Decade Comparisons

This is an idea inspired by a post I saw on Twitter, comparing two pictures taken at the beginning and the end of the decade. Since I've been active photographically - and as a self-portrait artist - throughout these past ten years, I thought it would be very interesting to look at some picture comparisons of my own from the beginning and end of this decade.

[description: two portraits of a man with long, wavy hair - one dark, and the other bright]
January 2010 vs. May 2019

Here is one of the first pictures I took in this decade compared with a photo from this year. The fact that I'm wearing underwear in the picture on the right is mere happenstance. I thought it was interesting (although not altogether surprising) that I had two such similar pictures taken almost ten years apart. There are two notable things about this comparison. First, is what hasn't changed - namely, the length of my hair. Although it has now been over 18 years since I last cut it, its length hasn't changed noticeably in over ten years. More poignant, however, is the difference in lighting. Ten years ago my life was suffused with darkness - I even lived a nocturnal lifestyle. But I have since been dragged back into the light.

[description: two nude portraits of a man wearing bunny ears outdoors]
Easter 2010 vs. Easter 2019

To further demonstrate that point, here is a comparison between two Easter photos taken in April - the one on the left in 2010, and the one on the right in 2019. Ten years ago, I had to sneak out into the woods in the dark of night to take nude photos outdoors. After several years of living in stuffy apartments, I am now back living in a house; and this time, with enough (if not total) privacy to shoot in full daylight, right out in my back yard!

[description: fashion selfie in jeans and a t-shirt, and short shorts and a crop top]
July 2010 vs. May 2019

My fashion sense has certainly evolved over the past ten years, as I've gained confidence and experience embracing a more feminine identity. However, the change would be even more drastic if you went a few years further back; 2010 was in the midst of a transitional period, in which I was starting to experiment with wearing women's clothes, and getting into the regular habit of trimming my body hair. Still, I'm much more confident now, whether it's wearing dresses, or going out in public half-dressed. :-3

[description: two portraits of a nude man holding a jack-o-lantern, indoors and out]
Halloween 2010 vs. Halloween 2019

My weight has fluctuated over the decade. I'm slimmer now than I was ten years ago (in fact, I'm in the best shape I've been since I was a teenager), but there was a period during the middle of that decade during which I was a little heavier. (Thankfully, I've managed to put the kibosh on that trend). I still like carving pumpkins and posing naked with them for Halloween, though!

[description: two girly portraits posing nude and in a bikini, with heart-shaped glasses]
Lolita, May 2010 vs. May 2019

Also interesting to note is not just the differences, but the things that remain constant throughout your life. Ten years ago I picked up a pair of heart-shaped sunglasses and posed as Lolita. And just this year I paid tribute to Sue Lyons' iconic role in the first film adaptation of that story. And while the before picture, in hindsight, is quite cute, I viewed it at the time as an indication of what I lacked, while now, I have much more confidence in my appearance, as regards my ability to express femininity in my own way.

[description: two outdoor portraits of a nude man lying on the ground, one knee raised]
October 2010 vs. June 2019

I was also very interested to find two very similar pictures of me nude in nature in similar poses spanning the decade. The earlier one was taken in the woods in the fall, and the later one during the summer at a lake. I clearly have more of a tan in the later picture, owing to the greater opportunities I have now to be nude out in the sunshine. However, the practice of going out in nature and finding surreptitious moments away from the crowds to strip down and take some pictures hasn't changed.

[description: two portraits dressed in fur pelts, in a dark room, and out in daylight]
June 2008 vs. May 2019

This is the only picture comparison that I had to cheat on, as the image on the left hails from my Daily Nudes project in 2008, making it over eleven years old. But I just reshot the theme this year - posing like a primitive in the fur pelts of my boyhood camping days - so I wanted to see them side by side. Again, you have the difference between indoors and out, as well as the difference in lighting, from shadows to daylight.

[description: two clone shots of four girls in pajamas having a slumber party]
October 2010 vs. May 2019

By coincidence, it just so happens that my original and celebrated Slumber Party clone shot was taken in 2010, and I recreated it just this year. I consider it a testament to how my life has changed, with regards to the people that have come into it that I never would have expected, that have made me just a little bit less of a timid recluse, and have provided me with some life experiences I never thought I would get to have.

[description: two nearly nude portraits featuring turquoise panties]
March 2010 vs. October 2019

In another happy coincidence, I have two images spanning the decade that feature me in (or sliding out of) turquoise panties! You can also get a hint from the background of how my bedroom has changed. Although you can't see much in the before picture, my room used to be a haven of anime geekdom. I may still not have grown up, but I have fully embraced the girliness within, surrounding myself with an explosion of pink princesses and unicorns.

[description: two portraits of a nude man in a Santa hat standing before a Christmas tree]
Christmas 2010 vs. Christmas 2019

I try to mix things up and keep them fresh, but in ten years, you're bound to repeat some themes, especially classic ones, and around the holidays. If anything has surprised me about these comparisons, it's how consistent I've been over the past decade. I'd like to believe I'm improving - both as a photographer and as a model - although what's most apparent in this photo comparison is the difference in equipment. I'm shooting exclusively with my iPhone at this time, and it shows in the graininess of the later image, shot in the dark. I've been using the same dSLR for the last ten years, until I dropped it in Lake Michigan this year and figured it was time to retire it. Now I'm in the same position I was late 2008, after I lost my camera at Burning Man. I think it's time to buy another nice camera, and start shooting more professional quality images (not in terms of creativity, but technical aspects) again.

Fixation

How is it that we've come to exist in a society where, if a photographic artist tends to fixate on a particular type of model - presumably because she fits his aesthetic ideal of beauty - we view this as a flaw, a type of moral failing? This artist's taste may not match yours, but these things are uniquely specific, and surely one cannot expect an artist to follow another's artistic compass.

Is it because we, for some reason, resent the way that this phenomenon reveals the underlying motivation for many artists to be one that is more in tune with the sensual instincts than we would like to admit? But why should this fact offend us? As Thomas Mann once wrote, "we artists cannot tread the path of Beauty without Eros keeping company with us and appointing himself as our guide." And why should this be a bad thing, unless you harbor an unspoken (or perhaps even outspoken) resentment for the erotic? It is not as though the presence of Eros in any way erodes the value or the virtue of Beauty (in fact, I would argue, it enhances it).

Or, is it perhaps only when the fixation centers on certain over-represented qualities - such as youth, femininity, and litheness of form - that one becomes offended? Is it that we have progressed so far into a culture of diversity and inclusion that popular interests must be maligned in favor of the exaltation of minority qualities? That whiteness, straightness, etc. and the proclivities thereof must be viewed with suspicion and derision in a form of reverse discrimination? To exact upon the innocent and the many the justice that is due for the crimes of others who merely appear superficially alike? And how does that sound? No, I will have no part of it.

Social Nudity and Consent

One of the great paradoxes of nudism is this idea that a nudist is relatively unconcerned about being naked in front of other people, and yet nudists have a tendency to hide their lifestyle, even to the point of practicing it surreptitiously behind tall fences. This practice isn't, in fact, logically inconsistent - nudists don't hide because they're shy, they hide to protect themselves from the antagonistic attitude that textile culture often takes towards nudists, and nudism on the whole.* But you have to admit that it makes for a confusing public image.

*Other nudists before me have said that the fences exist for the benefit of the outside world, not for the benefit of the nudists - they're there to keep textiles comfortable, not because the nudists need them. Of course, the fences do benefit nudists insofar as it protects them, as I said, from attack by outsiders. It's an interesting twist, though, to imagine that the nudist resorts actually represent small pockets of freedom, and it's the rest of the world that's actually being "fenced in" - it's just that the prison occupies a much larger area.

An attitude that I've seen bandied about among nudists is this idea, reinforced by the current social climate of sensitivity and political correctness, that social nudity is an activity that (strangely like sex - given how much nudists try to separate their lifestyle from it) requires consent. This is a bit of an establishment position - "we're nudists, but we don't want to make textiles uncomfortable". Rather than fight for our fundamental right to dress ourselves as we see fit, it endeavors to make nudists as benign and uncontroversial to the status quo as possible.

It's a position that favors majoritarianism over civil liberties, and recognizes that we live in a world where the default agreement is that people will not expose their nudity to others except in carefully controlled situations where everyone has consented to it. What, then, makes the social practice of nudism legitimate is the fact that everyone involved has agreed to be there, with the expectation of being exposed to the nudity of others. Therefore, this practice can only occur in isolated and planned contexts, where "innocent" passersby will not be startled and potentially offended.

Despite its commitment to nonconfrontation, which I generally support in my personal life, I have serious reservations about this attitude, because it capitulates too much to our enemies. I have always been of the opinion that any serious movement needs to move forward on many fronts, and while it's important for nudists to express their ultimate desire to coexist peacefully and NOT cause undue social unrest, it is simultaneously important to stand up for what we believe in - and one of the things we believe in is that no civilized society should criminalize the sight of the unclothed human body. And as long as it continues to do so, it should NOT be permitted to rest comfortably.

So, you have protests like the World Naked Bike Ride, and people like the Naked Rambler who are labeled by some (including nudists) as public agitators, sometimes even called exhibitionists, in order for "pure" nudists to distance themselves (and their perfectly polite, capitulatory activities) from these malcontents. Yet I've always supported these approaches. Establishment nudists want to be allies with their textile enemies, and while I agree that we ultimately want the textiles to support us and not oppose us, I side with the free range nudist activists who believe that only more (and not less) exposure to nudity will ever normalize it.

