What a singular fact for an angel visitant to this earth to carry back in his note-book, that men were forbidden to expose their bodies under the severest penalties!Henry David Thoreau
There is a dreadful anxiety surrounding nudity in some modern countries, most notably the United States. The prevailing popular opinion is that nudity is negative and deplorable, best left behind closed doors, under the sheets, and in the shower. People in these countries are warned not to “expose” themselves because it would offend others, implying that it is reasonable to associate emotions like disgust and shame with nudity. As many other countries across the world know and many societies in the past have proved, this is simply not true: nudity is a natural and normal state of being that should be embraced and supported in all of its good forms.
Like pretty much every other activity or state of being, nudity has good and bad forms. Good forms of nudity and nude activities include (but are not limited to): art, sunbathing, relaxing, domestic duties, swimming, socializing, philosophizing, blogging, romantic evenings, and moral sexual encounters. Bad forms are just as innumerable and include most of what the mass media ties to nudity: harassment, molestation, immoral sexual activities (defined in the article linked above), and many other incidences of mal intent or neglect.
Much of the fear and sensationalism surrounding nudity in American society stems directly from the publicly held belief that nudity is somehow necessarily or at least usually connected with sex. Most advertisers make this situation worse by producing risqué commercials and popularizing bare sex appeal as a virtue among the younger generation. For the most part, these advertisers and large companies cling to the “sex sells” mantra and disregard the effects that their messages have on the people who see them and the conceptual images of nudity and sex in the eyes of those people. There is, of course, no necessary connection between nudity and sex, but rather a coincidental one like that of wearing a bathing suit and swimming. Nudity does not need to imply sex in the least; there are forces in American society that have made a fortune endorsing and reinforcing that causal link, but that doesn’t make it any more true.
Besides the mass media, another common source of negativity surrounding nudity is the group of American Christian conservatives and evangelicals. This group of people is typically combative, perhaps rightfully so, when it comes to the aforementioned risqué advertisements and baseless sex appeal in the popular media, but for the most part they fail to recognize the distinction between good nudity and bad nudity, casting all nudity aside as negative and/or sinful. This is a mistake that has been passed down from the Victorian traditions of prudence and etiquette, most of which were disposed of in the past century as unfounded and useless. Traditional religious views on nudity were natural and pure, respecting and revering the body as something created in the image of a divine being. It would be wise for modern religious followers to examine the non-Victorian roots of their religion in order to recognize and accept the distinction between the good and bad forms and to restrict their battles to the arenas where they are appropriate.
We’re still talking about fighting and recognizing distinctions though; why should we worry about allowing good nudity? Frankly, for the same reasons that we allow people to drive cars, travel across and out of the country, visit day spas, go to the beach, own property on lakesides, and attend major sporting events: freedom. The freedom to be happy, healthy, active, productive, sane, social, bold, unashamed, and alive. There are no sound reasons against permitting the above listed activities when they are practiced with freedom and good intentions in mind and the same goes for nudity. Being nude and comfortable is a serene and wonderful disposition, reserved for every human being on the planet, not just some über-sexy subset of sex-crazed megalomaniacs on TV.
So what are my intended calls to action? First, I implore all opponents of nudity to stop attacking and criminalizing a state of being for which there is absolutely no defensible reason to attack. Second, I call for recognition of every human being’s right to be nude in a comfortable and relaxed situation. I am not calling for an all-nude society, legalization of obscenity, or a reduction in penalties for sexual offenders. Instead I only bring the sane, rational argument that there is nothing wrong with nudity in itself, nor with the several good forms of nudity as defined by a moderate and responsible person.
I have no delusions that perceptions of nudity will change overnight and be treated in a proper and rational manner, but I have hope that the younger generation can appreciate the facts at face value and pave the way for a country where people are not persecuted or exiled for their enjoyment of a healthy and natural life.
After all, living a lifetime without being comfortable in the nude is like going to Hawaii and never visiting the beaches.
Listen, I hear ya…
But with facts from articles like “The Return of Patriarchy” [1], I find it hard to believe this will change for the better. Unfortunately, I expect rather than finding a move toward more open-mindedness we’ll see a more toward less open-mindedness.
