Gymnaesthetics

I'm coining a new term - gymnaesthetics. It combines the Greek word for nudity, "gymnos", with "aesthetics", the branch of philosophy that concerns itself with the nature of beauty. In a nutshell, gymnaesthetics is the study or appreciation of naked beauty. As a corollary, and taking cue from aestheticism - an art movement focused on aesthetics, or "art for art's sake" above and beyond any pragmatic function - the term gymnaestheticism may be used to refer to the artistic discipline of producing art that is focused on the perceived beauty of the unclothed human form.

In thousands of years of human civilization, and half a millennium removed from the Renaissance, I'm surprised I have to be the one to come along and invent this concept. Now, I know I'm not the first person in the history of mankind to appreciate the sight of a naked body. The subjective experience of human beauty is a nearly universal phenomenon. But in civilized society, there exists a stringent taboo on nudity. And are you really fully appreciating the human body if you're covering part of it up? Yet the clothes don't come off unless it's about sex. Why isn't there a community dedicated to naked beauty, as distinguished from porn?

Nudism comes close, but misses the mark with their politically correct rhetoric prioritizing self-acceptance. "Every body is beautiful" is a self-contradiction, because beauty is inherently selective. Any kind of emphasis on the visual aspect of seeing people naked (and the pleasure it can bring) is criticized by nudists as voyeurism. You're not permitted to openly acknowledge the positive impact of fitness, diet, grooming, etc on a person's appearance. Nudist beauty pageants have become more than passé - they're an outright taboo!

Of course, there are lots of people who appreciate naked bodies in a superficial manner, but it's always myopically centered around sexual recreation. I've never been one to deny the erotic element of naked beauty, but so much gets lost when sex is the primary focus. Sight is treated as merely an appetizer to the main course of touch. Appearance is only a means to the end of getting off. It's like going to the theater to catch the trailers, and then having to sit through a movie you didn't want to watch. Little care is given to the craft and artistry of presentation. People are paired off (or grouped), instead of sharing their delight publicly. It's interactive, when sometimes you want a more passive form of entertainment. And you have to strictly limit your audience, which also restricts your reach.

Is it so hard to let people interpret art however they want, while still letting the images stand for themselves? It's enough that the human body is considered "indecent" and inappropriate for public viewing - with artistic exceptions inconsistent, as well as few and far between. But you can't even comfortably honor gymnaesthetics in private, without carefully vetting potential observers, lest the wrong person get an eyeful, complain to peers and authorities, and then you face the prospect of social reprobation even if there isn't enough of an offense to support legal repercussions...

Cabin Fever

I'm beginning to suspect - and in retrospect, it's not at all surprising - that every year around Thanksgiving, I begin to suffer from a nudist version of cabin fever. It's been over a month now since I've been out naked in the fresh air and sunshine with any regularity, and my body is suffocating! When I don't get that release, those feelings bottle up inside, and my thoughts turn desperate. Completely unrealistic fantasies of being naked in public start to seem more and more appealing.

I'm not suggesting that I would do anything impulsive. But it's a struggle, and I wish I knew a way to vent that frustration. I could find a nudist meetup to join, but I'd have to travel really far, and in this season, hanging around with a bunch of mostly strangers indoors (doing karaoke? playing video games?) doesn't strike my fancy. (Especially if it's centered around drinking and socializing). That would be true with or without clothes. I definitely prefer activities with more... well, activity.

I'd love to hang out with other artists, and do some creative collaborations. But you know how that turned out last time. Why is it so hard to find community as a nude/erotic artist? All the art groups out there are allergic to nudity and eroticism, and if you search through "adult" channels, you just end up with people looking for hookups. Am I really that unique in this universe? (You don't have to answer that question, I already know the answer is yes). It's a funny feeling being alone on an overpopulated planet.

Some time last year, I came across an image on DeviantArt* that caught my attention. The subject of the image was public nudity - which, needless to say, I found intriguing. The image depicted a fully naked woman in the foreground, hiding in front of (from the camera's perspective) a tree, behind which were three other people, fully clothed, with their backs to the camera, standing on the shore of a lake. The middle figure was looking back over her shoulder toward the camera, adding a little bit of dramatic tension to the image. Does she see the naked person just at the top of the hill? (Spoiler: yes, she does).

But the wildest thing about the image was that, although it was surely taken nowhere near any place I've ever been (not even on the same continent, I'd wager), I instantly thought of a place I'd been to with similar geography - with a tree on a hill leading down to the rocky shore of the rightward bend of a lake. Naturally, I had to try recreating the image using my clone technique.

The hardest part of the shoot was bringing three different outfits (complete with shoes!) to the lake, when I'm used to bringing one outfit and not even wearing it. No, wait. That's a lie. The hardest part was actually putting on those clothes, when it was so hot I was already sweating in just my birthday suit! I tell you, I don't understand how these textiles do it.

*A cursory search reveals that, unsurprisingly, the source image was stolen from a porn site. To be more specific, the model's name is Sylva N., and the image appears on nude-in-public.com (as part of a set). I wish somebody would pay me to walk around naked in public, while they take pictures. Sounds like my dream job! Except that it's always "young girls", isn't it? Which I am not opposed to (obviously), but even if I were a girl, I'm not exactly young anymore.

But suppose I were a girl. Even then, at around age 19 or so, I wouldn't have been in the right headspace to do this sort of thing. Which is not to say that "that's too young". I just wish I lived in a culture where I could have found my calling earlier (before it was too late). A culture that didn't cause me to feel like I had to hide my shameful dalliances, taking my clothes off in secret during adolescence. A culture that would have let me explore opportunities to be naked outdoors and in social situations, outside of a strictly sexual relationship. A culture that didn't judge and ridicule the artistry of eroticism, and discriminate against anyone who dares to pursue a career in that field.

I'd be really curious to find out what goes on behind the scenes of these "nude in public" photoshoots. Isn't it funny how they always take place in other countries (at least since we lost San Francisco), despite the United States (undeserved) reputation for freedom? I know it's part of the fantasy that a gorgeous chick can walk around town naked without repercussion (and they kind of can - even a gorgeous dude would have issues with people feeling intimidated and reading it as sexual aggression). But I want to know.

Were there any arrests involved in the making of these photo sets? Fines that had to be paid? Awkward chats with law enforcement? How many of the strangers encountered genuinely reacted either positively or nonchalantly, and how many were upset or confrontational? How many people were approached and asked for their consent to be depicted in these images (those that are recognizable), and how many declined?

Where was the shoot conducted? I understand the importance of privacy, but was this a city or a country that's generally permissive of this sort of thing? Did the participants choose a place they know well, or one that's completely unfamiliar to them, so that there would be less of a chance of interacting with the locals ever again?

