Guzzi27 wrote:Yes you have a right to reach out to people. But you also have a responsibility to do so in a friendly and constructive way that respects what they put down as interests and preferences on their profile, And it is amazing how few people read profiles before sending friend requests etc.If that profile says no single men. Fine, move on, respect it dont ignore it. You dont know quite what reason there is behind it, and you have no right to know.Someone putting no single men on their profile or ignoring approaches from single men is exactly the same. Could it be unfair in the motivations of a particular single make, yes it could. But it is their right to do and that possibly a greater right than your right to expect to talk to them.
Well said, Guzzi. The longer I live, the more I appreciate that nearly everybody is in some sort of struggle against their past or something that happened there, and we don't have a clue about what that struggle is about. So respecting other people's space is paramount, whether it's in person or on a forum or whatever.
I should point out that we single men are often paying for the sins of other single men who have refused to respect that space of others. Yes, it's a shame that we have to do this. It's a form of profiling, which we decry when we see our police or our press doing it. But it's a fact we have to live with. Simply saying that it's wrong doesn't exonerate us from having to disregard it. We single men have to convince others that we do respect the space of others, that we won't stare at women or hit on them or otherwise make them uncomfortable. If the "Single Men's Army" has an enemy to fight, it's not the people who put us down. It's the countless single men who have pissed in the pool in the past, and who are doing it now.
I should point out that we single men are often paying for the sins of other single men who have refused to respect that space of others. Yes, it's a shame that we have to do this. It's a form of profiling, which we decry when we see our police or our press doing it. But it's a fact we have to live with. Simply saying that it's wrong doesn't exonerate us from having to disregard it. We single men have to convince others that we do respect the space of others, that we won't stare at women or hit on them or otherwise make them uncomfortable. If the "Single Men's Army" has an enemy to fight, it's not the people who put us down. It's the countless single men who have pissed in the pool in the past, and who are doing it now.
Wise words thanks for sharing this perspective all to often a perspective that get drowned out by those who suggest anything goes without regard for consequence.
I should point out that we single men are often paying for the sins of other single men who have refused to respect that space of others. Yes, it's a shame that we have to do this. It's a form of profiling, which we decry when we see our police or our press doing it. But it's a fact we have to live with. Simply saying that it's wrong doesn't exonerate us from having to disregard it. We single men have to convince others that we do respect the space of others, that we won't stare at women or hit on them or otherwise make them uncomfortable. If the "Single Men's Army" has an enemy to fight, it's not the people who put us down. It's the countless single men who have pissed in the pool in the past, and who are doing it now.
Exactly
I should point out that we single men are often paying for the sins of other single men who have refused to respect that space of others. Yes, it's a shame that we have to do this. It's a form of profiling, which we decry when we see our police or our press doing it. ... If the "Single Men's Army" has an enemy to fight, it's not the people who put us down. It's the countless single men who have pissed in the pool in the past, and who are doing it now.
You come out against profiling only to ... profile yourself. Are you saying that only single men piss in the pool? Implying that men who have a female chaperone behave? Isn't that a bit like saying black people are arrested for driving while black are justified because black drivers before them were worse drivers than their ethnic majority counterparts/ Could we perhaps focus on the condemnable behavior without profiling?
Stoneandy wrote:IYou come out against profiling only to ... profile yourself. Are you saying that only single men piss in the pool? Implying that men who have a female chaperone behave? Isn't that a bit like saying black people are arrested for driving while black are justified because black drivers before them were worse drivers than their ethnic majority counterparts/ Could we perhaps focus on the condemnable behavior without profiling?
It's not me doing the profiling. It's the resorts that charge single men up to six times the admission fee that they charge for single women or accompanied men, or simply refuse to admit them at all.
I'm sure there are men who are accompanied by women and who "piss in the pool," but they're not singled out for discrimination the way unaccompanied men are.
As for the "driving while black" analogy, let's be clear about something: the dynamics of that are complex. It's almost never based on the assumption that Black drivers are historically worse than other drivers. It's based on keeping Blacks from being in places where Blacks aren't supposed to be, namely white neighborhoods, particularly after dark, on the assumption that they're up to no good. At least that's the pretext.
The real dynamic is that Black people are being told that they are under the yoke of white law enforcement, and need to be reminded of that from time to time. That was explained to me by Black co-workers when I was doing health inspections for the Baltimore City Health Department (of the 80-some members of my division of that department, I was one of five whites). Usually, they'd let me drive, on the grounds that we'd be less likely to be stopped if a white guy was at the wheel. Believe me, the danger of "Driving While Black" is very real, and not based at all on how the driving is done.
* Implying that men who have a female chaperone behave?*
I can say in my experience it is almost always the married man who is at the nudist venue without his wife that causes the most problems. Not always, but often enough that it sticks out.
John aka cobeachbum
I can say in my experience it is almost always the married man who is at the nudist venue without his wife that causes the most problems. Not always, but often enough that it sticks out.John aka cobeachbumCare to elaborate? As a married guy I'm not really seeing why my wife not being with me would suddenly make me problematic - it's not like I magically turn into an asshole when my wife isn't around to keep me in check, lol.
Only speculation on my part but an asshole is just that whether clothed or nude and if he is true to himself he'll be an asshole whenever his wife is not with him or worse yet, all the time.
Gday guys,
I recently rejoined as I couldnt even remember my previous log in. Im a divorced single guy and many if not the majority of clubs and venues either totally reject solo males or jerk you around so long on a waiting list they hope youll give up and go away. So I started my own localised group covering my area in Australia for solo males:
North Queensland Solo Male Social Group - https://www.truenudists.com/group/nqld-solo-male-group
In my sparsely populated part of the world the area is bigger than most European countries, but its a start and Im determined to make it work. Even in this area, there must be hundreds of unaccompanied males who can band together to enjoy simple nudism/naturism by beach days, bushwalking/hiking, group bookings of venues, etc.. The only limits are our imagination and determination. Once a group is formed it could become affiliated with other nearby clubs/venues whether mixed or not.
And does anybody know how one can promote a group to others who may wish to join?
Thanks for reading
Geoff
Does Australia have any equivalent to The Naturist Society or the American Association for Nude Recreation? If so, you might be able to promote your club through them. If not, the best you can do is to put notices on the "Groups" section of this web site or some of the other web sites like Earth Naturists or Naturists Corner, and see what happens. Good luck!
I can say in my experience it is almost always the married man who is at the nudist venue without his wife that causes the most problems. Not always, but often enough that it sticks out.John aka cobeachbumCare to elaborate? As a married guy I'm not really seeing why my wife not being with me would suddenly make me problematic - it's not like I magically turn into an asshole when my wife isn't around to keep me in check, lol.Only speculation on my part but an asshole is just that whether clothed or nude and if he is true to himself he'll be an asshole whenever his wife is not with him or worse yet, all the time.
True, an asshole is an asshole, but more often than not the wife keeps them in check, particularly from making inappropriate comments to or ogling women.
There is nothing to elaborate, It's just been my experience in over 35 years of attending nudist venues. I will say the problems were usually not at legitimate landed clubs where such crude behavior is quickly rectified, but rather at public venues.
John aka cobeachbum
Actions
Back to TopicsReply to TopicShare this topic
Get paid just by sending us users/traffic.
Signup takes seconds, start now!
Signup as an affiliate!