Thursday, December 10, 2009

Nudist Photos of the Day 12/10/09


Anna said...

I see in recent days you have made an effort to get in pictures of older more natural nudists.

Good for you.

The other ones I did question their intentions when being photographed. Just like now with the "Russian children" videos, back then several producers of so called "nudist mags" did market their product to those with a prurient interest in seeing naked people.

They were the stuff that boys would place under the bed with their playboys. Actually nudist mags back then were what legally opened the door for the playboys and such. Once the playboys and like were allowed to publish it really cut into the nudist mags business getting one publisher of nudist mags to produce "Nudist Moppets" in order to attract the pedo crowd since he was losing teenage male crowd to playboy and the like.

These were certainly the dark days of nudism. Not that nudism is perfect now as the "Russian Girls" videos prove. There are still people out there who under the name of "nudism" perverts it for their own financial gain.

Nudiarist said...

Please note that "Anna" is a known Usenet troll with over 12000 posts in nearly 200 groups, and is not a nudist. Anyone who has followed this blog knows full well that the photos I post have always shown diversity when taken as a whole. Certainly sometimes a particular series of vintage photos will be tilted towards one gender or another, and might not be representative of all body types. Again, I will not apologize for the photographers and editors for the choices they made in publishing nudist magazines half a century ago. These photos are still part of nudist history.

Anna said...

Yeah, one of the darker aspects of Nudist history.

And remember those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Nudiarist said...

Absolute, unequivocal nonsense from "Anna". Nobody with any normal, healthy mindset can look at any of these old photos of smiling nude people and interpret them as being "dark". The worst you can say about them is that they are not as "politically correct" as some would like them to be in terms of gender balance or diversity in body types. That's what I mean about editorial choices made a half century ago.