I imagine that many of you will have heard of or may even know Helen and Simon Berriman. The Berrimans are a U.K. couple who actively promote naturism and have appeared in numerous print publications, on the radio and on television discussing and demystifying the naturist lifestyle.
"It is a fair criticism that the news article was poorly written, inadequately researched and an example of lazy clickbait writing that seems to permeate the media these days. We must be careful not to allow poor journalism to taint the tireless work that the Berrimans and many others do to promote healthy naturism."
"It is also critical that we call out examples of poor representation of the naturist philosophy in the media. Many people reading such articles may form inaccurate impressions of naturism, or it may reinforce already held flawed beliefs."
You make a good point about not letting sub-standard journalism taint the story it is telling. It is a sad fact - in the UK at least - that newspapers generally and local papers in particular have been in free fall for years. Changes in society loosened the bonds of “locality” in forming communities; smaller circulations meant less advertising so less revenue (ad revenue has always funded the press); and the internet administered the coup de grace. Local journalists are too often unworthy of the title, getting little or no training in writing or understanding what is news and how to gather it.
Sorry, got into rant mode there. My former profession is not what it used to be.
Anyway, the result is bad writing badly presented, but as readers we need to see through that to the real story underneath. Sadly, while we can do that on subjects about which we have an understanding it is harder to achieve when the story is new to us; thus we have to accept that people who don’t know about naturism will, indeed, get distorted ideas about us from sloppy journalism, and we have to be ready to call it out and put things straight.
I agree completely that we naturist folk need to be as loud and as often seen in public as possible until it really becomes "ho hum" or "so what" if someone is seen naked on a street or at a deli. So what? It is the clothists who should be required to explain their sick affectations and shame for their own skin.
My activity to "shout it" includes public exposure all summer, and daily advocacy exposure on Twitter, Reddit, and other social media. We need to be seen on-line and in person until nobody notices that we aren't covered with ugly uncomfortable oil based polyester..
We must continue to promulgate the ethics and sense of naturism as loudly as we can. Firstly to ensure that we do not lose the gains we have made in the more advanced countries and secondly to hopefully make gains in those countries where prejudice remains.
Unfortunately the UN convention on human rights is a convention and not a treaty and as such is not binding on member states. Thus while some countries have altered their domestic laws to be more in line with its ideals others have not.
To those of us fortunate enough to live where our rights are accepted and may even be protected we need to continue our flag waving. If only to hope that one day all may have the freedoms we enjoy.
I see in this article 2 different themes: Nudism and profession or journalism. Before I attempt to offer any view I want to remain the reader that any human activity consists of thousand degrees of grey. Nothing is black or white. I do not believe that any idea is valid universally.
Journalism: A statement was made that the article was not carefully researched and presented perhaps in a less than helpful manner. I see journalists in 3 categories: The ones paid by and controlled by governments. We are fed 10 times before breakfast how much democracy do we have. No longer true. Journalists employed by our dictators speed-feed us what they are ordered to feed us and tell us "what we want to think, but we are not smart enough to know it".
Next, we have journalists often called underground not following government propaganda. They seek and disclose the crookedness of many policies and in Muslim countries, they are often killed for it. In the west, they may be only tortured like for example Assange, or get lucky and be pampered by our enemies like Snowden. Or they may devise other means to become less threatening to their rulers, declare themselves mentally challenged, change sex, and get sick or similar, an example Chelsea Manning.
At last, we have journalist idealists whose goal is to genuinely enlighten us.
In all cases, there is a chief editor that is paid and has some personal bias. He will color the work of the reporters or simply prevents its publication. The example is preventing the publication of any scientific evidence that global warming is mainly the result of cosmical regularity and in only a minuscule amount affected by what humans do. Any such discussion would upset the green apple cart of profits for the electric vehicle revolution and the editor would not survive.
All reporters must eat and eventually they publish what sells. This includes government propaganda, it may not sell but they get paid for regurgitating the official doctrine.
The issue of nudism should be no issue. Nude is a natural state. Profits for an industry created all kinds of coverings protecting our fragile bodies from cold, rain, insects, and excessive solar radiation.
The population "south of the border of Canada" without naming it correctly is just an attempt on political correctness. They are deemed a population less sexually mature, less educated, and less accepting. If you want proof just listen to the news about how many arguments are conducted by guns instead of some logical discussion.
Nudists are, to me laughingly, trying to create a schism between nudity and sex. Life is short and we owe it to ourselves to enjoy it as much as possible. But we have to draw the line between healthy and unhealthy enjoyment. Enhancing our pleasure by chemical means is demonstrably wrong. Eventually, drugs will kill us. Greed is a strong motivator and states are now salivating about how much tax revenue they are generating from drug sales. Cannabis is pushed in ads on us daily. I did not see, yet an article describing the damage to long-term marijuana users. I know a few. They become paranoid and believe much unbelievable propaganda that Earth is flat, that people never went to the moon, stout anti-vaxers, etc. Of course not everyone's addiction is severe, but the potential is always there.
