Conference moira::naturism

    
    	   Well, I think it's fairly obvious that by definition
    	Naturists/Nudists tend to be what society calls "exhibitionist",
    	although I'm not sure that the sexual link is as strong as
    	some imagine.
    
    	   Apart from being a naturist, of sorts, I am also a celibate,
    	a sex-avoider (in general), and a loner.  I like being naked.
    	I like being naked around other naked people.  I derive 
    	pleasure from it, sure... but not sexual pleasure, per se.
    
    	   Contrary to your observations, my sex drive is pretty
    	low.  I have no interest in sex with men, women, children,
    	or animals.  Mostly, I have no interest in sex at all.
    	Granted, this makes me a bit of an oddball, but I know I
    	am also not alone in my quest for celibate sensuality
    	(as opposed to sexuality, you see).
    
    	   Sorry if I am blowing your theory... I seem to be the
    	exception to a lot of rules.  
    
    	- Greg

    Thank you, Greg, for your candid reply.  It took a lot of courage.
    
    But the intention of this topic was not to get the Naturism noters
    to "fess up."  I was looking to see if the OBSERVATIONS of the noters
    were similar to mine regarding Other people (in general) in public
    nudity settings.  
    
    I understand the reluctance of many noters to "expose themselves"
    to the noting public (to use an apt analogy ;^).  But certainly
    you may preface any observations as being strictly observations
    (and not personal disclosures).
    
    Jack

    (I wrote this response a week ago, but somehow I seem never to have
    entered it, so here it is.)

    I disagree fairly strongly with a lot of what's in the base note.

    SEXUAL DRIVES
    
    To begin with, I am somewhat astonished at the assertion that "nudists
    are generally more sexually driven" and that "many (if not most)
    naturists/nudists have sexual leanings that are different, or stronger
    in certain areas" than the non-nudist population.  Of course, my own
    experience is very limited -- I don't think I've ever talked about sex
    with another naturist or nudist -- but I don't have any experience to
    confirm this suggestion.  The one study that I am aware of concluded
    that nudists were, if anything, sexually more conservative than "the
    mainstream."  (But of course, for *any* group X, many X will have
    sexual leanings that are different from those of the majority.)

    EXHIBITIONISM AND VOYEURISM

    Almost by definition, most naturists and nudists will be people who
    enjoy seeing and being seen by others in the nude.  I would question
    whether that enjoyment is sexual in character, in anything other than
    the broadest sense.  But in any case, this has nothing to do with
    exhibitionism and voyeurism, as those terms are normally understood. 

    Exhibitionism normally means a deviant sexual behaviour whose
    gratification comes through subjecting an unsuspecting and presumably
    unwilling victim to the sight of one's genitals.  (In a broader usage,
    it refers to getting gratification *from attracting attention* through
    one's state of undress, relative to the expectations for a given
    setting.)

    This has nothing at all to do with the nudist experience.  I can
    imagine few places where a true exhibitionist would get less
    gratification than in a nudist camp, where his exhibition wouldn't even
    be recognized as such. 

    Similarly, the essence of voyeurism is that it is a violation of the
    privacy of an unwitting, and presumably unwilling, victim.  The true
    voyeur won't be found on the nude beach -- he'll be up in the dunes
    with binoculars.

    Now, you have the right to use whatever definitions you choose, but if
    you choose definitions which characterize normal, innocent *feelings*
    as "exhibitionism" and "voyeurism," you can't then suggest that we need
    to be careful because of all the "exhibitionists" and "voyeurs" amongst
    us.

    SWINGING AND HOMOSEXUALITY

    About swinging, I'll have to take your word.  About homosexuality, yes,
    it seems that there is greater evidence of gays within the naturist
    (not nudist) lifestyle than in the mainstream culture.  (I like to
    think that this is probably because of the generally greater tolerance
    and openmindedness of naturists.)  But in any case, my reaction is, "So
    what?"  It's their business, not mine.

    CONCLUSION

    But suppose we accept everything up to this point.  I still cannot see
    what it has to do with the following conclusion:

>       Much of the emphasis on removing sexuality from the public nudity
>       scene is due to this predisposition of so many practicers of
>       nudism/naturism. Almost all of the people I have met at nudist
>       camps and nude beaches have shared my concern of protecting
>       children and women from sexual attacks/approaches.  

