Obviously, you like to be naked. You can enjoy being naked at home or on some remote beach. However, you are going to have more fun hanging out naked with friends, whether at home or on the beach. So, a very good reason to start (or join) a naturist group is to increase your number of like-minded friends and acquaintances and to increase the opportunities to enjoy getting naked without being harrassed. For example, you can't afford to rent a pool and gym for a winter swim, but a group can. If there are others already willing to help form a group, great; but you can start a naturist group on your own if need be. Soon enough, others will be there. Also, the more people there are that are involved in local groups and the more connected these groups are to each other, the more likely we are to take effective political action and to organize major social and/or political events.
Now, you've decided to start a group. What to do?
First, decide what type of group are you going to be. Will it be a community wide group? Or limited to campus, church, or business? Perhaps a group dedicated to preserving or creating nude use at a certain beach?
A community wide group, of course, will be open to and promoted to all naturists and clothing-optional enthusiasts in the entire community. This type group offers the greatest opportunity for growth and effectiveness. However, your group might focus upon your college campus, your church, or your place of employment, assuming any of these allow clubs. If there is no group at all near your community, you will want to start a community wide group. If there is already a community wide group, then you should join that and work to make it better. However, you can also start a more focused group. This more focused group can and should connect to the larger group while still maintaining its own identity.
Colleges are a natural for the development of groups and will have an established procedure for getting your group recognized. This recognition will afford you all the rights granted to every other campus group. The senior and junior classes will want to make sure first and second year students are recruited and trained in management of the group so that the club continues despite graduations. The club could be open to college staff and faculty which could help maintain continuity.
Churches may seem unlikely, but many congregations are surprisingly accepting of diversity and will accept naturists amongst them -- not actually naked, of course -- although some churches have actually allowed clothing-optional activities in limited times or places. Pagan or New Age Churches should be particularly open to naturism. Getting you and your fellow naturists recognized affords you opportunities to educate other congregants about naturism and enlist their assistance in advocating for your rights. If ultimately, they reject you, well, what do you want to support such a church for anyway? Find a church where what is preached is actually practiced. Most every church has social clubs, so why not a naturist club?
If you work amongst lots of employees, your work place too could use a naturist group. Why not? You may have to educate your employer about Naturism, but most will have no problem with it. Wouldn't it be nice to make naturist friends at work? If you are concerned about your employer punishing you for being a naturist, check with a civil rights attorney as to your rights. Obviously, using company time and materials to promote your activity may be just cause for disciplinary action, but you should be able to participate in any legal activity outside of work and not have it impact your status at work. Some states even have laws protecting employees from punishment for outside legal activities.
You also may decide to limit the club to heterosexual couples and families or to homosexual men or to lesbians and their families. Or you might wish to introduce a naturist subgroup to an already established ethnic or tribal association. Some might argue that such a limitation is not naturist -- nudist perhaps, but not naturist. However, that is your decision. You will still be encouraged to connect to the Michigan Nude Beach Advocates.
Decide on a goal for the group. Look at the agenda and goals that I have established for the Michigan Nude Beach Advocates. Having far reaching and encompassing goals projects the group well into the future. Knowing your main goal and keeping it in mind allows you to shrug off any tactical failures while learning from them. So no one attends some event or meeting. That event failed, but so what? You try again, get smarter, fail again, try again, succeed here and there, and slowly build momenturm by keeping in mind your major goal rather than dwelling on momentary failures. Eventually, the tactical successes far outnumber the failures.
You've decided on the type of group and its goals. Now what?
Establish a means for people to contact you. A mailing address, a phone number and answering machine, an e-mail address or some or all of these.
Promote through whatever means are allowed, avialable, and affordable.
Have occasional events to get together in person now and then. All events do not have to appeal to everyone, so try to have differant events occasionally.
Recruit help. Make this a cooperative enterprise. Don't allow others to expect not to have to do anything but show up (when they feel like it). Especially when someone says, " You should ..." or "I wish..." or " It would be good if we did ..." Agree but get them to get it started (or it's not going to happen). Form committees and have others form committees to get particular activities started and to keep things going..
Have fun. Don't neglect to have fun yourself. One of the reasons to start a group is to increase your naturist fun. Naturism is a social activity. Don't do all the planning and all the work. You've started a group, but expect and enourage others to meet their own expectations for events: canoeing, cards, hiking, outings to nudist resorts, whatever. You do not have to initiate every event. How much you let others do may have to do with your own personality. If you are a controlling type or a perfectionist, you will end up squelching the enthusiasm and initiative of others. Channel your energies into encouraging others and let them get on with it without your constantly overseeing or altering things; otherwise, you will drive them nuts and exhaust yourself. Recognize that others will have better ideas and more skill in certain areas than you, so let them at it. Your job is to inspire, not to do everything nor even to oversee.
Here are some promotional ideas thathave worked:
Attend Naturist Gatherings and see if you can meet people from your area. At a closing circle, for example, listen for where people say they are from and approach them afterwards. Post flyers at the gathering and at any nudist resort. Send flyers to the resorts and ask for them to post them for you (concentrate on the nearer resorts).
Post and get others to post flyers all around the town and the county and as far as you care to outreach. Post anywhere you are allowed to do so. Check on the posters often and replace as needed. The flyers should make some announcement about the existance of the group or the forming of it and give a means to contact you. Keep them posted.
Does your local newspaper have a calendar of events? Have a monthly informational meeting at a cafe and get the information about the meeting into the calendars. Don't be sad if no one shows up. Keep "meeting". Enjoy a quiet tea on the days no one shows up. As your group grows, make it a social meeting for the group to hobnob about naturism and your group. Should new people show up, switch to a more introductory discussion, but let all the group members who are there talk and answer questions.
Get your group listed with The Naturist Society and with The Michigan Nude Beach Advocates.
Set up an informational booth at local art fairs and other shows when possible (this is great fun!).
Set up a website for the club. Put the group online via Meet Up, Facebook, Naturist Hub and/or the like.
Contact The Naturist Society, The Michigan Nude Beach Advocates, The Southeast Michigan Naturists, and any other naturist groups and ask if they could send out a message to any of their members in the area about your new group. Ask them for advise. Nicky Hoffman of The Naturist Society can send you an additional article about starting a naturist group.
Now the group is a growing enterprise. Hooray! How have you been staying in contact with each other? Establish an e-mail notification system right from the start and keep it going and up to date.
Also, a hardcopy newsletter mailed out on a periodical basis reinforces the "reality" of the group and increases attendance at events, but it is work and costs money. So, having a newsletter means increased dues. It's worth having, but don't bust yourself over it. Make sure the treasury can handle it and make sure you've recruited at least one person who really enjoys publishing. As the size of the group increases, a committee will be needed for the newsletter to get it addressed, folded, stamped, sorted, and mailed -- unless you have the wherewithal to turn it all over to a service. There is also the possibility of utilizing a digital newsletter that is e-mailed.
