There is an issue of gender inequality in many landed naturist communities. While many naturist clubs and organisations are struggling to recruit members, and some may say, struggling to remain relevant in today's socially connected world, many clubs and groups offer barriers to single men looking to join the community.
Here in LA, I've know of 3 different trans nudists, one of whom shows up for hot spring hikes regularly. I also know one who is not a nudist but is nude friendly and quite happy just to hang out. Obviously, I only know a small fraction of the LA nudist community.
One can't say that nudity isn't sexual or even that it isn't inherently sexual. About all a guy can say is, "For me, nudity in a social setting is not sexual." You can't speak for the other guy, even if he says he's a nudist. The only evidence for the statement is your behavior when you're in the socially nude setting. Nothing else you do or say is at all convincing.
And here is where men who are evangelical about nudism fall flat on their face. Suggest to a textile female that they ought to take up social nudism and you will raise all kinds of red flags. The bigger the enthusiasm, the bigger the flags. The only male who can safely broach the subject to a textile female is one who already has a high degree of trust with the female in question. (If they approach you, that's different.) Just accept it and move on.
Even men who are married or otherwise pair bonded do a great disservice when they try to coax their partners into social nudity. They are interested or they are not. It doesn't matter how badly you may want it, if they aren't interested and you keep applying pressure, you are disrespecting them. Just accept it and move on.
OTOH, females can talk to other females about the joys of nudity without coming across as a creep. They can even make it into a feminist issue. But a guy? A textile female will always assume its just an excuse to get her clothes off to see her naked. And as often as not, she will be right.
I can't help but wonder if clubs that are obsessed over gender balance are adding an implicit layer of sexuality. I have been in a fair number of male dominated organizations that did not obsess over trying to coax women in. The activity was the focus and if women joined that was fine and if they didn't, that was fine too.
Letting in all men and then expelling misbehavior isn't workable.. I belong to several naturist / nudist groups, most try to prevent the male % from exceeding 60%. If it's more, the women shy away. I have also attended an all gay men campground and found it worked very well, very kind and welcoming, without the heterosexual male behavior. I do wonder if my main naturist club would do better by breaking down male membership into % gay, %hetro males. That might reassure women attendees that the pool of potential predators is below the 60% de facto limit. Maybe even below 50%. But that info might also cause alarm for the "family friendly" set.
But while this is 100% correct, it gives me no revelation. While liberals are trying to eliminate the difference between male and female, evolution had a different idea.
A Female has several hundred eggs in a lifetime and just a few dozen capable of developing. The Female is looking for the male that wields the biggest club and will bring the biggest bear home to feed the brood.
I do not agree with the description of the situation in the 2 subjects.
The first one, the male has several million cells spread around the world every day.
Therefore this explains why the male always acts in accordance with how evolution made him. The socially acceptable aspect is a different story. Here the behavior is modified in accordance with the mix of the hormones in the blood, empirical experience of what did work in the past, and geographic location on the planet, in other words, what is the norm or acceptable behavior in the society at the place.
The second is welcoming single males. Of course, there are clubs that do it, they are called gay clubs. Even if the intent at the beginning was just to accept everyone, as soon as the imbalance necessarily and rather quickly tips in favor of the male the females stay away.
I do not believe that it would make any difference if the female will spend time in a single-male company. Females cannot get conditioned to be comfortable in such a setting. She will need other females around, and preferably gender-balanced numbers. Look at the birds. Blackbirds sit with blackbirds. Evolution is not something we can legislate or condition against.
The male in nudist parks are very well-behaved, more educated, and generally at better economic standing than males in a golf club or similar. But this is not enough to overcome the negative influence of gender imbalance situation.
I do not see that this will change ever. At public nude beaches, we will see mixed groups enjoying the sand and clearly separate areas where the single male will roast.
Here in LA, I've know of 3 different trans nudists, one of whom shows up for hot spring hikes regularly. I also know one who is not a nudist but is nude friendly and quite happy just to hang out. Obviously, I only know a small fraction of the LA nudist community.
One can't say that nudity isn't sexual or even that it isn't inherently sexual. About all a guy can say is, "For me, nudity in a social setting is not sexual." You can't speak for the other guy, even if he says he's a nudist. The only evidence for the statement is your behavior when you're in the socially nude setting. Nothing else you do or say is at all convincing.
And here is where men who are evangelical about nudism fall flat on their face. Suggest to a textile female that they ought to take up social nudism and you will raise all kinds of red flags. The bigger the enthusiasm, the bigger the flags. The only male who can safely broach the subject to a textile female is one who already has a high degree of trust with the female in question. (If they approach you, that's different.) Just accept it and move on.
Even men who are married or otherwise pair bonded do a great disservice when they try to coax their partners into social nudity. They are interested or they are not. It doesn't matter how badly you may want it, if they aren't interested and you keep applying pressure, you are disrespecting them. Just accept it and move on.
OTOH, females can talk to other females about the joys of nudity without coming across as a creep. They can even make it into a feminist issue. But a guy? A textile female will always assume its just an excuse to get her clothes off to see her naked. And as often as not, she will be right.
I can't help but wonder if clubs that are obsessed over gender balance are adding an implicit layer of sexuality. I have been in a fair number of male dominated organizations that did not obsess over trying to coax women in. The activity was the focus and if women joined that was fine and if they didn't, that was fine too.
Letting in all men and then expelling misbehavior isn't workable.. I belong to several naturist / nudist groups, most try to prevent the male % from exceeding 60%. If it's more, the women shy away. I have also attended an all gay men campground and found it worked very well, very kind and welcoming, without the heterosexual male behavior. I do wonder if my main naturist club would do better by breaking down male membership into % gay, %hetro males. That might reassure women attendees that the pool of potential predators is below the 60% de facto limit. Maybe even below 50%. But that info might also cause alarm for the "family friendly" set.
As always an excellent article by BOP.
But while this is 100% correct, it gives me no revelation. While liberals are trying to eliminate the difference between male and female, evolution had a different idea.
A Female has several hundred eggs in a lifetime and just a few dozen capable of developing. The Female is looking for the male that wields the biggest club and will bring the biggest bear home to feed the brood.
I do not agree with the description of the situation in the 2 subjects.
The first one, the male has several million cells spread around the world every day.
Therefore this explains why the male always acts in accordance with how evolution made him. The socially acceptable aspect is a different story. Here the behavior is modified in accordance with the mix of the hormones in the blood, empirical experience of what did work in the past, and geographic location on the planet, in other words, what is the norm or acceptable behavior in the society at the place.
The second is welcoming single males. Of course, there are clubs that do it, they are called gay clubs. Even if the intent at the beginning was just to accept everyone, as soon as the imbalance necessarily and rather quickly tips in favor of the male the females stay away.
I do not believe that it would make any difference if the female will spend time in a single-male company. Females cannot get conditioned to be comfortable in such a setting. She will need other females around, and preferably gender-balanced numbers. Look at the birds. Blackbirds sit with blackbirds. Evolution is not something we can legislate or condition against.
The male in nudist parks are very well-behaved, more educated, and generally at better economic standing than males in a golf club or similar. But this is not enough to overcome the negative influence of gender imbalance situation.
I do not see that this will change ever. At public nude beaches, we will see mixed groups enjoying the sand and clearly separate areas where the single male will roast.