Making naturism more acceptable

[Agde]

Its really about striking a balance between, on the one hand, people respecting each other's feelings and, on the other hand, people being tolerant of each other's choices, isn't it?. In a diverse society like the US, there are so many ways people can offend each other's sensibilities. I suspect that is why the US Constitution so carefully protects minority and individual rights unless others are actually harmed. At the same time, over the years while working in the States, I have seen the definition of "harm" and "offense" get kind of muddled together, the latter often becoming legislatively the former when an organized group is convincing about its electoral clout. It can be a sort of backdoor imposition of majority preferences on minority rights which undermines tolerance.

Choosing not to wear clothing, as Mark points out, does not in itself pose a threat to others. Forcing someone to dress a certain way is in fact the aggressive behavior. Why shouldn't we demand a little tolerance? It is hard to understand why people, particularly nudists, have not objected when legal adjectives got mashed into their nouns -- for instance, when did "exposure" become "indecent" by definition, rather than "indecent" being a specific subform of behavior. The real danger, as Mark again rightly points out, is when a peaceful minority acquiesce to marginalization, thereby relinquishing their right to tolerance by the majority. We nudists may find it "a trifle absurd" or even disturbingly incoherant for people to go swimming in their clothing, but we tolerate it -- as they should tolerate our decision to leave our clothes safely dry onshore. If they want to sweat in clothes when sunbathing, we don't require them to hide behind fences, nor should they us when we are acting more sensibly. I bet our families could even picnic next to each other in a public park without misfortune to anyone!

[Stu2630]

Is prudent to do as the romans do. To force yourself nude on non receptive persons is forcing your life style on them and if they forced their lifestyle on you, you would certainly pitch an objection, rightfully so...The best way to promote nudity is to not ruffle feathers as you shed yours.

Nuggets of pure gold wisdom! Well said, Rabid_Clam!

Mind you - if I had said that, some people here would have called me a troll or accused me of being anti-naturist.

I agree with that philosophy as stated, nobody should be forced to be naked, or forced to be clothed. To do either is one person forcing his lifestyle on his neighbor.

And nobody should be forced to be around nudity when they don't expect it and they're not likely to be comfortable with it - i.e. folks like me.

Stu

[Naturist Mark]

And nobody should be forced to be around nudity when they don't expect it and they're not likely to be comfortable with it - i.e. folks like me.

Have you considered wearing these?

[TheNorm]

Remember the old x-ray glasses advertised in comic books? Maybe there's a twist there...glasses that make people appear to be clothed. Everyone who is offended by nudity would be "required" to wear them.

[RichNH]

If I could make a small point.

This entire issue of public acceptance of naturism and nudists is one heavily affected by social norms. When dealing with social norms, particularly one that is strongly entrenched, it's majority rules. Now most of us have the good fortune of living, to one degree or another, in tolerant societies. Anyone who cares to disagree can try being a nudist in some place that isn't that tolerant, like Iran, or Afganistan under the Taliban. Anyway, the point is that majority rules when it comes to social norms, the stronger the social norm, the more power the majority weilds in enforcing that norm through laws and such.

In trying to change a social norm, particularly one that's well entrenched, one has to tread carefully. In essence, you tread upon established social norms only through the tolerance of the majority. But if you push too hard and fast, then the majority may become startled and in doing so, abandon some of their tolerance of this bucking of the herd mentality, this individualism.

There's a lot to be said for the salami technique of getting the sausage, of getting what you want slice by slice. Many people naturally like this approach, it involves getting a bit of what you want without too much risk to yourself. Others may be a bit bolder or impatient in personality and want to change things faster. This is good too, to an extent.

If you push too hard, the majority may come down on you like a load of bricks. In our tolerant society, walking nude down Main Street will probably get you a night in jail. Do that in Riyad and you may lose your head. Above all, you have to "respect" the power of the majority and what they'll do when they perceive a direct challenge. What's the expression? There are so many, don't pull on Superman's cape, don't piss into the wind. You know them. Its the same here.

There's a time and a place for pushing the boundries and there's a time and place for taking a chunk. Just like eating an ice cream cone, its mostly licks and a few bites. The trick is to know how much/little to bite so your teeth don't ache with the cold.

A person who's personality suits them to simply take advantage of the ground that's been won already is just as valid for the cause as one who's personality impels them to constantly take bites and who tries to grab as much as possible. The storekeeper is just as valid as the sodbuster who is just as valid as the railroad man who is just as valid as the mountainman. They all serve the cause, just in different ways. Some take ground in leaps and bounds and sometimes suffer for it. Others till ground that's not as contested as it once was and others serve to occupy ground that's been won, constantly reaffirming the win.

