I also feel very lucky to have my own house. Myself & my wife only live in the house. Though my wife is not a naturist, she doesn't have any objection for my naturism passion & hence always I have the privilege to be naked in the home. However I can't practice naturism out of my house walls as the nakedness outside home is legally banned in India..I can understand the situation & I feel extremely sorry for the naturists who don't have that privacy & may have to compromise with their naturism passion. You have raised this genuine issue through your nicely penned article which many naturists have to tackle in a day to day life...
I am pleased that you have the ability to be naked at home, and that your partner is supportive, or at least tolerant of your philosophy. Thank you for your kind words.
Great article. From personal experience, it can be frustrating not to be able to enjoy naturism in the common areas of my home. If I am accepting an outsider into my space, there might be different expectations. If I make it clear how I live my life and they are willing to accept that while being with me, then OK. If not, then maybe they should consider looking elsewhere for a place to stay.
But for those I live with always, (spouse, older children, parents, etc.) I need to keep in mind that my comfort in common areas is no more important than my family's comfort. We need mutual respect.
It sems that in practice it is usually the Naturist who does all the compromising. And this is because people (including a lot of Naturists) just assume that being clothed is the norm. It's sad, but unless we become at least as assertive as the textile world, nothing will change.
Thank you as always for your thoughts. I have to admit to being more in Rokkers camp. If someone is offended it is their internal value system that is making a judgement call and measuring against what? I cannot see how our natural state can be offensive. It is after all just a state of dress, like jeans, dress, nightgown etc.
Reality i think actions can possibly be offensive but not a state of being.
As you know our place isnt private, there is usually distance but when we are outside we are certainly visible to passers by.
A short time back we had a house guest, my daughter's friends partner. We carried on our life as normal, given its just a regular life she was quite comfortable.
Both you and Rok make valid points. I guess we are seasoned naturists, of an age where we really don't care what others think. We have been practicing nudity for so long now, in an environment that is far more permissive of our lifestyle than many places.
For people new to naturism, or those living in areas that have attitudes that you and I might call oppressive, a less compromising approach may be counterproductive.
For a young female living in a conservative family environment with a lack of privacy, making the argument that her nudity is a natural state and can't be considered offensive is something she may not have the experience or vocabulary to articulate. She may not have our confidence to defend that position.
I want more people to enjoy naturism. People new to the philosophy may need to take small steps before they build up the resilience that we have developed over the years.
Hi Steve, Again, an interesting and thoughtful piece. You’ve raised some important points about the pragmatics of shared living, and while I respect the "sanctuary" you’ve created, I wanted to offer an alternative view based on how I see things especially and my own life experience.
On the issue of consent, I’ve come to see it differently. If we accept that the human body is inherently neutral, why is consent required to be seen in our natural state? We don't ask for consent to be seen in a suit or a tracksuit; those are just different ways of being. From my perspective, "offence" is subjective—it is a choice or a reaction the observer makes. The body itself does not have the power to proactively offend. While I agree with you that mutual tolerance is the goal, I believe that tolerance should include the "clothed" party accepting that their discomfort is their own responsibility to manage, rather than a right to dictate how others exist. Requiring consent to be naked is a form of social control that reinforces body shame by treating the natural state as "inherently sexual" or "dangerous".
I also wanted to touch on your point about trauma and triggers. This is deeply personal for me. By the time I was 13, I had been sexually abused by three different perpetrators. I was an angry, confused kid until I was placed in a loving foster home where my healing actually began. That home was very relaxed about nudity. Far from being a "trigger" that caused further harm, that environment actually became a vital part of my recovery. It allowed me to confront those demons head-on and refuse to let shame rule my life or my body. It taught me that the body itself isn't the predator—the intent is.
When people say they are triggered by the sight of a naked form, I feel for them, but I also believe they still have work to do. We shouldn't have to hide the natural world to accommodate a trauma response; instead, we should be empowered to reclaim the body as something safe and non-shameful.
I don’t mean this to sound pushy, but rather to suggest that the "safe space" isn't always one where the body is hidden—sometimes the safest space is one where it is finally allowed to just be.