You never get any information about the women in these shoots, either. As a fellow internet model, I understand and respect the need for anonymity. But even in general terms, I'd love to get to know them a little bit more. Do they do a lot of porn shoots? Or was this a crazy, once-in-a-lifetime stunt? What kind of attitude do they have about being seen naked by strangers? Do they have any experience with nudism (whether social or solitary), or are they legitimate exhibitionists?

Again, in general terms, what walks of life do these women come from? Are they all starving university students? Budding artists? Raging perverts? The desperately poor? How did they come across this opportunity? And how much does a gig like this pay? I feel like I've put in the work as an artist to deserve to know more about the back end of these endeavors, because I'd love to be involved in producing them. It sounds weird to say this, but I feel like this is just the kind of thing I was put on this Earth to do.

But I have no community. I'm an isolated node in a detached society. There's no realistic way to get in touch with these people. And I'm not in any rush to hop on a plane, for the purpose of committing public indecency in a remote village in the Siberian wilderness, anyway. No matter how much fun that sounds like it would be. I'm a fruit just waiting to be plucked. And I'm not getting any riper by the day.

Confessions of a Gymnophiliac

I was traveling the other night by interstate. Alone. At night. And I stopped at a rest stop. The place was empty. Like, completely empty. And the restroom had a gigantic mirror just inside the entrance. I was the only one in there. (Are you sensing where this is going?) I felt compelled to take off all my clothes, and snap some pictures. Don't get me wrong, it's not as though I had to do it. But I wanted to. I found the idea positively thrilling. Not strictly in a sexual sense - as you can observe for yourself. I just think there is a primal beauty and a forbidden sensuality to being unclothed, that can be enhanced, whether by proximity to the natural world, or, alternatively, by juxtaposition with the trappings of modern society. And I like to capture the electricity of that tension in my photography. Is there an erotic component to this beauty? Yes, there can be. I don't deny it. But that doesn't change the fact that this wasn't about sex.

If there had been any indication of a single other person present in the building - inside or outside that restroom - I wouldn't have done it. I chose that time and place because I knew I could do it without anybody ever finding out. At least, outside of the audience those pictures would have, who I could reasonably assume would appreciate (and not condemn) the boldness I exhibited. It was a closed location, with only one entrance. I could hear if somebody was coming, with what I judged would be enough time to dip into a private stall (where I had hung my clothes), so that nobody would suspect a thing. And, being a restroom, I knew (at least, I hoped) there were no security cameras in there.

Hypothetically, I would have been thrilled to have left the restroom while still naked, and wandered the rest stop. Taken some pictures standing beside the vending machines. Browsing the stacks of brochures. Sitting on a bench. Exiting to the outside through the automatic doors. But the danger of being spotted increases exponentially as soon as you cross the threshold of that restroom. There would have been no time to set up a camera. A high likelihood of being seen by staff or other visitors, long before I had a chance to hide. And near certainty that I would be caught on a security camera, with recorded proof of my mischief. (Not a heinous crime, mind you - just... mischief).

[description: a sculpted figure stands naked from head to toe in a public restroom]

I know this isn't normal. Most people don't have these inclinations. Such thoughts don't run through their heads. And even if something were to cause them to contemplate such a bizarre scenario (as wandering naked through an interstate rest stop - or a grocery store, or a laundromat, or a hotel lobby, or any public place), it would be met with confusion, if not outright horror. Is there something wrong with me? Not just that I have these feelings, but that I am somehow able to justify them in my mind as being less than the antisocial compulsions of a lunatic? Is it not relevant that their purpose seems to be something other than simple sexual gratification? That I'm conscious of the need and the value of making an effort to avoid being a public nuisance (whether or not that's just a self-defense mechanism)?

The problem is, there's no context in our society for these kinds of behaviors. It makes me feel alone. But more than that, it leaves me in confusion, to wonder what's wrong with me. (Because there has to be something wrong, right? I couldn't simply be expressing a wonderful if rare example of human diversity, could I?). It seems related to nudism - the interest in living life, and engaging in normal activities, without clothes. Yet I have enough experience with how nudist communities respond to expressions of these kinds of fantasies - with criticism, revulsion, and ostracism - to know no kinship will be found there. People like myself are readily labeled exhibitionists, and while that may not be completely untrue, neither is that a community with which I find fraternity. The lack of sexual motive. The effort to which I want to avoid being exposed. Not to mention the unfair (and unfairly cruel) stereotypes which are used to classify exhibitionists as subhuman, not worthy of understanding, much less sympathy.

Where, then, does that leave me? I'm okay with being labeled eccentric. An outlier. But human society demands categorization. I want to be understood. Not treated as something I'm not, just because most people can't distinguish the difference. Above all, I want to be convinced that I'm not a monster. It's not enough that I don't believe I am. I could be delusional. I have to explain my case in the hope that others can see me, and come to the same conclusion. To know that I'm not insane. But how can you rest your sense of self-worth on the judgment of others who can't possibly know your experiences and motives as well as you do, and may not even have the interest or the capacity to care? It's a cruel fate. But therein I lay trapped.

How do you extend a hand in compromise, toward a society that would simply prefer you didn't exist? To reach out for help, from someone who wants to stamp you out? And what's the alternative? Crawling around in the shadows, wallowing in loathing and self-pity? What kind of a way is that to live? Or should I prove their worst nightmares true, for lack of a better outlet? Become the monster they've fated me to be. And why do I keep torturing myself by expecting reason, let alone compassion, from the human race? There's no order. There's no justice. There's no meaning. I want certainty. I want protection. I want peace of mind. And it's not forthcoming. I just can't seem to come to grips with the fundamental chaos of living. And I can't even say these things to the people that need to hear them, for fear of what it would do to my reputation...

[description: naked selfie in a mirror over the sink in a public restroom]

I have to acknowledge the possibility that I could be somebody's worst nightmare - imagine, walking into a public restroom and what you find is a naked person holding a camera (although this should be dreadfully obvious from context, I feel compelled to say it because people are idiots - the camera's not there to take pictures of you, it's there to take pictures of me). Especially - and I am loath to say this, but - if they have the "wrong" anatomy (because a penis is really just a type of horn, that proves men's fundamentally demonic nature). I mean, if that's your worst nightmare, I envy your charmed life, but that's beside the point. What's also beside the point is the fact that if I encountered such a person - a person just like me, who is as conscientious of others, as well as committed to the artistry of beauty (and not simply looking to get a kick out of breaking a sexual taboo, all other concerns aside), it would be a dream come true! I can only imagine what could come from a collaboration between two such bodies and minds in sync. Maybe that's reason enough, from the perspective of the masses, to never let such a thing happen.