I hope I’m wrong…
[1] http://www.keepmedia.com/pubs/ForeignPolicy/2006/03/01/1332578
That’s a good read filled with unfortunate conclusions. It’s thought provoking though…I think I’ll read more about it.
As a nudist, I absolutely agree with this article. Not all nudity is sexual in nature.
I fear, however, the many people who work so hard to eliminate the freedoms of individuals. I find it appalling how in the United States — a land of so-called “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” — logic and reason could be thrown out the window, restricting innocent people from harmless activities. It’s a dangerous trend where those who do not know the truths of a matter attempt to oppress the people who do know.
I hate how fearful and distrusting so many people are today, because they are never given an opportunity to learn about even the simplest facts of life. The unknown and the fear of change cause people to make judgments based not on logic an reason, but instead based on personal insecurities and inexperience.
Since when has a LACK of knowledge and experience lead to accurate wisdom and understanding? Never, yet people are continuously restricted from opportunities to grow into morally mature individuals — that is why people freak out at the mere sight of a nipple. Society, on average, is immature.
while the article seems logical and reasonable, I think it has a higher degree of skewness. It also fails to see a societal view of this issue. Nudity should be intresting and of cause to some ( am not exempted ) within the confine of your house/home and this make this intresting to look forward to going home to create as it were an exiting moment which if you had it all day may become unintresting. Also, if you have control over your emotion and this stand as a justification for your fight for freedom of nudity on a societal front, do you stand in proxy for others ( in terms of their emotional stability and their propensity to negatively take advantage of ‘advanced nudity’. I summit to you that nudity should be intrestingly confined rather than advanced to cause a societal menace or environmental toxicity. Cheers
I’ll respond to what I think was said.
1. “Nudity should be [interesting]…” I disagree. Nudity should be whatever it is that any given person wants it to be. If someone wants to live mundanely in the nude, that is his prerogative. Indeed, for nudists, nudity does not have to be exciting, just free.
2. “…do you stand in proxy for others…in terms of…stability…[?]” I don’t fully understand what’s being asked here, but from what I gather the question revolves around the scope of my intentions; whether they are societal or personal, especially in light of others’ abuse of nudity for sexually devious or otherwise nefarious purposes. I intend the call to action to be societal in scope, as the necessity for a basic awareness and understanding of nudity and the fact that there is no causal link between nudity and sex. I am not trying to provide a solution for problems with sexual deviants or anything else. These domains are not mutually dependent on one another — it is possible to treat nudity in a rational and healthy manner without having a magical solution for sexual deviance in society.
3. “I [submit] to you that nudity should be [interestingly] confined rather than advanced to cause a societal menace or environmental toxicity.” This, to me, seems a typical sentiment resulting from ignorance and irrational treatment of the subject. There is no defensible reason that nudity should be kept behind closed doors (both literally and metaphorically), especially not ones involving anything menacing to society or toxic to the environment. These notions are so far beyond reasonable that I’m inclined to doubt my interpretation of the original statement.
In any case, I think this response relies mostly on the treatment of nudity more as an activity and less as a lifestyle. Furthermore, there is a strong assumption that nudity as an activity should be restricted and personal, which is precisely the mindset that the original article set out to argue against.
As a middle-aged gymnophobic male, I don’t understand exactly why the pro-nudity brigade apparently claims moral high ground and sole jurisdiction in defining as ersatz public policy what should be a personal opinion based on an individual’s morality and ethics. I’m the first to acknowledge that my refusal to be nude with a medical doctor isn’t exactly rational, but it is my decision. My personal decision to stay clothed effects nobody but myself. When public nudity advocates demonstrate their beliefs, they knowingly cause offence to others, even if they will not admit it. To me, it is solely an expression of their narcissism. Why is it so important to be nude where others will see them?
No nudists I know of try to claim moral high ground at all. On the contrary, the fight is against the anti-nudists who think their moral views are somehow superior and worth restricting the freedoms of others over.
Nudists completely respect your personal decision to not be nude, but you don’t respect the nudist’s freedom in like. The “offence” caused to others is the very issue at hand — namely that it is only perceived as offensive because of the way the issue is treated in society. In reality there is not a single objective defensible reason for claiming that nudity is offensive.
