Monday, August 31, 2009


A commentary in the Times states that a precondition for a naturist beach is a "suitably secluded coastline."
The human body unadorned is only rarely a thing of beauty, and in few cases does its loveliness increase. A wish to avoid the unexpected sight of it is not prejudice but aesthetic sense.
Pure, unadulterated hogwash, and completely offensive, too.

The editorial also claims that naturism is a personal choice, and therefore not subject to legal equality considerations. Well, the wearing of clothes is also a personal choice - deciding what costume to don, what color combinations, what style. Same with beachwear. Some wear suits which cover most of the epidermal landscape, some wear next to nothing. One does not discriminate against people on the beach based upon their degree of coverage, so why should society place barriers against complete nudity, which is only one small step from what already exists?

The aesthetic argument against total nudity does not hold up considering the disastrous fashion sense of many people, or the fleshy folds which pour over the sides of bikinis and speedos. How can complete nudity be any more or less offensive than the supposed eyesores which already dot the human landscape?

No, the real issue here is genitals and nipples. Mostly the genital thing. Somehow over the centuries, people and their governments have decided that these sexual organs simply must not be seen in public, that they somehow have this power which will transform the average viewer into some sort of monster, out of control and destroying society. So we cover these parts up neatly and discreetly, protecting the children and little old ladies who might be ruined for life or sent to an early dirt nap at the mere sight of a penis or vagina.

Truth be told, we've all seen these body parts, and we see them every day when we get dressed, or bathe, or make love. We also see them in magazines, movies, art museums, and anywhere visuals occur, and when it comes to the Internet, it's becoming increasingly hard not to see genitals close up and angry, pounding into each other in full high-definition wide screen glory.

But somehow in natural, non-sexual settings like beaches and hiking trails, these genitals and nipples are eyesores, subject to the "stigma of the snigger", as the editorial so subtly puts it. And to dare call naturism a mere "personal choice" as if this is something to be dismissed - well, where would we all be without personal choices, which give us all uniqueness and spirit of life? Denying naturists their small spot of sand, merely because someone looking might be offended, is stomping on personal choice, and treads upon the basic human freedom we all should have to be natural in nature, as is intended by design, divine or otherwise.

There are very simple solutions for all those who are offended by naturists. Look away. Avert your glance. Bury your nose in a book. Cover your eyes. Walk somewhere else. Go to another stretch of beach. Do any or all of these things and you cannot possibly be offended, unless you harbor some inner prejudice which precludes you from accepting the simple personal choices of others.

Nudist Men Photo of the Day 8/31/09

Nudist Photo of the Day 8/31/09

Adam and Eve 8/31/09

It's Fun to Vacation at Nudist Resorts

"It's fun to vacation at clothing optional and nudist resorts." That has long been the motto of Tom Mulhall, the owner of the Terra Cotta Inn, along with his wife Mary Clare. Today Tom has a new post reiterating that philosophy.
The only conclusion I can come to is nudism just is not being portrayed as fun. And if it doesn't seem like fun, people won't be interested.
Tom correctly points out that the Naturist Society Facebook page has only about 500 members, about the same as the AANR Facebook page, yet a group called "Sleeping Naked" has 125,000 members. What's wrong with this picture? The lack of any mention of the word "fun." by the national organizations.

The Naturist Society offers a solemn "mission statement" promoting naturism as "a culture of body acceptance through clothing-optional recreation using the tools of education and community outreach." Honestly, would anyone ever go to Disneyland if they marketed their parks like this? Imagine if Uncle Walt had promoted his family amusement park as "a culture of leisure acceptance through mechanical recreation using the tools of engineering and marketing."

This past weekend at Cedar Trails in Ohio, a little toddler girl squealed with delight as she approached the pool. She nearly fell over in her enthusiasm to get into the water. Her unmitigated glee was an external expression of what most nudists and naturists feel when they shed their clothes - pure delight. There is absolutely nothing wrong in admitting that it simply feels wonderful.