Rich

[NudeAl]

Excellent post RichNH. I like it, I like it a lot!

[Kohana_Kioni]

My wife is trying to understand my not wanting to wear clothing outdoors, even to sun tan. She has never questioned me doing it around the house, as long as our kids who are now grown are not around.

She can not believe my change, as I told her, I feel better about myself as I wish she did as well. She implied that she would not sun naked in the yard as I do, but will try and understand my position on this matter.

Like she said, her opinion will not have any effect on me in the slightest anyway, and she is right about that one.

[ohioriver]

It would be interesting to better understand the culture in New Zealand where there is a rugby team called the Nude Blacks that plays rugby in the nude. In fact, it seems that nude rugby is fully accepted there. On the tourism website for Dundelin, New Zealand they even have a web page for nude rugby http://www.dunedinnz.com/visit/event...ude-rugby.aspx

It is awesome that nudity is so well accepted there that a local tourism organization includes that on its website. I could not imagine any tourism group - whether it be local, state or national - that it would be accepted anywhere in the United States. The simple fact that athletes are allowed to compete while totally nude is something that could never happen in a public place in the United States, yet it seems that naked rugby takes place in New Zealand in front of a crowd - just as what would occur at any athletic event in the United States. Imagine the uproar if naked rugby were played on a college rugby field in the United States!

I have not been to Dundelin, New Zealand and do not know the culture there... but I must give them high praise for their welcoming attitude toward nudity in regards to nude rugby. It's just a matter of simple competition in which the athletes compete in the nude... maybe someday the United States can get to the point in which healthy competition in the nude might also be accepted.

[NakedGary]

http://www.wat.tv/video/rugby-all-bl...19_2exyv_.html

[Centauri4]

I was going to argue that perhaps many older laws regarding nudity were proposed and passed at a time in history when people were less accepting of even the 'concept of' nudity in general, but on second thought this does not seem likely. It is more feasible to me legislators were less comfortable with enunciating the specific nudity-related offenses such as waving an erection around, engaging in self-gratification, naked wrestling, erotic dancing, explicit photography, sexual intercourse and so on, so they worded the laws broadly and all-encompassing to sweep a variety of less desirable activities under one rug!

The concept here being this: There are FAR MORE things a person can do while nude that COULD BE offensive to some, then what they do while clothed. It is like what you do "behind closed doors" is by in large your own business as long as the activity is consentual. The participants (A) made a disclosure as to the planned activity, and (B) sought agreement of THOSE INVOLVED to participate or be exposed to the activity. I feel certain there must be concepts of law related to these things, but having no formal education IN law, I am simply proposing ideas based on my observations, experience and accumulated knowledge of human behavior.

The impracticality of disclosing an intent to be nude to a large crowd with constent "churn" (turn-over) in participants, and then obtaining the consent of those "impacted" is mind boggling! A dozen people in a static setting, no problem. Five dozen people, many more problems.

Therefore I think what society has achieved over time are "blanket coverage" laws that apply to numerous situations. Public intoxiation is an end-result "state of being" and does not necessarily require law enforcement to identify WHICH "intoxicant" the offender used, only to verify the end result. Public indecency is likewide an end-result state of being also requiring only an observation of the behavior itself, not knowledge of the thinking or motivation of the offender.

We need to work on ways to express the "proper" behavior people SHOULD BE legally entitled to engage in at their discretion; perhaps by developing a list of unoffensive behaviors (less offensive behaviors) that COULD be accceptable. I suggest engaging in nude meditation, nude exercise, nude prayer, nude sleeping or nude reading within sight of the general public SHOULD BE included on any list of peaceful/practical behaviors permissable to be conducted without clothing. Or, or, we could simply ask legislators to disclose those behaviors which are NOT prohibited (I know we already have some lists of these things at our disposal). As in the case of San Francisco, what have they done to APPROVE or BAN specific behaviors? Nudity at certain areas of a specific beach: APPROVED. New York: Toplessness (I suspect of a non-commercial, non-professional nature) in public areas: APPROVED.

Ultimately the positive legislations seem to be the result of what organized groups of people are willing and able to work to achieve. Simple concept: Laws do not make themselves! So where are the nudist or nudist-friendly lawyers in the CFI audience??

~