    What possible danger is a woman in from an exhibitionist, a voyeur, a
    swinger, a homosexual, or a pedophile -- even a practicing one, much
    less someone who just has "a predisposition" (still less someone who
    just (for example) "derives sexual pleasure from being seen in the
    nude")?

    What does forbidding sexual activity have to do with protecting
    children and women from sexual attacks and approaches? 

    It seems to me that what people need to be protected from is the
    behaviour that would not be public in any case, and that would continue
    to be proscribed under any conceivable loosening of the sexual
    strictures in the naturist environment.  After all, no one has
    suggested permitting rape or child molesting.

    CHILDREN

    Ok, ok, I'll back off a little.  Children aren't adults, and it isn't
    at all clear whether or not it is harmful for children to observe
    sexual activity.  As the parent of a young child, I'm not going to take
    chances:  I'll avoid environments where it would be a problem. But note
    that my concern has nothing to do with "sexual attacks/approaches." 

    MY OWN THEORY

    I would draw exactly the opposite conclusions.  I think that the reason
    we constrain sexuality is not because we are different from (more
    sexual than) the public, but precisely because we are the same as the
    public (except that we take off our clothes).

    The nudist culture has essentially the same sexual mores as the general
    culture because it really is just a cross-section of that culture.  The
    reason sexual activity isn't tolerated in a nudist park is the same as
    the reason that sexual activity (and nudity) isn't tolerated in a
    public park:  because people would be offended by it.  We've thrown
    away one taboo, but we've held on to all the rest.

    	-Neil

RE: .3 (Neil) - Because apparently there was some lack of clarity about what I 
was suggesting, I will respond to some of these questions/misunderstandings 
directly.
    
>    To begin with, I am somewhat astonished at the assertion that "nudists
>    are generally more sexually driven" and that "many (if not most)
>    naturists/nudists have sexual leanings that are different, or stronger
>    in certain areas" than the non-nudist population.  

Much of this was based on my experiences in nudist camps such as Solair, where I 
was a member for three years, and observations and conversations at places such 
as Moonstone and the Ledges.  Having an interest in psychology and human 
relations, I would be more apt to discuss these things, and to spend more time 
interacting with people.  I was very much involved with the Membership Committee 
at Solair, where I was involved in a relationship with one of the members.  The 
chairman of the committee, a counselor, shared many of my concerns.

And my note stated that nudism/naturism "Attracts" people with these sexual 
interests - many of whom are there under misapprehensions, and are quickly 
disillusioned.  These are the people that are the greatest concern of true 
nudists/naturists.

>   Of course, my own experience is very limited -- I don't think I've ever 
>   about sex talked with another naturist or nudist -- but I don't have any 
>   experience to confirm this suggestion.  

That's understandable.  It is not an interest of yours.

>   Almost by definition, most naturists and nudists will be people who
>   enjoy seeing and being seen by others in the nude.  I would question
>   whether that enjoyment is sexual in character, in anything other than
>   the broadest sense.  But in any case, this has nothing to do with
                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>   exhibitionism and voyeurism, as those terms are normally understood. 
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I am not sure that the psychological motivations of many nudists and naturists 
in that regard are significantly different from those of many flashers and 
peepers.  I will do some research, however, and report back.

>   I can
>   imagine few places where a true exhibitionist would get less
>   gratification than in a nudist camp, where his exhibition wouldn't even
>   be recognized as such. 

On the contrary.  At a nudist camp, someone with repressed exhibitionistic 
tendencies would be free to practice something that he would be arrested for in 
public.  S/he could flaunt her/himself in front of others (including children, 
the most frequent "victims" of exhibitionism) with no fear of reprisal.

And in answer to your question of "What possible danger is a woman in from an 
exhibitionist, a voyeur, ...", the law (and most psychologists) believes that 
there IS a "danger," or threat, from these individuals.  Otherwise there would 
be no laws prohibiting these behaviors.  And, frequently, male Swingers have an 
attitude that devalues women to the level of chattel - that they have the Right 
to make sexual advances upon whatever woman they choose.  I saw evidence of this 
when a long-standing male member at Solair, and a self-professed swinger, had 
too much to drink one night, and started making sexual advances toward my then 
SO.  (We handled the situation, and never had a problem with him again.)