Why is it so important that you be allowed to wear the color yellow? I am phobic of the color yellow and you don’t respect my view by disallowing everyone in the world from wearing yellow. That’s about how it works, right?
at the risk of agreeing with runbux,I just don’t know anyone who is offended by the sight of a clothed person, but do know many who are offended by the sight of a naked person. i almost never wear anything in the confines of my own home, but would consider myself a poor host if i did not clothe myself when someone came to my door or when i leave the house for any reason.
the so-called “pro-nudity brigade” remind me of smokers who think they should have the right to subject everyone around them to their second-hand smoke.
just for the record, they are also losing ground.
With that philosophy we wouldn’t have any freedom to speak of. You are (at least leaning toward) justifying anti-nudity on the basis of the lowest common denominator of agreeable morals. That is not a defense at all, but just a circular reflection on the problem itself. Of course more people are uncomfortable with the sight of a nude body: that is precisely because most people have been raised in an atmosphere that is hostile to nudity in general.
My position rests on the defensible and rational grounds to be found in the benefits of nudity and the complete lack of reasonable arguments against it.
Note well that the pro-smoking brigade is in an entirely different situation, with indefensible negative effects and no benefits to speak of.
I definitely agree with nudists since I want to become one someday soon…if this society would get out of its gutter and start waking up. I’ve said this time and time again on several other websites, but tonight, I’m saying it here. NUDE IS NOT LEWD! People who think it is are obviously brainwashed by our poor society’s way of thinking. And, I read something on another website about good nudity. God created us nude to begin with. Think about this, if nudity was meant to be bad, don’t you think He would have created Adam and Eve with some kind of cloth to cover them up from the very beginning? Instead, nudity was intended to be good and so, they were created all nude and not ashamed. You can agree or disagree, but I speak my mind and I’m sticking with it. That is all for now.
Adam and Eve’s sin was not being naked, but by eating the fruit of knowledge with the tempting by that idiot serpent, whom Adam or Eve or both should have crushed with their feet. And, when they realized they were naked, they hid in the bushes and put on fig leaves. But, no where does it say that God was proud that they covered up their nudity. Rather, He asked how they knew they were naked. I speak so much like a nudist, don’t I? There’s a big difference between playing volleyball or any games nude and doing all kinds of sexual stuff nude. See, that’s the problem with this messed up country…Americans banish simple non-sexual nudity, but they keep the porn industry going strong. I’d like to know why?
And, those of you who think nudity is offensive, tell me why it’s okay for pornography to be so widespread? Tell me that, why don’t you?
David:
I don’t think its okay for pornography to be widespread, I actually think its a huge downfall in the US, seeing as over half of all males in the US are addicted to it. It promotes disrespect for woman in general, degrades ones own morals, and is a complete waist of time (and money) that could be better spent.
Towards the beginning of this well writ article, the author states that nudity and sex and not necessarily related when he/she compared “wearing a bathing suit and swimming” to “nudity and sex”. Now I don’t know about for most people, but for me the only reason one should wear a bathing suit is to swim, and, likewise nudity and sex are very closely related, and most likely (hopefully anyway) always will be. Is there anything sacred anymore?
If bathing suits are meant for swimming, then heck, why not wear them for bathing, hence the term “bathing” suit? Plus, I’ve read a lot of websites regarding nudity and, given the choice to swim with swim trunks or naked, I’d chose naked anyday. I’ve learned so much about nudity and nudism is not the same as pornography. While you don’t think pornography is good being widespread, obviously a lot of others do. Why else would it be so widespread? If nudism was commonplace, pornography might go out of business. Some guys and gals might groan for that, but something has to be done about the widespread porn before it destroys all of our minds. Nude is not lewd, at least, non-sexual nudity isn’t. I say “Ban Porn! Up With Nudism!” Who’s with me?
Trouble is, since non-sexual nudity is pretty much a “no-no” in this country, except at various nudist resorts, people looking to see naked people are limited to pornography. But, back to bathing suits. Did you know that at the beach, sand and bacteria collects in a suit because it has no place to go. You can try and get it out yourself, but if you’re afraid of nudity, that would certainly cause a scene of embarrassment as others would be drawn to your attention. And, nudists don’t care what you look like on the outside. Skinny, normal, fat, obese, young, old, white, black, brown, scars, etc…nothing nudists care about. They care what’s on the inside. Hasn’t anyone ever heard of “it’s on the inside that counts”?