifestyle in harmony with nature, expressed through social nudity, and characterised by self-respect of people with different opinions and of the environment."

http://www.inffni.org/index_e.htm and there faq

[John P]

I think there's a more subtle aspect here, but maybe one that has an even stronger effect. That is that if there are lots of pictures of women in sight, it gives the impression that "women are there to be looked at". And women are likely to think that if they're being looked at nude, it's going to be with sexual interest (pornography being well-known for that very thing!) and that makes women feel very vulnerable and hence unwilling to participate. So unless naturist publications are careful not to over-emphasize the display of women's images, they risk making making it seem that it's all about getting a good look at women with their clothes off. And with all due respect, web sites that support themselves by getting users to pay for looking at naked people aren't helping this, even if they maintain deniablity by saying that there are men's pictures there too.