This past weekend my wife and I swam, sunbathed, hiked, played about 50 games of billiards, socialized, and just plain had fun, all completely in the nude.

There are a myriad of problems facing nudists and naturists, especially on the marketing front, but Tom is absolutely correct to point out that bringing the fun back into nude recreation is job number one. AANR managed to do that this year with the skinny-dip record attempt.

So lighten up a little out there and have some good, clean, naked fun.

Thursday, August 27, 2009


A letter to the editor of the Sacramento News and Review perpetuates many of the myths surrounding nudism, and is reflective of the pernicious attitude nudists and naturists need to address if more public lands are ever to be set aside for clothes-free usage.
There are places nudists can enjoy their nakedness (nudist colonies, camps, private clubs), as well as private beaches...What is the big deal then, with protecting public places against behavior that offends the majority of the public, who would rather not be exposed to the overexposed human form?
Obviously this person has never been to a public beach, where the populace is already "exposed to the overexposed human form." The question here is why people who only wish to sunbathe and swim without artificial clothing coming between them and nature should be denied equal access to public lands. This is clear discrimination against taxpaying citizens. Forcing nudists and naturists into "colonies" or other private venues is reminiscent of the old Jim Crow laws in the South.
And here’s a complication to throw in the mix: Ever heard of the indecent-exposure law? Just when does it apply, and when does it not apply?
Natural nudity is not indecent. To believe otherwise is to deny that the human body is the epitome of nature's creations. The indecent exposure laws should apply only when indecency and lewdness is exhibited.
And let’s face it: Prancing around in the nude can sexually excite other nude bathers.
Really? This is news to all nudists and naturists who have been engaging in social nudity for many, many years. The fact is that when everyone is nude, the level of sexual excitement decreases. The wearing of speedos and skimpy bikinis is far more erotic, and the same people who get their jollies from watching naturists are also out with their binoculars and cameras on textile beaches. Using that "excitement" argument, the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue, probably the most popular mainstream fodder for teenage masturbation, should be immediately banned.
I find it ironic the very behavior that can get you arrested in the lobby of a public building is somehow OK on a public beach.
Nudists and naturists do not advocate public displays of sexual activity. Period.
...common sense should instantly kick in and force us to be more aware of the other person, rather than be so self-absorbed that we feel it’s OK to just “let it all hang out” without first considering whether or not our actions will cause some offense or a feeling of threat to someone else.
The same argument can be used by nudists and naturists against "self-absorbed" textiles who feel that they somehow "own" the rights to all public beaches. True freedom of expression means that sometimes one person's actions might be offensive to another. There is no evidence whatsoever that nude sunbathing is in any way a "threat" to others. What naturists propose is for areas of public lands to be set aside for nude swimming and sunbathing, with the proper signage to warn anyone who might feel offended, so all those "self-absorbed" textiles who can read can either go to another section of the beach, or simply divert their gaze. It's amazing how simple it is to avoid being offended if one uses a little common sense, as the writer suggests.
And speaking of the 21st century, there’s this little thing: a hole in our ozone layer. I’m sure you’ve heard about the UV rays seeping in and zapping sunbathers. Melanoma is now ranked in the top 10 cancers that are killing people, especially among the young.
I'm sorry, but playing the "skin cancer" card doesn't wash, expecially considering that tons of flesh is exposed on textile beaches, too. Melanoma amounts to less that 8,000 deaths per year in the United States, and while it's wise to use sunscreen and avoid prolonged exposure to UV rays, skin cancer can be caused by many other factors, including moles, family history, and certain illnesses. The exact causes of melanoma are still unknown, so there is no hard evidence that exposure to the sun actually causes the disease, but it is recognized as a risk factor.

If anything, exposure to the sun has amazing benefits from vitamin D, and it is logical to conclude that many diseases from vitamin D deficiencies could be caused by the false hysteria over melanoma, which is keeping people indoors or covered to such a degree that they are not getting any sunshine. Bottom line is that any naturist should see a dermatologist on a regular basis, something which is true for people who sunbathe in a speedo or bikini, too.