Committees are a good idea for many activities. A small house party or picnic or outing can be handled by one "host", perhaps; but major activities should have a committee formed as part of the planning stage, otherwise who is going to do all the work? My mantra is this: "Don't ask me to do it. Tell me what you are doing . Need help? Write up a request for volunteers and send it to the newsletter editor, etc."
Some groups make volunteering a requirement of membership ... just several hours a year, and may require a fee or an additional fee for non-members to attend events. Once a person is volunteering, he usually puts in many more hours than the minimum. Having volunteering a requirement assures that everyone is contibuting in some small way. But what about the problem of losing people who won't or can't work? Easy. Give them them a brochure for the nearest naturist resort. There they pay for the priviledge of being catered to.
The most important person to recruit is someone good at handling money and maintaining a budget. This is your treasurer. As the group grows, you will need to establish some official organizational mechanisms: such things as by-laws and a board of directors. This is needed to give the organization a future. You want the group to outlive you. You want it around at least until nudity on public lands is no longer remarkable, until the day you can stroll naked on any public beach, smile at any passing police officer, and merrily continue on your way. Do get started! There are lots of good folk in your community who also enjoy naturist activities. Get them connected. Of course, you can keep it simple. Maybe only act as a contact person in your community, not getting any fancier than creating a Meetup group to connect interested persons. That's fine too.
Either way, we need local naturist groups to power the state and national organizations. A local naturist group in every major population center in every county in Michigan is needed to give every naturist in the state a naturist group with which to connect. Detroit and Ann Arbor each have a group. How about starting one in your county?
First understand that I am not a lawyer, have never formally studied law, and have done very little informal investigation into law or legal theory. Nonetheless, what little I have considered and discovered about it might be useful to the degree that it is not wrong.
While laws against indecency are on the books, the interpretation and enforcement has certainly changed since People v. Ring (1934) 255 N.W.373, 267 Mich. 657. In that infamous case, "the operator of nudist camp who went about without clothing was guilty of 'indecent exposure,' irrespective of whether members' sense of propriety was thereby shocked." If this finding were still valid, all nudist camps and nude gatherings would be illegal (and so would the presence of children in locker rooms and public showers as well as parents nude before their kids under any circumstances). Fortunately, the Michigan Supreme Court in The People vs Hildabridle (1958) invalidated People v. Ring .
But something has changed. We can see it in the lack of enforcement of prohibition of nude art per Act 328 of 1931 which states in part that "any representation of the human form in an attitude or dress which would be indecent in the case of a living person, if such person so appeared in any public street, square or highway, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor." This act was recently ruled unconstitutional -- in whole or in part, I forget which -- when some prosecutor tried to have Right to Lifers charged with this for displaying aborted fetuses (displays of personal violence is covered in this act.) We can see the change in actual law, even as early as 1937. In Act 94 of 1937 (205.93a), a law establishing a tax for use or consumption, "nudist camps" are specifically mentioned as an establishment along with inns, motels, et al. How can nudist camps be legal establishments if nudity is indecent and therefore unlawful? That would be like recognizing Crack Houses as legitimate places of business.
More telling, though, is the passage of The Home Rule City Act, Act 279 of 1901, which was amended (117.5h) in the 1990s to allow cities to "regulate or prohibit public nudity". Act 245, 41.181, sec 1 does the same for townships. If nudity were prohibited by the "open and indecent exposure" act, there would be no need for these acts. Furthermore, the judiciary hates the use of general laws to prosecute a behavior when a specific law was or could have been available. The questions arise: Why did the city or township council not pass a law regulating nudity, or if they did, why did they not write it to cover this situation? Is the prosecution violating separation of powers by taking on the legislative powers of the council in attempting to make nudity illegal when the council hasn't?
The City of Ann Arbor, for example, does have an ordinance on the books prohibiting nudity in any city-owned building (but seemingly no where else). Dexter Township and other townships having Huron-Clinton Metropolitan Parks have passed a law -- at the behest of HCMP -- to make illegal to "intentionally expose the male or female buttocks or genital areas or the female breasts, either openly or by wearing beach attire calculated to expose such areas." This came about when some woman complained about a skate boarder or roller-blader wearing a thong (she complained about both). Thus, the HCMP asked for this law, despite the existance of the "Indecency Act", to allow for the regulation or prohibition of these activities or states of dress. However, the law passed by Dexter Township is specific to the HCMP park in Dexter Township. Nudity may well be legal anywhere in Dexter Township outside the park and legal anywhere on public land in Ann Arbor outside of city owned buildings. However, testing this hypothesis in court, even if won, would likely prompt more expansive laws. A coordinated effort at developing political savvy is needed.
Nonetheless, you may get arrested for public nudity, despite lack of any law against it. However, getting arrested and being found guilty are not the same. Initially, a person will be charged with "indecent exposure". Ignorant and frightened persons will plead guilty, but that is a mistake. Get convicted twice and you go onto the "Sexual Offenders List". Yet, if you were simply being nude and were not acting out sexually, then prosecutors will drop the charge of "indecent exposure" should you exercise your right to a trial. They may drop charges altogether or attempt to substitute some other charge such as "disturbing the peace". Of course, acting out sexually in public or "flashing" with the intent to offend are prosecutable as indecency. Always seek competent legal help should you be arrested for simple nudity and make sure your lawyer has read this article. Not all lawyers are conversant with laws regarding nudity.
How did nudity get separated from the legal concept of "indecency"? It probably started at the federal level with the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on nudist films which declared them not obscene. Thus we find in the Federal Reporter in a case involving South Florida Free Beaches, Inc. that "Nudity is protected as speech only when combined with some mode of expression which itself is entitled to First Amendment protection." Please realize the significance of this. Combining nudity with any 1st Amendment entitlement gives protection to nudity. Sexual acts, murder, assault, drug use, rape, and the like are not protected no matter how entagled one might make them with First Amendment rights. Throw rocks at a speaker and you will be arrested, charged, and convicted. Perform a sex act on stage in a legitimate play (and who can determine legitimacy of art?) and you will go to jail. While neither that decision nor any other decision has yet to recognize a constitutional right to nudity, it too also goes on to say that a "trial court erred in reaching constitutional validity of statute prohibiting conduct tending to 'corrupt the public morals' or 'outrage the sense of public decency' " Judges prefer specific law which Michigan's Indecency Act is definitely not.
A thorough study of federal law regarding nudity would be worthwhile as I don't know that it has ever been done. There are informative books about federal law and obscenity which have some applicability to nudity, but nothing I know of that focuses on nudity and brings in all the cases in a good time line.
