I've just been reading through the responses to my last blog and they seem to reveal the conundrum that is Naturism. When I first became interested in Naturism it was through the pages of the Octavo, quarterly Health and Eficiency at the very end of the fifties. It cost 3/6, had almost no photos (and those it had were airbrushed into asexuality) and was full of forthright articles about the benefit and discipline of social nudity.
Healthy living was the watchword in articles that made it clear you could not be a true Naturist if you smoked or drank alcohol, ate red meat or had any form of sexual thoughts. Fortunately for the thirteen year-old I then was, it also made much of the delights and benefits that naked air-bathing brought: these I wanted to try and, one summer morning at about 5am, I climbed out of my bedroom window and went down to the beach where I stripped off and ran naked along the empty sands.
The sense of freedom was amazing! I did not then, nor even now, understand how the absence of a few ounces of material could result in such a different experience. From that moment on I was addicted. Since then I’ve never felt comfortable wearing anything on a beach. I have only met a handful of people who share this feeling and almost all have been men who, like me, had found a quiet spot on a beach somewhere. Women, it appeared, did not share this addiction of mine; most considering it weird to want to be naked in the presence of other people. To be fair, a few would come with me, but none ever seemed to share the amazing freedom I experienced.
I have no doubt that it is the sensuality of being naked that is exhilarating but sensuality and sexuality appear to have become confused in Naturism with the result that its message is anti-sex, all the stronger since the vegetarian, teetotal, non-smoking ethos appears long gone. At about the time I discovered Naturism I also found writers like Havelock Ellis whose message echoed many of Naturism’s tenets except that these writers held that sexuality was natural and that the repression of natural sexuality was at the heart of many social and psychological disorders.
The correspondence that followed my earlier blog didn’t surprise me, but I was a bit saddened that Naturism is still anti-sex. I don’t know much about Naturism as a brand since the nearest I’ve got to joining a Naturist club was Eureka where, despite its reputation, people behaved decorously, were friendly and sociable. Also, I have been to spas that advertise themselves as Naturist and I, personally, have never been bothered by what might or might not go on out of my sight.
What does bother me is the fact that very few people are ever naked – even in the sauna or steam people keep their towels on! Why? Is it because Naturism has never properly faced the issue of sexuality? Many of the letters in the old H&E and in every Naturist forum since have been concerned with erections - true Naturists, correspondents were told, did not disport themselves in this way. But, I wondered, why was there all this concern over public displays of sexual arousal if social nudity had nothing whatever to do with sex? Was there something wrong with me, since I never had that problem when I went naked?
I am aware of the problem caused by people (always men) who leer around naturist beaches like Studland. The behaviour of the, often largish, groups of Naturists, could, however, be quite surprising. Like a wagon train under attack from hostiles, all the women and children huddled in the centre while burly men guarded the perimeter, arms crossed on chests. On a couple of occasions I saw them deal very vocally and aggressively with some poor lone male who had approached too close or otherwise threatened them. Frankly, I found the gays a whole lot friendlier and nowhere near so intimidating. But in the end I just stopped going because, as the perimeter shrank and Police and warden patrols became more aggressive, it was no longer a relaxing experience.
I have no doubt that there are lots of people who, like me, just find the experience of being naked in the open air an exhilarating experience. I think a fair few of them may well be female. That the people attending Naturist spas and queuing to join clubs are male is, I would argue, a consequence of the fundamental anti-sex stance of organised Naturism.
In my experience women are vastly more sensual creatures than males, many I’ve known are much more deeply sexual too: and I, poor male that I am, find this both exciting and frightening. The sexual politics of much of the world for much of recorded history has been concerned with the subjugation of women, largely, so far as I can see, because of a fundamental male fear of losing the power to control by force: nothing subverts male authoritarianism quite like sexual and sensual freedom.
Personally I think Naturism (or naturism, or nudism) is about the freedom to act responsibly. When I go to a spa I really don’t care what other people do so long as they understand that I may not have gone there to share it with them. Thus, while I find it odd that people in a spa may wear towels, that’s their choice. Equally, I think it is very responsible if a spa owner makes an ‘adult/couples only’ area available because it allows people to make choices about how to behave without upsetting others.
Naturism has always meant to me the absence of pretence: literally total physical and social nakedness. It is about the acceptance of standards of behaviour that are negotiated and dynamic rather than Mosaic. Which means that some people will want their Naturism to be quite rigidly defined while for others their Naturism will be the ability to negotiate the boundaries.
Naturism, therefore, as a philosophy to be developed rather than a brand to be defended?
Click here to read more - if you want to be a part of ITB, sign up it is free to sign up and chat on line