Letter to BN Editor for publication in BN Magazine - if thought appropriate.

What kind of BN do you want?

That was the question which Chairman Mick Ayers posed in the debate on BN membership fee rises at the AGM in October. He was trying to get members to chose between a low cost / low service organisation and a higher cost / higher service organisation. However, I think the question is too superficial, and I hope with a few words now to spark a debate in the naturist world which might feed itself back to BN both via the Executive Council and then next AGM, as a sample of what naturists actually want from BN. I say naturists, and not just BN members, because I believe there are many naturists who do not join BN because they feel it is not giving them what they want from the organisation. They should be heard too, and BN would be short sighted to ignore them. To start things off, here is my own view.

I feel that BN lacks a sense of direction at present. It pays lip service to all sorts of good intentions, and so spreads itself so thin in trying to be all things to all men (& women of course) that it achieves very little. This is evidenced by the fact that public acceptance of the naturist lifestyle has moved on very little in the last 40 years compared with other social changes. BN's origins is in the Sun Clubs, and it has brought that ethos with it, which largely dominates the ECs thinking today. They seem to consider BN to be a sort of National Sun Club for which they should organise sports and social events, and spend a lot of time doing things for & with local Sun Clubs. Their view of naturism seems based on the premise that we must go somewhere private to do naturism and, at the most, any campaigning should be for more private places to go.

I take a different view of naturism. To me it is a valid lifestyle choice, and ought to be accepted wherever people want to adopt it. This is viewed as radical only because we have all been brought up to see being clothed as the norm and nakedness as something extraordinary. Naturism is not an activity in itself, and treating it as such in Sun Clubs merely leaves members casting about to find other things they may or may not have in common. Naturism is a natural state in which you should be allowed to carry out any activity, should you chose to. I do not suggest everyone will ever chose to go naked, but some will, and should not be victimised for doing so. This requires changes in public attitudes, the law and the way the law is applied.

Such a utopian society could not be achieved overnight, but without effort it will never be achieved at all. So, to me, BN as The National Naturist Organisation should be the vehicle to push for that change. Exactly how to do that is not the purpose of this treatise, merely to suggest that campaigning towards that end should be BNs highest policy priority. If that is accepted, a lot flows from it. To achieve an effective campaigning organisation a lot of things would have to be dropped to focus on the main aim. Many are sacred cows, but would have to go. They have for years dissipated BN resources, but could either actually be done by the Sun Clubs themselves, or not done at all without much real loss to the cause.

I believe such a shift in policy, if evidenced in action, would lead to an increase in membership. At present the only really tangible benefit from membership to the bulk of ordinary members is BN magazine. I suspect that most BN members remain such out of a sense of loyalty to naturism anyway, and so would stay and welcome such a move.

If this is the kind of BN you want now is the time to speak up. At the recent AGM the tiny proportion of the membership who voted, did so largely for the status quo. Maybe it was because they were mostly middle aged to elderly Sun Club members who like what they are used to. Maybe it was because there appeared to be no alternative. I believe that over the coming year alternatives will emerge. So say what you want and you may even get it eventually. Say nothing, and nothing will happen.