Nudity and Modesty

[EltonJ]

"Modesty died when clothes were invented"

So, another topic on Modesty today. Can you be modest while nude? I believe so (although it can take some time to convince your neighbors). I think we, as a culture in the United States, don't understand modesty. We got it wrapped up in clothes wearing. And Madison Avenue exploits it. So, I read an abbreviated history of clothing on the LDSSDF earlier this week, and since I can't post there on it, I thought I'd post here.

What do you think?

Here is the link to the Brief History of Clothing in Europe.

Just watched the Nudels of Nudeland trailer. Now I didn't know what to think of it. But I think it's crazy to put animals in clothes.

[nudeyooper]

Yes, you can be nude and modest if you consider modesty as an attitude rather than something that you would put on. Modesty in clothing can be thought to indicate simplicity rather than how much of the body is covered. Nudists could be considered immodest when adorned with jewlry or tatoos. I am not against either, but use no jewelry and have no tatoos. Like clothing, the level of modesty would tend to go down with the increase of the cost of this type of adornment.
It seems that human nature has a desire to draw attention to onesself, and clothes among other things can be used to satisfy that desire. Being naked among the clothed, and clothed among the naked also serves that purpose.

[EltonJ]

Yes, you can be nude and modest if you consider modesty as an attitude rather than something that you would put on. Modesty in clothing can be thought to indicate simplicity rather than how much of the body is covered. Nudists could be considered immodest when adorned with jewlry or tatoos. I am not against either, but use no jewelry and have no tatoos. Like clothing, the level of modesty would tend to go down with the increase of the cost of this type of adornment.
It seems that human nature has a desire to draw attention to onesself, and clothes among other things can be used to satisfy that desire. Being naked among the clothed, and clothed among the naked also serves that purpose.

The cartoon above is funny and has some pertinence to what you are saying.

[Mosquito_Bait]

If you define modesty as acting in a manner that doesn't bring attention, then the modest thing to do is to dress and behave in a manner similar to others nearby. In that case, modesty requires being nude when at a nudist park or on a nude beach.

[EltonJ]

If you define modesty as acting in a manner that doesn't bring attention, then the modest thing to do is to dress and behave in a manner similar to others nearby. In that case, modesty requires being nude when at a nudist park or on a nude beach.

That's correct.

[nudeyooper]

That's correct.

That's just where I was trying to go with this. I well remember the 1950's when game show prizes could include fur coats. That was status back then. If one would be worn today it would more likely bring scorn rather than envy or admiration. At either time the wearer would be aiming to attract attention.

[EltonJ]

Do you think women's swimsuits are designed to attract attention, and men's swimsuits are designed not to?

[Bob S.]

It depends on the type of swimsuit, Elton. There are women's suits that do better to cover rather than attract attention like bikinis. There are also speedos for men that attract more attention than things like board shorts. The thing with women is that they simply have more parts of their bodies that are immodest to show. This makes wearing clothes that do not hide, or even accentuate those parts of the body, more attracting of attention.

Bob S.

[nudeM]

Mens and womens swimwear come basically two different types. One type is your everyday swimwear, suitable for use at any beach/pool setting. The other type is the "revealing' type, the ones that draw attention, that could be borderline exhibition. It could include skimpy and mild see-through.

[NudonyII]

If you define modesty as acting in a manner that doesn't bring attention, then the modest thing to do is to dress and behave in a manner similar to others nearby. In that case, modesty requires being nude when at a nudist park or on a nude beach.

A friend of mine - who was rather "old school" - had a much more pointed definition of "nudist modesty." She felt that pretty much anything that "brought attention" to the genitals (for example positioning oneself open-leggedly - especially if shaved) was immodest.

I of course disagree with that definition; but I think this sort of "genital-focused" viewpoint on nudist modesty is not entirely uncommon.

[Noodfellaz]

A friend of mine - who was rather "old school" - had a much more pointed definition of "nudist modesty." She felt that pretty much anything that "brought attention" to the genitals (for example positioning oneself open-leggedly - especially if shaved) was immodest.

I of course disagree with that definition; but I think this sort of "genital-focused" viewpoint on nudist modesty is not entirely uncommon.

I would tend to agree with your friend

[EltonJ]

Yes, this is agreeable.

[NudonyII]

I would tend to agree with your friend

My wife and I just had a conversation about it today at our nudist venue. She doesn't "lounge around with her legs open" herself; as she feels it is immodest. But we were far away from other people; so on a lark, and out of curiosity, she decided to try it for herself. After a while she did say that it was actually quite relaxing and enjoyable. So she actually embraced it and stayed open legged for a good while as we simply lounged by the lake.

She would herself never do this right in front of other people. But at my resort, there are women who do. When I'm hanging out in the pool, and I look up at people lounging around, I frequently see various degrees of open-leggedness. When the "intent" behind it is relaxation or "full body" tanning; is it really immodest? If it does happen to bring some attention - and it is unsolicited; is it "lack of modesty", or is it the "viewer" who is actually "out of line" by being too "attentive"?

If the intent is to "provoke" or "stand out"; then I would say it is immodest. But if it is simply while being "comfortably naked"; I personally don't think it is immodest.

[Noodfellaz]

for the sake of conversation, even if it is immodest, is it wrong? Personally I don't think it's wrong at all, but it is immodest. There's a gray area where it crosses into exhibitionism which may be inappropriate and very much immodest, but not necessarily wrong

[nudeyooper]

Lounging with legs spread is only considered immodest if you are sexualizing nudity. That's something that we tend to say is not done by nudists. Consider that no matter how a man stands or positions his legs when sitting or lounging, he will be exposing the part of himself that in photos and films tend to be fuzzed, blocked, or have something placed between him and the camera. Why should a woman have to act differently?