| Author |
 Topic  |
|
SingingSabre
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/04/2005 : 02:04:19 AM
|
Why bother categorizing nudists into such categories? Why not just say "Some people who don't partake in the superfluous wearing of clothes tend to congrate and form communities, while others are into it for more exclusive reasons"?
Sure, it may be long winded...but why say "Oh, this person's a liberal nudist" when being liberal is almost like being called a witch in the 1700's?
I see striking differences between swingers and "liberal" nudists. I don't see as many differences between "liberal" and "conservative" nudists.
I guess my entire, rambling point is why bother categorizing us into groups. Especially with those two heavy words.
"Son, crying in your milk is bad enough. Crying in your hot fudge sundae is just disgusting." R.A. Heinlein.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 60 |
 |
|
|
GeeWilly
Forum Member
|
 Posted - 11/04/2005 : 3:45:39 PM
|
I think you're right Sabre, a place like Hedonism III supports a class all of its own. While tolerance of behaviors considered sexual, such as displaying erections or adorning genitalia so as to bring attention thereto, may be Nudony's definition of a "liberal" nudist, the partying envisioned by Hedonism III's patrons is playing around while naked. It is not naturism.
Yet, for me, there must be a sex element even to the "conservative" group. If it were all guys, I wouldn't be there.
And, by the way, categorizing is what we do when we get to know someone. It is not harmful.
|
Edited by - GeeWilly on 11/04/2005 3:48:00 PM |
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 249 |
|
|
|
SingingSabre
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/05/2005 : 11:27:33 AM
|
Of course categorizing is what we do when we get to know someone. I just don't understand why it has to be with such buzzwords as "conservative" and "liberal."
Why not go with something more neutral, something that doesn't bring up angst of policits? Perhaps "traditional" or "conventional" and "contemporary" or even "bohemian."
"Son, crying in your milk is bad enough. Crying in your hot fudge sundae is just disgusting." R.A. Heinlein.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 60 |
|
|
|
GeeWilly
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/08/2005 : 9:50:46 PM
|
The "category" is in the eye of the beholder.
Do you think resorts should be given ratings such as "Conservative #5" (scale of 1 to 5) or say, "Slightly Risque"? So that potential visitors could be apprised of what to expect. What would Bohemian #3 be?
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 249 |
|
|
|
old hippie
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/17/2005 : 10:20:01 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by SingingSabre
Of course categorizing is what we do when we get to know someone. I just don't understand why it has to be with such buzzwords as "conservative" and "liberal."
Why not go with something more neutral, something that doesn't bring up angst of policits? Perhaps "traditional" or "conventional" and "contemporary" or even "bohemian."
"Son, crying in your milk is bad enough. Crying in your hot fudge sundae is just disgusting." R.A. Heinlein.
. Categorizing is an almost automatic human activity. But it seems a bit more comfortable to engage in self-categorizing than to impose it on others. I find no problem in the train of thought that goes,"I think I'll spend my vacation week at HotSwingers Haven, because that's my kind of crowd". It gets a bit dicier to hear someone comment, "He doesn't belong here; he should go to that other place"
. After all, isn't self-categorizing what we do when we choose to go to a c/o beach or a naturist resort? There may not be enough shades of different venues to accomodate all the positions on the "traditional -to- progressive" spectrum. But that just means we will still have to exercise a bit of tolerance for those who are different. And if this particular wierdo is a bit too wierd, maybe a kind neighbor can approach and suggest, calmly and politely, that there may be another site more accepting of his attitude. Maybe even name the place, if it is known.
. I think Nudony's original observation was good, and useful; I think maybe he stopped at two categories because that's an easy number to count. But behavior is tough to classify in a binary tree - continuous spectrum is more descriptive, but slipperier to work with.
thus spake the Old Hippie
Dum vivimus, vivamus!
|
Edited by - old hippie on 11/17/2005 11:00:06 AM |
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 327 |
|
|
|
Drrummer
Forum Member
|
Posted - 01/21/2007 : 11:21:16 PM
|
"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."
To anyone who agrees with the above sentiment i have one question - when i am clothed, i often get erections especially when with my girlfriend, and this often happens in public places - now i know the general rules and opinions on erections, but do you think that an erection is accepatable as long as it is not 'utilised' !?!
