Announcement

**Stevedaoust** · 03-12-2004, 06:24 AM

Ok, you're opinions on show #2?

I thought that the wiccan scene was very beneficial but the naturist scene was a sham. It was like SHOWING THE GOODS. I felt our lifestyle falling back 10 yrs on that scene.

As for the "GIRL" that got kicked off? I felt bad because it reinforced her way of life BUT it's of her own creation. She can change if she gets over what her life is now instead of showing her claws at first meet.

Steve

**NewAndNude** · 03-12-2004, 07:00 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Stevedaoust:
[qb] Ok, you're opinions on show #2?

I thought that the wiccan scene was very beneficial but the naturist scene was a sham. It was like SHOWING THE GOODS. I felt our lifestyle falling back 10 yrs on that scene.

Steve [/qb]

That wasn't nudism OR naturism. It was exhibitionism, pure and simple. The women, being dressed in only loincloths, had their breasts beared and then of course there were plenty of vaginas (vulvas) and penises bared in order to
"play the game." Even Avacado was wearing a loincloth, though I believe he, too, "showed the goods" before the game began.

That was disgraceful, and I don't even consider myself a "full" naturist. It also doesn't make sense to me why they would have that sort of thing happen and leave the houseguests clothed?

For all the other "challenges" the houseguests are having to interact with the Alt's fetish (such as the pool of blood from last week, and next week the animal parts thing), so what is the point of not forcing them to get undressed? Granted I don't really want to see that 50ish mother naked but at the same time I don't understand why they chose to do what they did. I have called this a "Fear Factor meets Survivor" ripoff and with last night's laughable naturist stunt I believe it stands even more.

**zuma** · 03-12-2004, 09:06 AM

eeek!

Sounds like reality tv shows exploiting naturism have reached a new low (who;d have thought it could get any lower?)

I saw show 1 and thought it was lame. Sounds like #2 was even worse. What did our dear "Avacado" do to represent naturism?

**NewAndNude** · 03-12-2004, 09:55 AM

quote:
Originally posted by zuma:
[qb] eeek!

Sounds like reality tv shows exploiting naturism have reached a new low (who;d have thought it could get any lower?)

I saw show 1 and thought it was lame. Sounds like #2 was even worse. What did our dear "Avacado" do to represent naturism? [/qb]

Absolutely nothing, as far as the show was concerned.

The idea was this: Avacado was out on the lawn wearing nothing but a rectangle-shaped loincloth hanging down covering his genitals from view. As the houseguests came outside, there were around 30 or so men and women standing in rows wearing the same garments. This meant that from the beginning the womens' breasts were open and exposed to view for anyone in the victinity.

The game was that each of the semi-naked individuals were "friends" of Avacado's and on the back of each of their loincloths was a type of edible food or nut. The game was "mix and match" as each housemate had one turn to go up to one of the individuals, have them lift their loincloths to just above the navel, exposing their secrets to the world and whoever was in front of them.

Once a housemate found two items that matched on the loincloths they were to go back to the line and the two matching individuals were to stand behind them as the game progressed.

The winner of the game would be immune from being voted out and would be able to sit in on the voting decision for that night. It came down to two individuals, one male and one female, and the female won by immediately picking which of ten "friends" of Avacados, who had switched loincloths back behind the bushes, had the avacado on his or her loincloth.

It was disgraceful and tacky. A housemate would come up to a male or female and ask them to reveal the image on the loincloth. To do this they would lift the loincloth showing the image and displaying their genitals for as long as they held the loincloth up. Avacado also did this to demonstrate how the participants would be doing this upon selection.

At one point, I forget who it was, one of the houseguests, a male, went up to another male and had him reveal the image on the loincloth he wore. When his genitals were visibly exposed, the housemate muffled his laughter and I believe pointed at the man's penis as well, mocking him obviously for his size.

There was one other thing I noticed last night, and that was that all of the participants -- all thirty or so of them -- had shaved their pubic hair completely off. Both males and females. Now I've never seen a female up close who has done this, though I've seen it in various nudist images before. However, I personally found it interesting because what it meant was that when the blurring (it was blurring, by the way, not pixilation which is the standard in the industry for censorship) occurred, that the blur would show only skin.

In other words, Sci-Fi channel had all the participants shave their genitals so that when they would appear on-camera there would be no distinguishing dark features that would be the tell-tale pubic hair that humans grow upon hitting puberty. They were all, for lack of a better term, "smoothies." All in the name of censorship. Very interesting indeed.

Only one person opted out not to participate and it was the fiftyish mother; she later claimed that she did not participate because she did not want to go to the frat house that her son was at after the show was all said and done and end up being harrassed by his fratmates or other people on the street asking her if she "wanted to play that [naked] game she played on tv."

**CTyankee** · 03-12-2004, 01:48 PM

quote:
There was one other thing I noticed last night, and that was that all of the participants -- all thirty or so of them -- had shaved their pubic hair completely off. Both males and females. Now I've never seen a female up close who has done this, though I've seen it in various nudist images before. However, I personally found it interesting because what it meant was that when the blurring (it was blurring, by the way, not pixilation which is the standard in the industry for censorship) occurred, that the blur would show only skin.