But why should some of my greatest fantasies of happiness be things I'm not even allowed to want? Is two beautiful people running around naked in public really so horrible a thing? I don't know why this concept intrigues me so. I wonder how much different my life would be if I had normal, un-controversial passions. I'm sorry I wasn't born conventional, like you. I wish I had been. My life would be a lot easier. But I wasn't. Does that mean I don't deserve to live? And if I do, does it mean I don't deserve to be happy? If the world is constructed in such a way that naked beauty cannot appear without being an obstruction to the normal functioning of society, then I want to live in a different world. A world where that kind of thing can happen. And does happen. And I can be a part of it. What's the point of a life lived in misery because you can't have the things you want most? Tell me, how is this thing that I want a threat to the well-being of others? Nothing about my desires depends on the suffering of others. The existence of nudism proves that it is not a foregone conclusion. Our culture is just pre-disposed to interpret what I find beautiful as threatening. Yet it won't recognize that in indulging its neuroses, it is torturing me. Why is their peace of mind more valuable than mine, and my agony less of a concern?

The only resolution to this conflict of interests is either to strip the part of me that enjoys nudity from the core of my being, or to change society to view the human body in a more positive light. (Would that be so odious an adjustment to make?). But as monolithic an endeavor as the latter would assuredly be, it still seems more possible to me than accomplishing the former. Alas, there shall be no resolution. And if I must suffer continuously through all the days of my life, what's it to anyone if, every once in a while, somebody has to suffer in some very small part because I took too daring a risk one too many times? The shit I see humans doing - and getting away with, without remorse, or even reflection - and I have to sit here with this wretched conscience telling me I'm scum because I can't be happy without doing something that might upset someone somewhere sometime. It really is true that evil prevails because good must follow the rules. I wish I could take a pill to stop caring. To shut off my conscience. Why can't I just be content to be human, with all its incumbent flaws, without having to beat myself up because I'm not a perfect angel?

Beauty is Truth

It's an almost universal feeling among at least half of the population. It's our natural, biological programming. AND it's necessary to the continued survival of the species. It's literally our prime directive, and yet, somehow, we've drilled this idea into the core of our concept of civilization, that it's a sin for a man to look at a woman with lust in his heart.

Now, don't get me wrong, I fully support treating women with respect. There is a misogynistic culture in which men seem to revel in abusing - verbally, and worse - any woman that arouses his libidinal desires, accompanied by an undeserved sense of entitlement to their bodies. I think that if your compass causes you to feel pleasure in the fact of another's existence, then that alone, without promise of anything more, justifies the responsibility to treat her well. And, after all, isn't that a better strategy for befriending her, in the hope of being able to spend more time in her presence?

But treating women with respect also includes not shaming them for courting attention of a particular variety. Especially (but not exclusively) when they're not doing it consciously! Because this is how our species propagates, and it's interwoven into the very fabric of our society. The way women dress. The fundamental nature of dance. Things that they learn even from a young age, before they understand the underlying purpose of it. It's not some evil plan. It's just a fact of life.

And then we make men feel bad for feeling good when their biological instincts respond as they've been programmed to. Even when they exercise restraint, and practice good manners. An implication is posed, that there is some sinister intent at the heart of it all - at the heart of physical attraction, which drives flirtation and courtship behaviors. Civilization has taught us that these things exist to bond pairs together. But evolution knows the real truth: that all those precious babies are being made because men are designed to salivate over women's bodies. We should be grateful for it - not resentful of it. Because, without it, we wouldn't even be.

But we live in a culture where protecting the planet that cradles us, and shelters us from the lifeless void of space, is an unpopular stance. So I guess that's way too logical an expectation for our species. Life is already hard. Why do we make ourselves suffer more than is necessary? For the inscrutable glory of some imaginary character? Intelligence is a myth. We're just dumb, hairless apes. How did we ever make it this far? Oh, that's right - because desire is more powerful than shame. More powerful than any civilizing influence. And if the day ever comes when that is no longer true, then that will be the day that we go extinct. The forces of chastity would do well to take that lesson to heart.

The Cross-Dressing Uncle

So, my uncle passed away from an accumulation of health problems this year, and it turns out... he had an interest in cross-dressing. It wasn't, like, a real big secret (my mom knew all about it), but he wasn't very public about it, either. At least not within the family. I didn't even suspect the full depth of it until we were going through his stuff after the funeral this summer. I knew he had a lot of clothes and shoes, but nothing I'd ever seen that would interest me. Until, in a locked closet, we found (in addition to the expected stacks of porn) racks and racks of women's clothes and costumes stacked layers deep, and high heels lining shelves stretched literally from floor to ceiling!

[description: series of fashion portraits modeling dresses and heels in front of a large mirror]

My uncle grew up in a different era. Granted, there's still lots of progress to be made even today. I think it's sad that we sometimes have to hide parts of our selves, such that people don't get to know who we really are until after we're gone (if ever). I'm a pretty private person by nature, but I prefer to live my life authentically. I'd rather be hated for expressing who I am, than liked because people think I'm someone I'm not.

I never had a strong bond with this uncle, for reasons that have nothing to do with this subject (just because two people share an interest doesn't necessarily mean they'll get along), but I do regret never having had the opportunity to get to know this part of him. I think of the stories we might have shared, or the support we could have given each other, being "straight males" interested in women's fashion in a largely gender-conservative culture.

I'm doing my part to pay that support forward, by being the public and uncloseted cross-dressing uncle to a new generation. No secrets, no shame. I'm an open book. And whether any of them develop a similar interest in the future or not, I'm teaching them that there is dignity in gender fluidity, and the importance of being free to express your identity authentically, and to treat others who do with respect, as fellow human beings. And no amount of conservative legislature will ever change that - even if I end up behind bars for teaching kids that you don't have to conform to gendered expectations. Give me liberty or give me death.

Anyway, I've inherited this truly spectacular three-part mirror, along with a bunch of pretty clothes and shoes - finally liberated from the closet. Never before had I seen so many interesting shoes - that were all in my size! I couldn't resist modeling them for you. Just by happenstance, I ended up with the exact same number of shoes and items of clothing, so I tried to pair them 1:1. I did the best job I could, but I had to "shoehorn" in a few at the end. :-p

Tokka Fan Edits

Longtime fan Tokka made these edits of my photos, and I thought they were really cool, so I wanted to show them off (with permission). I love it when my work inspires the creativity of other artists!

[description: series of various photo collages]

While we're thinking about it, this would be a good time to reiterate and articulate my thoughts on copyright. As far as usage of my photos goes, I'm pretty lenient. I know it sounds vague, but use common sense. What does that mean? Well...

I don't mind other people sharing my photos - within reason. Free advertising is great, but don't undermine my subscription model. And make sure to give me credit. I want people coming to ME to see my work, not getting it from somewhere else.

As an example of what not to do, there was an account on Flickr once (this was a little while ago), that was passing my images off as their own, with minor edits that seemed designed to hide their source - like, a lot of my watermarks were deliberately trimmed off.

