One of the responses that naturists get when they are advocating or even just trying to explain to non-naturists about the naturist philosophy, is the question “What about the children?”. As any parent of young children will attest, young kids like running around naked. Infants don't care. We haven’t taught them body shame yet, that lesson is perhaps some time away. I argue that we should leave that lesson out of the curriculum altogether and shouldn’t teach them to be ashamed of their bodies at all. It appears that society, the mainstream media and the advertisers that need body shame to sell us products to improve our confidence, are going to fight me on that issue.
Being relatively new to naturism, this is an issue I often ponder. Your post is well done and hits many of the points I have wondered about - thank you. I came face to face with the issue on a recent Solstice Hike. A family with two small children arrived at the trail head - my first thought was that I hoped they were leaving soon and we didn’t encounter them on the trail. Well, they were part of the group! I have to say I was extremely uncomfortable and dare I say concerned. Why? I had no reason for concern except for the societal conditioning I have encountered. Of course as many here know, you quickly become comfortable in your own skin (it is amazing how quickly that happens, isn’t it), and being nude in their company and seeing the young children nude became part of the landscape. It was nice to this family enjoying the day unencumbered. Now, would I offer up this story to non naturists……. I’m not there yet, but discussions like this help move me closer to being able to factually discuss the issue, while also bringing my own thinking forward.
Certainly pornography doesn’t portray healthy relationships, but the same can be said of countless movies and TV programs. This is also true of many cartoons and fairytales produced for children. Most children don’t have much trouble differentiating good from evil. But as there are probably relatively few parents who promote healthy attitudes about nudity in their children, there are probably almost none who provide much meaningful education about sexual relationships to them. And despite the exposure to pornography and limited sexual relationship education the vast majority of children grow up to be what we would consider to be pretty normal adults. If pornography is having a serious negative effect on children where is the evidence?
Re: tying "what about the children" to religious institution abuse: church going is greatly reduced from levels in the past. But the majority of children do go to school. If predators go where the children are, then that is the schools.
In my city, a former high school teacher was tried for years (decades?) of sexually abusing his students. It turns out parents had been complaining for years. When it reached a crescendo, the school board just transferred him to a school with developmentally delayed children. Classic pass the trash behavior of bureaucracies.
Why isn't the Principal also charged for condoning the behaviors? The Superintendent of schools too? Colleagues who said nothing? Why are only religious hierarchies persecuted for not stopping this when school boards get a free pass?
While I absolutely agree with your premise that exposure to nudity does not negatively affect young children I want to play devil's advocate here and question your statement regarding "the known harms of exposing developing minds to pornography."
Before going any further I want you to know that I don't think that children should be exposed to pornography, but I've never seen a study which showed that children suffer any harm by being exposed to pornography. There have been studies of the effects violent video games, violent movies and TV programs have on young children which fail to show a causal relationship. I suspect the fear of harm done to children by pornography is irrational just like with exposure to nudity. Children are not nearly as fragile as many imagine.
In your essay you mention that large numbers of young children either stumble upon or seek out pornography on the Internet, but there is no mention of what actual harm is done to any of them. I suspect there is none. I believe that if people would unemotionally examine pornography they would find it is essentially harmless to most of those who watch it. The availability of pornography may actually benefit society by providing an outlet for potential sexual predators, an opportunity for them to act out their sexual fantasies in private without harming anyone. Most societies have irrational attitudes regarding nudity and sexuality which are unlike their attitudes on any other subjects.
I want to tell you you have a great, concise, on-the-money and hard-hitting article here, but by now I'm super angry at what I just had to do to leave a simple comment. What a world. I had to be "authenticated!" No WONDER people say stupid stuff like "what about the children?" when this new order we have must "authenticate" people. I was authenticated in 1946. Sorry for the rant. I wish everybody would read your essay and consider what you say.
A recent afternoon radio programme here in the UK included an interview with someone from British Naturism. The two women presenting the programme were reasonably straight on the subject, not too nudge-nudge-wink-wink. But in their discussion in the post-show podcast they talk about what if they suddenly met a naked person/group when out with their children - “wouldn’t like that”, said one, “how would I explain that what they were doing was all right when I’d been teaching them for years that it’s not?”
My first thought was “reasonable objection”, my more considered thought was “you’re teaching them the wrong thing then!” I also realised it goes some way to explaining all the “what about the children” shrieks - we’re asking parents to accept they’ve been wrong in teaching their children, and that is a mountain I doubt we’ll ever reach the summit of.
Well written, Steve. It's really frustrating to witness society constantly scoring own-goals on this matter without even realising it. "You should be ashamed of yourselves!" came the cry from the chap on the suspension bridge that we encountered on our recent walk up the Waitawheta River. How sad was he - instilling his own shame on the young women with him by making them turn their heads away. When will society come to see that their fixation on clothing, merely to hide the body, actually produces the very harm in children that they think it protects them from? Own goals!
The primary work of children is to learn all the knowledge and behavior they will soon need to become fully functional adults. Most of their learning is done by passively observing other children and adults.. Children need to be given opportunities to observe a wide range of other children and adult members of their own species. Their learning needs to include observing a full range of common human behavior.