Social vs. Legal Ramifications of Nudity

As an analogy, in a democracy where homosexuality is despised by the majority, public displays of homosexual affection are a right to be fought for and defended, and not something to be sacrificed to capitulate to the comfort of the majority. So, I believe, it is the same with public displays of nudity. However, there are, at this time, legal ramifications that anyone planning to engage in nudist activism ought to consider. This is why, although I yearn for a society in which nudity is less stigmatized, I am more concerned with the legal than the social ramifications for it.

Yes, it is heartbreaking to think that somebody will not accept you, maybe even refuse to spend time with you, because of what you are most comfortable wearing. But how can we change anyone's minds when we risk not just losing friends and family, but possibly our own freedom for upholding our perceived right to be comfortable in our skin? I can handle confronting people's attitudes about nudity, but what kind of platform do I have to stand on when the thing I am advocating for could be considered a crime, and sometimes a very serious one?

(Because, as sex and nudity are intertwined in the public mindset, so-called "indecent" exposure is often construed as a sex crime - something that is exponentially more severe if there happen to be any minors involved, in spite of the fact that some children engage in recreational nudism with adults both legally and ethically. Considerations vary wildly, depending on context and interpretation).

As such, it is not only a question of whether the people in my life accept my practice of nudism, but the extent to which I can even practice it solitarily. I must be concerned about who can see through my windows, or into my backyard. I must submit to the dress codes of my neighbors on my own property if there is any chance of being seen by them - I cannot do yard work, for example, in my front yard, without covering up. I cannot roll my trash can to the curb, or even step outside my front door to grab my mail from the mail box on my porch, in my preferred state of dress.

God forbid someone should come for a visit unannounced, and I should answer the door naked, for even if I were willing to cover up upon consideration of the sensibilities of my guests, the very sight of my naked body, however brief, is enough to constitute "exposure" of a potentially criminal nature. It's almost like we're censoring knowledge of human anatomy, despite the fact that everybody has unrestricted access to the sight of their own bodies, and there is nothing about the opposite sex's genitals that require one be kept ignorant up to and even beyond the age of eighteen.

The Devil's Advocate

It's human nature to argue a position, and ignore or minimize the concerns of one's opponents. Both sides do this, and it's counterproductive to coming to a compromise. I have no desire to follow that strategy. I want to address and ideally assuage the concerns of those who would disagree with me, so that we may eventually come to some kind of agreement, otherwise it's just two people shouting at each other, and one of them gets to have their way (decided arbitrarily) while the other one suffers, instead of making everyone happy to at least some measure.

So what liabilities, if any, would there be if we decriminalized the exposure of one's genitals to another without their consent? What (I can hear the voices shouting in my head) would stop a random pervert from, for example, answering the door naked (on Halloween, say) for a sexual thrill? What would stop other perverts from masturbating in public parks? I might argue how much harm this would actually do in an enlightened, sex-positive society, but putting that aside, we could certainly maintain the criminality of public sex acts.

Yet, unless caught out with some proof (which becomes easier in this age of mobile phones with cameras), what would stop these perverts from claiming in their defense that they were merely practicing nudism? Even now it's hard to differentiate in cases of indecent exposure whether or not there was any sexual intent, to any but those directly involved (and sometimes even them also). My understanding is that we criminalize nudity partly because it's easier to determine whether or not somebody was exposed than it is to determine whether there was any sexual intent.

But is it just to restrict an individual's basic liberties in order to curtail potentially criminal behavior? I suppose it really comes down to a question of principles versus pragmatism. I would rather uphold the right of an individual to be free to dress as he pleases, even if it means overlooking a few minor sexual offenses, than to promote an overly controlled society in which people can perhaps feel safer at the cost of their liberties. But I guess that makes me a monster, especially in the current climate, where there is little that is considered more serious a concern than sexual impropriety.

I honestly don't want to make it sound like my vision of sex-positivity relies on insensitivity, but there is an element of consent culture that is inherently sex-negative, which is the idea that sex (used as a vague term that encompasses a wide variety of activities) is something so odious that it requires consent in the first place. I am not saying that it does not, in its traditional form - particularly, socio-sexual contacts, which involve multiple people in sexual contact with one another, which absolutely requires the consent of all involved. But the notion that the very idea, the thought of sex can be traumatic to some, that we have to restrict its expression to such an extent...

I'm not denying that this may be the case for some, even many. And as women speak out about how tough it is to be the subject and object of so much sexual attention, it saddens me. I want to work toward a solution, but toward a sex-positive solution. Which is to say, not one in which sex is stamped out so that the only people who ever experience it are people who are definitely going to have a positive experience with it (a pretty twisted notion of sex-positivity, if you ask me), but one in which we can all behave in such a way that sex is not such an odious subject, and that it can coexist peacefully with the other aspects of our humanity.

I ask, why is sex so traumatic to so many? Why is it so horrible to imagine walking in on somebody having sex or even masturbating alone? I'm not unsympathetic to those who experience this discomfort, but I view this discomfort as a disease to be remedied, not a condition that ought to be considered normal, such that we redesign society around it, along with our attitudes towards sex, which is now seen not as being this amazing miracle of pleasure and creation and physical beauty, but this traumatic and ugly thing that must always be kept behind closed doors, and anyone who takes too much pleasure in it ought to be viewed with suspicion.

A Statement on Exhibitionism

First of all, I am a nudist, and I fully support non-sexual nude recreation. In fact, I've published a book describing twenty-five different non-sexual reasons to enjoy recreational nudity - so believe me, I get it. But I'm also sex-positive, and I would describe myself as both a voyeur and an exhibitionist. And I find that nudists in particular, but the public in general, have a lot of misconceptions about exhibitionism, many resorting to a reductionist definition informed by the DSM. But one must remember, even things like homosexuality and transvestism had been relegated to the category of a mental disorder for a long time. So while it may have medical utility, I don't trust the DSM to be the final arbiter on issues of so-called sexual deviance.

The fact is, there is nothing intrinsic to the enjoyment of being on exhibition - even for sexual purposes - that relies on a violation of consent. People can engage in a variety of alternative sexual practices in either consensual or non-consensual forms. Even a desire that would seem to rely on non-consent - such as rape fantasies - can still be practiced ethically and consensually. It would not be fair to define any of these desires by the criminal behavior that some individuals - usually those with a lack of boundaries, poor self-control, a disposition toward violence, etc. - engage in. It would be tantamount to defining heterosexuality by men who commit rape - or, even worse, serial killers who sexually assault their victims.

Most people, when imagining an exhibitionist in their mind, think of the stereotypical trench coat flasher. This is an archetype, and apparently a powerful one. Does it exist in reality? Probably. But I don't think it's all that common, and it doesn't define for me what exhibitionism is about. What's appealing about shocking or offending unsuspecting people anyway? Even the supposed thrill of getting caught is better in theory than practice - the thought of it can excite a person, but the reality is often extremely embarrassing, at the very least. The thought of being exposed may thrill me, but the thought of being chastised, reprimanded, even arrested is as utterly horrifying to me as it would be to anyone else of sound mind.

So what, then, is an exhibitionist? I call myself an exhibitionist because I've been sharing naked pictures of myself on the internet for over a decade now. Some of those pictures are celebratory of non-sexual nude recreation. Others are more sexual in nature, and it turns me on to know that others are not just looking at them, but looking at them and liking them. I have never in my life sent an unsolicited dick pic, and don't intend to. There are resources out there, especially on the internet, to share images with people who want to see them, so there really is no excuse, in my mind, for not seeking out these consenting audiences. That some exhibitionists are maybe not as conscientious as I am, isn't an indictment of exhibitionism, but merely an example of the fallibility of mankind.

You can find good actors and bad actors in any lifestyle. Defining the lifestyle by the bad actors is usually a symptom of lack of understanding, and often reinforced by commonly-held prejudices. If the only exhibitionists you ever hear about are the ones that mistakenly act out and cause problems in society, then that's how you're going to view them. But the resulting stigma really isn't fair to those of us who are capable of behaving ourselves, and knowing the boundary between having a vibrant sex life, and violating society's code of ethics. And if you want a general idea of how many other exhibitionists are out there, who enjoy sharing themselves with consenting audiences, try visiting a social media platform that doesn't restrict porn - Reddit [NSFW], for example - for a start.

Dressed To Distraction

I just started watching the new season of Big Mouth, which is a great animated series that confronts issues of sexuality in the context of a group of kids entering puberty. Because (although it's not really a kids' show) the best way to promote healthy sexuality is to teach it right the first time. It's a funny show, but I especially enjoy it as modern social commentary on topics of a sexual nature. Anyway, the first episode of the third season (not counting the Valentine's Day special) addressed the issue of boys being distracted by girls' clothing, resulting in the girls performing a slutwalk-style protest. But therein the issue got confused, and while the episode failed to resolve it (in realistic fashion), I've had a bit of insight into where things tend to go wrong, when it comes to the struggle between women fighting for the freedom to dress themselves as they see fit and the way men have a tendency to view them in certain clothes (or any clothes, if we're being honest).

Consider the following scenario:

(a) A woman wears something tight or revealing.
(b) A man is distracted by it.
(c) The man complains, and the woman is compelled to change.
(d) The woman protests.