The primary healthy pleasures are food and sex, and the secondary enjoyment of art such as classical music. Just think that every time we put something into our body or take something away from the body it enhances pleasure in harmony with evolution, therefore pleasure we do not get punished for by evolution, the pleasure we are entitled to.
The food industry employs hundreds of scientists to enhance basic caloric intake chemically so that it creates maximum pleasure, maximum craving, and maximum profit for the creator. Of course, this excess creates problems, 70% of people are now obese.
The sex industry created a similar phenomenon. Enhancing our pleasures gives the industry profits. There is nothing wrong with enjoying pleasure from food and nothing wrong with enjoying sex and employing our pleasure-enhancing toys. Toy manufacturing passed the billion mark regardless of how the media tried to avoid the subject. Do you remember when a professor went to jail for showing students a condom?
Our body functions, bathroom routines, sex, and eating are as natural as breathing, nothing less and nothing more. It is somewhat deviant thinking that put all kinds of conditions and negative connotations like shame on sexual aspects of our lives. When we lived in caves in large groups we behaved naturally and our children were just fine. Our bizarre sexual attitudes were developed by seeking to control people. Stronger males over weaker females, the equaler person over the tribe.
Trying to separate nudity and sex I see as paranoia. That is the reason why I do not label myself as a nudist. I am simply nude whenever possible and whenever I identify as comfortable like temperature and safe from being arrested for violating some regulation developed by less cerebrally endowed regulators.
Yes, I happen to be one of those who would "shout it from the rooftops." I make no secret of the fact that I like to be free of clothing much of the time, especially when the weather is hot. More often that not, I'm naked for no better reason than that I couldn't be bothered putting any clothes on when I got out of bed! And so all my friends, family and neighbours are used to seeing me run around naked, and have come to not care. If they once thought of me as some psychopathic idiot, they don't seem to now, and we all get along just fine.
However, my situation doesn't fit all naturists or other clothes-free participants. Many are concerned about any backlash from neighbours, employers, family - even spouses. And so they are quite content to go down to their local sun club once in a while, and that seems to be sufficient. They are not necessarily all-out to promote clothes-free acceptance in society generally. I wish they were, but I have to respect their right to their own level of involvement.
But, for those of us that do have a passion to "spread the word" about the benefits of shedding those clothes and promote acceptance, it's important that we do hold the media to account and call out inaccurate reporting, personal bias on the part of the journalist, and lame, childish writing that is looking for a cheap laugh to the detriment of the cause.
I believe it's important to continue 'shouting it from the rooftops' as the article says. Probably the more so directed toward restrictive Western societies who are ensconced in the concept of nudism is for sex.
These two paragraphs are spot on. :)
"It is a fair criticism that the news article was poorly written, inadequately researched and an example of lazy clickbait writing that seems to permeate the media these days. We must be careful not to allow poor journalism to taint the tireless work that the Berrimans and many others do to promote healthy naturism."
"It is also critical that we call out examples of poor representation of the naturist philosophy in the media. Many people reading such articles may form inaccurate impressions of naturism, or it may reinforce already held flawed beliefs."
You make a good point about not letting sub-standard journalism taint the story it is telling. It is a sad fact - in the UK at least - that newspapers generally and local papers in particular have been in free fall for years. Changes in society loosened the bonds of “locality” in forming communities; smaller circulations meant less advertising so less revenue (ad revenue has always funded the press); and the internet administered the coup de grace. Local journalists are too often unworthy of the title, getting little or no training in writing or understanding what is news and how to gather it.
Sorry, got into rant mode there. My former profession is not what it used to be.
Anyway, the result is bad writing badly presented, but as readers we need to see through that to the real story underneath. Sadly, while we can do that on subjects about which we have an understanding it is harder to achieve when the story is new to us; thus we have to accept that people who don’t know about naturism will, indeed, get distorted ideas about us from sloppy journalism, and we have to be ready to call it out and put things straight.
I agree completely that we naturist folk need to be as loud and as often seen in public as possible until it really becomes "ho hum" or "so what" if someone is seen naked on a street or at a deli. So what? It is the clothists who should be required to explain their sick affectations and shame for their own skin.
My activity to "shout it" includes public exposure all summer, and daily advocacy exposure on Twitter, Reddit, and other social media. We need to be seen on-line and in person until nobody notices that we aren't covered with ugly uncomfortable oil based polyester..
We must continue to promulgate the ethics and sense of naturism as loudly as we can. Firstly to ensure that we do not lose the gains we have made in the more advanced countries and secondly to hopefully make gains in those countries where prejudice remains.
Unfortunately the UN convention on human rights is a convention and not a treaty and as such is not binding on member states. Thus while some countries have altered their domestic laws to be more in line with its ideals others have not.
To those of us fortunate enough to live where our rights are accepted and may even be protected we need to continue our flag waving. If only to hope that one day all may have the freedoms we enjoy.
I see in this article 2 different themes: Nudism and profession or journalism. Before I attempt to offer any view I want to remain the reader that any human activity consists of thousand degrees of grey. Nothing is black or white. I do not believe that any idea is valid universally.
