| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Nudony |
Posted - 01/26/2005 : 8:46:05 PM
I'm (relatively) new to this forum, and I was reading over some of the old posts (and contributing to some.) What I've noticed here more than anywhere else, is a strong divide between liberal thinking and conservative thinking; and it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with age, religion, etc… Although I'm aware that categorizations are usually flawed (because no one fits into one sole category), I will attempt to point the differences I perceive between the two.
The conservative nudist believes his/her individual actions should represent the nudist community as a whole and serve its best interests; the liberal nudist is more interested in his/her personal well-being as a priority.
The conservative nudist believes in a strict adherence to nudist etiquette; the liberal nudist believes in a more flexible approach, based on the situation and personal preference.
The conservative nudist believes in disciplined behavior when socially nude; the liberal nudist prizes self-expression, which may be outside the "norm."
The conservative nudist emphasizes the "non-sexuality" of nudism; the liberal nudist understands the difference, but concedes that the "line" between the two can be blurry.
This is not a criticism of either way of thinking; on the contrary. I think they are both necessary and complementary. If nudism was too conservative, then young people would be turned off by the formalism and rigidity, and nudism would age even more drastically. On the other hand, if nudism was too liberal, it would attract the "wrong crowd" and the movement would fall into limbo. So I think we need conservative thinkers to keep the movement in line and structured, and the liberal thinkers to bring new ideas and new directions to the table. We may see things differently, but we still all want to share the same space....naturally. |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| valkyrie_major |
Posted - 04/23/2010 : 3:17:57 PM
with tendencies towards liberal, but that may change as i get older, who knows
|
| valkyrie_major |
Posted - 04/23/2010 : 3:16:50 PM
Um...
I'd say im moderate |
| Warmskin |
Posted - 11/04/2008 : 2:19:22 PM
I'm not too much on the one-dimensional conservative-liberal axis. It's really more of a diamond shape. You still have the liberals on the left, conservatives on the right, but the libetarians are on the top corner of the diamond, and the totalitarians are on the bottom anle of the diamond.
Libertarians would offer the most freedom of choice to nudists, while totalitarian nudist resorts would enforce their dictates at gunpoint, and oddly would force people to either go to nudist resorts, or force the closure of all nudist camps.
If you think of the diamond rather than the usual left-right axis, it is much easier to see the big picture.
Which am I? Libertarian, naturally, with one part emphasized, a different type of nudist resort for each type of nudist group.
That government governs best, which governs least - Thomas Jefferson |
| bear |
Posted - 05/23/2008 : 6:35:34 PM
We live a nude life.
We do not find clubs and resorts all that appealing. Been to several worldwide and very few impressed us enough for a second visit even though we did have a hand in the foundation of a couple or so.
We prefer natural places although finding us on a beach would be like finding a particular grain of sand on a particular beach at low tide, we're mountain people, forest people, river people so we suppose that makes us liberal nudists.
__________
Life is good. |
| n/a |
Posted - 05/23/2008 : 6:09:17 PM
Well, Randy, the things you speak of are FAR BEYOND "social barriers".
You said:
quote:
We learn our values and behaviors from what we are taught by our entire environments. Those, (and in my belief, the way we came to be,) are the things that elevate us above the animals.
As you said, we ARE elevated above the animals. That has nothing to do with "social barriers." The very fact that we CAN create social barriers, in this matter proves that.
You said:
quote:
...natural humankind that has not been influenced by environments. A situation that clearly doesn’t exist on any level in the real world.
We DO live in the real world.
But I will concede that IF WE WERE LIKE THE ANIMALS, AND COULD NOT MAKE SELF DETERMINATION, SirGodiva MIGHT have some credibility in his statement. But such is NOT the case. Therefore, his statement is not valid, and is also probably very offensive to most women. It was truly a very immature statement. NO offense meant, SirGodiva, but it would be "naive" to believe that EVERYONE thinks like you do, or that your beliefs make you always correct, any more than mine make me so.
So, to try to stay on topic, I am most probably an ULTRA conservative nudist, is SOME respects. However I truly enjoy the local nude beaches as well as a local "family-oriented" nudist/clothing-optional landed club.
Hiking the Cascades "naturally"! |
| nudeisntlewd |
Posted - 05/23/2008 : 3:51:46 PM
quote:
Originally posted by northwest
quote:
Originally posted by SirGodiva
Women are naive to think that there is any man who wouldn't like to have sex with them if all social barriers were gone.
Well, he is STILL just 18, and STILL wrong. I have a much more important reason than "social barriers" that keeps me from wanting sex with just any woman. How about desiring a monogamous relationship for the sake of TRUE LOVE? Yes, that STILL does exist, SirGodiva. Hopefully, you will find out one day. Hey, I AM still a man. I enjoy LOOKING at the woman's nude body. I think you will find many more men out there that feel like I do - married or NOT. I have been widowed for 12 years now, and am still waiting for that "old-fashioned true love." Nothing better! THEN I will enjoy a monogamous sex life.  I do not WANT it any other way.
Hiking the Cascades "naturally"!