Now, here's where the protest sometimes misses the point. The problem lies in step (c), and not step (b). It's not wrong (and certainly not unhealthy or unnatural) for a man to be distracted by a woman, or to have sexual thoughts about her. The issue is the idea that a woman ought to change her behavior for the sake of the man. The solution is not some sterilized "utopia" where men are never distracted by women's bodies, regardless of how they dress. Yes, men should be able to control themselves, but that doesn't mean preventing any sexual thoughts from crossing their minds. If men are distracted by women, then let them be distracted. Let them struggle with their coursework because they can't take their minds (or their eyes) off the girls' shoulders sitting in front of them, while the girls blissfully plow forward, their minds focused on their coursework. Isn't that Darwinism in action?

So don't protest men's sexual thoughts about women (often couched in the political language of "sexualization" and "objectification") - that just confuses the issue, and prevents us from making any progress. Focus your protest on the idea that it's unfair that women should have to dress to prevent men from being distracted (instead of men taking responsibility for their own lack of focus). Let women wear what they want. And let the men be distracted. That's the natural order. Forcing women to change the way they dress, or expecting men not to be distracted by them, are both perversions of this order. You can't protest one and then demand the other, because then you've just locked yourself into an equally untenable position, with the men demanding that women change, and the women expecting men to stop being distracted, which are both unreasonable.

P.S. I was thinking about this some more after I posted this entry, and (not to belabor the point, but) I want to approach it from a slightly different angle. It occurs to me that men could be making an argument that sounds similar to mine - that it's natural for men to be distracted by women's bodies. But the difference is in the conclusion. My conclusion is that it's the man's responsibility to deal with being distracted, whereas their conclusion is that it's the woman's responsibility to change her clothes (or behavior) in order to stop distracting men. And it's that conclusion that's heinous.

But I think that the angle a lot of women come at it from, is the idea that the men are at fault for being distracted, whether it's because they're obsessed with sex, or they supposedly see women as "sexual objects". But the reality is that nature and evolution compels men to view women in a sexual light. That's not a problem, or something that needs to be changed. Both sides seem to see the elimination of distraction as the solution - whether it's by unfairly forcing women to change, or unrealistically expecting men's minds to transform. But as I said above, it's not the distraction that's the problem, it's what's expected to be done about it (in the first case by men, but then also later by women).

Is there not a perspective from which we could see the distraction as permissible? As I said, let men be distracted, and hold them responsible for how they respond to that distraction. Personally, I think being distracted by attractive women, especially in revealing clothes, is one of the great delights of living, and one of the many things I so enjoy about nudism - which I wouldn't be permitted the privilege of enjoying, if I weren't capable of taking responsibility for my actions while distracted, and behaving civilly. Which is the standard to which we should all be held.

Tricky Treats

[description: a smiling man sits in a chair with a bowl of candy in his lap]

People get so superstitious around Halloween (drugs in candy, anyone?), it's ridiculous. But not inappropriate, I suppose - after all, this is the season for tricksters and evil spirits. I'm probably risking my reputation posing like this, but it's art, not reality. And I delight in turning my imagination to the subject of sexual deviance. To paraphrase the Marquis de Sade, I have imagined everything under the sun, but I have not practiced a fraction of the things I've imagined, and I never will. I am a pervert, but I am neither a criminal nor a scoundrel.

[description: closeup on a bowl of candy with an exposed penis resting within its midst]
In case you didn't catch it the first time.

Anyway, I think the very concept of somebody hiding their genitals in a bowl of candy (so, what, they can get a brief second of physical contact before spending the rest of their life in jail?) is as pointlessly impractical as it is fiendishly clever. So I couldn't help recreating it for a photo. You'll also notice that I'm wearing my Satanic t-shirt. It seemed appropriate.

[description: a man points to an erection springing from the bowl of candy in his lap]

"Live deliciously this Halloween, with the only candy bar that grows from fun size to full size when you put it in your mouth!"

Cat on a Windowsill

Tell me again how pornography is gross, ugly, disgusting. How it's degrading and humiliating and exploitative. How it's obscene and a form of violence. How it can't be artistic, or aesthetically pleasing. How it can't be beautiful, or uplifting, or inspiring. What a tragedy it is to have such a narrow mind, a negative outlook, and a dearth of imagination.

[description: series of portraits of a nude man with erection silhouetted against a window]

Thought Police

Although opinions on this subject - obviously - vary, I have encountered attitudes that are very opposed to the "misuse" of photos shared on the internet. This may manifest in the form of slander and harassment, but the primary concern often cited is a sexual one. Let's say, for example, a young woman posts a photo of herself at the beach on her Instagram feed. It gets downloaded and passed on to a porn site. As a creator, I sympathize with the grief that may be caused by the public distorting the intended use of an image. But at the same time, there is a limit to how much we can control the public's interpretation of what we share. I am more concerned about the porn site's unauthorized use of the image (especially if it's making any money off of it), than the notion that any number of people might view the image and think sexual thoughts.

And my question is, to what extent is that something that we ought to be able to restrict? Should a person be allowed to think sexual thoughts about another person (or their image) without their knowledge or consent? I would, of course, say, absolutely! But is this a universal response? We cannot prevent others from fantasizing about us because it is simply impossible. So, if we must permit people their fantasies (for practical reasons alone), then perhaps there isn't much to be said about what personal purposes a person might put an image to, once it leaves the hands of its owner.

But what if we could police people's thoughts? Assume, for a moment, that we had the capability to do so. That, by some power or technology, we could prevent other people from even thinking sexy thoughts about us without our consent. My question is, should we? Is that a level of control society ought to have? Or is the freedom of our minds important enough to be worth permitting people to have thoughts that may disturb us (if only we knew - which, most of the time, we don't)? I think you should know my answer to this question, and I would go so far as to say that there really is only one permissible answer. But what I'm curious about, is how many people there are out there that would say differently, especially in this current climate of antagonism toward the concept of free speech. Imagine if you could prevent people from ever having racist or sexist or bigoted thoughts. Would it be worth it? Knowing that this capability could be put to far more nefarious uses? To lose the autonomy of our own minds?

In short, I ask you: if we had the capability to police people's thoughts, is that something we should do?

Sex-Positive Nudism

I posted a tweet [NSFW] on Twitter a few days ago, and it absolutely exploded. It's been a challenge just keeping up with the discussion it has generated. I've enjoyed it, to be sure, but it's kept me preoccupied for days. The tweet asked the simple question, can there be a sex-positive nudism? The response was largely positive, although certainly also represented was the sort of attitude my own tweet had been responding to: nudists who push too far in the direction of antagonizing sexuality in an effort to legitimize their lifestyle. It's always been hard for me, as I'm sure you can understand if you've followed my writing for any length of time, to limit my thoughts to the relatively short limitations of the Twitter format - even as they are double what they used to be (I also dislike how confusing it sometimes is trying to follow a thread of discussion on Twitter - it drives my organized mind nuts). I'm trying to learn to take advantage of the power of a pithy and distilled response (indeed, the original tweet in question was the distillation of a much longer stream of consciousness that I decided would be more effectively reduced to its central essence), but sometimes my mind just requires more space to make my point. So, since I can't post this there, I'm posting it here on my blog - a discussion of my concerns re: the issue at hand, specifically regarding nudism's place in the world, the troubled relationship between nudism and the swinger or hedonistic lifestyle, and the relative priorities of legitimizing nudism versus healing our society's sexual dysfunction.

---

If so-called "hedonists" are appropriating nudism as a strategy for legitimacy, that's a mirror image of nudists disavowing hedonists for the same reason. We have the upper hand in that exchange, because nudism really isn't hedonism, whereas hedonism isn't really nudism. But we should be reaching out to the hedonists to be their ally. As long as we are enemies, they will strike at us, coveting the potential for legitimacy that we have. If there is space for hedonism in the world, then they wouldn't need to drain our lifeforce, and then there could also be nudism in the world, without needing to exert so much effort into reassuring the public that we really aren't hedonists. I suspect that many nudists view nudism as more legitimate than hedonism, same as the rest of the population disavows the legitimacy of anything related to sex (especially "alternative" expressions thereof). But that's a flawed and inhumane perspective. It's simply not the case that hedonism must be ignored while nudism finds its footing, only for society to then turn to consider the legitimacy of hedonism. That'd be like saying racism must be eradicated before we can consider the issue of sexism.

We exist in a sex-negative world. Nudism can see itself fitting into that world so long as it can convince the world that it's not a sexual lifestyle. I support this strategy because it's a true portrayal of reality - nudism is not a sexual lifestyle. But I am not just a nudist, and I am certainly not a sex-negative nudist. As important to me as nudism (and nudism is very important to me) is the fact that I am sex-positive. I don't just want to live in a world where nudism is an option. I want to live in a world healed of its sexual dysfunction. And so I am cautious, in the effort to "legitimize" nudism by distancing itself from sex, not to disparage sex in the process. I absolutely do not object to the accurate portrayal of nudism as a non-sexual lifestyle. But I refuse to engage in any kind of sex-negativity in the process of "purifying" nudism, even if doing so stands to further legitimize nudism in a sex-negative society. Saying that nudism isn't sexual is accurate and truthful. But allying nudism with a sex-negative perspective is not, and that's where I draw the line.