>   Now, you have the right to use whatever definitions you choose, but if
>   you choose definitions which characterize normal, innocent *feelings*
>   as "exhibitionism" and "voyeurism," you can't then suggest that we need
>   to be careful because of all the "exhibitionists" and "voyeurs" amongst
>   us.

You are right.  I will look up the definitions in the Diagnostics and 
Statistical Manual, or DSM-III/IIIR, the "Bible" for abnormal psychology.

>   SWINGING AND HOMOSEXUALITY

>   About swinging, I'll have to take your word.  About homosexuality, yes,
>   it seems that there is greater evidence of gays within the naturist
>   (not nudist) lifestyle than in the mainstream culture.  (I like to
>   think that this is probably because of the generally greater tolerance
>   and openmindedness of naturists.)  But in any case, my reaction is, "So
>   what?"  It's their business, not mine.

Please don't misunderstand me on this point.  I have met a number of gays/bis at 
nudist camps, and they have caused no problems whatsoever.  And I am not 
characterizing homosexuality as "deviant" sexual practice, as I would 
pedophilia, exhibitionism, and voyeurism.  But at a number of nude beaches, most 
notably the Ledges in Wilmington, VT, and Portuguese Fisherman's Beach in the 
Los Angeles area, there are gay "sections" of beach where the primary purpose 
appears to be to "make connection" with other gays.  (Which is okay by me 
[assuming anyone gives a sh*t!] ;^)

>   What possible danger is a woman in from an exhibitionist, a voyeur, a
>   swinger, a homosexual, or a pedophile -- even a practicing one, 
                                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I will leave that to the female members of the noting public to respond to.  But 
certainly there IS danger to Children from a practicing pedophile.  At Solair 
there are no fewer than five male members who are always in the company of young 
to teenaged girls.  (They play roles of foster grandfathers and Dutch Uncles, 
usually, but there have been incidents where the behavior of other such 
individuals was not what one would call "grandfatherly."  Needless to say, those 
people were prosecuted, and expelled from the camp.)

>   What does forbidding sexual activity have to do with protecting
>   children and women from sexual attacks and approaches? 

When they are the victims of the illicit sexual activity?

>   It seems to me that what people need to be protected from is the
>   behaviour that would not be public in any case, and that would continue
>   to be proscribed under any conceivable loosening of the sexual
>   strictures in the naturist environment.  After all, no one has
>   suggested permitting rape or child molesting.

I agree!  But I haven't suggested anything else.

>   CHILDREN

>   Ok, ok, I'll back off a little.  Children aren't adults, and it isn't
>   at all clear whether or not it is harmful for children to observe
>   sexual activity.  As the parent of a young child, I'm not going to take
>   chances:  I'll avoid environments where it would be a problem. But note
>   that my concern has nothing to do with "sexual attacks/approaches." 
         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I am not sure that I'm reading you correctly.  Are you saying that you have no 
fear that your own daughter, or other children, are susceptible to these 
attacks?  I believe, if that is true, that you are living in a dream world.  I'd 
be happy to put you in touch with very knowledgeable people who would disagree.

>   MY OWN THEORY

>   I would draw exactly the opposite conclusions.  I think that the reason
>   we constrain sexuality is not because we are different from (more
>   sexual than) the public, but precisely because we are the same as the
>   public (except that we take off our clothes).

Again, you appear to be referring to "we" as nudists/naturists (from your 
experience), whereas I am also including people who are drawn to the nude scene 
as an attempt to satisfy an illicit sexual leaning.  Both kinds are found in any 
nude scene, as well as the general "curiosity seekers."

>    The nudist culture has essentially the same sexual mores as the general
>   culture because it really is just a cross-section of that culture.  The
>   reason sexual activity isn't tolerated in a nudist park is the same as
>   the reason that sexual activity (and nudity) isn't tolerated in a
>   public park:  because people would be offended by it.  We've thrown
>   away one taboo, but we've held on to all the rest.

