Having lived most of my life in the suburbs of Southern California, I have come to believe that government, at all levels, is our biggest obstacle. As I have trouble tolerating low or cold temperatures when nude, I understand the need for protective clothing for those conditions. The problem is, when conditions would be tolerable to be nude, laws make it difficult or excessively risky to be observed by others. I wonder, however, if we could classify nudity as free speech and use the 1st Amendment right to push the issue with government? What do you think about that?
I have long advocated that nudity should be a freedom of expression and that people should be free to choose what to wear or indeed what not to wear. As a citizen of New Zealand, I am not subject to the same laws and restrictions that seem to be ingrained in American law and culture, and I often struggle to understand the reactions of Americans to nudity. Unfortunately, those attitudes are included in much of the popular culture and television that America exports to the rest of the world, and in turn, influences world opinion. In NZ it is not illegal to be naked in public. That doesn't mean that everyone walks around naked, they don't, but it does mean that if I wish to be naked at the beach, I can do so without breaking any laws. There are laws about offensive behaviour, but simply being naked is not considered offensive by our courts.
An interesting point. I have never been a member of a landed club but I would identify as a naturist. I was raised by naturist parents and grandparents. Clothing was always optional as I grew up. It was normal for meals to be eaten with nude people at the table. Gardening was always done naked as were most recreational activities. I dont feel that not being in a "landed club" has denied me over time.
Personally I believe that hiding behind high fences and hedges implies that there is something wrong with it. Not a state I wish to portray. However if truly 14% of the uk population identify as naturists. That should be sufficient for a critical mass so long as they are prepared to publicly identify as such
“people will choose a label to try and identify as a person with the same interests as others who identify and use the same label”
Oh, I so dislike labels! Naturist/nudist, so many variant labels of both, and some used - or at least interpreted - pejoratively. One person’s nudist is another’s pervert, my naturist is your exhibitionist.
We all use labels as shorthand descriptions, be it of ourselves or others, and they’re very useful ... up to a point. But what does that label mean to someone else? There’s probably not a naturist forum or blog that doesn’t have some sort of discussion or debate on the difference between a naturist or a nudist, and that’s among friends. But outside our circle our self-applied label can often carry very different meanings.
I prefer to avoid either naturist or nudist as my label (or to use the vernacular of the day, as my pronoun) and describe myself as someone who prefers to be naked over wearing clothes. Less room, I feel, for differences in interpretation and for misunderstandings if my naturist turns out to not be your naturist.
I agree that labels can be divisive and subjective. I guess my spin on it is that if you are looking to connect with other like-minded people and build acceptance of social nudity in society, you need to hang your ideas on a label that others will recognise and find. While being someone who prefers to be naked over wearing clothes may well be a much more accurate description, it is probably not what other people who feel the same way are going to put into their search engine to find others. While I don't dislike the term naturist as I feel that it is more a philosophy than simply being naked, but I accept that it may well be interpreted differently by people in different communities.
Having lived most of my life in the suburbs of Southern California, I have come to believe that government, at all levels, is our biggest obstacle. As I have trouble tolerating low or cold temperatures when nude, I understand the need for protective clothing for those conditions. The problem is, when conditions would be tolerable to be nude, laws make it difficult or excessively risky to be observed by others. I wonder, however, if we could classify nudity as free speech and use the 1st Amendment right to push the issue with government? What do you think about that?
I have long advocated that nudity should be a freedom of expression and that people should be free to choose what to wear or indeed what not to wear. As a citizen of New Zealand, I am not subject to the same laws and restrictions that seem to be ingrained in American law and culture, and I often struggle to understand the reactions of Americans to nudity. Unfortunately, those attitudes are included in much of the popular culture and television that America exports to the rest of the world, and in turn, influences world opinion. In NZ it is not illegal to be naked in public. That doesn't mean that everyone walks around naked, they don't, but it does mean that if I wish to be naked at the beach, I can do so without breaking any laws. There are laws about offensive behaviour, but simply being naked is not considered offensive by our courts.
An interesting point. I have never been a member of a landed club but I would identify as a naturist. I was raised by naturist parents and grandparents. Clothing was always optional as I grew up. It was normal for meals to be eaten with nude people at the table. Gardening was always done naked as were most recreational activities. I dont feel that not being in a "landed club" has denied me over time.
Personally I believe that hiding behind high fences and hedges implies that there is something wrong with it. Not a state I wish to portray. However if truly 14% of the uk population identify as naturists. That should be sufficient for a critical mass so long as they are prepared to publicly identify as such
“people will choose a label to try and identify as a person with the same interests as others who identify and use the same label”
Oh, I so dislike labels! Naturist/nudist, so many variant labels of both, and some used - or at least interpreted - pejoratively. One person’s nudist is another’s pervert, my naturist is your exhibitionist.
We all use labels as shorthand descriptions, be it of ourselves or others, and they’re very useful ... up to a point. But what does that label mean to someone else? There’s probably not a naturist forum or blog that doesn’t have some sort of discussion or debate on the difference between a naturist or a nudist, and that’s among friends. But outside our circle our self-applied label can often carry very different meanings.
I prefer to avoid either naturist or nudist as my label (or to use the vernacular of the day, as my pronoun) and describe myself as someone who prefers to be naked over wearing clothes. Less room, I feel, for differences in interpretation and for misunderstandings if my naturist turns out to not be your naturist.
I agree that labels can be divisive and subjective. I guess my spin on it is that if you are looking to connect with other like-minded people and build acceptance of social nudity in society, you need to hang your ideas on a label that others will recognise and find. While being someone who prefers to be naked over wearing clothes may well be a much more accurate description, it is probably not what other people who feel the same way are going to put into their search engine to find others. While I don't dislike the term naturist as I feel that it is more a philosophy than simply being naked, but I accept that it may well be interpreted differently by people in different communities.
Thank you