On the one hand, I was flattered that somebody liked my images enough to want to pretend to be me. But I work hard to create these images. I appreciate being given credit for them.

That said, I am okay with people manipulating my images with artistic intent. As long as you're respectful. I'm a pervert, so sexual themes don't bother me (on the contrary, they can be quite exciting). But if you're making fun of me, or using my images to express an idea I strongly oppose, I'm going to be less happy about it.

You don't technically need my permission to do this, but if you're working with my art, I want to know - because I'd love to see the results! And I'm totally willing to give you credit for your contributions, just as I expect to be credited for what I've contributed (in the form of the images you're manipulating).

I have no intention of passing off your work as my own, not least of all because I don't want your artistic vision to be mistaken for mine. Art is intensely personal. Credit is given where it is due.

But above all, I want to foster a positive and creative atmosphere for other artists to enjoy and even evolve the work I've produced. I want to believe my art is interesting enough to inspire other creative minds!

Fallen Empire

Insofar as the fallen empire of the United States is a world leader in cultural influence (although they don't deserve to be), I'm anticipating some hard times ahead - particularly on the front of freedom of sexual expression. Rest assured, I WILL die on this hill. Nothing will ever stop me from spreading sexual pleasure to the masses, short of locking me up or putting a bullet in my head. But there is probably a lot of frustration coming down the pike, as the Christofascists - emboldened by the stupidity of the American public - clamor to put into place their vision of a sexless utopia. I just want to warn you, so you can be prepared. There is a storm coming. Now is the time for us to brace ourselves, so we are not beaten down by the forces of chastity that are polishing their rifles for the hunt right now, as the Antichrist readies himself to take the throne. We shall prevail, by hell or high water. Or we go extinct. There is no other option. Let us make our adversaries the ones who will go extinct, once and for all time.

Bare Scouts

In a recent post, I expressed some measure of wonder at the direction life has taken me - that I've become so enamored with wilderness recreation (provided there are opportunities for naked communion), despite quitting Boy Scouts when I was a kid. Consumed by fears and anxieties, I don't think I was capable of appreciating those activities - e.g., rock climbing, white water rafting - back then. But I feel like if I had a chance to redo it with the mindset I have now, I would enjoy it.

It's the same thing with sports. Although I'm not competitive by nature, visiting nudist camps has instilled in me a great love of playing volleyball, to the point that I find myself practicing alone, lamenting not having access to a league, or even a group of friends with similar interests. As someone who dreaded gym class in school, and always got picked last for teams, I was convinced I had no athletic talent - something that I no longer believe to be true. If only we weren't expected to figure things out so early. We throw all these activities at children, to help them find what they like, before they are even fully formed. But once you've grown up, you're expected to be set on your path. It's difficult to find opportunities without the momentum of having done it since you were young.

I had an idea while out hiking nude up a partially dry riverbed, and I can't decide if it's brilliant or bonkers. As you know, my enjoyment of wilderness recreation is largely incumbent on being able to mix in the feeling of being naked in the great outdoors. (Maybe I'm weird, but I think doing something naked makes it a lot more fun). What if there were an organization designed around just this sort of thing? You could call it... Bare Scouts! Of course, my first thought is that people would freak out, thinking it has something to do with mixing children and nudity. As a nudist, I want to state for the record that I see nothing wrong with kids engaging in nude recreation outdoors - provided they're supervised by responsible adults. But there's no reason this organization would necessarily have to involve children. I just think it would be fun to base it loosely on the scouting model. You could even design merit badges to be awarded to members for completing various activities naked in nature!

Let's brainstorm. First of all, in order to meet the requirements for a given merit badge, a supervising scout leader must sign off on it (photographic evidence is encouraged). All requirements must be performed completely naked - without shoes or any kind of cover up, unless otherwise indicated. Ideas for merit badges could include:

*hugging X number of trees of distinctive character;
*skinny dipping (with different badges for river, lake, and ocean);
*hiking and biking X number of miles (shoes and packs permitted);
*paddling a canoe or kayak (safety gear permitted);
*standing under a waterfall;
*performing a rock scramble;
*dancing in the rain;
*hiking by moonlight;
*setting up and striking camp;
*collecting firewood and tending a fire;
*campfire social (sitting around a campfire in a group, roasting marshmallows, telling ghost stories, etc.);
*animal sightings (with a checklist for different animals encountered);
*spelunking/cave exploring (safety gear permitted);
*taking in a scenic vista;
*cleaning up the environment (picking up trash);
*tending a garden (plant a tree, trim a shrub, water flowers, etc.);
*leaf peeping (collect a red, gold, and orange leaf on a single hike);
*cross-country skiing (boots, hats, and gloves permitted);
*answering the call of the wild...

Any more ideas? I know nudists are a minority, and there isn't nearly enough interest to support an organization like this (and that's to say nothing of the potential for bad actors to slip in and exploit the opportunity to turn it into something different - alas, we cannot have nice things), but doesn't it sound like fun?

Hunting Bare

[description: nude series pitting a man in a bear mask against a hunter with rifle and coonskin cap]

I've spent a lot of time outdoors over the past four summers, in the wake of the pandemic-induced lockdowns of 2020. Two years ago, I published a series of nude-in-nature self-portraits titled Dendrophilia, which was the culmination of eight months (from March to November) I spent exploring the woods, posing naked with distinctive trees. Last year, I published a series titled Bare in the Woods, which saw me posing naked in a bear mask, alongside rivers, in caves, and climbing on rocks.

I don't want to condition you to expect a prominent nature series to be published every year come fall - especially because I could stand to take a hiatus and focus on my backlog, instead of generating more new content - but I do like having projects to work on beyond simply getting out into the wilderness and posing aimlessly in front of the camera. Not that that doesn't have its draw, but I do so much of it already.

This year's project was fairly spontaneous - I had had the idea in my head, but it was only on the spur of the moment that I decided to follow through with it - and represents a much smaller scale effort that I accomplished within just three excursions stretched across only a 10 day period. That said, I had fun shooting it, and I'm pretty happy with the results. I'll be glad to finally retire that bear mask - it's warm, and when I wear it, I can't see, or hear properly; which makes posing difficult, and also limits my ability to monitor the surroundings for approaching hikers.

I value any excuse to spend time naked in nature, especially when there's some purpose beyond that activity, like working on an art project. Although nude recreation should be its own justification (and it is), the rest of society often doesn't see it that way, and so it's a mental comfort to feel even a little bit legitimized by the work that I do. Plus, having a good concept raises my photography one small step above the "fine art nude", which itself suffers from frequent misinterpretation. To wit, it creates a framework through which to share my appreciation of the artistry of the human form, matter-of-factly, and yet with plausible distinction from the tasteless vulgarity that characterizes so much pornography.