Assuming that we DO have the same sexual mores as the general culture, which I 
am not sure I agree with, you have to admit that due to the availability of the 
stimulus (i.e. nude bodies galore!), inhibitions are considerably reduced (as 
opposed to in a Shopping Mall, for example).

I am not saying that anyone and everyone that you see at a public nudity scene 
is a sexual deviate, potential rapist, etc.  But that due to the nature of the 
environment, there is a much greater possibility of such, and more precaution 
should be exercised.

Jack

    re: .3, .4
    
           If I were to characterize these last two replies, I would
    say that Neil is defending while Jack is attacking (that's from
    my perspective.)  So, to that extent, the "truth" for me is more
    towards the middle, but I believe reality can be created and therefore
    seen/experienced any way one wants to.
           I don't really want to spend time in this discussion other
    than to say I disagree with Jack's last sentence.  In "clothed"
    society, people have to be just as aware (and responsible) as
    they do in non-clothed society, especially public and non-clothed.
    The criteria may be different, but the responsibility doesn't change.
    As many have noted in here, including myself, our first experiences
    (and I suppose that we can say that we had "success" or otherwise
    we'd say something different) were revelatory...in that we found
    ourselves functioning in more subdued manners than we might have
    anticipated.  In other words, after a few minutes the nudity did
    not have the impact that we guessed it might have had.  That's the
    point, I think.  (That it's "safer" in that environment taking off
    one's clothing than it would be in a mall, say, and taking off one's
    clothing.)  
         I am not the best person to represent the naturist/nudist point
    of view since I don't care to belong to any such organizations...I'd
    rather go naked whenever I feel like it.  But I have been a member
    of that type of organization in the past and resent someone trying
    to tell me that there was something wrong with it.  I found it one
    of the best things I ever did (for 4 or 5 years) and don't feel
    anyone was ever in a "dangerous" situation.  I just don't like
    negative projections, fear-mongering, etc.  This isn't to say that
    playing ostrich (pretending everything is okay when it isn't)
    is any better, but I'll take positives over negative almost anytime.
    
    
    Frederick
    

    This seems to be one of those topics where one can collect
    "data" to "prove" one's point, somewhat independent of what one's
    point is.

    How does one compare attitudes in a nudist environment with
    those held by the folks in the shopping mall? I don't believe
    it is likely that one would conduct the same interview (formal
    or informal) in a shopping mall that one could safely conduct in
    many nudists camps.

    I am sure there are nudists with high normal and less normal sex
    drives, so is it with textile folks. There are nudist camps
    where open sex is ok, there are family camps also. There are
    churches and there are swing clubs. 

    Solair has a very large population, I believe it wouldn't be
    hard to find many different sexual orientations. There are
    country clubs with large populations... There are gay beaches
    and there are gay bars...

    My point is, I can't see anything in these notes to make me
    believe that nudists are different than the textile population
    other than they are more likely to discuss the subject. Maybe
    this is out of concern about being "typed" by other folks and
    folks doing "studies".

    - gerry

    For my two cents, I've been to both Solair (Connecticut) and Moonstone
    Beach.  I don't think I've ever noticed any gay people there.
    At both places, they didn't really stand out the way they do in,
    say, Boston.  I did see one guy at Moonstone who tried to be
    sneaky with his camera.
    
    The point is, I've never seen anything that particularly
    "characterized" a nudist/naturist at a naturist resort or a public
    beach.  A Naturist comes in all shapes and sizes, whether those
    characteristics come in a physical or mental (or emotional) form.
    I will stick my neck out here and say that I think Naturists are more
    comfortable with themselves and have much fewer hangups about their
    bodies.  They make nicer people (in general)...better than the
    textiles; this applies to people who wish they could go nuding but
    are still a bit shy.
    
    
    Ben
    
    
    
    

RE: .4

Hi Jack,

>Assuming that we DO have the same sexual mores as the general culture, which I 
>am not sure I agree with, you have to admit that due to the availability of the 
>stimulus (i.e. nude bodies galore!), inhibitions are considerably reduced (as 
>opposed to in a Shopping Mall, for example).

I don't disagree with your entire note, but I think this is subjective.
I like nude bodies but I think I'm more likely to be stimulated at the mall,
where the people (I'm thinking of young girls), have put on their best
clothes in an effort (usually successful effort) to hide what ever
"imperfections" they have.