Nudists and naturists need to continually push back on all this "myth-information" being generated by people who simply speak from prejudice and untruths. There is nothing logical in any arguments against having public lands set aside for nude recreation, only irrational fears and discriminatory attitudes.
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Nude Model Arrested, Film at 11

More evidence of our stupid society.

A nude model posing for photographer Zach Hyman was arrested for stripping down at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City. It appears to have been some sort of pre-arranged sting, with police ready to pounce at the moment of disrobing, and an NBC video crew on hand ready to roll.
Today 30 seconds wasn't enough time as police busted up the shoot -- an event, which was captured exclusively by a camera rolling for The footage will also be shown on News 4 New York at 11, so stay tuned for exclusive footage.
So, arrest the model, and then promote the event on television for mass consumption. Model KC Neill was charged with public lewdness.

Certainly Hyman has been expecting trouble since he carries around bail money and employs a lookout, but a lewdness charge seems extreme unless the model was making some sexually explicit poses.

No word on whether NBC news will be brought up on charges of distributing lewd images.

Hyman's web site is here.

Nudist Photo of the Day 8/26/09

Nudist Men Photo of the Day 8/26/09

Adam and Eve 8/26/09

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

Guns and Boobs

I'm sorry, but this is really one fucked-up country. I don't like to use expletives, but this issue requires it. An 18 year-old girl in Keene, New Hampshire, topless with a handgun holstered to her hip, was arrested for indecent exposure during a protest with other armed people affiliated with the Free State Project.
In an online video of Nicosia’s protest and arrest, she explains why she decided to go topless in public.

“I chose to do it because this is one of the most important issues to me is equality … men can walk down the street … and, you know, not get harassed at all but yet somehow this is dirty,” she says.
New Hampshire's state motto is "Live free or die". It's absolutely astounding that New Hampshire does not require residents to have permits on openly carried firearms, but the mere act of baring a breast can land a woman in jail. This is the heart of the topfree movement, it's not about getting women to take off their tops, it's not about immature males drooling over naked breasts, it's about the decriminalization of the femalel breast, and that if men have the right to take off their shirts, then a woman should have the same right. Arresting women for exposing nipples is misogynistic, irrational, cruel, unnecessary, and just plain stupid.

New Hampshire Courtroom Legal Opposition Group
Cassidy Nicosia's Twitter Account
Cassidy Nicosia's MySpace Account

"Tampa is gross"

That's the conclusion of one writer regarding the AANR sanctions and subsequent withdrawals from the organization by Caliente, and now Paradise Lakes Resort. No good will come from any of this sexing-up nonsense of once-respectable nudist resorts.

More bad PR for nudism is here. "So much for social, family nude recreation."

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Adam and Eve 8/25/09

Nudist Men Photo of the Day 8/25/09

Nudist Photo of the Day 8/25/09 in Columbus, Ohio

On Saturday, April 23, members of held a paint party for women's topfreedom in Goodale Park, Columbus, Ohio. An unusually cool summer day and cloudy skies kept the typical park crowd very low, and consequently the event drew very few observers and participants.

Carla Watson, event organizer, showed plenty of enthusiasm and was the first to shed her top and have her breasts painted. Her eloquence on the subject of topfree equality can be seen and heard in my interview - part one is here, part two is here. My photographs of the event can be found here.

Turnout was much better in other cities. A report from Chicago is here, and New York here. TERA's commentary on the event is on their website.

It seems that mainstream media coverage of this event was down dramatically from last year. In once sense that's good because the exposure or women's breasts in public could be seen as more of a non-issue, or it could be bad because public interest in the cause is fading. One thing for sure - bare breasts are always fodder for the punsters, who cannot resist the "hanging out" or "Boobstock" references.

All naturists that I have spoken to agree on one thing, that the folks at should drop their references to Raël and the Raëlian movement. As Dr. Paul Rapoport observes, it's a "distraction" from the topfree issue, and spawns such absurd headlines as "UFO Cult Would Like to See Your Breasts."