Anyway, this is something of a sequel to Bare in the Woods. It pushes my cloning technique to the forefront - which is something that was under-represented in the previous series, and only sporadically featured in Dendrophilia before it - by adding a hunter. With a coonskin cap and a wooden replica rifle, he's something of a nude Davy Crockett. I tell you, I'm glad my "costumes" are so skimpy, because not only is it a chore to lug props through the wilderness, but it gets hot fast wearing anything when I'm running around shooting in the heat. But, they do add some welcome character to my clone shots.

I had no big plans for the narrative, but I was very excited that I was able to shoot a proper climax and conclusion - in the "bear cave", and then with a bear on the mantel above the fireplace in a cabin/pavilion (what a perfect spot!). It's only with luck and a little derring-do that I can shoot in the places I sometimes want to shoot. Opinions vary, but it's a risk I think is worth taking, all in the name of art. -_^

Hard Shadow

[description: a shadow on the pavement depicts the outline of a nude man aroused]

Despite how it looks, it bears noting that you can't actually see my erect penis in this image - just a spot on the ground where it has prevented the sunlight from reaching. Which begs the question, is it the organ that's indecent, or is it the idea that the organ represents? In which case, the offense is in your head, not in the picture. And those ideas aren't immutable. They are a product of conditioning. Can you imagine how frustrating it is for those of us innocents who are stuck living in a world that insists that our beautiful bodies, and the life-affirming pleasures they can generate, are an abomination to be scorned and hidden away? Why must we suffer, for the evil that's in your hearts? Pray, tell me. Because that's not what freedom looks like to me.

Inventory

I keep the photos I take in folders on my computer labeled by day, sorted into folders by month, and by year. I don't take pictures every day, but I do take them more days than not. Not all of it is self-portraits, of course, but that is my most frequent subject.

Anyway, I've started doing an inventory of all the content I've left unfinished (processing it for sharing) since the fall of 2021 (which is where I left off when Patreon committed its act of injustice against me). Even though all I'm doing is writing folder names down in a text document, as a sort of index to guide me to where there is still work to be done, just getting it organized has been enormously helpful to my headspace. It's no longer a jumbled mess of unidentified folders scattered across three years of photos - it's a neat list I can check off as I go along, getting the work done that's been ignored and piling up for years.

To think that, even now, I'm still recovering from the effects of the way Patreon treated me, and the impact it had on my health (both physically and mentally). If there were any cosmic justice in this universe... but I don't believe in that idealistic bullshit. I've seen too much to maintain such naive delusions. We inflict so much unnecessary suffering on each other, just because we're superstitious about sexual pleasure. I can see a better way; so why doesn't anybody listen to me?

Nevertheless, I'm still trucking along, leaving what impact I can on this world, in the vain hope that when it's all said and done, my having ever existed in the first place will have been worth it. I just wish I'd been born to a more promising species. One that deserved me, and had its shit together enough to recognize the potential in me, and the means to utilize my talents for the betterment of all. Because that's what I want to do. But all I see around me is regression, and the resentment of anyone who promotes progress. Humans are either dumb, or scum. And neither alternative inspires much confidence.

Addendum (2 days later): Much of the relief I felt has evaporated, now that I've completed the inventory and realize how much work there is to be done. Going back to October of 2021 (fully 3 years ago), which is when the backlog starts, there are approximately 200 separate folders (that is, days) worth of photos in various stages of incompletion. Some of these folders might have a handful of photos that need watermarks. A great many of them have multiple videos that need to be canvassed for screen caps - which is a tedious job. We're talking three summers' worth of outdoor recreation, among other things.

I should be glad I have enough content to guarantee posting will continue without undue interruption for years to come, even if I were to put down the camera and not take another shot from this day on (and we both know that's not going to happen). But the task ahead intimidates me, and I know I have a lot of great stuff that I'm excited to share - there's just so much of it that it's going to take a while to sort through it all. And heaven forbid I should have an accident or a medical emergency and miss the chance to release it to the public, or lose the use of my right arm due to excessive clicking and dragging (I'm not even kidding), before all is said and done. (Having anxiety means you frequently think about these sorts of things)...

Outdoorsman

Life takes us in strange directions sometimes. I wouldn't have thought, when I was younger, that I'd turn out to be an outdoorsman. I mean, I remember Cub Scout camp fondly, but I quit Boy Scouts within one week of leveling up - though probably on account of the social aspect. One thing I like about the wilderness is solitude. Having said that, I still find myself wishing I had some companions on the same wavelength as me (and who could keep up with me).

[description: a naked figure basks in the sun on a rock beside a river]

I have zero interest in hunting and fishing, which are so popular. I like to hike, bike, and kayak. But the greatest feeling in the world is hiking through the woods on a hot summer day (no cold weather adventures for me), finding a swimming hole to cool off in (even if it's just a tiny creek), and then drying out in the sun on a rock. And if I can do it naked, it feels a hundred times better. I know that might sound weird, but it's perfectly natural. Life's too short to deny ourselves these healthy, harmless pleasures, on account of some arbitrary societal taboo.

Workload

I have the will. I have the motivation. I have the attention span. I get up in the morning, and I'm prepared to sit at my desk all day processing photos. It needs to get done. I want to get it done. The backlog is only growing, never shrinking. But I can feel the nerve damage in my arm from too many hours at this computer. My mind's ready to work, but my body is shutting down. What can I do? If I push through it, the damage will get worse. If I put it off, I'm shirking my duties. If I switch to another part of the process - shooting photos rather than processing them - then I'm just sentencing myself to even more work in front of the computer later.

So much of what we do these days is at a computer. My side project (designing a video game) involves working at the computer. My other side project (hosting a blues/rock music log) involves working at the computer. My recreation (playing video games) involves sitting at the computer. Communicating with my family and friends online involves sitting at the computer. And I have to reserve my strength for the marathon task of designing a year-end photobook for my family (mostly not involving self-portraits), which takes up all of November. If I switch from one activity at the computer to another activity at the computer, it doesn't solve the problem. And if I hamper my ability to do one thing at the computer, it will affect everything else I need to do at the computer. I don't have sick leave. I don't have disability. I don't even have a real job, so if I don't hussle doubletime, it makes me feel like I'm not deserving of a paycheck, even though I don't actually get a paycheck (it's insidious how that psychology works).

I think I need to re-evaluate some things. Like why I'm killing myself for a hobby that doesn't pay commensurate to the work I put into it (I know the answer is that I'm passionate about it, but that's not going to keep me intact to continue doing it). I need to re-adjust my attitude about it, and start saying "fuck off" to the email notices that tell me how long it's been since my last upload, and demand (figuratively speaking) that the hosting platform start paying me before it's able to make those kinds of demands on my time. And I really should get a new computer chair, maybe even a new computer desk. It's just so hard to find a chair I like - I bought one the day the lockdowns commenced in March of 2020 (already four years ago), got it home, and didn't even like it. So I'm still sitting in a chair I've had for I don't even remember how long. And you have to match the chair height to the desk height, taking into account the position (and padding) of the arm rests - which aren't always adjustable. How does anyone do it? I'm not made of money, either...