I also feel very lucky to have my own house. Myself & my wife only live in the house. Though my wife is not a naturist, she doesn't have any objection for my naturism passion & hence always I have the privilege to be naked in the home. However I can't practice naturism out of my house walls as the nakedness outside home is legally banned in India..I can understand the situation & I feel extremely sorry for the naturists who don't have that privacy & may have to compromise with their naturism passion. You have raised this genuine issue through your nicely penned article which many naturists have to tackle in a day to day life...
I am pleased that you have the ability to be naked at home, and that your partner is supportive, or at least tolerant of your philosophy. Thank you for your kind words.
Great article. From personal experience, it can be frustrating not to be able to enjoy naturism in the common areas of my home. If I am accepting an outsider into my space, there might be different expectations. If I make it clear how I live my life and they are willing to accept that while being with me, then OK. If not, then maybe they should consider looking elsewhere for a place to stay.
But for those I live with always, (spouse, older children, parents, etc.) I need to keep in mind that my comfort in common areas is no more important than my family's comfort. We need mutual respect.
It sems that in practice it is usually the Naturist who does all the compromising. And this is because people (including a lot of Naturists) just assume that being clothed is the norm. It's sad, but unless we become at least as assertive as the textile world, nothing will change.
Hi Steve
Thank you as always for your thoughts. I have to admit to being more in Rokkers camp. If someone is offended it is their internal value system that is making a judgement call and measuring against what? I cannot see how our natural state can be offensive. It is after all just a state of dress, like jeans, dress, nightgown etc.
Reality i think actions can possibly be offensive but not a state of being.
As you know our place isnt private, there is usually distance but when we are outside we are certainly visible to passers by.
A short time back we had a house guest, my daughter's friends partner. We carried on our life as normal, given its just a regular life she was quite comfortable.
Both you and Rok make valid points. I guess we are seasoned naturists, of an age where we really don't care what others think. We have been practicing nudity for so long now, in an environment that is far more permissive of our lifestyle than many places.
For people new to naturism, or those living in areas that have attitudes that you and I might call oppressive, a less compromising approach may be counterproductive.
For a young female living in a conservative family environment with a lack of privacy, making the argument that her nudity is a natural state and can't be considered offensive is something she may not have the experience or vocabulary to articulate. She may not have our confidence to defend that position.
I want more people to enjoy naturism. People new to the philosophy may need to take small steps before they build up the resilience that we have developed over the years.
I concur on all 4 points.
I see the situations where compromise may be required but i firmly beleive it should never be our starting position.
Always thoughtful writing. Thank you. T
Hi Steve, Again, an interesting and thoughtful piece. You’ve raised some important points about the pragmatics of shared living, and while I respect the "sanctuary" you’ve created, I wanted to offer an alternative view based on how I see things especially and my own life experience.
On the issue of consent, I’ve come to see it differently. If we accept that the human body is inherently neutral, why is consent required to be seen in our natural state? We don't ask for consent to be seen in a suit or a tracksuit; those are just different ways of being. From my perspective, "offence" is subjective—it is a choice or a reaction the observer makes. The body itself does not have the power to proactively offend. While I agree with you that mutual tolerance is the goal, I believe that tolerance should include the "clothed" party accepting that their discomfort is their own responsibility to manage, rather than a right to dictate how others exist. Requiring consent to be naked is a form of social control that reinforces body shame by treating the natural state as "inherently sexual" or "dangerous".
I also wanted to touch on your point about trauma and triggers. This is deeply personal for me. By the time I was 13, I had been sexually abused by three different perpetrators. I was an angry, confused kid until I was placed in a loving foster home where my healing actually began. That home was very relaxed about nudity. Far from being a "trigger" that caused further harm, that environment actually became a vital part of my recovery. It allowed me to confront those demons head-on and refuse to let shame rule my life or my body. It taught me that the body itself isn't the predator—the intent is.
When people say they are triggered by the sight of a naked form, I feel for them, but I also believe they still have work to do. We shouldn't have to hide the natural world to accommodate a trauma response; instead, we should be empowered to reclaim the body as something safe and non-shameful.
I don’t mean this to sound pushy, but rather to suggest that the "safe space" isn't always one where the body is hidden—sometimes the safest space is one where it is finally allowed to just be.
Cheers!
Rok
Hey Rok... Always good to read your comments and hear your perspective on things.