7 Struggles

I came upon yet another interesting item on Twitter, this time an article from elite daily [NSFW] titled "7 Struggles of Being a Nudist in a World Full of Clothes" (via Nude and Happy [broken link]). And because, I guess, I like to contradict anyone who claims that their personal experience is in any way universal, I wanted to give my own personal comments on these supposed seven struggles that every nudist can relate to.

1. You make people uncomfortable.
Only insofar as I would choose to go naked among people who would be uncomfortable about it. I wish I didn't have to take others' concerns into mind when deciding how comfortable I get to be, but that's the world we live in. A bigger struggle of being a nudist in a world full of clothes is how much other people (read: textiles) make me uncomfortable - by forcing me to wear clothes against my will.

2. You're confused by exercise.
I'm confused by this being a struggle. Exercise doesn't confuse me. I love exercise! I do it regularly. Being a nudist doesn't mean I don't appreciate the benefits of good health, nor that I don't believe that being fit is beautiful. I know there's a stereotype that in nudism "all bodies are beautiful", but it's not to be taken literally (at least not in my opinion). Yes, it confuses me a little that textiles insist on working out in clothes, but the fact that they cover up the bodies they work so hard on? Well, they're just saving the results for their intimate partners, aren't they?

3. You don't own pajamas.
Actually, I do own pajamas. In fact, I like pajamas. They're cute. They're intimate, without necessarily being indecent. I don't wear them often, and never to sleep in. But sometimes you need something comfy to lounge in at home when you have guests staying that aren't nudists. I do like the occasional opportunity to go out to, say, breakfast (or a late night run to the store) in pajamas every now and then.

4. You're always hot.
This is another struggle that confuses me. I'm not always hot. Not even in my clothes. And being out of them means I'm more likely to be cold, especially living with someone who's not as dedicated to the lifestyle as I am, and so is usually clothed, and prefers the house to be on the cool side...

5. When you get drunk, the clothes come off.
Actually, I could totally see how this would be true. That is, if I drank alcohol - which I don't. At all. I have nothing against others who drink responsibly, but I just have no desire to do it myself. Anyway, I don't even have to be drunk. I'll take any excuse you'll give me to get naked. As long as it won't get me in too much trouble.

6. You never feel like you're being your true self.
I mean, kinda. I'm me whether I'm dressed or not. Of course, nudism is a large part of my life and my identity. But I identify as a nudist among my family and friends anyway, whether I can practice it or not. Yeah, not being able to practice it when I'd like to is a huge struggle, no doubt. But I'm still me. In fact, despite being a nudist, I have an interest in fashion, too. So I can totally be myself while dressed.

7. People think you're hypersexual.
I know there's this stereotype that everyone thinks all nudity is sexual. Well, I don't really have a problem with people thinking I'm hypersexual (I think?). In fact, people that have known me tend to peg me as being very reserved, sexually. Which is ironic, because I'm very sex-positive and sexually liberated - in theory if not so much practice. Unless you consider the fact that I'm an erotic model on the internet to be relevant (I mean, it kinda is). I don't think most people know about that, though. I'm sure it was a shock for my family and friends learning that I'm a nudist, but I'm pretty sure I introduced the concept in a way that they didn't jump to the conclusion that I'm, like, a swinger or anything.

Have You Ever? (Nudist Questionnaire)

I found this little nudist "survey" on Twitter, and thought it would be fun to answer (but, of course, my answers transcend the limits of Twitter's capabilities). It lists a bunch of things to do naked, and you get a point for each one you've done. It'd be fun to have one of those comprehensive "purity tests" for nudists, wouldn't it?

Have you ever...

...been naked outside your house? More times than I can count!

...gone skinny dipping? Certainly. Especially if you count pools at nudist resorts. The first time I can remember was in a lake on family vacation when I was still a child.

...been naked around family & friends? Yes, though not as much as I might prefer, for the sake of comfort and convenience. When I first started identifying as a nudist, I remember hanging out with my best buddy from college, who is pretty open-minded (though he remained dressed). That was kind of surreal. My dad has walked in on me a few times while I was naked when I was still living at home, and I've been skinny dipping in front of my mom. I also went nude around the apartment when I moved in with my girlfriend and her (grown) son, before he moved out. He was cool with it.

...convinced your family & friends to get naked with you? Again, not as much as I would like. I've offered an open invitation, but the only one who's taken me up so far is my brother, who has visited a nudist resort with me a couple of times. Sad to say he hasn't become a lifelong convert, however. Does it count that I introduced my girlfriend to the lifestyle?

...worked out naked? Five days a week! In fact, I hate wearing clothes while exercising.

...went to work naked? Does it count if I work from home? Or if my work involves modeling in the nude? Because I've done both. But in the traditional sense of this question, I would have to say no. Has anybody actually done this?

...been to a nudist resort? Duh. I've been countless times in the last ten years since I first went to one. I mostly frequent a particular one, but I've been to at least four in as many states.

...shared a shower with someone of the opposite sex? Yes. I mean, this is common at nudist resorts. But does it only count if you share a single showerhead? I'm thinking no, because the question specifically mentions the opposite sex, which would rule out a typical locker room situation. I've shared a showerhead with my girlfriend, of course. And showered alongside complete strangers of all ages and sexes at nudist resorts. Outdoors, even!

...slept naked? Every single night. I hate sleeping in clothes - even as little as underwear. The only time I'll do it is if I'm camping and it's just too cold. Been doing it since I was a teenager, too. I remember slipping off my shorts after getting under the covers while sharing a room in college. I tried sleeping nude when I was a kid, too, but I didn't stick with it due to embarrassment and a relative lack of privacy.

...been to a nude beach? Not technically... But I've been nude at a beach. Both lake, and ocean. And swam nude in both. I tell you, it's on my bucket list, though. I've been angling to visit a nude beach for years. But they can be hard to find, especially when you don't even live on the coast.

...walked around naked at a hotel? I'm going to assume this means outside of your room. Like, in the halls, the elevator, the lobby. I've been naked in the hot tub at a hotel pool - that's got to count for something, right? This may cross the line into exhibitionism (although it's not like I want to get caught), but walking around naked in a hotel is something I've wanted to do for a long time. But with cameras these days... God forbid, you should decide to go for a streak and end up on the sex offenders registry! But can you imagine riding an elevator naked? Not knowing if it will stop, and who will be standing on the other side of the door when it opens... Now that's a good idea for a dare if I ever heard one.

...answered the door naked? Again, with conditions. I feel like it should only count if you answered the door naked not knowing who was on the other side (or knowing it was a stranger, or somebody who doesn't know that you're a nudist). It's something the idea of which titillates me (for whatever exhibitionist reasons, I'm sure), but I've never had either the guts or the lack of concern for the expectations of others to try it. I have answered the door naked when I knew it was my girlfriend, though.

...been naked at school? I'd like to hear the story of anyone who's actually done this. I assume locker rooms don't count. Or is showering in school that unusual these days, that it would count?

...did a Snapchat/Facetime naked? (These are counted as two separate questions). Well, I don't use Snapchat or Facetime, but I would do it naked if I did. I've certainly shared naked photos of myself on the internet. And I've been naked in the vicinity (but not visible on camera) of other people using Facetime, if that counts...

My score? Depends on how strict we're being. Out of a total of 15 questions, I count 8 definitive yeses, and four more conditional or technical yeses (work, nude beach, hotel, answering the door). That leaves three hard nos, although two of those are Snapchat and Facetime, which are services I don't even use. The remaining one is school. What's your score?

Porch Games

[description: a naked man with an erection poses seductively on a porch]

I'll never understand those who say that human sexuality can't be a beautiful thing, or that it isn't worthwhile to document. Is a portrait like this different in some fundamental way from a completely nonsexual nudist portrait of "simple nudity"? Sure! I won't deny that. But is this not also worth documenting? How would the world be a brighter place for not having images like these in it? And why must this sort of media be seen to exist only at the expense of some other virtue? The existence of porn doesn't make nudism any less legitimate, or any more sexual. And just because nudism is nonsexual, doesn't mean you have to be asexual to be a nudist, or that appreciating the nonsexual benefits of nudity precludes you from also enjoying its erotic potential. I know it's a muddy, politically-charged atmosphere we're wading through. But if anything, nudity is supposed to symbolize truth, honesty, and transparency. And I could never trust anyone who claims that sex - the guiding force of joy and creation in an otherwise miserable universe prone to destruction - is some kind of pernicious influence on life.

Exhibitionistic Disorder

It feels a bit disjointed to transplant a response from the middle of a conversation outside of the context that generated it, but sometimes I write things that I feel are important even beyond the limited scope of the discussion at hand. And this time, it's about the meaning of the word "exhibitionism". A user on Reddit asked [NSFW] whether it's possible to be a "genuine naturist" and also an exhibitionist. Obviously, since I consider myself to be both, I had to chime in [NSFW]. But the consensus of the discussion was unsurprisingly that nudism and exhibitionism are as incompatible as oil and water. The sticking point, however, was this idea (propagated in particular by a certain poster, who has expressed this position before) that the term "exhibitionism" should be strictly limited to its usage as a medical diagnosis. To which I replied [NSFW]:

You're implying that "exhibitionism" doesn't have any worthwhile use outside of the concept of a deviant pathology. But it does. You can't just eliminate the phenomenon of non-deviant exhibitionism just because it's "normal" and "common" for everyone to like being seen in a sexual context. That's not even true. Some people have sex with the lights out.