Not true. You can blur things out in such a way to keep the colors the way you want to. One easy way is to just make all pixels that are hair colored look the same color as skin. Very easy to to really. So the blurring is hardly proof that there was any shaving.

**zuma** · 03-13-2004, 06:32 AM

I'm almost in support of the fcc's crackdown on indecency, the way these shows are going. This crap is so juvenile and dehumanizing (not to mention insulting naturism) to make me want to puke.

**zuma** · 03-14-2004, 05:00 AM

you know what would have been REALLY funny? If corey or any number of us folk had been chosen to be on "mad mad house", and the producers would have thrown the peek-a-boo genitals are funny challenge at us, and we'd have walked off the show.

Of course most of us would have lawyers vetting the contract, so it would probably not come to that, but still! I do wonder how "avacado" would feel about being a national joke, assuming people were watching this crap show.

**Naturist Mark** · 03-14-2004, 05:11 AM

quote:
Originally posted by zuma:
[qb] you know what would have been REALLY funny? If corey or any number of us folk had been chosen to be on "mad mad house", and the producers would have thrown the peek-a-boo genitals are funny challenge at us, and we'd have walked off the show.[/qb]

Which is doubtlessly why they didn't choose Corey, they had no intention of having a legit nudist who would oppose their defamatory shenanigans.

-Mark

**nudeM** · 03-14-2004, 02:24 PM

From what I am reading here, it's obvious that this past episode was not being 'nudist' friendly. As I stated earlier, the very first episode was more of a 'Fear Factor'. Is that how this last episode was? If so, then the 'Naturist' is not a (true) naturist. It's (the show) is specifically just for the ratings. Not a true redemption of a 'true' naturist.

**MikeJB** · 03-14-2004, 04:06 PM

I wouldve just ripped the loincloth off and thrown it in the guy's face and told him to grow up and tell his buddies upstairs to get a life and grow some brains! If youre gonna have nudism on tv you oughta fricken do it right!!!

**nudemommy** · 03-14-2004, 05:40 PM

I tuned in on Thursday, but I saw a repeat of the first episode...did I do something wrong here? Hmmmmm. I really didn't like the premise on this show from the getgo, but I wanted to see what happened to the Christian boy and girl. So I wanted to watch again this last week. Obviously I missed it. When will it air again?

**NumberOneNudist** · 03-15-2004, 05:51 PM

Hmm... well, here's my thoughts on this. I think that Avocado practices an obscure form of Naturism that I have never heard of before that also involves deep communion with nature. I think it is quite clear, even to the average viewer of the show, that this isn't standard nudism-style naturism.

As for the issue of having a "practice naturism" challenge, the promos clearly show that a future episode will have the guests running around naked, although it seems they're using this to the advantage of ratings...

**zuma** · 03-16-2004, 04:50 AM

Avacado doesn't practice any form of naturism. wb is labelling him a "naturist", when in fact he has nothing to do with naturism except running around naked once in a while.

Just great.. now everyone will think going to a naturist resort involves eating raw foods, sitting in weeds, and god knows what else.

I'm torn now. Do we submit to reality tv and actually try to show naturism in a positive light, or let attention-starved media *****s steal the "naturist" label.

we lost on option #1, and we lost even more on option #2.

I hate to say it, but our movement is failing in a spectacular way. Maybe we need to get back to going on ricki lake/phil donahue type shows. maybe our resorts need to post ads in newspapers. has anyone here ever seen an actual nudist resort ad in an actual newspaper?

.

**Tad** · 03-16-2004, 08:51 AM

JONATHAN TAD KETCHEN (JTK.CA)
Christian Nudist, Artist, & Poet

Founder of
GUELPH NUDIST CLUB
Families * Couples * Singles

NudeCreations.com

Guelph, Ontario, Canada

(519) 780-1057
[email protected]
http://NudeCreations.com

---------------------------------------------

Dear naked friends,

I'm with zuma. I think part of naturism's problem in getting its message out is that they call it naturism. Some even call it naturalism which has absolutely nothing to do with nudism.

I "barely" tolerate the term "naturist," but wish it would go away. I call myself a nudist, so that everyone outside the lifestyle has no excuse for misunderstanding the fact I love to be naked whenever possible. If I called myself a naturist,
several textiles would think I was a naturalist, a scientist out in the field picking flowers. Why do naturists call themselves an obscure term that many outside the lifestyle are ignorant of. What is the point of telling people who you are if they are liable to misunderstand completely or be completely clueless as to what you mean. I am not a naturist. Unfortunately a lot of the groups I can join use that word so I'm stuck with it. I vote INA change it's name to
International Nudist Association. Don't get me wrong, I love how friendly INA is to my Christian faith. ClothesFree.com
is by far the best nudist site on the web, even though it unfortunately has the word "Naturists" in its name; a term often misunderstood in the textile world.

Love in Christ
(the best kind),

Tad (JTK.CA)
Christian Nudist, Artist, & Poet
Founder of Guelph Nudist Club
(Guelph, Ontario, Canada)
http://NudeCreations.com

Announcement

Mad, Mad House #2

Mad, Mad House #2

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment