I can see how this is a difficult sell with Gen-Z. It's generally been true that each new adult generation mainly has experience with others near their age, and so discounts the attitudes of preceding generations. As it happens, the "Boomer" generation (initially) was a lot more open to nudity with others - compared to the generations that preceded them. And they found it relatively easy to spread their enthusiasm to their age peers. I observed that personally. Subsequent generations haven't accepted that enthusiasm as easily, and especially not Gen-Z.
However, as people mature, they tend to socialize more with others of different generations, so they become - at least to some extent - more receptive to attitudes of others not in their own generation. So I don't think it's futile to think that naturists who are Millennials or Gen-X will be more inclined to promote naturism to others. Still not to a great extent, perhaps, but if they really enjoy naturism, they should try to promote it. Because that's in their own best interest.
I think it would be best to have the discussion here, so that others can participate if they want to. If your essay is long, consider dividing it into a few parts. And/or provide a summary that indicates the main points.
Hi Charles - you wrote a wise and thoughtful article that makes intelligent recommendations. My experience of nudism in England has been of steadily increasing illiberality and I was aware of growing prudishness in the USA, but I did not know that nudism is illegal in Arkansas nor that a woman can be arrested for going top-free in her own home in Utah. The observations you make about the present situation suggests that regaining acceptance of the freedom to be naked in Western countries needs a revolution rather than a gentle PR exercise...
As I understand it, public nudity is generally OK in England as long as it's not offensive. What have you seen, specifically, that suggests naturism is becoming less well tolerated?
Interesting question - public nudity, eg WNBR, is accepted because it is a mass event - over 1000 in London, 300 or so Brighton in my experience - that has been organised, police are aware and is stewarded. Because of that the few extreme prudes cannot influence the police and the majority of the public look on, cheer, laugh and enjoy. The nudist section of the beach at Studland, a nudist haven since the 1920s, began to be encroached upon and then invaded by textiles and the National Trust (which owns it) put up posts to delineate the nudist area and then introduced warden patrols in the late 80s. When I first went there it was a self-policing area with naturists, nudists, libertarians and gays well separated from textiles. Brighton nudist beach, which is about as public as you can get, may have begun as a naturist haven but it attracts hordes of gawping tourists so only exhibitionists or hard-line revolutionary naturists take their clothes off there. Closed naturist communities, although more accessible than they were, are still very protective of their members and vet visitors and potential members. I was a member of Mark Wilson's Eureka, a deliberately open and libertarian but still nudist club. After he died it almost closed and is now a vibrant 'swingers' type of venue.
Is naturism less tolerated in England? No less or more than ever it was. The difference is in public attitudes to nudity. Before about 1970 naturism was the stuff of music hall jokes and seen as the preserve of sandal wearing health nuts and intellectuals. As nudity in print, film or on television became more acceptable the association of 'nudity' with 'sex' seemed to be reinforced. Nevertheless the shamefulness of nakedness is so deeply ingrained in the public mind and one's inherent sexuality so powerful that any relaxation of the old repressive rules was seen by many as an invitation to sexual licence. As we have seen that has provided the Mrs Grundys with the opportunity to scream 'wolf' whenever a penis is exposed and, unfortunately, many penis owners felt the need to express their sexuality in ways that raised concerns in the minds of conventionally indoctrinated citizens - thus empowering the Grundys to call for drastic measures to control the wolves.
The consequence is that naturism has to defend itself from the Grundys and therefore stresses ever more strongly that social nakedness has nothing to do with sex. Of course it doesn't... but sex is the most powerful sales aid. So, if there are people with repressive urges, like Mrs Grundy, they will use sexual inuendo to incite shame in innocent minds...
In my view, most people are so ashamed of their own sexuality that the Grundys' overt connection of nakedness and sexual activity is a wonderful tool to control public behaviour and subvert activities, such as Naturism, that teach freedom from shame.
Even in "modern" countries like England, France, Germany, etc. (U.S. is NOT in that category) there seems to be a tug-of-war all the time between naturists and the prudish majority. At least BN and many small naturist parks in England provide lots of opportunities for naturists. Here's an interesting article that just appeared: Brave nude world: How and why Berliners get naked together (https://www.the-berliner.com/berlin/nudist-culture-fkk-natural-body-positivity-adolf-koch-naked-tea-party-karaoke-life-drawing)
Hi Charles - thanks for those links. In your reply you say the tug-of-war is between naturists and the prudish majority... the majority of people in England are not shocked by public nudity - my experience of WNBR has been that the thousands who watch are supportive of our right to be naked but few are willing to support us by joining in (though some do!) because religions' historical obsession with 'sex as sin' has been seized and perverted by those who want to control us. The more the general populace accepts public nudity the greater will be the efforts to suppress it...
Now I'm confused about the situation. Earlier you said there's been "steadily increasing illiberality" and "the shamefulness of nakedness is so deeply ingrained in the public mind and one's inherent sexuality so powerful that any relaxation of the old repressive rules was seen by many as an invitation to sexual licence." But now you're saying "the majority of people in England are not shocked by public nudity".
What's the actual situation? Are the people opposed to public nudity a minority but having an effect because they're so vocal about it? People aren't shocked by public nudity yet they allow repressive rules to persist? I'd guess that that reputable scientific surveys would be needed to sort this all out. Since I haven't been in England for a long time, I have little idea what the situation actually is. However, during the Covid pandemic of 2020-21 a BN survey claimed increasing numbers of people were favorable to naturism. What's up? Is naturism in England better off now or not? Are visits to naturist venues and beaches increasing or not?
Hi Charles - sorry to be confusing. To try to answer your questions:
Q "Are the people opposed to public nudity a minority but having an effect because they're so vocal about it?" - YES
Q "People aren't shocked by public nudity yet they allow repressive rules to persist?" - Yes, BUT the legacy of religious moral conditioning goes very deep and informs many of our laws. Liberalisation since the 60s has 'greyed' many areas but that simply introduces more scope for uncertainty about how far one can stray from the original injunction 'all sex is sinful'. Most people enjoy nudity or near-nudity on television but would not expose themselves. I am told that young people now dislike communal showers and boys shower in their underpants after games...
Q "Is naturism in England better off now or not?" I can't evaluate that - my experience is that naturism is more open and accepting but also more aware of its duty of safeguarding. It is surviving but seems not to be growing. The difference from the 60s and earlier is that today there is a much greater range of opportunity to get naked socially and also in a wider range of settings - indoor/outdoor, age limited, gender/orientation specific and, it must be said, acceptance of sexual activity. I accept that isn't 'naturism' but the only place to get naked with others in 1960 was a closed naturist club and that is no longer the case.
Q. "Are visits to naturist venues and beaches increasing or not?" I can't speak for the clubs other than to say that my experience has been that membership is ageing and there are fewer families and people under thirty or so. Teens were always less common but anyone under about 25 is now a rarity. Clubs are not especially inviting to young people. Beaches tend to be frequented by more lone individuals than mixed gender couples and families and that, plus the increase in textile gawpers (eg Brighton beach) tends to incite safeguarding fears which, whether real or not, are transmitted widely via electronic media.
Sorry if that is an overlong response and it is only my opinion. Nevertheless I agree with you that we need statistically valid surveys rather than opinions such as mine...
I can see how this is a difficult sell with Gen-Z. It's generally been true that each new adult generation mainly has experience with others near their age, and so discounts the attitudes of preceding generations. As it happens, the "Boomer" generation (initially) was a lot more open to nudity with others - compared to the generations that preceded them. And they found it relatively easy to spread their enthusiasm to their age peers. I observed that personally. Subsequent generations haven't accepted that enthusiasm as easily, and especially not Gen-Z.
However, as people mature, they tend to socialize more with others of different generations, so they become - at least to some extent - more receptive to attitudes of others not in their own generation. So I don't think it's futile to think that naturists who are Millennials or Gen-X will be more inclined to promote naturism to others. Still not to a great extent, perhaps, but if they really enjoy naturism, they should try to promote it. Because that's in their own best interest.
I think it would be best to have the discussion here, so that others can participate if they want to. If your essay is long, consider dividing it into a few parts. And/or provide a summary that indicates the main points.
Really great reading and even better points made.
Hi Charles - you wrote a wise and thoughtful article that makes intelligent recommendations. My experience of nudism in England has been of steadily increasing illiberality and I was aware of growing prudishness in the USA, but I did not know that nudism is illegal in Arkansas nor that a woman can be arrested for going top-free in her own home in Utah. The observations you make about the present situation suggests that regaining acceptance of the freedom to be naked in Western countries needs a revolution rather than a gentle PR exercise...
As I understand it, public nudity is generally OK in England as long as it's not offensive. What have you seen, specifically, that suggests naturism is becoming less well tolerated?
Interesting question - public nudity, eg WNBR, is accepted because it is a mass event - over 1000 in London, 300 or so Brighton in my experience - that has been organised, police are aware and is stewarded. Because of that the few extreme prudes cannot influence the police and the majority of the public look on, cheer, laugh and enjoy. The nudist section of the beach at Studland, a nudist haven since the 1920s, began to be encroached upon and then invaded by textiles and the National Trust (which owns it) put up posts to delineate the nudist area and then introduced warden patrols in the late 80s. When I first went there it was a self-policing area with naturists, nudists, libertarians and gays well separated from textiles. Brighton nudist beach, which is about as public as you can get, may have begun as a naturist haven but it attracts hordes of gawping tourists so only exhibitionists or hard-line revolutionary naturists take their clothes off there. Closed naturist communities, although more accessible than they were, are still very protective of their members and vet visitors and potential members. I was a member of Mark Wilson's Eureka, a deliberately open and libertarian but still nudist club. After he died it almost closed and is now a vibrant 'swingers' type of venue.
Is naturism less tolerated in England? No less or more than ever it was. The difference is in public attitudes to nudity. Before about 1970 naturism was the stuff of music hall jokes and seen as the preserve of sandal wearing health nuts and intellectuals. As nudity in print, film or on television became more acceptable the association of 'nudity' with 'sex' seemed to be reinforced. Nevertheless the shamefulness of nakedness is so deeply ingrained in the public mind and one's inherent sexuality so powerful that any relaxation of the old repressive rules was seen by many as an invitation to sexual licence. As we have seen that has provided the Mrs Grundys with the opportunity to scream 'wolf' whenever a penis is exposed and, unfortunately, many penis owners felt the need to express their sexuality in ways that raised concerns in the minds of conventionally indoctrinated citizens - thus empowering the Grundys to call for drastic measures to control the wolves.
The consequence is that naturism has to defend itself from the Grundys and therefore stresses ever more strongly that social nakedness has nothing to do with sex. Of course it doesn't... but sex is the most powerful sales aid. So, if there are people with repressive urges, like Mrs Grundy, they will use sexual inuendo to incite shame in innocent minds...
In my view, most people are so ashamed of their own sexuality that the Grundys' overt connection of nakedness and sexual activity is a wonderful tool to control public behaviour and subvert activities, such as Naturism, that teach freedom from shame.
Even in "modern" countries like England, France, Germany, etc. (U.S. is NOT in that category) there seems to be a tug-of-war all the time between naturists and the prudish majority. At least BN and many small naturist parks in England provide lots of opportunities for naturists. Here's an interesting article that just appeared: Brave nude world: How and why Berliners get naked together (https://www.the-berliner.com/berlin/nudist-culture-fkk-natural-body-positivity-adolf-koch-naked-tea-party-karaoke-life-drawing)
And here's another event (of many) from BN: The Great South Skinny Dip in Dorset (https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/24545065.date-announced-great-south-skinny-dip-dorset/)
Hi Charles - thanks for those links. In your reply you say the tug-of-war is between naturists and the prudish majority... the majority of people in England are not shocked by public nudity - my experience of WNBR has been that the thousands who watch are supportive of our right to be naked but few are willing to support us by joining in (though some do!) because religions' historical obsession with 'sex as sin' has been seized and perverted by those who want to control us. The more the general populace accepts public nudity the greater will be the efforts to suppress it...
Now I'm confused about the situation. Earlier you said there's been "steadily increasing illiberality" and "the shamefulness of nakedness is so deeply ingrained in the public mind and one's inherent sexuality so powerful that any relaxation of the old repressive rules was seen by many as an invitation to sexual licence." But now you're saying "the majority of people in England are not shocked by public nudity".
What's the actual situation? Are the people opposed to public nudity a minority but having an effect because they're so vocal about it? People aren't shocked by public nudity yet they allow repressive rules to persist? I'd guess that that reputable scientific surveys would be needed to sort this all out. Since I haven't been in England for a long time, I have little idea what the situation actually is. However, during the Covid pandemic of 2020-21 a BN survey claimed increasing numbers of people were favorable to naturism. What's up? Is naturism in England better off now or not? Are visits to naturist venues and beaches increasing or not?
Hi Charles - sorry to be confusing. To try to answer your questions:
Q "Are the people opposed to public nudity a minority but having an effect because they're so vocal about it?" - YES
Q "People aren't shocked by public nudity yet they allow repressive rules to persist?" - Yes, BUT the legacy of religious moral conditioning goes very deep and informs many of our laws. Liberalisation since the 60s has 'greyed' many areas but that simply introduces more scope for uncertainty about how far one can stray from the original injunction 'all sex is sinful'. Most people enjoy nudity or near-nudity on television but would not expose themselves. I am told that young people now dislike communal showers and boys shower in their underpants after games...
Q "Is naturism in England better off now or not?" I can't evaluate that - my experience is that naturism is more open and accepting but also more aware of its duty of safeguarding. It is surviving but seems not to be growing. The difference from the 60s and earlier is that today there is a much greater range of opportunity to get naked socially and also in a wider range of settings - indoor/outdoor, age limited, gender/orientation specific and, it must be said, acceptance of sexual activity. I accept that isn't 'naturism' but the only place to get naked with others in 1960 was a closed naturist club and that is no longer the case.
Q. "Are visits to naturist venues and beaches increasing or not?" I can't speak for the clubs other than to say that my experience has been that membership is ageing and there are fewer families and people under thirty or so. Teens were always less common but anyone under about 25 is now a rarity. Clubs are not especially inviting to young people. Beaches tend to be frequented by more lone individuals than mixed gender couples and families and that, plus the increase in textile gawpers (eg Brighton beach) tends to incite safeguarding fears which, whether real or not, are transmitted widely via electronic media.
Sorry if that is an overlong response and it is only my opinion. Nevertheless I agree with you that we need statistically valid surveys rather than opinions such as mine...
I agree 100
Happy Wednesday