This is not meant to be a knock on Raëlians, who appear to be lovely people from my interactions, and are certainly no more "out there" than Mormons or Evangelical Christians in their beliefs, but when Carla opens up her interview with a statement about Raël, it strikes a cultish tone that turns off many people. The Academic Naturist also weighs in on this issue:
During the main speech, the organizer made sure to include a section on the Raelian beliefs. I couldn't help but roll my eyes. Here's my suggestion to them: People will take the GoTopless protests more seriously if you ONLY stick to the issue of top-equality! Once you mention aliens, people just consider you crazy and walk away. Take a look at the news stories -- they always mention the UFO cult, often as the headline. That's bad for getting people to take you seriously.
To be fair, Carla did not attempt to "convert" anybody, and seemed sincerely devoted to the cause, but a Raëlian book was placed prominently on the table next to the signup sheet.

The folks at need to mainstream their cause in order to draw in more people. By distancing themselves from the Raëlian movement, they can also be more successful at drawing in organizations like AANR and TNS who have thousands of members who should be willing to join in the demonstrations.

The organizers at need to reassess their strategies starting now if they want to remain a viable factor in the women's topfreedom movement.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Saturday, August 22, 2009

British Naturism Seeks Equality Protection Under the Law

In a bold and potentially historic move, British Naturism has submitted a claim to the Government Equalities Office which contends that "devotees of skinny dipping and nudist campsites suffer prejudice equivalent to that experienced by gays, ethnic minorities and the elderly."
It is urging the government and other authorities to make “affirmative statements” in favour of naturism and combat the financial penalties endured by those who pursue clothes-free leisure pursuits. Entry to naturist nights at council swimming pools is often twice as expensive as admission on other nights...British Naturism’s submission was one of those selected for display on the website of the equalities office alongside work by Stonewall, the gay rights group, Age Concern and the Runnymede Trust, which campaigns for racial equality
The National Equality Panel report will be published in November.

In the United States, people who oppose public lands to be set aside for nude sunbathing often make the comment that the beaches should be for "everybody", and that somehow the presence of nude people suddenly makes a beach restricted. In fact, this argument is prejudicial, and a society which denies equal access to tax-paying citizens who merely wish to enjoy nature without the burden of clothing is guilty of discrimination.

Nudists and naturists should pay close attention to the British Naturism action, which could prove to be a model for other initiatives around the world.

The complete equality bill which was submitted in June 2009 can be found here.

Sending the Wrong Message

Another seemingly positive article on nudism actually perpetuates the same old myth,s and profiles nudists and naturists as secretive kooks.
I spoke to a long-serving, elderly trustee from the Carlisle area who refused to be named or identified in any way.

Is all this cloak and dagger stuff really necessary in the 21st century?

“It is one of the things about naturism – we don’t like broadcasting who we are because people look down on us,” he said with heavy emphasis.

“We have had to keep our heads below the parapet because people think it is a sex thing.”
The article is peppered with words and phrases like "strange", "sex", "cheap jokes", "double entendres", "secret", "none of their business", "anonymity", "voyeuristic", "bothered by single men", "strictly controlled", "don't really like the publicity", etc.

Once again, a naturist club lets in the press, hoping to attract new members, and fails to control the message. National organizations need to develop public relations guidelines for all their affiliated clubs, complete with talking points, to counterract the biases of reporters who know nothing about the lifestyle.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Sheriff Calls Planned Nudist Resort "Silly"

Sheriff Steve Immenschuh of Granite County, Montana, is reported to have described a planned nudist resort as being "silly", although there is nothing illegal about the enterprise.

Law enforcement officials need to keep their personal opinions to themselves. Imagine if this prudish cop had made the same statement about a local church, restaurant, or any private business. Nudists and naturists are easy targets because they don't have overwhelming numbers to push back on the negative comments, plus so many remain anonymous in order to avoid coming under attack from employers or family members who share the sheriff's unfortunate attitude.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Friday, August 21, 2009

Diary of a Nudist - Resurrected!