Journalism: A statement was made that the article was not carefully researched and presented perhaps in a less than helpful manner. I see journalists in 3 categories: The ones paid by and controlled by governments. We are fed 10 times before breakfast how much democracy do we have. No longer true. Journalists employed by our dictators speed-feed us what they are ordered to feed us and tell us "what we want to think, but we are not smart enough to know it".
Next, we have journalists often called underground not following government propaganda. They seek and disclose the crookedness of many policies and in Muslim countries, they are often killed for it. In the west, they may be only tortured like for example Assange, or get lucky and be pampered by our enemies like Snowden. Or they may devise other means to become less threatening to their rulers, declare themselves mentally challenged, change sex, and get sick or similar, an example Chelsea Manning.
At last, we have journalist idealists whose goal is to genuinely enlighten us.
In all cases, there is a chief editor that is paid and has some personal bias. He will color the work of the reporters or simply prevents its publication. The example is preventing the publication of any scientific evidence that global warming is mainly the result of cosmical regularity and in only a minuscule amount affected by what humans do. Any such discussion would upset the green apple cart of profits for the electric vehicle revolution and the editor would not survive.
All reporters must eat and eventually they publish what sells. This includes government propaganda, it may not sell but they get paid for regurgitating the official doctrine.
The issue of nudism should be no issue. Nude is a natural state. Profits for an industry created all kinds of coverings protecting our fragile bodies from cold, rain, insects, and excessive solar radiation.
The population "south of the border of Canada" without naming it correctly is just an attempt on political correctness. They are deemed a population less sexually mature, less educated, and less accepting. If you want proof just listen to the news about how many arguments are conducted by guns instead of some logical discussion.
Nudists are, to me laughingly, trying to create a schism between nudity and sex. Life is short and we owe it to ourselves to enjoy it as much as possible. But we have to draw the line between healthy and unhealthy enjoyment. Enhancing our pleasure by chemical means is demonstrably wrong. Eventually, drugs will kill us. Greed is a strong motivator and states are now salivating about how much tax revenue they are generating from drug sales. Cannabis is pushed in ads on us daily. I did not see, yet an article describing the damage to long-term marijuana users. I know a few. They become paranoid and believe much unbelievable propaganda that Earth is flat, that people never went to the moon, stout anti-vaxers, etc. Of course not everyone's addiction is severe, but the potential is always there.
The primary healthy pleasures are food and sex, and the secondary enjoyment of art such as classical music. Just think that every time we put something into our body or take something away from the body it enhances pleasure in harmony with evolution, therefore pleasure we do not get punished for by evolution, the pleasure we are entitled to.
The food industry employs hundreds of scientists to enhance basic caloric intake chemically so that it creates maximum pleasure, maximum craving, and maximum profit for the creator. Of course, this excess creates problems, 70% of people are now obese.
The sex industry created a similar phenomenon. Enhancing our pleasures gives the industry profits. There is nothing wrong with enjoying pleasure from food and nothing wrong with enjoying sex and employing our pleasure-enhancing toys. Toy manufacturing passed the billion mark regardless of how the media tried to avoid the subject. Do you remember when a professor went to jail for showing students a condom?
Our body functions, bathroom routines, sex, and eating are as natural as breathing, nothing less and nothing more. It is somewhat deviant thinking that put all kinds of conditions and negative connotations like shame on sexual aspects of our lives. When we lived in caves in large groups we behaved naturally and our children were just fine. Our bizarre sexual attitudes were developed by seeking to control people. Stronger males over weaker females, the equaler person over the tribe.
Trying to separate nudity and sex I see as paranoia. That is the reason why I do not label myself as a nudist. I am simply nude whenever possible and whenever I identify as comfortable like temperature and safe from being arrested for violating some regulation developed by less cerebrally endowed regulators.
You gave a good response to Jillian's article. I also agree that we still need to "shout it from the rooftops."
Yes, I happen to be one of those who would "shout it from the rooftops." I make no secret of the fact that I like to be free of clothing much of the time, especially when the weather is hot. More often that not, I'm naked for no better reason than that I couldn't be bothered putting any clothes on when I got out of bed! And so all my friends, family and neighbours are used to seeing me run around naked, and have come to not care. If they once thought of me as some psychopathic idiot, they don't seem to now, and we all get along just fine.
However, my situation doesn't fit all naturists or other clothes-free participants. Many are concerned about any backlash from neighbours, employers, family - even spouses. And so they are quite content to go down to their local sun club once in a while, and that seems to be sufficient. They are not necessarily all-out to promote clothes-free acceptance in society generally. I wish they were, but I have to respect their right to their own level of involvement.
But, for those of us that do have a passion to "spread the word" about the benefits of shedding those clothes and promote acceptance, it's important that we do hold the media to account and call out inaccurate reporting, personal bias on the part of the journalist, and lame, childish writing that is looking for a cheap laugh to the detriment of the cause.
I believe it's important to continue 'shouting it from the rooftops' as the article says. Probably the more so directed toward restrictive Western societies who are ensconced in the concept of nudism is for sex.