Guilty of Perversion

Nudity is sexy. Not always, of course - seeing an ugly person naked isn't a very sexy experience. But getting to see an attractive person naked is exciting, and it's sexy.

Nudism, however, is not about sex. It's about all of the benefits of nudity EXCEPT those that are sexual in nature. And there are many. For some, being naked is just more comfortable than wearing clothes, and for others, being naked has psychological health benefits. Behaviorally, spending time at nudist resorts will reveal that it is not uncommon for nudists to have a - relatively speaking - healthy, active, and positive attitude toward life.

Now, within a culture not afflicted by the sexual dysfunction that ours suffers from, it might be possible for a nudist community to embrace the sexual benefits of nudity in addition to all others. I don't see why that shouldn't be the case. After all, if nudism is a healthy lifestyle, then nudists in this hypothetical society ought to aspire towards having a healthy approach to sexuality; so that, rather than being a haven for sexual impropriety, nudist communities would embrace healthier sexual practices than the wider community, and there would be no need for alarm.

As it stands, in our culture, anything associated with sex is steeped in stigma. Considered a sin, rather than a natural part of life, anything outside of private sex between committed partners is viewed with disdain - this includes all the myriad and complex ways that sex intersects with society at large, including mating displays which involve persons exhibiting their sex appeal to strangers who are expected to respond in one way or another. Social aspects of sexuality also include pornography - both the production and the consumption thereof - which is a fascinating expression of human feelings, not a disgusting waste of time that rots people's brains and hijacks their abilities to relate to one another.

But for some reason, we think of sex in such poor terms, so that anyone who embraces it is relegated to outcast status and looked down upon. Above all, sex is deemed exclusively an adult activity (despite the fact that most persons reach sexual maturity years before reaching adulthood, and because of which we are unwilling to give young persons the proper education they need to make responsible decisions about sex), and is not considered a topic for polite conversation, or to be discussed among family.

The end result, especially considering the hysteria over sex crime in these modern days, is that for anything to be considered "prim and proper", it must entirely divest itself of any connection with sex. All the more so with something like nudism, that so closely involves something (nudity) that is so commonly linked with sex in the public consciousness.

Now, as I said, nudism is not really about sex. In a perfect world, it wouldn't have to be oppositional toward sexuality, but in this world, nudists go out of their way to defend the standing of their reputation (and keep it friendly to families, which is far more important to them than being appealing to a 'swinging' adult set).

From a proper perspective, this really should be a no-brainer. People at nudist resorts are not an especially attractive bunch (on a purely shallow level). And there is nothing particularly sexual about old retirees, married couples, and little children hanging out in a vacation-type atmosphere. Unless you've got a very peculiar sort of taste, which would seem to be very uncommon.

But they're naked, right? I know. The nakedness doesn't make it sexual, but it's not hard to see where people might get confused about that. I mean, remember, nudity is sexy. At least in the right context. See, that's the thing. The context of nudist resorts (families; old, ugly people) is so often unsexual, but you kind of have to be familiar with them to know that. And someone who's not familiar with nudism, is probably not going to see what the appeal of hanging out with naked people is unless it's something sexual.

See what I mean? The problem is that nudism's reputation hinges on being nonsexual, because otherwise everyone involved in it would be tarred with that 'pervert' brush, and with all the little kids running around, a lot of people might even end up in jail - unjustly. Otherwise, they could dedicate only so much energy to educating people who have the wrong idea about nudism, and expect the kinks to work themselves out.

But as it stands, I see more nudists than I'd like stepping into that evangelical position, taking the 'nude is not lewd' motto too close to heart. And they seem to get it into their heads that it's their job to speak out against anyone anywhere who associates nudity with sexuality, because it, supposedly, mars their claim that nudity in nudism is not sexual.

Which, yeah, I guess it kinda does. But only in the sense that men fetishizing women's breasts mars the claim that breastfeeding isn't a sexual practice. It's a case of having two perspectives on the same subject - it's not that we can only have one (and if we did, I'd rather nudity always be sexy than never be sexy), but just that we have to expect people to be smart enough to understand that a thing can be two different things in two different contexts.

And, even, sometimes - but not always - in the same context. Sometimes, women experience sexual pleasure during breastfeeding - it's a well-documented fact. Still doesn't mean they're perverts. And some people honestly do get turned on by the very idea of nudity in a nudist sort of context. What are you going to do? Silence those people, or try to eliminate them?

I know it's hard to expect people to be able to understand subtleties like, "naked people are sexy sometimes, other times, they're not, and sometimes they are, but they're not trying to be", and so on, when people constantly, everyday, demonstrate stupidity on a massive scale. I mean, if anything, it explains why so many people have so much trouble with the whole "is it nudity? is it sexual?" thing.

But, you know, it wouldn't matter half as much if there wasn't quite so much riding on the "is it sexual?" question. I mean, sexual activity is one thing, and if nudist resorts really were grounds for spontaneous, indiscriminate orgies, that would probably require some attention, and perhaps a change of rules. But, "might people get turned on by this?" isn't really a concern at all. Who really cares!

God forbid, nudity shouldn't be allowed to be sexy anymore, on account of the nudists. What a world that would be. But I guess the kind of people who would like to live in that world are just the kind of people who would love a world with less sex overall. No porn, no hookups, no sexy advertising. Sex only between committed partners and behind closed doors. And only in state (or bible)-approved positions (or combinations of persons).