OK, I give up.

Over two months ago I abandoned this very successful but censored blog, Diary of a Nudist, in order to get a fresh start. I basically split the blog into five: The Political Naturist, Nudist Men, Nudist Photo of the Day, Adam and Eve, and The Naturism Blog.

All of the new blogs are doing well, but the funny thing is that this old Diary of a Nudist site is also doing well, and has even added new members during its two months of dormancy. The traffic is also still pretty strong although only about a third of what it was.

So here's the deal. Diary of a Nudist has been revived and will be a compilation of the other blogs in one place. For those who want a "safe for work" version. all of my commentaries, news reports and observations will be on The Political Naturist, with no images of frontal nudity.

Thanks to all of you who continue to support all of my blogs.

AANR Suspends Paradise Lakes Resort

AANR suspended Paradise Lakes Resort in Florida over an advertisement for a "Miss G-String International" contest, contending that such an event was contrary to the organization's family-friendly principles. When notified of the suspension, resort owner John Forier withdrew membership altogether.
The Paradise Lakes investigation determined that the resort's management had "increasingly sexualized the nudist experience" by advertising and marketing the G-string contest, AANR said.

The resort opened in 1981. Hawkins characterized Paradise Lakes as a longtime member or the organization. She said she has worked for AANR nearly 20 years and doesn't recall any previous investigations at Paradise Lakes.
The sexing-up of nudist resorts continues, no doubt due in part to the pervasiveness of pornography in our culture, and to many traditional nudist resorts no longer pack enough of a thrill to keep up the attendance.

I've said many times that I have no problem with people engaging in whatever mutual sexual activity they desire, just don't call it nudism, or naturism. Also, the danger facing these adult-oriented clothing-optional resorts is that they will soon be drawing the attention of public officials who will no doubt seek to regulate them as adult entertainment establishments. This is precisely why AANR did the right thing by suspending this club.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Naked Sports Booming in Germany

According to Bild, with photo gallery.

Canadian Freehiker Perseveres

Interesting article from Orillia, Ontario, Canada, about a man who has been freehiking trails in that area for years. A recent encounter with cyclists provoked the following reaction:
"He was like anybody else," said (Guy) Aubin. "He just gave us a nod. If he had clothes on, you wouldn't think he was weird or nothing."

Still Aubin felt compelled to call the Orillia OPP to report the bizarre encounter. "It doesn't bother me personally, but if kids are out there, I'd be worried."

"He should get a fine to encourage him to put his clothes on."
This sort of irrational response isn't anything new to the unidentified naturist. He has been charged with public nudity and committing indecent acts but never convicted on either charge, and in 2007 authorities managed to harrass him with a "mischief" charge.
"He's been doing it for years," Severn Township mayor Phil Sled said. "We asked him not to do it any more, but he thinks he's within his rights. We passed the matter on to the police, but they couldn't do anything.

"It's just one of those things. It is kind of humorous."

Orillia OPP Sgt. Robin Moore said the hiker is not committing an indecent act if he covers his genitals, however skimpily.
Four questions. 1) If the man is within his rights, why do the authorities continue to harass him? 2) If the mayor finds the man humorous, why continue to pass the matter on to police? 3) What exactly is it that makes even the skimpiest covering of the genitals "decent", and the uncovering of them "indecent?" 4) What specifically is it about the mostly nude freehiker with one arm that is dangerous to children?

There are no good answers to these questions. This freehiker is being persecuted simply due to people's ignorance of the law, and of naturism. Has the Federation of Canadian Naturists come to the support of this man, or has he been fighting this battle alone?

I have been fortunate enough to freehike at Ohio's Cedar Trials, which has 5 miles of paths, and after feeling the freedom of not having sweaty clothes clinging to my skin, and feeling the cool breeze instead, I think it's weird that anyone would ever want to hike wearing textiles.

Freehiking could be one of the keys to getting the next generation interested in naturism. Next to sunbathing, swimming and beach volleyball, it's the recreational activity that makes the most sense being done in the nude.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]