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 10 |
|
|
|
Drrummer
Forum Member
|
Posted - 01/21/2007 : 11:23:38 PM
|
Oh, can i also ask why people speak with such disdain of swingers and other sexually liberal people. I understand and appreciate the reasons for seperating sex from nudity, but surely these people are entitled to their opinions and lifestyles as much as as nudists/naturists are ?
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 10 |
|
|
|
ggwydion
Forum Member
|
Posted - 01/22/2007 : 12:22:31 AM
|
You know, I have to agree. I am by no means a swinger but why is everyone just assumeing that those who engage in such activities are interested in our children. I mean pedophilia is hardly a common thing and while true I would not want to be harrased at a club these folk have the right to do as they will so long as they are not bothering anyone!
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 59 |
|
|
|
allnaturalwife
Forum Member
|
Posted - 01/22/2007 : 1:47:58 PM
|
The debate regarding nudism and swinging is a never ending one. Many people say that all swingers and even the smallest hint of a "sexual element" should be ban from all nudist venues. That is idealistic and unrealistic. From a lifelong nudist and mom of nudist children, I have many opinions about this issue. Many of which I have already shared with this board. Personnally, I/our family do not have a problem with swingers who are also nudists, as long as they SEPARATE the two. Im sure there are many people with religious views that many of us would find VERY strange. But as long as they are not at the nudist club passing out pamphlets, we dont ban them from our clubs. We have some close friends that are swingers that know how to act appropriately at a family nudist club. I highly doubt that ANYONE would know they were, unless they told them. Do I want certain behaviour accepted at OUR OWN club or any other FAMILY club? Of course not. And I do share the opionion of many on here that blending swinging and nudism is a dangerous thing. But it is more up to us nudists to "set the tone" for what kind of venues we want to attend" What I mean by this is...Our club for example is a family club. We pretty much maintain an environment where someone looking for "something else" wouldnt want to come anyway. Most swingers want to go to a place where there are other who share the same interest anyway. And as for the last post by ggwydion..I agree assuming that because someone likes to have sex with multiple adults..is a FAR CRY for them wanting to have sex with children.
Jenn
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 689 |
|
|
|
sueallday
Forum Member
|
Posted - 01/24/2007 : 8:01:21 PM
|
Everyone has both liberal and conservative thoughts. If I most label my believes on nudism I would say liberal to a point with adults, and very conservative with children. I believe you switch from one to the other depending on the topic and your personal beliefs. I don't even think you can label nudists liberals or conservatives, we more function on moral fibre, right and wrong. What is and is not acceptable to each person.
|
|
Country: Canada
| Posts: 47 |
|
|
|
NakedAmbition
Forum Member
|
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 3:53:00 PM
|
Hmmmmmm... if pressed I would say I'm a conservative nudist when it comes to behavior at nudist venues and a more liberal nudist when it comes to people's motivations for enjoying nudism. In other words, as long as you behave yourself and don't act like a cretin while you're at a nudist resort, camp, or beach, I don't particularly care if a little bit of exhibitionism, voyeurism, or desire to feel "naughty" is part of the reason you're going. In addition, the event one is attending at any given time at a nudist venue has a lot to do with my attitude at a given time: I'll tolerate, and probably even enjoy, a bawdy joke told at midnight at a camp's adults-only dance, but will get embarrassed and probably a little angry if the same person tells that joke around the pool at noon when there are a bunch of kids around. I think most nudists are flexible this way.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 25 |
|
|
|
mugwert
Forum Member
|
Posted - 07/16/2007 : 09:52:50 AM
|
put me down as a moderate, I believe in the rules, but some gray needs to exist just so long as those around you aren't made uncomfortable
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 44 |
|
|
|
Loki
Forum Member
|
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
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 11 |
|
|
|
SirGodiva
Forum Member
|
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.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 28 |
|
|
|
Little Fellow
Forum Member
|
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
:]
|
|
Country: United Kingdom
| Posts: 75 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Nudist-Resorts.Org Discussion Forum Bulletin Board Nudism Clothing Optional Resort Naturism Nude Beaches |
© 2002-2020 SUN |
|
|
|
"Conservative" and "liberal" nudism.