First, I want to say that I agree with, and subscribe to, your philosophies on monogamy and love. Having been divorced for several years now, I’m still looking for the same thing that you are. I think we have both learned that that can be an elusive target these days. That “old-fashioned true love” is hard to find.
That being said, I have to point out the obvious that the way our personalities and the way we feel is indeed shaped and influenced by our societies, religions and environments, and continue to be until the day we die. The “social barriers” referred to have surely been created by your, my and everyone’s beliefs and personalities combining together to form a society. Mankind is not inherently good. We learn our values and behaviors from what we are taught by our entire environments. Those, (and in my belief, the way we came to be,) are the things that elevate us above the animals.
In principle and philosophy, I agree with you. I think I have a similar value structure to yours. Not “any man” wants “any woman”, as demonstrated by your statement about what you want. So in that respect, he is wrong. But his statement is fundamentaly correct, if you strip away our personal views and just look at natural humankind that has not been influenced by environments. A situation that clearly doesn’t exist on any level in the real world. But if we didn't have those things that made us what we are, sex would be no different than eating or sleeping. Just something we would do like anything else we like to, or are compelled to do and we wouldn't be much different than the animals.
Therefore, and this is not a compromise, neither of you is technically wrong.
 |
| n/a |
Posted - 05/23/2008 : 1:47:43 PM
quote:
Originally posted by SirGodiva
Women are naive to think that there is any man who wouldn't like to have sex with them if all social barriers were gone.
Well, he is STILL just 18, and STILL wrong. I have a much more important reason than "social barriers" that keeps me from wanting sex with just any woman. How about desiring a monogamous relationship for the sake of TRUE LOVE? Yes, that STILL does exist, SirGodiva. Hopefully, you will find out one day. Hey, I AM still a man. I enjoy LOOKING at the woman's nude body. I think you will find many more men out there that feel like I do - married or NOT. I have been widowed for 12 years now, and am still waiting for that "old-fashioned true love." Nothing better! THEN I will enjoy a monogamous sex life. I do not WANT it any other way.
Hiking the Cascades "naturally"! |
| nudeisntlewd |
Posted - 05/23/2008 : 02:41:37 AM
quote:
Originally posted by SingingSabre
...but why say "Oh, this person's a liberal nudist" when being liberal is almost like being called a witch in the 1700's?
WITCH!!!
Dude, I'm totally just kidding. But I couldn't resist. I've always wanted to scream that!
|
| nudeisntlewd |
Posted - 05/23/2008 : 02:34:45 AM
quote:
Originally posted by FlCpl4NewdFun
quote:
Originally posted by CMx2
quote:
Originally posted by SirGodiva
Women are naive to think that there is any man who wouldn't like to have sex with them if all social barriers were gone.
In my vew, This statements makes the top 3 list of the most ignorant statements ever made on these forums. And thats really saying something.
CMx2: Totally agree, it was clearly an oversight by SirGodiva. I'm sure he meant that only to apply to "Hot" women.
But wait a minute guys.
(The point of contention I'm commenting on here is about the remark: "Women are naive to think that there is any man who wouldn't like to have sex with them if all social barriers were gone.") He didn't say if all clothes were removed, but "if all social barriers" were removed. I would take that to mean the constraints put on by society, religion and the like. Let's face it, if all people had no moral, social or religious influence, would we not all be left to only our pleasure principle? After all, that's how social barriers to this thing or that developed. I'm not if sure that's what he meant or not, but it is possible. So I can see a point in his statement. Although it may not be something that people would expect or like to hear. But I think it was probably an honest statement by a young mind not yet clouded by too much paranoia of being politically incorrect. Just my thoughts. Maybe I'm ig'nant.
(I like playing the devil's advocate once in a while, because it doesn't always turn out to be the devil.)
|
| FlCpl4NewdFun |
Posted - 05/23/2008 : 01:06:15 AM
quote:
Originally posted by CMx2
quote:
Originally posted by SirGodiva
Women are naive to think that there is any man who wouldn't like to have sex with them if all social barriers were gone.
In my vew, This statements makes the top 3 list of the most ignorant statements ever made on these forums. And thats really saying something.
CMx2: Totally agree, it was clearly an oversight by SirGodiva. I'm sure he meant that only to apply to "Hot" women.
|
| nudenewbie |
Posted - 05/21/2008 : 8:49:22 PM
quote:
Originally posted by CMx2
quote:
Originally posted by SirGodiva
Women are naive to think that there is any man who wouldn't like to have sex with them if all social barriers were gone.
In my vew, This statements makes the top 3 list of the most ignorant statements ever made on these forums. And thats really saying something.
I sort of groaned when I read this statement too, but remember SirGodiva is 18 years old. A very articulate 18 year old, to be sure, but still 18.
And I'm not questioning his honesty either; at 18 I might have thought that too. Probably due to my 18-year old hormones! I know better now. I shudder to think what I may have uttered at 18.
But at least his final point is right on the money: despite what you feel inside, a person ought to make sure they behave appropriately within the guidelines of the situation they're in. I don't think SirGodiva---no matter what he's thinking---would ever "misbehave" or make anyone uncomfortable around him in a nudist setting, and that's the bottom line. |
| CMx2 |
Posted - 05/21/2008 : 03:53:14 AM
quote:
Originally posted by SirGodiva
Women are naive to think that there is any man who wouldn't like to have sex with them if all social barriers were gone.