The same is true in Michigan, but here is a bit I've managed to get from Michigan Compiled Laws. By the way, while the Internet site is useful for getting the text of the laws, the book form at the library gives useful commentary about the laws. Thus I found these tidbits:
"Michigan Criminal Obscenity statutes 750.343a, 750.343b which neither specifically defined nor carefully limited terms employed such as obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or indecent, sadistic or masochistic, were vague and over broad and therefore unconstitutional on their face" People v Neumayer (1979).
"Requirement that the prohibited material be specifically defined in a statute or ordinance regulating pornography is designed to provide clear and conspicuous notice to sellers of sex related material as to the scope of the prohibition." People v Austin (1977)
"Obscenity ordinance which prohibited, inter alia, the showing, less than completely and opaquely covered, of the buttock and the female breast below a point immediately above the top of the areola was overly broad and attempted to prohibit nudity" People of City of East Detroit v Vickery (1976)
Rulings like the above, I think, led to the amendment of the Home Rule Act to allow the regulation of nudity.
Look at the logic of the Indecency Act, which states, "Any person who shall knowingly make any open or indecent exposure of his or her person or of the person of another shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment ..." This is not a regulatory law that prohibits "indecency" in particular places or at particular times. It is a law of prohibition, flat out. To say that nudity is covered by this act is to say, as I stated earlier, that all nudity in front of children is prohibited -- anyplace, anytime, by anyone. To say that it applies only in certain places is to say then that sexual acts can knowingly take place in front of children -- in one's own home. Courts have ruled, however, that sexual acts are indecent when done in a place where children could happen upon the act, even if they were not there at the start. So indecency is indecency anytime it is knowingly in the presence of children.
Is nudity, therefore, indecent and therefore prohibited in front of children at all times and in all places? Furthermore, if nudity is indecent, wouldn't subjecting children per the "or of the person of another" to the condition of nudity also be indecent and, in fact, abusive? Thus, wouldn't bathing one's child subject one to prosecution unless one kept him in a bathing gown? It would be if nudity is legally "indecent".
As there is obviously doubt about the validity of charging one with indecency merely for being nude, I like the following: "Constitutional provisions for protection of life, liberty, and property are to be largely and liberally in favor of citizens." Lockwood v Nims (1959)
The question arises as to whether the "open exposure" part of the "indecency act" might not be pretty clear cut. However, the same problems that come with prohibiting nudity as "indecent exposure" come to bear in prohibiting "open exposure". No child could be exposed to adults, no group showers, etc. Yet, if the courts found a way to somehow enforce prohibition of "open exposure" while allowing children into public locker rooms as places where exposure were to be expected and therefor not illegal, then that automatically would still allow for the development of public nude beaches. Simple signage warning that nudity is to be expected in this area then makes the nudity no longer "open", being restricted to but still allowed in a place where nudity is -- well -- expected. Thus the Michigan Department of Recreation's argument that they cannot authorize nude use areas on state beaches is incorrect even now. They just need to set aside clearly marked areas for nude recreation as any nudity within that area would not be "open".
It would be nice to get a clear cut ruling specifically on this issue in Michigan so that no police officer, prosecutor, or bureaucrat can use the Indecency Ordinance abusively. Once nudity is fully understood not to be "indecent", the lawmakers and prosecutors will then be put in the position of having to actually defend the laws against nudity. What is the basis for these laws? That someone is actually harmed? Or merely that someone is offended?
Per the Michigan Constitution, one group of people can not be placed above another group. It may be a stretch to define nudists as a group, but what about Pagans who wish to perform a sky clad service in a public park? Why should the Mormons be allowed to have service on public park land dressed as they wish, but not the Pagans or Spiritual Naturists ? Since nudity harms no one and is not indecent, the government had better have a damn good case for restricting a religious practice other than "it's offensive." And if Pagans (or even some Christian nudist groups) were able to worship nude on public land, why should nudity be prohibited to anyone? The very least a government must do to even pretend to uphold the rights of all citizens is to provide some public park areas for freedom of choice rather than giving all the land over to the Textilists. Imagine if Dearborn, with its large Mideast population, were to restrict all Dearborn Public Lands to only those who covered their chests and legs at all times (and women their hair) or restricted beaches to either women and children or to men. According to the Home Rule Act, Dearborn can do so! Would that stand up to muster in a Michigan court?
The afore mentioned Hildabridle case, in effect, firmly separated simple nudity from the concept of indecent exposure. Thus objecting authorities use "disturbing the peace" or some equally bogus charge to suppress public nudity. But such charges are recognized by all authorities as totally inapplicable in private settings. The result of the decision in People v Hildabridle is that people in Michigan can socialize nude in a private setting (wherein nudity is accepted by the host) and when children are present (sexual display is still cause for a charge of indecency). This has made legal our use of a public recreational building for nude recreation; for when we rent it, it becomes a private setting and we the hosts. The ruling also opens up the possibility of nudity on any public beach with official signs identifying it as clothing-optional, as the signs eliminate the "disturbing the peace" charge used to interdict nudity in the absence of a law specifically proscribing nudity.
In theory, nudity could be allowed in any public area where the host (the ruling authority) accepts it.
Right now, women can demand the right to go top-free using the successful arguments that won top-freedom in Ontario and in New York State. The Federal and State Constitutions make it illegal not to treat every group and every person equally. Furthermore, many Michigan cities, such as Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, have their own ordinances that emphasize the right of women to be treated no differently than men under the law. Challenging the prohibition of women's toplessness in any place or situation that men can go topless would be a slam dunk if actually pursued. Any woman out there willing to at least start a Top Free Rights Group for Michigan?
Any men and women willing to start a Local Political Action Group for Naturists' Rights? Just meeting once a quarter to discuss options would be a start. Getting volunteers to attend city or township council meetings to keep aware of anti-nudity legislation and to mobilize for nudist rights would be very helpful. For example, just 12 Ann Arbor volunteers could attend Ann Arbor City Council meetings with each volunteer having to attend just once a year -- unless there was a call to action. Even, maybe especially, starting a naturist social group in your area will help move this state to the full legal accommodation of naturists.
Please don't depend on others to do this. Don't expect the officers of your local naturist group or nudist camp to do it, if there is one. They are carrying too much of the load already. For that matter, if there is no naturist group in your community, are you willing to start one?
So what do you say? Are you willing to exercise your civic duty in an area that actually interests you? I look forward to hearing your announcement and will be interested in helping promote your efforts.
Premier Hotels and Resort’s reply to my letter to their editor got me excited about writing the media. I came across the publication in an Ann Arbor bookstore. Thumbing through it, I noticed that the Grand Lido Resorts in Jamaica did not make any mention of their nude beaches. My letter to the publication pointed this out and called into question the accuracy of the rest of the listings. I pointed out that the existence of a nude beach at a resort would certainly be of interest to a significant number of vacationers. Some time later, to my surprise, I received a package that included the latest copy of the publication. A letter thanked me for my interest and directed me to check out the listings for the Grand Lido Resorts. Sure enough, listed in the amenities were the au naturel beaches.