Fuck that. I don't want to live in a world like that at all. I guess it just makes it an us vs. them sort of situation. I've spent a lot of time resisting submitting to the perversion in the core of my being. I wanted to purify it (and still do), to turn it into something proper and acceptable. To bridge the gap and not turn my back on the prudes - as if their opinion mattered to me (it did). I wanted people to see that I can be a pervert and not be the horrible person that the zealous puritans describe perverts to be.

I mean, that's true - and I still want to demonstrate that. But the abuse is nonstop. I can't stand it sometimes. Every time I hear people complain about something being too sexy (and it happens way, way too often), I want to say, "yes, it's sexy, but it's not bad...", but my voice would just be drowned out (and they have the gall to proclaim that they are in the minority...). Sometimes it just gets to me and I think, "okay, yeah, I'm a pervert. You think perverts are evil? Fine, I'm evil, then." It doesn't give me the desire to do anything actually evil - because I'm not, after all - it just makes me feel like I ought to waste less time trying to defend myself and explain how I'm not (I guess it should be obvious to someone who really knows the difference).

So this is my proclamation: Yeah, I'm a pervert. I like sex, but more than that, I like sexiness. I like being sexy, I like enjoying other people who are sexy. I like to look at attractive people naked, because they're sexy. Nudity is NOT always sexual to me, but I refuse to lie and say that it isn't sometimes sexy (and not only when legs are spread and such) - and I think that's great! I wish there were more sexiness in the world, in spite of other people's claims that we've already got too much. And I'm not going to feel bad for thinking that.

If you want to restrict my freedoms, and censor my speech, then fuck you. I'll grant you every right I demand for myself, but I will NOT let you use your 'power', even if it's just majority rule, to determine the way I live my life. Equality is what the country I live in was founded on, and freedom of speech is one of its primary tenets. I intend to express that freedom. And those who would attempt to take it away from me are worms in my eye. Whatever argument for morality they might make will fall on deaf ears. Fuck your morality.

I treat people well to the best of my abilities, and that has NOTHING to do with my enjoyment of sex as a part of life. So you, who would restrict the pleasure of sexual enjoyment, while trampling the rights of others (I don't want anything to do with morality if it's incompatible with ethics) - fuck you. I'm not going to let your petty arguments make me feel bad about myself anymore. Your opinions - including your judgment of me as a person - mean nothing to me.

You might have some immoral power over me, granted to you by a broken system or a corrupt benefactor, and I'm not so stupid as to not fear what you might do to me. But I will not let that fear run my life, and above all, I will not continue to let it mold my own view of myself. He who judges his character by corrupt and immoral standards is himself corrupt, and immoral.

If there were a God, he would see, even if you broke my mind and body, that I am superior to you, and I would reign over you in the afterlife. For better or worse, I don't believe in a God or an afterlife, but I can at least believe in myself. And I know I'm better than you. You don't have to know it - I could spend a lifetime trying to convince you only to lose. So I'm not gonna care whether you know it or not anymore. I've gotta put all my faith in myself. Doesn't mean I think I'm perfect, or any bullshit like that. Just means I'm not gonna view my 'moral perversity' as a character flaw.

You don't have to be a pervert like me, for me to respect you. You just have to be willing to respect me as a pervert. Live and let live. Long live equality, freedom, choice, and diversity. Sexual modesty is not a requirement for being a good person.

Ladies and Men

I'm going to tell you a true story, and then I'll let you come to your own conclusions about it.

A little while back, I stopped at a rest stop on the interstate because I had to use the bathroom. I went into the men's room, as I usually do, because that's what I was taught to do, having been raised without conflict as a boy. While standing at the sink washing my hands, a man came into the restroom. He took one look at me, and quickly turned around and walked out, thinking he had stepped into the ladies' room by mistake. This is not an unusual occurrence, and is not the first time this has happened to me.

Well, I recently stopped off at the very same rest stop, but this time, I decided to go into the ladies' room instead. According to the social rules I was taught, this is an enormous violation. But the rules weren't designed with transgender individuals in mind. Well, I was standing at the sink washing my hands (in a weird reverse image reflection of the earlier time in the men's room), and a woman came into the restroom, leading her school-aged daughter by the hand. They walked right past me without flinching.

Now I've got all the physical plumbing of a man, but not only do I feel more comfortable in the ladies' room than I do in the men's room, but men and women seem to feel more comfortable with it, too.

As I said, you can draw your own conclusions from this. I was very convincingly dressed and groomed as a woman the day I went into the ladies' room, whereas I wasn't trying especially hard to be feminine the day I used the men's room. Is biology the more important factor in determining proper restroom usage, or is psychology more important? Is it entirely a superficial issue - whether other people would guess you are male or female just to look at you - and if so, why are we gambling people's comfort and safety on something as unsubstantial as image?

If I go into the men's room looking like a girl, I fear for my own safety. But if I go into the ladies' room and am not convincing enough as a girl, I risk threatening other people's safety. Yet I know I wouldn't hurt anyone, and I'm not there for the purpose of violating anyone's privacy. Other people may not know that, but is it my responsibility to put myself at real risk of harm, in order to avoid imposing on anyone else the false threat of harm? Is that the price transgender individuals have to pay for being different?