Clones (Three Different Ones)

[description: three nude figures pose on a rock in a dried up lake bed]

I just shot this image today. (This is what I do). I'd usually sit on it for months if not years before sharing (only because I've got so much else already in the queue), but I really liked it and wanted to show it off. Plus, it generated some thoughts in my head. Three thoughts - one for each clone depicted.

1) I feel like creating images like this one should earn me a free pass to walk around naked with immunity. "See - it's worth giving me this freedom. I'm making beautiful art!" Not only would I not have to sneak around - imagine the interesting images I could come up with in the city!

2) I know that asking my fans whether I'm a talented artist is preaching to the choir, but I can't really show off my best works to an impartial audience for evaluation, because the very subject of my art - nudity - is taboo! But I really want to be acknowledged, and told that my skill has improved, and that there really is something to what I'm doing here. I mean, I already believe it. But I need the psychological reinforcement, from somebody who doesn't just think I'm hot (because - I'm sorry for the stereotype, but it's statistically true - perverts are known to be indiscriminate towards matters of artistic taste).

3) I feel like the images I create are more interesting (because they're novel) than the dime-a-dozen images of naked women you'll find in artist society. But people won't even give them a chance, because they're conditioned to view men's bodies in a certain, limited way. I started this journey with zero interest in the aesthetics of male nudity, but I've totally turned myself around. People are missing out on a wonderful new kind of beauty, because they're too narrow-minded. Maybe what I do helps in some small way. But change takes too long. I'll be rotting in my grave before I can see the fruits of my labors. What's the point of that? I mean, I'll still do it. But what kind of bumbling fool designed things this way?

"What a colossal, immortal blunderer! When you consider the opportunity and power He had to really do a job, and then look at the stupid, ugly little mess He made of it instead, His sheer incompetence is almost staggering."

- from Catch-22, by Joseph Heller

Sex and Nudity in the Great Outdoors

or, Naturism vs. Ecosexuality*

[description: a nude figure sits on a park bench on a hill, with mountains looming on the horizon]

Like much in the life of an introverted loner tends to be, my photography is largely a solitary activity. It's partly what gives me the freedom to shoot my self-portraits nude. And, in addition to having a virtually limitlessly welcoming audience in the early days of sharing my art online, it's what has enabled me to shoot freely and without any unnatural boundaries between nudity and eroticism. I simply follow my instincts, and concern myself with categorizing my work after the fact. But it does make it difficult sometimes to differentiate the messages I want to send through my photography, between promoting nudism and sex-positivity - two philosophies that coexist peacefully in my head, but that the conscious construction of civilized society has separated by an artificial barrier.

In a more perfect world, there would be less of a taboo surrounding the subject of sex - particularly when and where and how and who people have it with. That doesn't, necessarily, mean we would all have sex openly and in front of each other. I respect the institution of privacy we've erected around the sex act. Very much like the privacy we give ourselves during the bodily act of waste removal. We could all hypothetically "do our business" in front of each other, and the universe wouldn't fall apart. But I don't particularly enjoy that scenario. If other people are less uptight about it than some - that's fine. It's their choice. And I think we should have more of that kind of approach toward the subject of sex. It's a bodily function. Even if we agree to maintain privacy, if somebody wants to step aside and "rub one out", it needn't have to be a secret, or something to be embarrassed about.

[description: a nude figure stands facing away from the camera, gazing out at a mountain overlook]

The real point of this discussion is a particular concern I've had for a while now. When I get out into nature, I'm always on the lookout for some privacy, so I can enjoy a little nude recreation. The vast majority of the time that this happens, I'm alone. Nudism is not very mainstream, you see, and if you're naked around other people, they'll assume a sexual motive (which only in very limited circumstances will be received positively). But since I'm alone, and I enjoy the physical sensations of being outdoors - in the heat and sunshine, without clothing, so that my skin can come into direct contact with the elements that surround me - on occasion I do get the urge to engage in a little, shall we say, self-stimulation. It feels good. It's healthy (allowing yourself sexual release is part of taking care of your body). I don't see any reason to feel ashamed of indulging in it. Yeah, it feels a little rebellious to do it outdoors in the open air, and not in a room with the door shut. But that's also part of what makes it so much fun. It's not that I want to be seen by nonconsenting parties. I'm not doing it around other people. But I still worry that doing it at all "taints" the otherwise wholesome quality of simply being naked in nature. And it makes me second guess the desire I frequently feel to share my naturist experiences with other people.

So, a couple of questions begin to form in my head. Is the sexual aspect an integral part of the naked experience? The answer to that one has to be no, because there isn't always a sexual aspect (it's not the reason I do it), and I'm perfectly content even when that doesn't happen (it's not like I feel like something is missing, or that the experience was a waste). The whole outing isn't charged with a sexual atmosphere - it's just certain, isolated moments that a feeling might wash over me (something that's less likely to happen in the presence of other people). And the second question is, do I actually want to share the sexual element with another person, or is it just the nude part that I wish I could have company for? Well, there's always a part of me that would enjoy sharing the sexual element with the "right" person - namely one that I specifically have an attraction to, and on the necessary provision that they're interested as well. But I feel like that's something separate.

When I daydream about starting a non-landed naturist club, or even just having other nudist friends to hang out with, it's the nude part I want to share, not any sexual element. Again, in a perfect world, if I were hanging out with nudist friends, and I felt the urge to take a moment to myself and "enjoy" the sensations of nature, it'd be nice if I could do that without feeling like I have to be super-secretive about it, and without the fear of judgment by my peers. (That said, it's fine even if I couldn't - that's not the goal of the experience, just an optional add-on). I recently had an epiphany - and that's why I'm laying out my feelings now - that it's not all that different than if you had to relieve yourself. You would go off into the bushes to take care of it with some measure of privacy. It's not anything to be ashamed of, and it's not something any mature person should hassle you for (apart from maybe some good-natured teasing). As an activity it's separate from the nudity - even if I have to hide the nudity too, because our culture doesn't get nudism. If I were with other nudists, and not alone, I would know better, and keep it to myself. It's no different than if a nudist couple were by themselves and decided to engage in a little intimacy. You can enjoy sex outdoors and still be a genuine and conscientious naturist, behaving yourself in the presence of others.

[description: a nude male lays on his back on a picnic bench, staring up at the sky]

*I just learned of this term (ecosexuality), and frankly, it sounds like a perfect fit for me - linking the sexual appeal of being in the midst of nature (such as masturbating while gazing up at the Milky Way - to pick an example from my own recent experience) with activities like skinny dipping and environmentally conscious activism. Maybe I've been ecosexual all this time? Well, I'm still attracted to humans, and I still want to share non-sexual nude experiences with platonic friends and acquaintances. But I can do and be both, right?