I’ve written to many local and national publications and media outlets since then and even have had letters published. Editors do respond to the interests of their readers. Even the publisher of your conservative hometown newspaper will allow a more objective view of naturism if he hears from even only a few of you. What do you say? The main thing is to let the publisher know that social nudity is a healthy, family friendly activity practiced by people even amongst the paper’s readership.
I’ve had several letters published in the Ann Arbor News and one lengthy opinion piece. I’ve encouraged others to also write the paper and who also have been published. In a short letter, stick to one point whatever it may be. Read Nude & Natural and articles on naturist websites to familiarize yourself with good points that you can make your own.
Concerned about having your name in the paper? You can state that your letter is not meant for publication or you can create a pen name for all of your letters. Inform others in the household of your nom de plume because many publications will call back to confirm that you want your letter published. You don’t want your family saying, “That person doesn’t live here.” Obviously, using your real name is simpler.
Respond to any article that mentions naturist related items. I expressed disappointment to Travel Holiday that an article, “25 Beaches in Florida,” failed to mention Haulover Beach. Caribbean Travel published my letter in response to the article, “Our Favorite Beaches”. Therein, the author mentioned the existence of several nude beaches but said nothing more about them. I suggested that clothing-optional enthusiasts would be interested in the same things that interest any beach goer: type of beach, suitability for swimming, available amenities, treatment of naturists (welcomed or merely tolerated “if no one complains”). Note that in either letter I stuck to one topic.
When a magazine is egregiously bad in its policy, voice concern. Conde Nast Traveler, for instance, never showed nudity, not even bare female breasts, despite many photographs of beaches all over the world. To my dismay then, the magazine, in a feature on Las Vegas, printed a prominent and large photo of a bare breasted stripper leaning toward a leering man who was offering her money. Her breasts were fully exposed. What? Conde Nast prints this but can’t show a bare breasted woman sunning on a beach? I took the publisher to task for this. Many months later, when the same publication actually did finally show bare breasted women on some French beach, I wrote to thank them for the apparent change in editorial policy. I also noticed that National Geographic had a picture of bare breasted white European women on a Tahitian beach and wrote to thank them for this (while expressing naturist values in my letter).
Occasionally, some magazine will do a good article on a naturist subject. Then I write to complement the reporter and thank the editor for the article and maybe expand on some particularly worthy point. For instances, Allure Magazine devoted most of an issue in 2000 to the theme of nudity and did so without giggly salaciousness; and Jane Magazine had an excellently objective article on a reporter’s first ever visit to a nudist resort. I did challenge both magazines to avoid the titillation of near nudity and cheesecake poses and to include, instead, photos of unabashed nudes of all physical types when appropriate to the article – reminding the editor of Jane of, in her own words, “the importance of leaving out of the magazine messages that reinforce unhealthy attitudes toward physical self-image”.
Sometimes, a magazine will include pictures of unabashed, non-sexualized nudity. Self Magazine, for example, in a 1999 issue included the depiction of unabashedly bare breasted women in two differant articles. I congratulated the editor for the attitude and contrasted it to Conde Nast’s policy at the time and suggested that the depiction of women exercising control over their dress is verboten in some publications possibly because the publisher has a stake in keeping women subject to fashion. So, I turned naturism into a women’s issue!
Body issues are an opportunity to extol the benefits of naturism and are subject in every women’s magazine every month. Elle Magazine even published my response to “The Thin Threat”, a disturbing account of the poor manner in which women treat each other regarding body image. I recommended nudism as a means for women to “disentangle their self-image from bodies and fashion”. Note again that I limited myself to one topic.
Be creative in finding a reason to mention naturist issues. I noticed that protecting the right to hunt foxes was becoming a major issue in the The Chronicle of the Horse as animal rights activists in England were successfully pressuring for a ban on fox hunting and were beginning to make it an issue in the states. In a letter to the magazine, I pointed out that efforts to protect fox hunting were doomed unless equestrians worked to assure the liberties of all, even those folks whom you might dislike. I said that if you elect officials who pander to your prejudices or your particular religious agenda, you will be electing people who will also sacrifice your particular interests to court the majority or a powerful minority so, I added, it is in your interest to support the rights of (and here I ran off a list of minorities including, yes, nudists and their right to some public nude beaches.) The magazine published my letter, cintributing one small notice that nudists have rights too.
Less successfully I’ve written to TV networks and producers. I’ve yet to receive an acknowledgement nor have I seen favorable change. Does it irritate you that all nudity on American TV (and in most American movies) is sexualized? With rare exceptions, the nudity has to be that of a beautiful woman (men – bare buns only) who is having sex, being raped, killed, or is already dead. Really! On network TV, all nudity is verboten; yet sexual acts are rampant (as is graphic violence). Thus we have the ridiculousness of shows like Elimanadate showing women grinding their groins into faces or having shots of alcohol licked off their chest, but will pixilate the bare breasts of a nonchalant woman on a Spanish beach. They even pixilated a nude statue! Who are they worried about offending late at night? Well, let them know their self-imposed censorship policy offends you! I’ve written the producers of NYPD Blue (the much ballyhooed nudity is always associated with sexual situations). I’ve written the Tonight Show (pixilated a picture in a Playboy) and the Letterman show (pixilated nudes riding bikes). Perhaps if more of us write, the media will respond more favorably. If eventually successful, it will have been worth the effort. (You can usually find where to write a show by going on the internet.) Get the media treating simple nudity as natural and normative, and society will follow.
You also have a right – even a duty – to write public officials. The federal constitution protects that right and so do most, probably all, state constitutions. It may be our most basic and protected American right, so do use it.
Write your state Department of Natural Resources. Write your state and local officials. I wrote the then attorney general to complain about her blanket and false statement that “nudity is illegal in Michigan” and gave the reasons why her statement was wrong and to protest her encouraging the suppression of the “Naked Mile” at the University of Michigan. Including a cover letter asking to be kept informed of any legislative action regarding nudity, I sent a copy of the letter to my state representative as well. At least my state representative responded positively. Obviously, coordinated action by all naturists will be more effective, so do respond to any Naturist Action Committee Alert, but don’t wait for an emergency to let your public officials know that you have an interest that deserves fair consideration.
You have visited some public nudist beach somewhere, haven’t you? After visiting Gunnison Beach at Sandy Hook National Seashore in New Jersey – a federally run, public, clothing-optional beach that provides lifeguards, lavatories, refreshment stands, and police protection for we nudists – I wrote the park superintendent thanking him for maintaining Gunnison Beach. I also wrote the hotel where my wife and I stayed explaining what a jewel is the nude beach and emphasizing that the beach was my reason for visiting the area. I also sent a letter to the local chamber of commerce saying much the same thing and also adding how much I spent around the area.