In my vew, This statements makes the top 3 list of the most ignorant statements ever made on these forums. And thats really saying something. |
| Little Fellow |
Posted - 05/05/2008 : 10:33:27 AM
quote:
Originally posted by NUDKIWI
I am of the opinion that the way we act with our clothes on, should be the same way we act with our clothes off.
I must agree, just because some people are liberal does not mean that they are all swingers. When naked, I just act how i act around people when i am clothed.
Tom
:] |
| SirGodiva |
Posted - 05/04/2008 : 5:49:23 PM
I have yet to attend a nudist resort, but I'm 18 and intending to start soon. In general I'd be quite liberal about it. Mostly because I'm already liberal about sexual subjects with my clothes on, the fact that I am not averse to the suggestion of nudism is dependent on the assumption that having clothes on or off is not a matter of ethical importance.
I think to suggest that people shouldn't have sexual feelings when walking around in the company of a lot of naked people is overtly naive, and is probably perpetuated more by women. Women are naive to think that there is any man who wouldn't like to have sex with them if all social barriers were gone. Of course, social barriers and etiquette exist, but that doesn't change arousal.
However there is a difference between being personally liberal about it and having respect for the etiquette of others. Personally, if someone specifically set up a resort where nudity was enforced and it was primarily for the purpose of sex and people were having sex everywhere, I'd be in attendance and would have no objections. I have casual sex with people who I meet clothed and so I have no objections to the other proposal.
However, attending a club which has predetermined that it is not a place for overt sexual activity would require that one does not act overtly sexual. If I agree to attend someone else's private institution then I shall do so on the terms I have agreed to by entering their trust and land. Nudity doesn't change normal ethics. I act by what is considered appropriate to the people around me, despite the fact that I have no sensibilities of my own, and so I will act overtly sexual in the company of overtly sexual people, and will wear a three piece suit with a tie whose colours match a predetermined etiquette when I am in the company of people who would require that. Common courtesy. |
| Loki |
Posted - 08/11/2007 : 4:45:26 PM
Terms like "conservative" and "liberal" have become so twisted in common usage as to often confuse more than convey a useful meaning. It's technically accurate that Cato Institute as a libertarian think tank, and ACLU in running a full page DC paper ad explaining itself as America's most conservative organization on the day the Bush chimp signed the abortion of international and Constitutional law called our Military Commissions Act, are far more conservative in terms up acting conservatorial towards Constitutional principles than most groups which identify as if conservative while trying to tear down and violate those principles. Being conservative in that sense isn't an opposite pole from being liberal, but requires a substantial degree of liberal tolerance of others in order to honestly be conservative.
A good social science based test for political perspective is hosted by some Brits at http://www.politicalcompass.org
It would show someone like me just slightly left of center, but a moderately strong libertarian. Media market the GOP and Dem's as if polar opposites, but in reality they are both right wing authoritarian/fascist entities as to national platforms and leading candidates they promote. People who buy into mass media frauds miss the fact that the majority of the political spectrum is not represented by any major party in the USA, which causes far greater voter disenfranchisement than still present in many regions racial politics. In most elections that's a likely cause for NOTA being the most popular candidate, albeit when people simply don't vote, it's difficult to tell whether "none of the above" is an active choice, represents disgust with a broken system, or if they're just disconnected from responsibilities as citizens.
As someone who's contributed to international technical standards development, and worked legal systems for business or activist reasons from local through international treaty level, including participation in Rulemaking Proceedings affecting traditional nude beaches up and down the entire East coast USA, it's clear to me that one of the most important part of any standards process, whether based in law, ethics, or technical, is too often missed by nudists advocating "rules" of various sorts. Before working on the nature of details that are specified, it's important to determine what areas should not be specified at all, whether physical packaging of an electronic item in a spec about internal interoperability with other brands and models, or in law where civil rights criteria place many issues off limits.
For nudism to be just that, it matters if others share interests in social nudity. It matters if non-aggression ethics are followed. It really doesn't matter what someone else's sexuality is unless they're being considered as a (or one of however many) personal partner, a rather complex set of issues simplistic words rarely define accurately. It matters if someone is a crude drunk regardless of whether that affects the way some swingers but not others act up, but far less than a clothed drunk driving and running a light as one is heading to or from a nudist event (and I personally have been clipped by one going the wrong way on an interstate heading home from a winter swim). It matters if a group is vegan skewed or likes to barbeque dead animals, though mature people often work out such issues. It matters whether a faction likes costly opera where kids are rarely welcome, as financial means, artistic tastes, and interest in activities where kids are supported or a nuisance vary widely. In one state with 3 nearby nudist resorts, the one owned by Mensans attracted a distinctly different style of member than the other two. None of those preferences define whether one is a nudist or not, any more than does sexuality, even if they can be very important in choosing close friends or immediate associates.
As humans we process 4 billion information cues a secon |
|
|