Anyway, how do you differentiate between someone who likes to be seen in the bedroom by their spouse, versus someone who gets excited having anonymous strangers making sexual comments on images of their body? The latter is absolutely not a universal experience. Neither is it criminal, though. Nor would I call it deviant, or pathological.

What are we supposed to call these people? What of their identity that helps them to understand this aspect of themselves? I agree that a distinction must be made between healthy people who like to be looked at and criminal deviants. Associating exhibitionism exclusively with criminal behavior is damaging. But we can't just toss this phenomenon to the dogs because it's been tainted by medical literature.

I think the psychological community's approach toward sexual pathology is flawed at best, and history bears out this perspective. As a society, we're simply not good at explaining good sexual attitudes and bad sexual attitudes. Our newfound focus on consent is an important step forward in this respect. It's not about what kind of sex you have - it's whether you're having it with people who also want to be having it.

So, the fact that a confused society has associated the desire to be seen in a sexual context with deviants going around violating others' consent doesn't mean that that's all there is to the story. Unless your fetish is specifically the violation of consent, it can manifest in both consensual and non-consensual forms (and even with non-consent, there is the outlet of fantasy and roleplay). Tell me what it is about becoming sexually aroused from being seen that relies on the violation of consent. It could go that way. But it could go the other way, too. So why focus on one to the exclusion of the other?

Defining the fetish as the pathology is inaccurate and damaging. If you ask me, there should only be one "paraphilia" listed in the DSM, and that is the decidedly non-sexual inability or unwillingness to honor the consent (or lack thereof) of another person (or persons). Whether you do this by means of penetrative intercourse, whips and chains, or tugging your rowboat on the subway is a matter of individual variation. That you prefer one or the other may say a lot about your mental state, but it isn't the thing that determines whether or not your mind is "diseased" or you commit criminal behavior. The purpose of the DSM isn't (or shouldn't be, rather) to moralize about people's sexual perversions.

Transgender Pride String Bikini

I suppose it benefits the readers of this blog, but it feels so ridiculous that I have to quarantine an integral subsection of my artistic output just because we live in a moralistic society where nobody wants to be held responsible for aiding and abetting any entrepreneur looking to profit financially from products or services of a sexual nature.

It's not like there isn't an erotic element involved in the appreciation of my non-explicit self-portraiture anyway. I can't even properly advertise my art as "nudist" because I'm not willing to adhere to a strictly limited mode of self-expression that willfully ignores the obvious truth that people find nude images of attractive people sexually stimulating - and that that's perfectly healthy, and there's nothing wrong with it. So I'm stuck in the middle (as I've always been) - neither pure nor vile, and without recourse to the advantages of either approach.

We're deluding ourselves, and imposing such arbitrary restrictions to our own detriment. And I don't want to contribute to that, but there is a level of cooperation you have to begrudgingly meet if you want anything in return from this unfeeling machine that dictates the fates and fortunes (or misfortunes) of the lives of every one of society's members. It's frustrating, and absurd, yet completely in line with the dream logic of a Kafkaesque nightmare.

[description: a long-haired man with an erection poses in a transgender flag bikini]

And yes, I'm the sort of person who would invoke a literary reference to accompany the posting of what is essentially pornography. It's a lonely world in which I reside.

Closing the Season

Summer is winding down to a close, and while that won't stop me from continuing to enjoy the naked outdoors as much as the weather will permit (and even in spite of the weather every now and then), it does indicate an end to the recreational camping season, and with it, my experiences in social nudism - leaving me to hole up in hibernation (with the heat turned up) until the spring comes 'round again.

But as I return to textile society after a weekend of naked freedom (one last, big hurrah), I am left (as I often am) with many thoughts. The foremost among them being that co-mingling peacefully with hundreds of people, both nude and dressed, all behaving naturally, never fails to reinforce my belief that the taboo society places on nudity is much ado about nothing.

Is there an appeal to nudity? Of course! Otherwise, we nudists wouldn't go to such lengths to reject our textile-based social conditioning. But it's unhealthy to foster the idea that the sight of our unclothed bodies is inherently traumatizing, or that permitting people to dress or undress themselves freely is an indication of the collapse of civilization.

If you have a problem with nudity, then you have a problem. I want to live in a world populated by those sorts of people I know who are rational and mature enough to enjoy life nude - or at least permit others that freedom - reasonably and responsibly, and with no small measure of delight, as I do.

I am also left with the typical frustrations regarding the apparent contradiction between nudism's commitment to body acceptance and my aesthetic sense as an artist (and human being), as well as the lifestyle's thorny relationship with photography.

To be sure, the majority of the nudist demographic do not have cover model looks, but every so often you come across someone who does, and being able to see them more "fully" than you would in textile society can be quite inspiring, although I hardly feel that it's an appropriate context in which to attempt to recruit models (if I even had such a skill), inevitably leaving me with a potent sense of photographer's envy.

But I've been ruminating about a comment [NSFW] I read recently on a nudist blog, citing that "one of the primary purposes for clothing is to hide our physically inadequate bodies as we age," and that one of the effects of requiring clothes is to reduce "the inherent advantage in being young and fit." This being the case (and it makes a certain amount of sense to me), it would seem that by removing their clothes, nudists - even as they are trying to forget the importance of looks (if ever there were a reason to discourage young people from joining in...) - should be all the more attuned to this reality: the fact (blatantly obvious to me) that these young bodies with taut, unblemished skin are, at least in a superficial sense, more physically attractive than the sagging bodies with wrinkled skin.

It's not a nice thing to say, I guess, but it's true is it not? Not that old people (or even older people) can't be beautiful, too, or kind and knowledgeable and interesting in their own way. But if we're going to admire physical beauty (and I argue that this is a valuable thing, although I often find it very difficult to do in modern society), can we not acknowledge this fact? It's a trope and a cliché that "youth is beauty" (although not everybody young is attractive, just as there are attractive old people), to the point that nowadays it's kind of non-PC to say so. We do idolize the physical qualities of youth (the mental qualities may be another issue), but then we demonize the people who openly admit to it.

Especially when the thorny subject of sex arises - and although there is nothing intrinsically sexual about nudity, it's very hard to separate the two subjects in the public consciousness. So when we begin to talk about youth and naked beauty - the aesthetic perfection of the human body in its youthful prime, before age has ravaged it - what should be a self-evident truth about nature becomes a controversial statement: that young people's naked bodies are attractive, and ought to be noticed and documented and admired. Say this, and you risk being labeled a pervert and a scoundrel.

But as an artist, all I want to do is capture the transcendent beauty I encounter in life so that I may be reassured that it has not gone unappreciated, though in its original form it will not last forever - much as a sunset, though recurrent, is transient and ever-changing - and so that I may share it with others, without being labeled a demon. What happens, then, when something I find beautiful is described by others as ugly? Does my subjective opinion count for anything? Should I be permitted the opportunity to at least present my position, regardless of whether or not others agree with it? And is there no value in depicting things that some people find ugly anyway?

Why I Wear Swim Briefs

Brief-style swimsuits for men - as exemplified (though not monopolized) by the Speedo brand - are not very popular in the United States (although I hear they're more common in parts of Europe). In fact, they carry a certain stigma that I feel is largely unwarranted, as it seems to extend beyond even men with out of shape bodies "parading" around in them, and is out of proportion with the sort of attention that similarly skimpy swimsuits for women regularly receive, regardless of the age or body type of the women wearing them.

[description: a man in an American flag-patterned swim brief stands on a gloomy lakeshore]
Tyr-brand swim brief

Why do I wear swim briefs? Because I like to wear swim briefs. Why do I like them? Well, let's see...

Reasons I like swim briefs:

* They're comfortable. I'm a nudist, and I'm comfortable in my skin. I like the feeling of not wearing clothes. So, in lieu of being permitted to go skinny dipping, the less I have to wear while swimming, the better.

* They're sexy. As someone who makes an effort to stay in shape, and who understands the appeal of eye candy, wearing swim briefs makes me feel sexy (regardless of how they make you feel).

* They're brief. Compared to shorts (especially the wide-legged, knee-length variety that is currently in vogue), there's less fabric to get in the way while swimming. There's also less fabric that needs to dry after you get out. (Also, fewer visible tan lines!).

[description: a man in a tiger-striped brown swim brief stands on a sandy beach]
tan-through swimwear by Kiniki

* They're more like underwear than clothes. As someone who enjoys swimming at any opportunity, I like that I can wear swim briefs under my clothes and be ready to swim at a moment's notice. They also preserve the action of getting undressed to go swimming, which feels natural to me, as someone who doesn't like to swim in my clothes. If this seems weird, consider that a great many women's swimsuits also resemble underwear.

* On that note, as a person with an unconventional gender identity, I like that swim briefs more closely resemble the style of swimsuits that women often wear, while still being practical for my anatomy. As such, I feel that wearing swim briefs promotes equality of the sexes, holding men's bodies to the same high standards as women's.

* Furthermore, I feel that men have a comparable lack of options when it comes to swimwear. There are plenty of colors and patterns, but hardly any variety in styles, with alternatives very hard to find in stores. Therefore, by exercising my right (where applicable) to wear swim briefs, whether the greater public appreciates it or not, I am exposing them to diversity, and promoting the freedom of choice.

[description: a man in a black and yellow swim brief stands beside an indoor pool]
a Speedo original

In conclusion, I think swim briefs are not only comfortable and practical, but also sexy, and wearing them promotes the democratic values of freedom, equality, and diversity that I believe in. That's why I wear them. And why you, even if you don't like wearing them yourself, should support those of us who do.