I mentioned to one regular at Gunnison of my planned action. Oh, how he averred my actions would only make them aware of the nude use. What nonsense! The officials are well aware of official, public, nude beaches in their area. The cranks let them know! It can only help our cause to let the officials know how valued are these beaches.
After visiting Haulover Beach in Florida and Mazomanie Beach in Wisconsin, I wrote similar letters to their respective public officials. Before even visiting any of these areas, I called or e-mailed the state and/or city travel bureau to request information on, amongst other things, nude beaches in the area. Now, I already knew what beaches existed, but I figure that the more requests they get for such information the more likely they will begin to understand the value of the beaches.
Even though my state has no official, public, nude beach, I requested from Michigan’s Travel Bureau information on nude beaches in the state. They wrote back to say that there are none but did include a photocopy of a page listing nudist resorts. If more people take the time to request information, maybe Michigan and other states will more seriously consider nude recreation as a valid and profitable tourist attraction. Get the bureaucrats on your side and the legislators are more likely to follow.
So please take the time to write. We will be a force if we all exercise our right to write!!
Familial and societal attitudes
toward nudity, and the effects on children's development
William D. Peckenpaugh
California State University, Sacramento
School of Education
Introduction
The study of children's sexuality is similar to a trip through the desert in
California: long stretches of nothing, interrupted by brief flurries of activity
and interesting sights. Alayne Yates (1979) cites the sparse and confusing
history of scholarly study of the general subject of children's sexuality, and
specifically the lack of any concise reference materials for parents and
educators. In the United States, as well as most other English-speaking
countries, research of this nature has historically been seen as unnecessary
(the mildest reaction), intrusive (a common belief among educators: children's
sexuality is seen as the purview of the parents alone), or evil (especially
among individuals and groups subscribing to certain religious codes and dogma).
The impediments to research present a special problem for families and groups
that do not share the prevalent views regarding sexuality in general, and
nudity/modesty in particular. Smith and Sparks (1986) give numerous examples of
families who are nudists, either "social" or "at home," who routinely hide that
aspect of their lives for fear that others will find out and disapprove. They
fear disapproval because they do not have any well-developed base of scholarly
research to support their beliefs that the body is a normal and healthy entity,
and that non-sexual nudity is not harmful for children (and is actually
beneficial). [Nudists are generally classified as follows: "social nudists"
participate in nude recreation and lifestyles in the company of others, such as
at beaches, clubs, or other gatherings; "at home nudists" might not participate
in group activities, but do not habitually wear clothes at home when
circumstances do not require them, such as when sleeping, relaxing in the yard,
or simply when in the home alone.]
Current Research
Fortunately for nudist families, several researchers have taken an interest in
the subject of nudity and children's development. Unfortunately, few others have
chosen to replicate their research, possibly due to the reasons outlined
previously (Yates, 1978). Following are four summaries of recent and relevant
studies.
Parental attitudes
Aquilino and Ely (1985) studied the attitudes of parents toward the normal
sexual development of preschool children. Eighty-one parents with children three
to five years old were surveyed regarding the sexual activity and curiosity of
preschool children. Subjects were parents whose children attended day-care
centers in North Carolina towns. An author-designed questionnaire was used,
containing questions relating to parental knowledge, responses to children's
sexuality, and comfort with children's sexuality. Subjects also gave information
about their age, sex, marital status, religious affiliation, and education, as
these factors were seen as potential influences on response outcomes. After
individually completing the questionnaires, the subjects were encouraged to
participate in group and/or individual question-and-answer sessions. The authors
did not state whether any of the subjects were nudists, and it is doubtful that
they considered this a potential influence on responses [as it was not
included].
Childhood influences on adult adjustment
The next study again queried adult subjects. Lewis and Janda (1988) examined the
relationship between adult sexual adjustment and childhood exposure to nudity,
sleeping in the parental bed, and parental attitudes toward sexuality.
Two-hundred ten undergraduate university students were recruited as subjects.
All subjects completed an extensive retrospective questionnaire measuring three
basic experiences during childhood (operationally defined as the period from
birth to eleven years): sleeping in bed with the parents; parental attitudes
toward and comfort with sexuality; and viewing parents, siblings, and friends
nude. Information on current sexual comfort and adjustment was also obtained
using an extensive questionnaire.
Children's perceptions of nudity
Goldman and Goldman (1981) chose children as their subjects, as opposed to the
previous two studies. Research involving children can be problematic, but can
also be quite revealing. The Goldmans interviewed 838 subjects from North
America, England, Australia, and Sweden. Subjects' ages ranged from five to 15
years old. Each child was individually interviewed and asked questions designed
to elicit responses indicating the child's understanding of wearing clothing,
nudity (as viewed by society as a whole), and modesty. The responses were coded
and scored according to the Kohlberg scale of moral thinking, in order to assess
each subject's level of cognitive reasoning for the answers given. No references
were made to the family nudity status, although this again may have been an
influential factor.
Nudist and non-nudist perceptions
The last study may be the most useful resource for nudist families. Story (1979)
interviewed 264 three- to five-year-old children and their parents. These
subjects were chosen and matched based on family nudity status: "social nudist,"
"at-home- only nudist," or non-nudist. Subjects were all North Americans, with
approximately equal numbers sampled from all geographic regions in the United
States. The parents were given individually administered interviews to determine
the children's ages, sexes, weights, and birth order. The children were
interviewed separately; they were asked to tell whether they liked certain body
parts, using as references line drawings of nude children of the same sex and
race as the child being interviewed. The children were also asked to identify
the most- and least-liked body parts, with an explanation for each.
Summary
The studies' summaries are presented in the order above.
Aquilino and Ely (1985) found that most parents were knowledgeable about the
normal sexuality and curiosity of preschool children. Subjects reported that
they would have mostly positive responses to children's sexual behaviors,
although some behaviors were tolerated less depending on sex (self-stimulation
of genitals more tolerated in females than males), and some were not tolerated
at all (children of opposite sexes "playing doctor"). Most parents, in spite of
their high degree of knowledge, were still uncomfortable as the sole arbiters of
their children's sexual development. Most wanted reassurance and validation from
both the researchers and the other parents that their attitudes were within the
societal norms.
Lewis and Janda (1988) found a positive correlation between childhood exposure
to nudity and adult sexual comfort. The authors point out, however, that some
would see this as a reason to prevent childhood exposure to nudity, as their
measures on comfort included acceptance of lifestyles that many would consider
immoral or undesirable (such as premarital sex, or acceptance of homosexuality).
The other factors (sleeping in the parental bed and parental comfort/acceptance
of sexuality), while not germane to the narrow scope of this review, also
demonstrate a positive correlation with childhood exposure and adult sexual
adjustment and comfort.
