Tuesday, October 23, 2007

The Free Body Movement

For all intents and purposes, nudism is nearly dead in America. Long live clothes-free and nude recreation, and topfreedom for women. It appears that the traditional nudist resort, such as those seen in the "Golden Days" of the 50s through the 70s, will not rise again.

This is not to say that there are not still some thriving clubs out there, but the membership is aging, and everybody seems to notice this, but nobody seems to know what to do about it.

In Germany, Freikörperkultur FKK (free body culture) began early in the early part of the 20th century as a reaction to Victorian social restrictions. The movement thrived until Hitler came to power and banned the practice, but nudism survived in many forms in Germany and other countries.

In the United States, the government tried unsuccessfully to suppress nudist magazines in the 40s, and only began to leave nudist resorts alone in the 1950s. Once the authorities stopped trying to halt nudism, the lifestyle thrived as part of the pop counter-culture. Just take a look at the photos in magazines from that era, with the beauty competitions, costume contests, and general goofiness. Even as a kid I was aware that there were nudists. A friend once raided his dad's magazines and we laughed and laughed at all the naked people playing volleyball and swimming.

The problem is that we as a society still have that mental image of nudists in our minds. Nudist resorts are still called "colonies", the practice is considered a "cult", and nudist publications are still "nudie magazines". The image of nudism today is further tarnished by all the horrible publicity put out over the last couple of years regarding the aging of people who belong to nudist organizations, and the problems with public nudity and the overreactions of local governments in dealing with the issue, such as in Brattleboro and in Huntington Beach.

Some organizations have begun distancing themselves from the "nudist" terminology, with words such as "clothes-free". I think that nudism should go a step further and begin referring to the lifestyle as The Free Body Movement.

The Free Body Movement means that individuals believe that the human body in its natural naked form is preferred to covering it up with clothing, that there is no shame in seeing or being seen by others in the nude. The Free Body Movement generally espouses all the best philosophies of nudism and naturism (no need to list them all here), but goes a step further in proclaiming that social nudity is an important component in the health and well being of all individuals. Being naked is not only liberating, fun, and physically healthy, but it also acts as a buffer to the social ills that permeate our culture, such as pornography, religious intolerance, and unrealistic body images.

The Free Body Movement also recognizes a greater responsibility to the planet we live on. The lifestyle does not end when the clothes are put back on, it stays with us at all times. A Free Body individual does everything possible to reduce his or her own carbon footprint, such as turning down the heat in the winter, turning up the air conditioner in the summer, riding a bicycle whenever possible, and so on. The health of the planet is the same as the health of the individual.

The Free Body Movement does not discriminate on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity or religious beliefs. And while The Free Body Movement believes that sex is one of the most wonderful gifts given to us as humans, there is no place for overt sexual activity in social situations. FBM is for ALL ages, especially for children, who need to learn at an early age not to be ashamed of their bodies, and to be responsible for their behavior on this planet.

I welcome any and all suggestions on this idea. In short, the end of nudism in America, and the birth of the Free Body Movement. The end of a reactive lifestyle, and the beginnings of a proactive culture, which teaches responsibility and respect for the body as well as the environment. After all, one cannot exist without the other.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

2 comments:

Academic Naturist said...

Way to hit my top two interests! This is an excellent writeup and I am in full support.

I wonder if this movement can piggyback the impending green movement? People will be more connected with nature, and more open to new ideas, so perhaps the cultural attitudes will shift for the better.

Anonymous said...

I do not believe that changing the name will change peoples acceptance or participation of public group nudity. Frankly I think that the US midwest (and a few other places as well) are eventually going to be dragged kicking and screaming out of Victorianism by a few supreme court challenges. Until that happens, it is one city or state at a time (with no regard for personal freedoms). To me this all boils down to social control, and exactly what kinds of things ANY government has the right to make illegal. Anti-nudity laws are just modern versions of medieval sumptuary laws. When the wealthy of the world wasn't to be nude they do not get in trouble for it, and most just go on holiday to a place where they are in a more sane society (or in the privacy of their own mansion).

I believe strongly that a persons ability to chose what to wear (or not to wear, including not anything)...is a fundamental right over ones one life. You might as well go back to making tattoos illegal while you are at it. It won't get rid of them, but it will make the practice far less safe. The fact is that the only real dangers associated with public nudity come from people who are seriously bent in the head, and the sooner society is willing to admit this, the better it will be for all of us.

I do not expect this in the USA. After all, the USA is one of the most fascist countries left on the planet, which at the same time pretends to be free. In my country all beaches are topless, kids TV show nudity (breast feeding), and the government has 'work-cover' adverts with nudity as well. Honestly, the problem is that the USA as a nation is a socially backward place, founded by the religiously insane ;12 out of 13 colonies had state religions, many of which did not accept people as married unless they were married in THAT version of Christianity. These were the least tolerant (and tolerated) religious people in all of western Europe. In those days if you were married with a family in Virginia and went to Boston- suddenly you and your spouse of 30 years get jailed for adultery, and all your kids are labeled as bastards. That is how it was, and the same nut balls are still in charge of local issues today (and occasionally national ones).