Separating social nudity from sexual nudity
Had a home a few years ago where I was a full-time nudist in my house & backyard. Over the years, I rented a room to different housemates. Some were nudists, some not. I made it clear in the beginning that I would ALWAYS be nude, even when they would invite guests to come over. Not once did I ever have a problem with a clothed person concerning my nudity. Thats because its all about how I behaved. Im so comfortable with my naked body, and doing normal, everyday things, that my conduct put (clothed) people at ease. I was very sexual when I lived there, but I kept a hard line between that and my everyday nudity. If it wasnt a sexual situation, then I didnt act like it, nor ever got aroused. I even demonstrated a sex toy for a clothed, mixed group, at their request. It would normally be used when a man had an erection, but since it wasnt a sexual situation, I didnt have one. I told many people that social nudity and sexual behavior are completely separate things. I also imparted this adage:
Social nudity is not about SEEING or being SEEN.
Its about BEING nude.
Your description sounds well-grounded and appropriate. I can't however separate sexual energy from everyday activities, naked or clothed. When I add spices to my soup or salad dressing, it's a creative activity that comes from the same energy as my sexuality. In the same way I feel my sexual energy is affirmed when I am being looked at as attractive, both clothed or naked. Separating social nudity from sexual nudity is for me about the same as separating social clothing from sexual clothing. It's not the nudity or clothes that make us sexual, it's our energy. There's a difference between sexual behavior and sexually inspired behavior, but the energy is what matters.
The proclamation that "Nudism is not about SEEING or being SEEN" is debatable IMHO.
Because I don't think we can dismiss the visual element in social nudity. For example when my wife sees that everyone is nude at the resort, she feels more comfortable with people seeing her naked as well. It's enjoyable to see our friends displaying confidence in their nudity - and they feeling the same way about me. It's about acceptance and appreciation more than "titillation."
I think for that idea to be more sensible you have to add "Nudism is not about SEEING or being SEEN - sexually." Because then it becomes something else that might not be about nudism.
The proclamation that "Nudism is not about SEEING or being SEEN" is debatable IMHO. Because I don't think we can dismiss the visual element in social nudity.
This is one of those hypocritical aspects of old school Puritanical US nudism. Of course people are seeing and being seen. It's part of the energy of social nudism, similar to the light erotic charge of having the sun and wind on all your skin including your genitals. To deny that is to deny being human. It's not a matter of seeing or being seen, but instead to interact with respect towards others.
Watch where your mind takes you. What's a four letter word for intercourse ending in "k"? How about talk? It's legitimate, and it's healthy social intercourse.
You can be respectful naked. And you can be a respectful naked sexual human. It's not the what but the how. Look closer at the word respect. Re=again. Spect=to view (as in spectacle, spectators). Respect=to look at twice, once with your eyes, another time with the other person's eyes.
Sexual thoughts, urges and activities are triggered by our neurological and glandular human functions. We were built this way. However, nudism is a choice. We may come to it in different ways, but I believe all of us feel exhilaration, self fulfillment and comradship. If our sexuality manifests itself during social nudity it's most likely to be our biology. Act as a lady or gentleman and all will be well with most fellow nudists.
We host farm volunteers for periods from a week to a month, and let them know we're casual about nudity. Only the occasional visitor is really comfortable being naked. I used to be gradual about resuming my usual in-home nudity with such visitors around. But I've found, like the OP with his housemates, that the best thing is just to keep on with my regular habits, which fairly quickly lets the visitors understand that my nudity is, in no sense, about them, it's just me living my life.
Does this mean I'm being "non-sexual"? Not at all. I'm a sexual being, drawing energy, ebbing and flowing, continually from my sexuality. My sexuality puts a spark in my eye showing my receipt to the tiny old woman checking my receipt at Walmart's door or walking past the farmworker stopping his weedwacker as I pass.
But I do not, in the course of living as a sexual being, engage genitally with everyone I meet. No one does.
To say that nudity is non-sexual just means that one is naked in a context where the nudity itself is not meant or seen as a particular signal of sexual arousal, assertion, or availability. And the simplest, most reassuring way to manifest that is to follow the conventional definition of social nudity - to act, when naked, more or less as one would when clothed.
However, nudism is a choice.
Are you sure about that? I was "built" that way, born nude. I would say that putting something on is the choice. All the more reason nudity should be accepted by all humans.
But as per the subject of this thread, sexual acts are a personal matter and should be kept personal. On the other hand, simple reminders that we are living sexual beings (like an erection) should not shock a fellow human being, especially ones that are used to seeing the natural human body.
Whats wrong with sexual nudity anyway? Why does it have to be separate?
Sexuality needs to be separate from nudity because it might make us happy, God perish the thought. H. L. Mencken put is succinctly about a century ago and for some time has stod still.
Puritanism: the haunting fear that somebody, somewhere might be happy.
Anyone else getting bored with old-school nudism and the recurring, ridiculous protestations of nudist asexuality?Whats wrong with sexual nudity anyway? Why does it have to be separate?We are sexual beings. Our sexuality isnt contained in our clothing, so it isnt removed when we remove our clothing.Its 2023 guys - sexuality has been emancipated. Get over it.
Short answer is, nothing if that's what the group norms are. But if they are the opposite then my view is either we respect them or don't participate in that environment or setting. Seems to me that is a reasonable idea both practically and ethically and gets the results that satisfy the most amount of people... no? Fighting against what's clearly a deeply held and inflexible stance that's important to someone else just ends up with the person fighting it miserable and angry with a bunch of pissed off people who have unjustifiably bad opinions of him. I respect their position without having to agree with it and as a result don't impose myself in their environment or show up at their gatherings. In the few instances where I have had to appear on business and community relations invitations I follow the rules established with exemplary attention. In reciprocal instances I have removed members from the organizations I was involved with when anonymous privileges had been extended to individuals who were part of strictly naturist organizations as well.
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!