Stop the nudist versus textile battle

[Agde]

There's so much divisiveness around these days that I was just pondering whether/how the textile vs nudist divide could be somehow softened or even completely discarded? Is it a divide that is actually accurate or useful?

One of the first rules of civil discourse is "challenge the argument, don't attack the person." When we label folks as "textiles" or "nudists" it errs on the side of attack and reinforces division.

Instead, perhaps, we should focus our civil discourse on the principles of naturism -- principles that not just naturists are passionate about -- such as interpersonal respect regardless of outward appearance, equality and respect regardless of physical gender, respect for nature and the environment, tolerance of sovereign personal choice regarding each person's own body when it does not impede others from making the same choice, behavior-based rather than appearance-based rules of civility or limits on liberty, "I don't want to see that" discomfort versus legal constraints, etc.

This allows for the second rule of civil discourse which is a commitment to "sit with discomfort:" How to have difficult conversations with others who disagree is a teachable, learnable skill -- for both sides it gets easier with practice. Make the arguments forcefully and clearly, then go for a coffee or beer together (6-feet apart of course!).

The point is that the "difficult conversation" should not set textile against nudist, but rather focus on specific modalities applicable to all -- like proximity, timing, location, health, safety, and/or such things as deletion of exiting discriminatory statutes in favor of formulations applicable to everyone equally. The advantage of American law is that this can be done locally and replicated. The advantage of current technology is that such discussions are only a Zoom meeting away.

In this time of political divisiveness, there have been more examples of debate disintegrating into personal attack or adversarial battle flags than of civil discourse. But that may be precisely why it is the ideal time for us to take an exemplary path, to engage a civil dialogue about de-politicizing and de-criminalizing the personal choice to be nude while well-behaved. Most of us afterall are not nude all the time -- we just have an extra dimension to our fashion choice than people who are clothed all the time.

Anyway, I think it may be an excellent time for each of us to seek out your most ardent "textile" neighbor or compatriot to have a civil Zoom chat with a "nudist" on how practically to enjoy "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" with mutual trust and respect.

[Mosquito_Bait]

There is no battle. The textiles generally have the law on their side. The law generally provides no right for nudists to be nude except on their own property when well-shielded from view by others. Textiles generally have no interest in changing this.

Perhaps the way to change this is to change society's attitude toward nudity by normalizing it in the mass media. This is basically the way gay rights became mainstream.

[nudeyooper]

It only takes one to object to normal nudity. Some surveys have shown that a majority of people have no objection to their neighbors being naked in full view of others, but it only takes one person to use the law against us, and most of us cannot afford the cost of fighting that law in financial as well as emotional terms. So we stay hidden.

[Mosquito_Bait]

I reread this post.

It feels like the Jews telling other Jews to stop fighting the Nazis.

[nudeyooper]

Here and in other places the advice seems to be live with caution. There is a lot of discussion on how to make your back yard private, covering up to answer the door, being caught naked by someone who was unaware of nudist lifestyles. Movements to become successful must have people coming together to make their desires or demands known. We are too scattered for that, we have developed a culture that requires privacy, and we have the law against us in most locations. Even where the law is not against us, there are cultural objections. We could be living in a community with dozens of nudists who are completely unaware of each other because of the secret we keep.
For some strange reason, the public has allowed nudity in large protest events like the World Naked Bike Rides. They even line the routes to observe and take pictures, but there is someone out there to make life very difficult for a person who would step out of the home without wearing any clothing.
Yes, it should not be a fight, but there is conflict and what price is one willing to pay?

[Tanazz]

It's a great concept and I'd love to see nudity laws liberalized. Just being nude should never be a felony, I don't care what the age of the so called "victim" is. In your yard, it shouldn't be a misdemeanor. It should be able to be handled by Zoom. But, in this politically charged climate, we'd never get beyond whether the Zoom was clothed or nude. Pick yer fights

[Centauri4]

The legal analyst/commentator on CNN stepped on that nude- Zoom landmine with only a few co-workers on the group call and it put them "Off Air" for several months! I do not think they were charged with any offense and mainly had to publicly apologize for 'privately witnessed' indecency.

[Tanazz]

Yeah, but wasn't he masterbating,?

[Bob S.]

Yes Tanazz, Jeffrey Toobin was on a break from zooming with colleagues from the New Yorker as well as people from WNYC radio. While on break, he changed tabs and, ahem, interacted with himself while on some porn sites not realizing his camera was still on and he was broadcasting.

He asked for time off from CNN, which was not involved with this incident, which they gave him. He was fired from the New Yorker and banned from WNYC. I do wonder about laws regarding sexual activities over the internet. I tried to look up laws against that, but couldn't find any apart from minors being involved.

Bob S.