Systematically depriving children of an opportunity to learn about themselves and their own species is deliberately harmful and hurtful to the children.
Being relatively new to naturism, this is an issue I often ponder. Your post is well done and hits many of the points I have wondered about - thank you. I came face to face with the issue on a recent Solstice Hike. A family with two small children arrived at the trail head - my first thought was that I hoped they were leaving soon and we didn’t encounter them on the trail. Well, they were part of the group! I have to say I was extremely uncomfortable and dare I say concerned. Why? I had no reason for concern except for the societal conditioning I have encountered. Of course as many here know, you quickly become comfortable in your own skin (it is amazing how quickly that happens, isn’t it), and being nude in their company and seeing the young children nude became part of the landscape. It was nice to this family enjoying the day unencumbered. Now, would I offer up this story to non naturists……. I’m not there yet, but discussions like this help move me closer to being able to factually discuss the issue, while also bringing my own thinking forward.
Certainly pornography doesn’t portray healthy relationships, but the same can be said of countless movies and TV programs. This is also true of many cartoons and fairytales produced for children. Most children don’t have much trouble differentiating good from evil. But as there are probably relatively few parents who promote healthy attitudes about nudity in their children, there are probably almost none who provide much meaningful education about sexual relationships to them. And despite the exposure to pornography and limited sexual relationship education the vast majority of children grow up to be what we would consider to be pretty normal adults. If pornography is having a serious negative effect on children where is the evidence?
Re: tying "what about the children" to religious institution abuse: church going is greatly reduced from levels in the past. But the majority of children do go to school. If predators go where the children are, then that is the schools.
In my city, a former high school teacher was tried for years (decades?) of sexually abusing his students. It turns out parents had been complaining for years. When it reached a crescendo, the school board just transferred him to a school with developmentally delayed children. Classic pass the trash behavior of bureaucracies.
Why isn't the Principal also charged for condoning the behaviors? The Superintendent of schools too? Colleagues who said nothing? Why are only religious hierarchies persecuted for not stopping this when school boards get a free pass?
While I absolutely agree with your premise that exposure to nudity does not negatively affect young children I want to play devil's advocate here and question your statement regarding "the known harms of exposing developing minds to pornography."
Before going any further I want you to know that I don't think that children should be exposed to pornography, but I've never seen a study which showed that children suffer any harm by being exposed to pornography. There have been studies of the effects violent video games, violent movies and TV programs have on young children which fail to show a causal relationship. I suspect the fear of harm done to children by pornography is irrational just like with exposure to nudity. Children are not nearly as fragile as many imagine.
In your essay you mention that large numbers of young children either stumble upon or seek out pornography on the Internet, but there is no mention of what actual harm is done to any of them. I suspect there is none. I believe that if people would unemotionally examine pornography they would find it is essentially harmless to most of those who watch it. The availability of pornography may actually benefit society by providing an outlet for potential sexual predators, an opportunity for them to act out their sexual fantasies in private without harming anyone. Most societies have irrational attitudes regarding nudity and sexuality which are unlike their attitudes on any other subjects.
I want to tell you you have a great, concise, on-the-money and hard-hitting article here, but by now I'm super angry at what I just had to do to leave a simple comment. What a world. I had to be "authenticated!" No WONDER people say stupid stuff like "what about the children?" when this new order we have must "authenticate" people. I was authenticated in 1946. Sorry for the rant. I wish everybody would read your essay and consider what you say.
A recent afternoon radio programme here in the UK included an interview with someone from British Naturism. The two women presenting the programme were reasonably straight on the subject, not too nudge-nudge-wink-wink. But in their discussion in the post-show podcast they talk about what if they suddenly met a naked person/group when out with their children - “wouldn’t like that”, said one, “how would I explain that what they were doing was all right when I’d been teaching them for years that it’s not?”
My first thought was “reasonable objection”, my more considered thought was “you’re teaching them the wrong thing then!” I also realised it goes some way to explaining all the “what about the children” shrieks - we’re asking parents to accept they’ve been wrong in teaching their children, and that is a mountain I doubt we’ll ever reach the summit of.
Well written, Steve. It's really frustrating to witness society constantly scoring own-goals on this matter without even realising it. "You should be ashamed of yourselves!" came the cry from the chap on the suspension bridge that we encountered on our recent walk up the Waitawheta River. How sad was he - instilling his own shame on the young women with him by making them turn their heads away. When will society come to see that their fixation on clothing, merely to hide the body, actually produces the very harm in children that they think it protects them from? Own goals!
Yes. What about the children?
The primary work of children is to learn all the knowledge and behavior they will soon need to become fully functional adults. Most of their learning is done by passively observing other children and adults.. Children need to be given opportunities to observe a wide range of other children and adult members of their own species. Their learning needs to include observing a full range of common human behavior.
Systematically depriving children of an opportunity to learn about themselves and their own species is deliberately harmful and hurtful to the children.
Our nude resort has several families with children ranging in age from infants to teens and 20s. They all thrive there and love it.
If body shaming wasn’t such a big thing, millions of £/$ would be lost by greedy advertisers and internet sites who prey on vulnerable youngsters..