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.