Goldman and Goldman (1981) found that English-speaking children were the most
adamant that clothes were necessary, even in hot climates; North American
children were the most insistent. English-speakers were also less likely to
advance to the highest level of moral thinking with regard to reasons for
embarrassment when nude, and reasons for wearing or not wearing clothes. The
Swedish children seemed to score consistently higher, and seem to be much less
clothes-insistent, although they live in a colder climate and would have more
reason to expect that clothing should be worn. The Goldmans point out that sex
education in the schools is compulsory after age eight, and the northern
European traditions of sauna and FKK "freikorperkultur," or "free body culture")
are well established in Sweden.
Last, Story (1979) found that while non-nudist children most often disliked
their genitals, nudist children were the opposite, most often naming the
genitals as the most-liked body part. In addition, nudist children did not
identify any particular body parts they disliked (the only possible exception
being the skin--not because of racial coloration or deformity, but because of
sunburn or too little tan). Family nudism was found to have a higher correlation
to body self-concept than did sex, race, or geographical area. Nudist children
consistently scored higher than non-nudist children in all areas of body
acceptance, self- concept, and self-image.
Conclusion
The results of the research presented would seem to speak clearly and with
force: children's exposure to nudity is not only not harmful, it appears to be
beneficial. Children who are thus raised grow up to be adults who are
comfortable with their bodies and their sexuality. However, this seemingly clear
relationship is not at all clear to most parents, nudist or non-nudist. Yates
(1978) theorizes that most parents are unaware of these studies for two reasons.
First, nudists are still widely (and erroneously) perceived in our society as
sexual deviants: people who obtain sexual stimulation by engaging in nude
recreation. Those who are not nudists generally have no direct personal
experiences to disprove this fallacy, and many nudists are afraid to reveal
their status for fear of being ridiculed, prosecuted, and persecuted. Second,
the study of human sexuality has made amazing advances in the knowledge of adult
sexuality in the last one-hundred years--this is seen as appropriate, as adults
are clearly sexual beings. The same research with regard to children has
advanced much more slowly, as researchers are loath to study in this area that
is still seen by many as unnecessary, intrusive, or evil. The research that has
been done has been sparse, and generally has not been replicated. This lack of
replication has led to a general lack of credence by those who rely on the
literature for their professional opinions, and these people are the ones who
directly advise parents. Thus, we are left with the advice of Dr. Spock [warning
us of dire consequences], who performed no research of his own and apparently
bases his conclusions on children's exposure to nudity on one anecdotal incident
involving his own son, and Dr. Joyce Brothers [warning us of "terrible guilts
and frustrations"], who performed no research of her own and apparently bases
her conclusions on normal children's exposure to nudity on her work with
emotionally disturbed children (Smith and Sparks, 1986).
We see from Aquilino and Ely that parents generally do not trust their own
judgment regarding questions of children's sexuality. We see from Smith and
Sparks that many widely published "experts" are not experts at all, but rather
individuals with personal opinions who also happen to be widely read by naive
and insecure parents. Last, we see from Yates, Story, Lewis and Janda, and the
Goldmans that there is convincing evidence that children's exposure to nudity is
actually beneficial in a social setting. It should therefore be quite clear that
the answer to the question, "Is children's exposure to nudity harmful?" should
be, "No," and the burden of proof is upon the so-called "experts" to perform and
replicate the research already offered in support of their opinions to the
contrary.
References
Aquilino, M.L., & Ely, J. (1985). Parents and the sexuality of preschool
children. Pediatric Nursing. 11(4), 41-46.
Goldman, R.J., & Goldman, J.D. (1981). Children's perceptions of clothes and
nakedness: a cross-national study. Genetic Psychology Monographs. 104, 163-185.
Lewis, R.J., & Janda, L.H. (1988). The relationship between adult sexual
adjustment and childhood experiences regarding exposure to nudity, sleeping in
the parental bed, and parental attitudes toward sexuality. Archives of Sexual
Behavior. 17(4), 349-362.
Smith, D.C., & Sparks, W. (1986). The Naked Child: Growing Up Without Shame. Los
Angeles: Elysium Growth Press.
Story, M.D. (1979). Factors associated with more positive body self-concepts in
preschool children. The Journal of Social Psychology. 108, 49-56.
Yates, A. (1978). Sex Without Shame: Encouraging the Child's Healthy Sexual
Development. New York: William Morrow and Company.
©1993, 1994, 1996 W.D. Peckenpaugh. All rights reserved.
Used with Permission.
At a recent party of about 20 people put on by my friend Craig, who is not a naturist, I discovered 3
other members of the former Southeast Michigan Naturists in attendance. I had not known any of them were acquainted with Craig. Well, what a happy reunion! Since it was not our party and Craig never offered to allow nudity, we did not suggest it; but the four of us were not shy about talking about naturism and having other people listen in. Nobody was shocked or perturbed by the conversation and some were interested.
Why then are many naturists reluctant to acknowledge to the world -- even to their family and friends -- that they enjoy and participate in nude recreation? Some undoubtably have real concerns such as an estranged ex-spouse who might use naturism as an excuse to limit the naturist's contact with their
children or a teacher who worries for her job, although, even in a profession as sensitive as teaching that
fear is not realistic everywhere. Here in Ann Arbor, a teacher in the Ann Arbor Public Schools was quite
open about being a naturist. Obviously, she did not discuss it in class, as a teacher would not discuss her
religous beliefs and practices in class; however, she often sat in at our very public "Michigan Nude Beach
Advocates" information booth at the Ann Arbor Art Fair and would be greeted by her middle school
students and their parents. Of course, she had tenure in a somewhat tolerant city. A teacher in Grand
Rapids, Michigan, even tenured, might not fair so well. So the concerns of some naturists are legitimate,
but need we all be so concerned?
Perhaps a few feel that naturism, while indeed fun, might have some negative effects on children or
society. Despite their own experiences or perhaps because of insufficient experience, they feel that on
some level the prohibitions against social nudity must have some validity, for why else, they think,
would society so adamantly protect itself from public nudity and the depiction of nudity; yet any
research on the matter indicates that naturism has nothing but positive effects. For example, Dennis
Surgrue (Phd), Sally Foley (MSW) and Sally Kope (MSW), professors at the University of Michigan
Medical School,state in their book, "Sex Matters for Women", that nudity in the home is natural and not
harmful. If any of you have even the slightest thought that simple nudity might be harmful to children or
to society, do go to the Naturist Society's website ...for a more exhaustive discussion of naturism's
benefits to society.
Those who ardently believe that nudity is bad for society and children are inexperienced in social nudity and also over-sexualize the environment. Their attitudes toward sex can be positive or negative. For example, a swinger couple contacted me about attending the Southeast Michigan Naturists' swims but decided not to attend when told that children may be there. "My wife says she would feel wierd and so would I to be naked around children," wrote the swinger. Well, while there are a few polyamorists in
naturism, we know that many swingers are not naturist as these swingers aren't actually comfortable
with simple nudity. The few naturists whom I know to be free lovers (not swingers, per se) are able to
separate simple nudity from sex -- probably because they are experienced with and knowledgeable
about naturism.