Naked Public Dares

So I came across a website [broken link] dedicated to people posting pictures of themselves doing naked dares in public. The website consists of a long list of dares, which are mainly locations or objects to pose with (e.g., in front of a store, or on an elevator). In order to complete a dare, you must be photographed fully nude (shoes alone are permitted) in a public place. It is not necessary that anyone see you (except, maybe, for a couple of specific dares that involve other people). The execution of the site leaves much to be desired, but I find the idea behind it to be positively thrilling. However, there's a bit of a demographic problem - and it's not so much the site's claim to be in desperate need of more "lady members", but rather more attractive people in general. I find it absurd to think that I would be turned away as a [technically] male only member, considering the quality of pictures I strive toward both as a model and as a photographer.

Call me heartless and superficial if you must, but I'm not making any judgments about these people's lives, their personalities, their interest in this hobby, or their right to engage in it. I just think that where the visual medium is involved, appearance becomes a relevant factor to consider. I mean, it's one thing to go out and engage in these dares, and then report on them - and I understand that the pictures serve as a kind of proof  - but the website does seem to heavily emphasize them, and I agree that pictures of naked public dares are something that would be exciting to look at. But they would be far more appealing if the people in them were more attractive. And I hate to sound insensitive, but a lot of these images feature people (especially the most frequent regulars, it would seem) who are not merely average people with average bodies, but those who take the stereotypical "nudist demographic" (old and/or overweight) to an extreme. If you're going to dabble in nude modeling, it is not enough to simply be naked. One must be naked and attractive. And so I'm left here wondering, where are all the attractive people who enjoy the thrill of being naked in public? Aside from being featured on porn sites, that is. Or is that it?

Anyway, as I said, I find the idea positively thrilling, and I would love to go on an expedition of naked public dares in theory, but I also don't want to get into any trouble, in this increasingly monitored and connected world. And I wouldn't be satisfied merely taking surreptitious snapshots, as I imagine many of the members of this site do - I'd want to create eye-catching images up to my usual standards of artistry. Which means going to even further trouble to set up a tripod and frame a good shot, which in some circumstances, would be very difficult to do. This is the sort of thing that would be greatly facilitated by having an accomplice (whether to hold the camera, or just act as a lookout), but I unfortunately do not know anyone who is both as artistically-minded as I am, and committed enough to the thrill of public nudity to be willing to take partial responsibility for engaging in these arguably illicit activities.

Bias & Discrimination

I fully submit that I am biased, and that I have had the opportunity to become accustomed to certain types of materials through years of regular exposure. But if it's a matter of perspective, then why shouldn't I argue the value of one perspective over another? It amazes me that companies (let alone our own government) - that ostensibly serve the public - feel justified in passing moral judgment on works of an erotic nature, and openly discriminate against those whose lifestyles or livelihoods revolve around physical and/or psychological stimulation of a more or less sexual nature. As if we were all still children - not responsible adults - incapable of wielding our own moral agency.

I get that some people - maybe even a lot of people - are offended or disgusted by the sight of these sorts of things, and that's why filters exist. Their utility (or necessity) in society is a separate discussion. But must we go one step further and punish those who engage in these pursuits to the extent that we can single them out? Is it really necessary to stand there and say, "you cannot point willing agents toward this material." Even if you warn them about what they are going to see, and rely on their free choice to click through (or not)? Do we not live in a free society?

Whose imperative is it to dictate the righteousness of asexuality, and under whose authority are they given the power to enforce the sexual purity of our culture? There is nothing evil about sex. It is not a corrupting influence, but a fundamental part of our existence. There are good and bad ways of approaching it (for which reason education is imperative), but it is not a character flaw or a moral weakness to engage in erotic media.

To experience sexual pleasure is healthy. To share it with others is a positive force for society. And there is no reason why profiting from this exchange should be viewed as any less moral than any other exchange of goods or services that our capitalist society wholeheartedly condones. I ask not for society to judge me, but if it insists on doing so, then I deserve an explanation for why getting turned on is equivalent to a vice - comparable to introducing poisonous chemicals into my body, or lying and cheating others, much less engaging in violence. Isn't it the society that does so - that deems pleasure a moral toxin - the one which is truly diseased?

Nude Recreation Recap

I wanted to go the extra mile for my photo series honoring Nude Recreation Week this year, and that meant stepping outside my comfort zone and leaving the backyard. So for the biking, hiking, swimming, and boating themes, I packed up my stuff, and went out on location, first to the woods, and then to the lake. I picked weekday mornings in the hope that the wilderness would be relatively abandoned - and it was. The best thing about this project was that, in addition to getting some spectacular photographs that I am very excited to share, I was able to not just simulate these activities while posing for pictures, but actually engage in them in what turned out to be two extremely memorable days of outdoor nude recreation.

On the first of these two days, I strapped my bike to the trunk of my car, and drove out into the woods. I picked a location on the grounds of a state park where I knew there was an abandoned parking lot. I walked my bike through the woods to that spot, and got to work. I didn't see a single person at the park all day, except for the one park ranger who nearly caught me. Luckily, he drove up the hill on a very loud vehicle, giving me just enough time to pull on my shorts, and pretend that I was just stopping to have a snack by the side of the lot where I had parked my bike. He stuck around for a bit, working in the nearby pavilion, but I had already got the shots I needed, so I grabbed my bike and headed back into the woods.

After returning my bike to my car, I set out again to get some nude hiking photos. I shot a few on the approach to a trail that runs over the ridge of a hill, along with some short establishing videos, just as a storm was settling in. The park was empty, and I felt sufficiently confident, so I decided to walk part of the trail without putting my clothes back on. And then I proceeded to walk the entire trail - until the point at which it comes down off the ridge - completely naked. It rained throughout the hike, which reassured me that I would be less likely to encounter any other hikers. But it was still warm, so I was perfectly comfortable - indeed more so, without being trapped in wet clothing. And I suspect the rain helped keep the bugs away. It was an absolutely enchanting experience. I wish I could do it more often, and it pains me to think that this sort of thing isn't more accepted in our society. The rain eventually cleared up, and I was able to get a few more photos on a separate trail before packing up, and calling the day a monumental success!

The next day turned out to be just as successful! I didn't know how much privacy I'd be able to find at the lake, but I strapped my kayak to the hood of my car, determined to take my chances. As it turns out, I didn't encounter a single other swimmer on the shore, and there were only a few boaters that pulled into the cove, so that I was able to have plenty of privacy for my photoshoots. I spent a good deal of time shooting in the water by the shore, then rowed over to some large rocks to take more photos. At that point, the cove was empty, and I felt sufficiently confident to stow my clothes away with my bag on the shore, and take my kayak across the lake completely unladen - I didn't even take my sunglasses; there was something almost spiritual about how truly naked I was. As during my hike the previous day, I was in such a state of mind that I was prepared to handle any encounters that might have cropped up, but was lucky enough not to have to.

There was, however, one point during my long trip around the cove that made me a little nervous. I found a large slab of stone sticking out of shallow water around a bend, sheltered in the reeds. It was tranquil, and private, so I shored my kayak and layed out on the rock for a while, feeling completely at one with nature. Then I heard a boat coming into the cove. I was in such a position that I had no fear of the boat spotting me, although if it had opted to lay anchor and stick around, I might have had to row around it without any coverage for my nakedness. However, the boat merely made a circuit of the cove and departed. Still, I became a little bit paranoid that the boater might have stopped and stolen my bag, all the way on the other side of the lake, and started to curse myself that I didn't hide it better.

And that's when a bizarre flight of fancy overtook me. Although I knew in my rational mind that it would be a nightmare if this were to actually occur, some part of me got excited at the thought of my bag being stolen. Not only would it mean that I would have no clothes or even a towel with which to cover myself up - utterly naked as I was - but that I wouldn't have a phone to contact anyone, or even my car keys to get home. Which means that I would in some way have to seek help - either from a passing driver on the road, or a park ranger at some station - approaching a complete stranger naked as the day I was born. Of course, in reality, I would probably be able to find some coverage at that point, even if it meant borrowing another's towel or blanket or clothes, but in my fantasy, I was tickled by the idea of having to stay naked, while navigating my way in public to get home.

I don't know why this thought should excite me. As I said, in reality it would be a nightmare. But something about the situation intrigues me on a psychological level. How much fun would it be to play some kind of virtual reality simulator, where you get to experiment with the effects of going nude in public, without real world repercussions? I know I can't be the only person in the world who would be interested in something like this. Alas, I don't think the technology is up to snuff just yet, and, sadly, I fear that prudish interests would obstruct the development of such a scenario. But one can dream. Anyway, the daydream passed, and I rowed back to my bag and found everything in order. I counted myself very fortunate to have had the opportunities I'd had over these two days, without my luck at any point running out and getting caught, and decided it was time to pack it in and go home. I can't wait, however, till I get the chance to have another experience like these...

Nude Recreation Week 2019 (Boating)

[description: a nudist sits on a kayak on the lake]

This week I'm celebrating Nude Recreation Week, with a week-long series of images featuring different outdoor recreational activities performed nude! Today's theme is boating - or, in this case, rowing. Let me tell you, taking pictures on a kayak is challenging, because you're drifting around on the water, so it's hard to position yourself - to know where in the frame you're floating, how far you can get from the camera, and what direction you need to be pointed. It's not a form of watercraft that's designed to sit still in one spot while you take pictures. So, composing a good shot was hard. And the sun kept going in and out from behind the clouds, so I would expose for one scene, then get out on the kayak, and the light would change drastically. :-/ Oh well, it was a fun experience, and I was grateful to have enough privacy to perform the photoshoot without interruption (and I really wanted to add this theme to my Nude Recreation Week celebration). It would definitely be worth trying again someday!