In fact I've heard many textiles argue that they don't want to have a nuding
experience because they'd be *turned off* by it.  They want to keep their 
irrational believe that nudity means sex, so whoever they see in the nude
better be attractive.

I don't know if this accuratly responds to your remark, but it's my $.02

Kb

    RE: .9 (Arpad) - I don't think that I did single out males, either
    in my base note, or in my replies.  I used such words as "persons,"
    "s/he," "her/himself," and other gender-nonspecific references,
    unless I was referring to specific experiences (such as males I
    have seen at Solair).  You are absolutely correct - that many of
    these things apply to females as well as males.
    
    But experience has indicated that there is a significantly greater
    incidence of females (as well as male children) being victimized
    by males than by females.  And my personal experience has supported
    this contention.
    
    As to many other replies, let me again repeat that much of what
    I am suggesting does not apply to naturists/nudists, but to persons
    who go to areas of social nudity hoping to experience a certain
    sexual stimulus.  (These people are frequently disappointed, and
    never return.)
    
    As I have indicated, I will do some research into whether or not
    studies have been made in this regard, and report back to the Naturism
    noters.
    
    Jack

    re: .10    
    I can offer some evidence in support. I had a friend, who was a
    professional artist. She taught art classes to supliment her income.
    On occasion she would conduct life study classes. She told me how
    it was amazing how quickly the "non-serious" students were seperated
    from the serious art students. The non-serious students seldom lasted
    more than 10 minutes in class!

    Let's see if we can find some common ground here.  Are we agreed on
    the following?

    Some people may be attracted to nudism/naturism for the "wrong"
    reasons:

      *	Popular cultural mythology conceives of nudism itself as a deviant
	behaviour, and nudists as persons of loose or nonexistent morals.
	This probably sounds attractive to some people.

      * Naturism is outside the dominant mores of society, and naturists
        must be prepared to disregard the conventional standards of society
        at least in that regard.  Some people might expect this disregard
        for societal standards to be universal, and therefore might expect
        to find in naturist society a comfortable home for their own
        departure from social norms -- be it vegetarianism, free thinking,
        feminism, free love, survivalism, or whatever. 

      * Some people might expect a naturist environment to provide a
	convenient opportunity for the gratification of their illicit
	desires.  (Voyeurs and pedophiles, for example.)

    These people are not themselves nudists or naturists; but some of them
    might, in some circumstances, present a threat to others in nude or
    clothing-optional settings (or elsewhere, for that matter); and so it
    is common sense for nudists and naturists to be alert for them and
    prepared to deal with them.

	-Neil

    RE: .12 - Neil,  That was very well put, and I agree with almost
    all of what you said.  The only thing I disagree with is the statement
    that "These people are not themselves nudists or naturists."  I
    would probably say "Most of these people ...."  There are nudists
    and naturists (not those who, IMO, embody the "principles of nudism
    and naturism") who are attracted to N/N for the "wrong" reason.
    Most of these people have "adapted" to the accepted norms of the
    N/N society, but some have not.  And those who have not, as well
    as the non-nudists/naturists that are seeking deviant satisfaction,
    are to be carefully observed.

    Jack

    
    I think the "New England" society (the only one that I know in the
    US) is too conservative, to religious. This creates, in my opinion,
    durty minds, very durty minds. I'm from a country where topless
    is common and accepted in a family beach. Looks like you guys skip
    over the 70's. When once I went with my wife to a nude beach, she
    thought that she would find their only great bodies, but she quick
    realize that we live in the real world  where just a minority has
    those great bodies. When you look at a 70 year person body you
    are not expecting a sex drive, are you? Nudism is the pleasure of
    making your body feel free." Any other thing in uncivilized".
    
    -rpg-
    

Do you mean to be accusing your readers here or were you using the word "you" in
a broad sense to mean "New Englanders (in general)."  The people writing in this
notes file, I think, support what your country's society accepts without
thought.  

There is an argument here some writers and readers are in as to whether social
nudity *requires* one to suppress thoughts of sex.  How is it in your country
regarding (what I assume must occur) when one *does* see an attractive nude or
partially nude person?

\bob