People who are actually hostile to nudity have had negative experiences with sex: abuse from a relative, rape, or being the abusers of others. I know people -- even my sister -- who, because of past sexual abuse, are adamantly opposed to my being nude around them. Nonetheless, so long as I respect that wish, we are able to have good relationships. None of them excoriate either me or my involvement in
naturism. They don't care what my beliefs are so long as I don't practice naturism in their presence. Nor
does my sister want me discreetly practicing naturism at her lake even when she is not there, for she
believes that everyone else feels as she does so she does not want her neighbors "insulted" by mere
suspicion of my nudity But are my sister's concerns valid? Are most people offended by nudity or even the discreet practice of naturism? Many naturists act as though it is true. Where do we get this idea that everyone but nudists is offended by nudity? Why do so many naturists believe that they will be ostacized by friends, family, and society if it is revealed that they practice social nudity?
The idea comes primarily from two sources. One source is the media. The other is our own desire to conform.
American media rarely shows simple nudity. In the past, of course, nudity was limited to National
Geographic's display of "primitives". Such non-conformity was understandable, as not only was the
nudity not Western, it was not even "civilized", thus depiction of it was allowed. The late 60's and 70's
began to see the occasional displays of simple nudity. PBS Channel 56 in Detroit allowed some nudity
then with nary a complaint; I particularly remember plenty of nudity in a teleplay in which God
masqueraded as a steam room attendant. However, as the cultural conservatives organized and
became political, they targeted displays of nudity; and the FCC has complied with fines for nudity on
over-the-air TV signals. However, note the high level of violence and salaciusness that is allowed. Even
by FCC rules, nudity could be displayed late night, yet nudity is self-censored by the programmers. For
example, on the Tonight show, Jay Leno held up a picture of nudists on bicycles. The private areas, even
the buttocks, were pixallated. Cable TV, can display nudity and does, but seemingly it is always
associated with sex or violence. And, boy, do both cable and over-the-air programmers display the sex
and violence. Thus we get explicit scenes, say on Private Practice, of passionate sex and lots of bare skin
-- but never (female) breast, buttock, or pubes under any circumstance. Even an old youth oriented
show like Buffy the Vampire Slayer (which I love) is rife with the sex act (and violence) -- but no nudity. I
suppose some people infer from this that simple nudity is more indecent than open sex or violence. For
sure, most begin to think that everyone else must think so.
Yet what is the truth about what most people think about nudity? We who read N Magazine know that nude people are allowed to run in public races in some west coast cities with little complaint but great enthusiasm from the spectators. Vermont allows nudity most anywhere and where practiced, even in the downtown area of one village, it has garnered few complaints (though much publicity). Here in
Michigan, the Nude Mile on UM campus generated but one complaint but was shut down by the then
president of the university in cooperation with the then attorney general (Jennifer Granholm)
obstensibly "for the protection of the runners", but primarily because Bollinger thought it presented a
bad public image for the university. Even in Chelsea in the conservative western half of Washtenaw
County in Michigan, a proposed photo shoot of a "Lady Godiva" by the artist, Harvey, generated no
public complaints but did attract lots of spectators, including parents with their children. The rider, of
course, was pulled off the horse and arrested by Chelsea's chief of police, because, despite the
overwhelming evidence to the contrary, he believed people would be offended. The expected charge of
"indecent exposure" was immediately dropped as being invalid; "disturbing the peace" was substituted
which the model declined to contest despite the photographer's lawyer's expectation of courtroom
victory for the defense. I have paint the houses of many non-naturists and they allow me to paint in the
nude, even those with children, without worrying about what the neighbors would think about what
they allow in their own house. In N Magazine, we are reading more and more of naturists pushing the boundary of "acceptable" nudity with little or no complaints.
But what about the uproar over the accidental baring of one of Janet Jackson's breasts at the 2004
Superbowl? In the aftermath of that, the FCC chair, Michael Powell, reported to Congress that his
agency had received a record number of complaints about "indecency" in 2003 -- more than 240,000
(for the year), up from 14,000 from the year before. However, a reporter from Mediaweek.com
investigated the complaints: 99.8 percent of the complaints in 2003 originated from the conservative
Parents Television Council. In 2004, if the complaints regarding Ms. Jackson's barely bared nipple aren't
considered, 99.9 percent of the complaints were again generated by the PTC, and while the publicity
over the Super Bowl incident generated some additional complaints, the media publicity and the PTC
were undoubtably behind most of those. Another reporter examined the 90 complaints that led to a 1.2
million dollar fine for an episode of Fox's Married by America. He found that all the complaints were
generated by 23 people and that all but four of the complaints were identical. Only one person
mentioned having seen the program. More than 5 million households had watched the "offending"
episode. So, because of an overreaching and repressive federal agency, the media feels compelled to
avoid nudity. But they go farther than the FCC demands, censoring nudity when even the FCC does not
require it while at the same time associating any incident of nudity with salaciousness or violence. Yet a
miniscule number is actually complaining about nudity.
The media's effect is that Americans believe that everyone else is offended by nudity even though most Americans themselves aren't offended at all. (It is true that most American men profess no desire to see naked penises up on the big screen, but that's not to say they are offended by it. Women seem to be asinterested in seeing naked women as men are, but for different reasons. It seems that very few are
offended by nudity at all.)
However, in defense of conformity and the supposed sensibilities of others, most people would presumably still not support nudity on public streets or in public parks except under special circumstances; despite this, surveys have repeatedly found that over 70 percent of the people
have no objection to official, clothing-optional beaches, since they understand that nobody should be
rightfully offended by the mere existance of a nude beach. One can extrapolate that far fewer care if
anyone privately practices social nudity, and do you really want to associate with anyone who is so
virulenty opposed to nudity as to want to ostracize people merely for going to a private nudist resort? I
sure don't want such a person in my life no matter the relationship; fortunately, I've never personally known such a person.
OK. So we know where people get the erroneous idea that most people are offended by nudity, but
there is also a strong desire in most people to conform, to not stick out. Therefore, many naturists are
uncomfortable being nude when most or all other people are clothed, even when it is legal to be nude.
For example, at Turtle Lake Resort one Windsor woman told me that she had just been to an outdoor
music festival in Ontario (where women can legally go top-free anywhere men can). "Did you take your
shirt off?" I asked. "Oh, no," she repled, "I was waiting for someone else to do so first." Hmmm, thus
despite the legality, I have yet to see a top-free woman in my many visits to Ontario beaches.