Nude Recreation Week 2019 (Swimming)

[description: a nudist stands in a lake with arms outstretched]

This week I'm celebrating Nude Recreation Week, with a week-long series of images featuring different outdoor recreational activities performed nude! Today's theme is swimming, and just in time for International Skinny Dip Day! I visited a lake on a weekday morning for a rare opportunity to go skinny dipping out among nature. It was exhilarating! And I didn't have to bother with a swimsuit getting in the way, or taking forever to dry. I only wish I could have shared this experience with other people.

Nude Recreation Week 2019 (Hiking)

[description: a nudist poses while hiking through the woods]

This week I'm celebrating Nude Recreation Week, with a week-long series of images featuring different outdoor recreational activities performed nude! Today's theme is hiking, and for this theme, I trekked out into the woods on a rainy weekday morning to walk through an enchanted forest nude. The rain kept the bugs at bay (not to mention other hikers off the trail), although it was very muddy. But the forest was quiet - except for the sounds of nature - and I felt like I was alone in the wilderness. Well, alone in the sense of being away from people - I saw two turtles, a wild hare, a deer, and something growled at me from the bushes at one point (I felt glad I was carrying my walking stick!). My nakedness further detached me from the trappings of civilization, and I felt exhilarated from start to finish. I highly recommend the experience; I only wish it were more accepted among society to enjoy nature the way it was intended - au naturel.

Nude Recreation Week 2019 (Biking)

[description: a nudist poses while riding a bicycle]

This week I'm celebrating Nude Recreation Week, with a week-long series of images featuring different outdoor recreational activities performed nude! Today's theme is biking. You might be hard-pressed to find a suitable location for bicycling in the nude (I chose a secluded park on a cloudy weekday morning) - where you won't be disturbed by excitable passersby. But it's a thrilling activity if you ever do get a chance to try it. I know that the World Naked Bike Ride is a popular phenomenon, and gives you the opportunity to bike nude through crowded streets, but only occurs in select cities. I have yet to attend one, but it's definitely on my bucket list.

Nude Recreation Week 2019 (Sports)

[description: two nudists play badminton outdoors]

This week I'm celebrating Nude Recreation Week, with a week-long series of images featuring different outdoor recreational activities performed nude! Today's theme is sports. I wanted to feature volleyball - as it is a popular nudist pastime, and I have participated in many nude volleyball tournaments - but I did not have enough room in my backyard for a full size volleyball net; and of all the volleyball courts I know of, they are either situated so that there is no chance of going nude, or else they are located in areas where cameras are strictly forbidden. So, you get badminton instead - a great activity for your next backyard barbecue! If you've never played sports in the nude, you're missing out on the freedom of running and jumping about with no clothes to hamper your movement, or to weigh you down when you start to sweat.

Nude Recreation Week 2019 (Tanning)

[description: a nudist lies out on a lawn chair]

This week I'm celebrating Nude Recreation Week, with a week-long series of images featuring different outdoor recreational activities performed nude! Today's theme is tanning. If you're looking for a more relaxing activity, try this popular nudist pastime. You can even do it in your own backyard! Just be sure to monitor your sun exposure. I prefer to get my tan naturally, engaged in a variety of outdoor activities. But I do enjoy the feel of warm sunshine on my skin, especially after swimming - it's the natural way to dry!

Nude Recreation Week 2019 (Camping)

[description: a nudist sits in a camp chair next to a tent]

This week I'm celebrating Nude Recreation Week, with a week-long series of images featuring different outdoor recreational activities performed nude! Today's theme is camping. Many private nudist resorts offer tent and RV camping, usually with amenities like snack bars and swimming pools, and activities like sports competitions and dance parties. Or, if you're more interested in getting out into the wilderness, you can find a campsite out in the woods at a national park, in a secluded location, and "get back to nature" - the natural way!

Swimming Equality

[description: portrait of a man in an American flag-patterned swim brief at the lake]

I couldn't possibly blame you if you thought I was shameless with regards to skin exposure - I've certainly outgrown the considerable amount of modesty I once had. But the truth is, I do sometimes get self-conscious walking around in skimpy swimsuits in public. Not because I don't enjoy it - after all, I do it because I enjoy it, and I fight for the freedom to do it because I want to be able to enjoy it even more. But because I genuinely don't want to cause any trouble or be a nuisance to anyone. (I'm just willing to do so in the course of standing up for what I believe in strongly).

Yet all it takes to reassure myself that my choice of attire isn't quite so beyond the pale after all is one glance at the way the women around me are dressed, even in perfectly G-rated, family-friendly environments. You could argue that, e.g., string bikinis are "inappropriate" swimwear (and I'm not talking about thongs, here - just regular bikinis), but as long as it is neither criminal nor uncommon for women to wear them, without being eyed suspiciously as potential sexual predators, then it is only fair for men to have the same freedom. #egalitarianism

[description: portrait of a man in a black bikini at the lake]

And for the record, I'm willing to wear a bikini top for the sake of equality - in fact, sometimes I do, depending on the circumstances - until such time as women earn their deserved freedom to go topless in public (after which point we can all get started working on bottom freedom). It's just that, from a purely anatomical perspective, there's not much practical purpose for me to do so. And in certain contexts (e.g., a crowded pool vs. a spread out lake), I fear there would be an even greater outcry over the bulge in my bikini bottom. Which do you think is more scandalous: a man wearing a Speedo, or a man wearing a bikini? At least the former has some historical precedent.

Moreover, wearing a bikini top would increase the confusion (in myself as well as others) when it comes time to decide in which restroom to relieve myself, given how little fabric there is to cover certain rather revealing aspects of my anatomy (as opposed to when I'm fully dressed). As I said, I'm not trying to freak anybody out. I'm just trying to live my life as authentically as I know how, while pursuing the things that make me happy. If everybody else in this ostensibly free country could permit me the liberty to do so, that would be fantastic. You don't have to live the way I do. Just don't try to make me live the way you do. Okay?

New Phone

Just a head's up that I recently got a new iPhone. It's very similar to the last one I've had, but I imagine it's got a better camera, which is important, as I do more and more of my photography with my phone (due to its convenience and portability, compared to my outdated dSLR and its prohibitive costs for upgrades). I remember being excited about the first selfie I took with my last new phone, so I wanted to take something memorable this time, too. And here it is:

[description: selfie of an erection posed next to a blooming hydrangea bush]

Just think of all the great photos and videos I'll be taking with this phone over the next few years!

Airbnb

[description: a feminine figure in a bikini lays out on a towel in the garden]

"...and this would be your housemate, Scarlett. So, will you be staying?"

[description: bathroom selfie in a sun hat, braided pigtails, and heart-shaped glasses]

I bought a pair of red, heart-shaped sunglasses recently (one more to add to my collection -_-;), and I thought it would be cute to pair it with a bright red bikini for a photoshoot. I went shopping but didn't find anything I liked well enough. But then I realized I already had a bikini with a cherry motif that would be perfect, and it dawned on me that I could totally recreate Sue Lyons' pose from Lolita! Although I prefer Adrian Lyne's adaptation, as it better captures the emotional intensity that forms the heart and soul of the story, I cannot deny that Stanley Kubrick's version is the more iconic of the two.

[description: fashion portraits in the garden, modeling a black cherry-patterned bikini]

In any case, I posed in my black cherry bikini, but I didn't really like the results I was getting. And the bikini itself wasn't fitting me right - the tube top has a tendency to curl downward (I think it had straps once, but they were lost before I ever inherited it). So, even though I'd painted my nails red just for the photoshoot, and had already repainted them teal for the weekend (mermaid theme at the pool!), I decided to give the pose another try. I figured I could just do the image in black and white so the colors wouldn't matter, and this other bikini not only fit me better, but was a better match to the original shot I was mimicking, besides. When I realized that it matched my teal nail polish, it was serendipity! And I'm much happier with the second day's results. The sun was out (it actually drizzled a bit while I was posing on the first day - good thing I was wearing a swimsuit!), and I had to shoot with my phone to better handle the dynamic range, but I think I pretty much nailed the pose, and the results look spectacular. So now I'm happy!

More Bikinis

[description: fitting room selfie in an open hoodie and flip flops and nothing else]

I headed to the store in my hoodie and flip flops to try on some bikinis, because what else can you do when you're riding out a severe thunderstorm?

[description: fitting room selfies in four differently colored bikinis]

There were some cute styles, to be sure, but the fits on them were all very iffy. As impractical a garment as this is for me (there are very limited circumstances under which I can actually wear a bikini outside of a private photoshoot - although that is also a valid reason to own some), I think bikinis are so much fun, I can't help being drawn to them. Repeatedly.