I really love the non-judgmental and broadly-encompassing aspects of the descriptions I'm reading. Like, yeah, there can be sex involved without dragging the whole thing into the gutter. And that sexuality can inform and interface with other parts of the philosophy that have little or nothing to do with sex. These are both elements of what I support about a sex-positive attitude - 1) viewing sex positively, and 2) breaking down the wall of exceptionalism that circles it and artificially isolates it from every other aspect of our lives.

It's refreshing to know that there are other people out there who aren't infected by the dark age mentality that is so widespread as to be taken for granted, as if it's the only valid perspective. What is isn't the only way it could be, and isn't necessarily the way it should be. That's what I hate most about conservatives - their inexplicable aversion to progress. They're stuck in the here and now, as if things are so great already that we don't need to improve anything (actually, they want to regress to some fantasy of better times in the past, but that's even worse). Have some imagination, people!

[description: a nude male crawls on all fours atop a picnic table]

Let It Be (Naked)

If casual, social nudity were truly mainstream, I think something important would be lost from nudism. There would be advantages and disadvantages - the comfort and convenience, but also issues with hygiene, etc. But some fundamental part of the thrill of being naked would be gone.

The taboo adds a little spice to it, I can't deny. But, that said, I still don't think "getting your kit off" should constitute a crime. An eccentricity, perhaps. But not a severe breach of social etiquette, or a violation of our ethical code.

It should be playful. It can be naughty, but in a toothless kind of way. It needn't be altogether widespread, but you should be able to come across, on occasion, a nude person on the basketball court on a hot summer day. At the pool or beach. In a laundromat or locker room. Without any fanfare. Just a "hmm, would you look at that!" No need for police, or any kind of confrontation.

The world doesn't have to join me. And it can have common sense regulations ("responsible nudity in reasonable contexts"), like in stores and restaurants. I just want it to let me be my weird, wonderful self, in a way that harms nobody (not really), without hassle. What's the big deal, anyway? Life's too short to live in fear, hiding who we truly are.

Looking vs. Feeling Naked

To be a nudist, I have an advantage, in that I'm at least moderately attractive (depending on who you ask). I like the way I look. I enjoy admiring my reflection in the mirror, or my likeness in a photograph. Sometimes, even just glancing down at my body makes me happy. But I understand that even I am not always the most pleasant thing to look at. It must be hard for people who don't actually like the way they look. People who, when they get a glimpse of their body, it reinforces their own negative self-image. There are a lot of people out there - most of them, I would wager - whose bodies I don't need, or have any special desire, to see more of.

But one of the things nudists like to say - that nudism is about being naked, not about seeing people naked - there's some truth to that. Yes, the human body can be a beautiful thing, and it's nice to be able to admire that, in a way that textile culture doesn't so readily permit us to do. But that's the exception to the rule. I was sitting out on the porch naked, hunched over, thinking that I'm gonna have to cover up when guests arrive. And I was thinking that, well, okay, they don't want to see me naked, and I can actually understand and empathize with the custom of covering our bodies up, given that (especially in this age of rampant obesity) in many cases that's a not entirely pleasant view that we could do without.

But then I thought about how, even if I were wearing, say, a loose dress over my body, I'd still have to wear underwear to keep me contained (otherwise I could not be considered "decent" despite being technically covered) - and that restrictive feeling on my anatomy is exactly what I hate most about clothing, and why I prefer to be unencumbered by textiles. And if I were being active, the looser, more flowy clothing would have a tendency to get in the way. There's really no good solution. Even if I wanted to cover up to preserve other people's sensibilities, I'm gonna have to sacrifice comfort, and the euphoric feeling of freedom that nudity gives you - that I like to call "gymnophoria".

So it's a tradeoff. With attractive people, there's little to be lost from letting them go naked (although beauty is a highly subjective quality). But for the rest of us (which is most of us), we have to choose: dignity, or freedom. I actually respect nudists for keeping things in perspective and allowing themselves to be comfortable regardless of the aesthetics. But it's a hard sell to get the rest of our textile culture on board with that philosophy. Oh, if only someone could invent some kind of workaround, where people could feel naked, while appearing dressed. Ideally, with an option for those of us free spirits to enable those who consent to bypass the "appearing dressed" part. Hasn't our technology caught up to this possibility yet? Some kind of "augmented reality" version of the Emperor's new clothes? Let's get on this, already.

It Ain't Me

Whether they're total fabrications spun from whole cloth, or legitimate issues with isolated segments of a vast and commercialized industry (I've heard both), 0% of the justified concerns lobbied against the sex trade apply to the work I do (as, some would say, "a purveyor of smut").

And yet, my livelihood and my freedom of expression is hamstrung by indiscriminate measures taken to curb the allegedly rampant excesses of the sex trade, because opponents care not to distinguish ethical sex work from abuse and exploitation.

Even if this were an unintended casualty of the war on sex, it would be unforgivable in a country that abhors injustice, and that has enacted failsafes to prevent miscarriages in the legal system to mistakenly harm the innocent.

But I profess that this is not merely a casualty - it is the primary goal of the religious zealots who head these awareness campaigns, to stain all sex work with the taint of immorality, and to recruit secular humanitarians with insidious lies about the evil crimes they claim that unscrupulous perverts are committing against innocent populations.

Wholesome

It's hard to promote an activity or lifestyle - especially when you're promoting it as wholesome (which then tends to come off as suspiciously insincere) - when society doesn't allow you to do it in front of children. Like, consider this. Children aren't allowed to drink alcohol. But you're allowed to drink alcohol around children. You don't have to hide it. You don't have to pretend you don't do it, or pretend you don't like it. You can do it right in front of them! You can even make it an integral part of your family get-togethers. Children aren't allowed to smoke, either. But you're allowed to smoke around them - even though this is demonstrably harmful to their health. They can't drive, but it'd be ridiculous to suggest that you should never drive in their presence.

But just because - what? children aren't allowed to have sex? - not only is that a taboo subject of conversation in the presence of children (hampering any effort to educate and promote good health practices), but you can't even be naked in front of them, despite the fact that nudity isn't automatically related to sex. Everyone has a naked body of their own, that they can look at as much as they want to - exactly what are we hiding them from? Yet, if you like to lounge around naked at home, you're expected to scramble for clothes (while feeling like a fugitive) whenever there comes a knock on the door. Even at a backyard barbecue on a hot summer day, when everybody else is in the pool, you can't swim comfortably the way you like to. You have to pretend you're one of those loopy textiles who swims with their clothes on, no matter how much you hate wearing wet clothes, or how much you enjoy the feeling of drying out naturally in the fresh air and sunshine. And you'd better think twice before making a joke about skinny dipping, because if there are any kids within earshot, somebody might think you're being inappropriate!