How will society's acceptance of nudity ever improve if naturists refuse to spearhead the change and if
we continue to allow the most socially repressive in our society to determine, not just public opinion,
but the opinions of our friends, family, and neighbors?
By being open about my practice of naturism, I was able to invite friends and family to the
clothing-optional swims sponsored by the Southeast Michigan Naturists. Few accepted the
invitation, but even so it is beneficial. For example, when my niece was trying to get a small dinner party
together at a restaurant for her mom's birthday, she e-mailed asking for restaurant suggestions. I
replied to all suggesting that, since the weekend in question was the night of an SMN nude swim
(emphasizing that they could stay suited), I could get the group into it after dinner to enjoy the hot tub
and pools. Knowing that no one but me on the reply list is a naturist, my niece's mom replied that it
would be OK with her (even though I've never seen her nude), and she went on to explain that she
knows that "it has nothing to do with sex". So I've got a non-naturist adding to the conversation in our
favor.
Even if you feel you can't be as completely open as I have been, do consider "coming out" to just a few more friends, family, and neighbors. The more you do so, the more you control the conversation and your life. You won't thereafter have to worry about their "finding out". What a relief and what a joy! Plus, you along with other open naturists make it easier for that teacher or divorced parent to openly acknowledge her practice of naturism without negative repurcussions. Thus society is
improved as well. Perhaps someday nudity will no longer be regarded negatively by the FCC or the
media. If so, the change starts with you, not by what political party happens to be in office.
After cruising around back country roads, we finally found the place. It had been a warm, sleepy 1¼ hours in the car, but we were now wide awake and sitting up straight. My 8-year old daughter and I drove up the long wooded driveway and stopped to announce ourselves over the intercom. Then the security gate gracefully swung open and we were in.
This was one thing I never thought I’d ever do: spend the day at a nudist resort. Aren’t they those places made fun of in cartoons and off-color jokes? All those sexy topless women . . . all those drooling men. Who’d want to go there except a bunch of perverts? And besides, why would I be willing to undress my 236-pound body in public? After all, this is the body I’d learned to cover up, disguise, suck in, and ignore as much as possible. (At least I’d ignore it when I wasn’t actively hating it.) How did I ever wind up at a place like this? As I learned, some people are just lucky, I guess.
We parked at the office and went in to pay our fee to use the grounds for the day. Inside were two young boys, 8 or 9 years old, naked, signing out tennis rackets and balls from the manager. The manager was wearing only a baggy T-shirt and tennis shoes, and she welcomed us and gave us a registration card to fill out. A grandmother came in, showing off her infant grandchild. Both were nude, except for the grandma’s sunglasses and sandals. My daughter and I looked at one another and smiled. This was going to be interesting.
We drove the car to the parking area, not sure if we should be looking at all the naked people lying out on lawn chairs or not. There were couples, singles, kids, seniors, dark brown bodies, light brown bodies, pink and freckled bodies, tattooed and hairy bodies, coconut oil-slicked bodies – a whole array. We drove past a couple of men who appeared to be in their seventies. They were intent on a game of shuffleboard over near the tennis court. Nearby, a volleyball game was going on in the shade among a rowdy group of males and females, from teens to thirty-somethings. On the tennis courts two middle-aged couples played doubles, while the two boys from the office were racing around shouting on the court next to them, trying to return each other’s wild serves. I won’t bother adding “and they were nude” because everyone at this place was N-U-D-E – and what’s more, no one seemed to notice one way or the other. What a hoot!
We parked and got out of the car. I looked at my daughter and she looked at me. Okay – this was it: Nudist Resort, Take One. I pulled off my clothes and threw them into the back seat, opened the trunk and got our cooler and towels and was ready to head for the lawn. “Ma! Do I have to take off my clothes?” my nervous 8-year old asked. “You can leave your T-shirt on,” I said. “The rules say skinny-dipping only, though, in the pool. Just hang out and see how you feel.”
She nervously shucked her shorts and self-consciously walked behind me up the hill, grateful that she’d worn an oversized T-shirt. We chose a spot among the crowd by the pool and spread our blanket on the grass. There was a bunch of kids in the pool, carrying on and having a good old time. Adults were chatting with animation – it seemed as though everyone knew each other. I plopped myself down and responded to the smiles of a nearby couple by saying ‘Hi!’ They commented that they hadn’t seen us here before, and we got into a conversation about how many years they had been coming to the resort.
My daughter was getting bored with the talk, and was eyeing the frolicking kids in the pool with longing when one little girl stuck her head out of the water and called, “You can use my diving rings if you want to!” Before I could blink, my daughter had tossed away the T-shirt and jumped in the water, where she pretty much stayed for the whole afternoon. At one point, as she climbed out of the deep end looking easy and natural as you please. I teased, “Hey! What happened to the T-shirt?” She just shrugged and went on playing with the bunch of girls and boys who were giggling and shouting as they dove for neon-colored rings. You’d never know this wasn’t a typical neighborhood get-together. You’d never know that anyone was (shhh) n-u-d-e.
The longer I sat naked next to the chatty, friendly couple in their fifties (he was wearing a cap, she was wearing nothing but gold jewelry and make-up), the more relaxed and comfortable I felt. Who was noticing that I weighed 236 pounds? For that matter, whose weight was I noticing? Not mine. Not anyone else’s either. Oh my goodness . . . was it possible? Could the preoccupation of a lifetime have just drifted away?!
Having decided to take the plunge into nudism, I’ve never looked back. Spending time with other nudists is a joyful affirmation of the human body’s rightness. Relaxing naked with other nudists undoes so much of society’s damage. No, you don’t have to lose 20 pounds before you go to a nudist gathering. Fact is, you’ll go and find out that you never did need to lose 20 pounds to be acceptable. That was all in your head – a head that’s been crammed full of commercial hype that’s intended to sell you products to improve your appearance. Advertisements shame us into thinking we’re deficient in some way. Buy mouthwash, deodorant, perfume and cologne to improve your smell; to improve your looks buy hair products, diet pills, fitness equipment, trendy clothing and so on. There’s no end!
When I spend time with nudists I am accepted for who I am; no judgment about my body comes up. What a blessing to be liberated from the tyranny of our compulsive cover-it-up culture! Being around other naked people is wonderful because I can see all of their fat, scars, warts and whatever, and see that they are totally adequate, pleasing and sufficient just the way they are. By seeing that they’re okay, I learn to feel that I’m okay.
I invite you to experience this. Go to a nudist resort, or just come hang out with a local nudist club and feel accepted, acceptable and free. When you don’t have to wear a bathing suit, you get to drop the need to look good in one. Well, thank goodness!
Ó 1993 by Deborah-Miriam Leff. All rights reserved.
A marvelous, very informative blog covering issues related to Naturism. It is produced by the Bare Oaks Naturist Park. Check it out. You can search topics but just start with the most recent and work back. All of the episodes are enjoyable.
We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.