[description: fitting room selfies in casual clothes, and naked]

As feminine as my body may be, it's never quite feminine enough for me. Don't get me wrong, I like my body the way it is. I like to believe I have a healthy body image - I work to stay fit (and reap the psychological benefits), but I've come to terms with the imperfections that I can't change. Nor do I have an overpowering sense of dysphoria, like I was "born in the wrong body". The body I have isn't foreign to me - it's the one I'm used to, that I've inhabited since birth. It's just that I like the female body more; and not just to admire, since I can't ever seem to get enough of that. I suppose, if I had the privilege to follow girls into the changing room, watch them try on clothes, and take pictures of them in (and out of) their different outfits, maybe that would satisfy me. I don't know. But not being able to have that experience up close and personal bothers me. (Why do we live in a culture where this kind of adoration is villainized? I don't want to sneak up on unsuspecting strangers, but we hardly live in a society where it's appropriate to request to do this sort of thing). And it gets to a point where I want to be so involved in the experience of being a girl, that I may as well just be one myself, if only I could. I'm not deluded, and pretending to be something I'm not. I'm just trying to pursue the things that make me happy.

[description: fitting room selfies in two more bikinis, from front and back]

I mean, I can't tell you how much fun I would have if I were a full-blown girl. I know what it's like to find a cute outfit that you look pretty and feel confident in. And swimsuits are my favorite type of outfit, because they give you a rare excuse to expose most of your body in public and not be considered a perverted deviant. But given the impracticality of wearing bikinis for me, I feel left out. There just aren't comparable options in men's swimwear (considering that you have to go online to find men's swim briefs, they don't come in nearly as many - or as cute - styles, and the places you can wear them are limited compared to women's bikinis). So I'm robbed of the opportunity to go to the store, find a cute swimsuit that I look pretty and feel confident in, and then wear it out in public and get the attention and admiration I know I deserve (from observing the same thing happen when girls do this). All because my fashion compass is oriented towards the opposite gender to the one commonly associated with my biological sex...

Park Shorts

I shouldn't justify this idiocy with response, but I like expressing myself, and I consider my voice a counter to all the idiots in the world who should probably keep their mouths shut, but are too dumb to realize it. After all, they say the only thing necessary for ignorance to triumph is that learned men do nothing. (Or something like that :-p). So allow me to rant for a moment.

[description: outdoor selfie in a skimpy pair of shorts and no shirt]

I wore this "outfit" to the park on a humid, ninety degree day. Now, I'm not naive (but I'm not stupid, either), so I'm not gonna pretend to be surprised if some people thought I was in my underwear. In my defense, though, this is totally the sort of thing you'd see at the swimming pool. Granted, this wasn't the swimming pool, but I would consider it similar conditions - outdoors, being active, when it's so hot that my skin is literally slick with sweat. Do you really enjoy wearing clothes that are soaked through with sweat? If I don't see a sign that says "no shirt, no shoes", I'm not gonna cover up just for the hell of it, when it's this hot out.* I look at all these other people, most of which are fully dressed (even sometimes in long sleeves and pants, believe it or not), and I think they're crazy! Yet that's normal, and somebody feels compelled to shout at me from a moving car, "where are your clothes?" Like, what business is it of yours what I choose to wear? I'm the only one at the park reasonably dressed, and I'm the weirdo? Plus, these shorts are pretty fashionable, and damn if I don't look good in them.

*Although I don't think this is just about wearing shorts, because there was a guy in knee-length shorts (no shirt) playing basketball who didn't get any guff - rather, it's about what kind of shorts are acceptable for men to appear in public in. I mean, yeah, maybe they thought I was a girl, and I was topless. But does that sort of thing actually happen, that your first thought is "that's a topless woman in public" instead of "that's a dude in really girly shorts?"** I would have thought that walking around bare-chested would have been the sort of thing that would pretty much give away my anatomical sex, but...nah? I feel a little bit guilty dressing like a girl, yet still wielding the male privilege of toplessness, except that I support topfreedom for women, and wearing a top just doesn't make sense for me from a practical perspective, when I don't need one due to rules or whatever. Do I have to pick one of two scripts (traditional male versus traditional female)? Is it my responsibility not to fuck with people's expectations of gender? Well, it's not against the law, and I'm not about to stop doing it.

**On the other hand, I encountered a kid who insisted on referring to me with feminine pronouns (without any kind of prompting whatsoever), yet seemed completely unfazed by the fact that I was topless. So, I guess there's still hope for the next generation, lol.

I just hate that we as a species are 1) so tied to arbitrary taboos that make no sense (like staying fully dressed when it's hot as balls and you're working out), 2) so concerned with conformity that we'll pressure individuals to suppress their self-expression in order to be like everyone else (yawn), and 3) so hell-bent on ruining a good thing, like when an attractive person deigns to appear in public half-dressed. Fuck's wrong with you? I want more of that in the world! And here's another double standard that I hate: redneck girls and women who dress and behave so identically to men that it's often hard to tell (like, seriously, the girl Sam from that one episode of Family Guy wasn't even an exaggeration), yet wouldn't dream of considering themselves transgender, and have no qualms about criticizing a man (who does identify as transgender) for dressing like a girl. Like, are men such hot shit that women are allowed to emulate them, but it's a humiliating step downward for a man to emulate a woman?

Whatever. Fuck that shit. People are gonna be stupid. I don't care. It's not gonna change who I am. I'm not gonna let some lowlife (honestly not unlikely to be a drug addict, which says a lot about the value of their judgment) suppress my individuality and drag me down to their level. Okay, rant done. Life goes on.

Best Dress

Here's a crazy idea that I hope will be a lot of fun. Every so often, I get the urge to photograph myself in all kinds of different outfits pulled from my own closet. It sort of acts as a way to document my wardrobe. Well, I thought about all the dresses I tend to collect (quite a few of which I never seem to have an opportunity to wear), and I got it into my head that I would photograph them all.

[description: fast-paced animated gif modeling dozens of different dresses]

Let me tell you, if I had known what I was getting myself into, I never would have begun this project. I vastly underestimated the number of dresses I own (at least 70 in sum total, when all is said and done - although I trimmed it down to 64, removing some of the broken and worn out dresses that I can't actually wear), and was so exhausted shooting (and filming!) them, that I had to break the shoot down across two nights, leaving the tripods in position overnight.

But now that I have a shot of every dress* I own (at the time of shooting; I've already added a few more to my wardrobe since then -_-;), I think it would be fun to play a little game - a tournament, in which you get to vote on my best dress! I've already paired the dresses into match-ups, and organized them into brackets. I just need to figure out the venue for this tournament, because it will be a waste if there's not enough participation. I'm thinking deviantART [NSFW], since that's the photo-sharing site where I'm currently most active, but I'm not sure yet how best to present the tournament.

In the meantime, here are some shots that probably won't make it into the tournament, just because, well, you know...I'm not wearing a dress. =p

[description: series of portraits nude and in sheer underwear]

*For the purposes of this tournament, I'm defining a "dress" as any single garment (i.e., one that does not need to be paired with a separate top or bottom) that functions as an outfit designed to be worn in public, and whose bottom half ends in a skirt and not shorts or pants (i.e. there must be no seam between the legs). Technically, this does not include nightwear such as lingerie, pajamas, or robes, but there are a few exceptions just because I felt like it. I considered excluding costumes and holiday-themed dresses to lighten my workload, but since I split the shoot across two nights, I ended up adding them in after all.

De-sexualizing Nudity?

I was rereading a post from last year on this blog in which I drew up a series of Venn diagrams illustrating contrasting views on the intersection of nudity and sexuality, and I realized something. Nudists often call for the "de-sexualization" of nudity, and this has always rubbed me the wrong way. I don't want to completely de-sexualize nudity. I think nudity can be sexual, and in the right contexts, that's perfectly healthy (not to mention downright fun). Calling for its total de-sexualization encourages the unflattering image of the anti-sexual nudist - the stuffy prude who (ironically, despite being naked) hasn't seen his own dick in decades.

But nudists do have a valid point about emphasizing the non-sexual aspects of nudity, particularly as pertains to their enjoyment of nudism. Textile culture has absolutely saturated the concept of nudity with a sexual connotation, and it's a problem for us when sex is the first and only thing people think about when confronted with nudity. It's okay if you want to use nudity for sexual purposes, but it's not okay to think that that is its only use, to the point that purveyors and practitioners of non-sexual nudity are assumed to have perverted motives, and mocked or ridiculed when they claim otherwise.

So it seems to me that textile culture has over-sexualized nudity, and that what nudists are campaigning for is merely a counter to that. And if we view "sexualization" (personally, I hate this term) as the artificial imbuing of sexual meaning to a subject, then to completely "de-sexualize" nudity wouldn't make it completely non-sexual, per se. It would just revert it to its natural state in which it may or may not be viewed as sexual depending on the circumstance.

Which sounds great to me. But let's be honest, I'm not dumb, and that's not the first thing I think when I hear the phrase "de-sexualization". How many people are going to get the wrong idea, thinking that nudists are crazy (and boring) because they want to completely castrate whatever sexual appeal nudity might have? And how many nudists themselves are jumping on the bandwagon, thinking that this is indeed what the lifestyle needs, to the point of joining the Prudists' Brigade, and, e.g., criticizing every nude scene that's ever been filmed for the purposes of titillation?

I don't know if there is some other language we could use to be more clear about our intentions, but at the very least we could all take a moment to realize what it is we are really campaigning for, and then make a point to communicate that to fellow activists and the public alike going forward. We should strive to make nudity less over-sexualized, but I am a nudist and I don't want nudity to be completely non-sexual. Nudity has an important and healthy sexual function. But that's not its only function. We should make sure that what we are saying is "not all nudity is sexual", rather than "all nudity is not sexual."