Conference moira::naturism

    I once met Michelle Handler at a Naturist west cost convention were
    she came across as a moderate feminist to me.  I have not heard
    anything about this controversy about her.  Could you enlighten
    me futher?  Thanks.
    
    
                            Paul
    

    About two years ago, a woman was given a copy of issue 7.4 of CwS as
    an intro to naturism.  She wrote a long letter to Lee Baxandall,
    with a critique of many of the photos in that issue (basically, that
    they were posed, unnatural, and exploitative), concluding that CwS
    was basically pornography, and that if this was what naturism was
    all about, she didn't want tohave anything to do with it.
    
    Baxandall didn't publish the letter, so she sent a copy to Michelle
    Handler.  Michelle forwarded a copy to Baxandall with her own
    letter, adding her own critiques, coming to essentially the same
    conclusions (that CwS was exploitative and Lee Baxandall no better
    than a pornographer).  "This is not naturism -- this is the cheap
    exploitation of nudity appealing to those who want to observe the
    naked (specifically naked women), not be naked."  "My choice has
    been made.  *I formally withdraw all support* for The Naturist
    Society and _Clothed with the Sun_.  ... In addition, unless I hear
    and see evidence of a strong outcry from the other leaders and
    members against naturism as depicted in [CwS 7.4], I will withdraw
    all involvement with the Naturist Leadership Council, and allow it
    to drown in its own apathy along with the rest of the movement."
    
    Not surprisingly, the entire naturist movement immediately started
    choosing sides, and the letters columns of all the naturist
    publications were full for months.  The NLC removed Handler as
    its coordinator on a very close vote, about which procedural
    questions were subsequently raised.  Partly in consequence, the NLC
    was recently dissolved, and replaced by a new naturist coordinating
    organization.
    
    	-Neil

    I have to agree that a good number of the pictures in CwS are posed and
    artificial.  I happened to be at Club Orient when Leif Heilberg was
    there, and it was very obvious that he was selecting people to
    photograph who were younger and more physically attractive than the
    average human.  He was in fact posing most of the shots.  For the most
    part, he also kept his clothes on.
    
    Having seen one of the major naturist photographers act this way grates
    on me to this day, and I guess it makes me suspicious of the motives of
    other naturist photographers.

    The January issue of _Bare in Mind_ contains both a personal response
    from Nikki Craft to the John Kyff article, and the official statement
    by the women who withdrew from the Cape Cod case.

    Nikki Craft's letter makes several points, but the most telling (to my
    mind) is her observation that of the half dozen or so naturist
    publications that published Kyff's article, NOT ONE bothered to contact
    Craft and ask her for her side of the story -- even though the factual
    content of the article was bizarre, and its tone bordered on libel.
    From the letter:

	"When Kyff's vituperation hit nudist/naturist mailboxes across the
	country in _Bare in Mind_ the Cape Cod plaintiffs were still
	holding our collective statement until Lee Baxandall had a chance
	to review it.  We had assured him, by telephone, that as soon as
	the plaintiffs reached a consensus on the wording he would have
	that opportunity *before* it was released to the public.  We were
	doing this in order to avoid any possible misunderstandings or
	inaccuracies.  Look where that attempt at fairness got us.  Kyff's
	missive was written before he or Baxandall had even read our
	statement!"

	"[Kyff] recklessly failed to speak to the plaintiffs, our attorney
	or me before hurling the absurd claim that "Ms Craft now says the
	government's anti-nudity regulation affecting the Cape Cod National
	Seashore ... is necessary in order to protect women on the beach
	from aggressive men."

	"Kyff's editorial 'Nudists Lose' went out to thousands, in numerous
	publications, without *one* editor requesting my opinion.  That is
	abominable.  Kyff's hysterics ... accomplished several things.  It
	aimed much undeserved outrage and hostility towards the plaintiffs
	in the Cape Cod case, me in particular, attempting to ruin my
	reputation while diverting productive discussion away from the
	*actual* reasons the case has ended."

    The withdrawal statement is signed by six of the original eleven
    plaintiffs, and notes that two of the other plaintiffs have also joined
    in withdrawing from the case, although they did not sign the letter. It
    is lengthy, and touches on a number of issues having nothing to do with
    the withdrawal, but the essence of the reason is that since Lee
    Baxandall was (primarily) funding the case, he had control of the legal
    strategy, which was inconsistent with the original intent of the
    plaintiffs.  From the statement:

	"First and foremost, we object to the emphasis on first amendment
	rights for nudists and naturists, with gender equality presented as
	a lesser concern or disregarded altogether.

	"The Cape Cod National Seashore's anti-nudity regulation treats
	women differently from men by requiring us to keep our chests
	covered.  This unmistakable gender discrimination ... is the issue
	that our demonstrations were meant to challenge, and the
	predominate concern we had hoped our case would address.

	"However, Lee Baxandall, John Kyff, and the attorney have presented
	primarily first amendment-based arguments, insisting the case could
	not be won on the grounds of equal protection. ... Some of us have
	come to realize that shirt-free rights for women and first
	amendment rights for nudists are incompatible legal strategies when
	used in the same case.  In a case where the plaintiffs are
	shirt-free women, a first amendment challenge *must* begin by
	accepting the presumption that a barechested woman is 'nude,' but
	... if a bare-chested man is not 'nude' then neither is a
	bare-chested woman.  A case argued on first amendment grounds, as
	this case was, should include *both* women and men, *all* totally
	unclothed and all *equally* 'nude.'

	"... Kyff, speaking on behalf of nudists and naturists, and as an
	"official functionary" of naturism, has become *the* voice of the
	Cape Cod civil case:  it is *his* opinions in the press, but *our*
	bodies and principles on the line. ...

	"The Cape Cod case was filed on behalf of eleven women, ten of whom
	are feminists, and most of whom are involved in the shirt-free
	rights movement.  Some of us may define ourselves as 'naturists,'
	and all of us have been and continue to be committed public
	advocates for access to clothing-optional beaches; however, none of
	us are 'Nudists.'  But in a twenty-one page article published on
	the Cape Cod case in _Clothed with the Sun_, Kyff uses 'Nudist"
	dozens of times. while using the words 'feminism' or 'feminist' not
	at all, and mentioning women's rights almost as an afterthought.

	"Until it was diluted by a so-called 'winnable' strategy, our case
	was about equal rights and body acceptance.  Our case was not, as
	Kyff argues, mostly about the 'fundamental rights' of the
	'oppressed class' of 'Nudists,' and their struggle to be free from
	'apartheid' on their beaches.

    Also:

        "Baxandall's personal interest in the Cape Cod case, apart from his
        political concerns as a naturist leader, includes paying tens of
        thousands of dollars in legal fees to the attorney.  With that
        investment made and the plaintiffs' names attached, he confidently
        assumed the role of primary decision maker, directing (with the
        attorney) the legal strategy of the case, as well as writing press
        releases, all without the input of the plaintiffs."

    ----------------------------------------

    -Neil