It's (obviously) a harder pill to swallow being an experienced nudist. What makes it weird is that I've been naked in the company of children who were complete strangers. Because we're all nudists, there's an understanding between us, and it's fine. But I can't reveal this aspect of my life to some of my closest friends and family? Even though they might be curious - if they're still minors, and their parents are too jaded to ever conceive of a context in which social nudism could be a wholesome and nonsexual activity - you have to button your lip and sweep it under the rug, and go on feeling like an outcast with a shameful secret you can't divulge. Even though, in reality, it's something you're proud of.

I don't want to put innocents in peril, and it bothers me that we live in a world filled with dangerous people, so that we can't have nice things. But sometimes we expose children to things that can harm them - like secondhand smoke (we're getting better at this), or a culture of alcoholism (why is getting shit-faced drunk a teenage rite of passage?), not to mention the violence in our entertainment (Deadpool might be rated R, but nobody's being put on a registry for taking their kids to see it). All the while other things that are wholly positive and life-affirming take on a disparate tone of foreboding, just because society has deemed them "harmful to minors" - whether or not (as in the case of wholesome nudism) that is factually true.

It's the same with dancing and modeling and fashion - things that, left to their own devices, kids love to play with (you'd think that, judging from some of the repressive messaging out there, kids naturally want to play with dolls and fire trucks until the night before their 18th birthday - and that's just not reflective of reality). These things aren't vices. They can be empowering, and a source of self-confidence. A medium for expression, and just plain fun! It's not indecent to admire both the human body's form and function. But because some people would prefer to interpret it in a sinister way, it's imbued with a veil of seediness. Like an art nude being slapped with a censor bar, giving it the impression of illicit pornography. It poisons the well, because now you can't defend any of these things without sounding like a sicko...

Small

If I've learned one thing about sexual fetishism from browsing DeviantArt over the years (and I've learned several things about sexual fetishism from browsing DeviantArt over the years), it's that a subset of the population gets their rocks off from the humiliation inflicted (whether giving or receiving) on men with small dicks.

Rest assured, I'm not here to kink shame. I can understand the sexual potential of humiliation. I don't want to take that away from anyone. But outside of the isolated context of sexual fantasy and roleplay, I think it's pretty dumb (not just mean, but dumb) to judge a guy for the size of his penis.

In the first place, you don't know what it looks like when it gets hard. What you see isn't always what you get. Sometimes that unexpected growth can itself be very exciting. And I get it, a big dick can make for a very impressive visual. There's nothing wrong with feeling that way.

[description: photo comparison of the same man with a small dick and a huge erection]

But also, it's not like you get to choose your anatomy. So how can that determine your worth as a human being? And, contrary to what penis pump companies would like you to believe, your size doesn't reflect the organ's ability to function, or how much work you put it to. It's a factor that's entirely outside of your control.

What's more, satisfying a woman (or, let's be fair, a man) can be accomplished regardless of one's size, or even which tools are at one's disposal. So, if you get a glimpse of a guy's cock, and your instinct is to laugh because it looks tiny, you'd do well to keep these things in mind.

Old Glory

[description: a man in a star-studded bikini brief holds up a volleyball on a sand court]

Given my feelings on toxic patriotism and the people who are most likely to fly the American flag, I'm beginning to wonder if I can even continue to wear this swimsuit proudly, without being a hypocrite, given what I feel the stars and stripes stand for these days (it's not liberty or justice, that's for sure). But it's so hard for me to find a swimsuit I genuinely like, that fits me comfortably, and in such a way that I can wear it to a crowded public pool (not the one I usually complain about) without fearing that I'll look like a pervert. And the fact that it's a bikini bottom marketed to girls, and not a swim brief designed for men - more than just freedom from dysphoria, it gives me a feeling of gender euphoria!

If I could find an equivalent substitute in a different pattern, I'd be ecstatic. I actually had my eye on one this year - a pretty mermaid bikini with shimmering pink and teal (my favorite color combination!) scales. I bought it twice, in two different sizes, and they were both too small. I haven't had any luck finding one in a larger size. I'm gonna make a point to look more closely at the selection earlier in the season next year, but in the meantime...

[description: a figure in a shimmering mermaid bikini reclines on a rock surrounded by wilderness]

Maybe this is just rationalization, but I do feel differently when it's me donning the stars and stripes. What I hate about seeing the American flag is the hypocrisy of what it's supposed to stand for, compared to what the people who fly it actually support in practice. They're more likely to be conservative and religious, which necessarily means that they oppose liberty and equality. When I walk into the pool dressed in a red, white, and blue bikini bottom, not only am I genuinely expressing the principles those colors stand for - i.e., the liberty to wear what I like, and the equality of the sexes to be judged by the same rules - but I'm also likely to upset and aggravate those "patriots" who think our flag stands for homophobia, transphobia, and misogyny (among other forms of bigotry).

And that's a win for me. I'd still like to have something different (I don't even feel comfortable wearing red, white, and blue on the Fourth of July anymore - I prefer wearing black lately), but in the meantime (as I said), I think I can live with that. Call it reclaiming the flag for the progressive, queer-friendly community. :-p

Modesty's Arrow

Outside of gravity's influence, we can move freely through space - in any direction we like. But time moves only forward, and never backward. In physics, this is referred to as "time's arrow". It's related to the concept of entropy, which you can think of - although scientists will tell you this is an oversimplification - as disorder. Closed systems (even the universe as a whole), if left to their own devices, have a tendency to fall into disarray.

"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings;
look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!"
- Percy Shelley

It's the reason why, unless you put deliberate energy into cleaning, a room will trend, over time, toward disorganization. To keep things in order, you must exercise - as Alastor 'Mad-Eye' Moody would say - constant vigilance. The orientation of time's arrow may be demonstrated by the fact that an egg dropped from a countertop will shatter into many pieces and scatter across the floor, but it will never gather itself back together and reform its original shape.

The explanation involves probability states and redistribution of the elements within a system. Consider the fact that if you were to mess up one shirt in a pile of folded laundry, it would stick out like a sore thumb; but throw another sock onto a disheveled pile of clothes and you'd hardly be able to tell the difference. It's all quite fascinating, but far beyond the scope of this discussion. I merely want to introduce the concept of time's arrow - and the unanswered question of why it should flow in one particular direction, but never the other - in order to draw an analogy to modesty (with relation to clothing), and its implied moral imperative.

"Decency is a pattern of behavior, not a style of dress."

It seems to me that the question of how much or how little to wear always carries with it some moral baggage, rather than simply being a matter of personal choice. The edict to "cover up" is always interpreted as a moral imperative, while any suggestion to "take it off" is viewed disdainfully as an indecent request. There may be localized exceptions - even whole communities (such as nudism) that create contexts in which this rule is flipped - but they are the exception that proves the rule. Over a broad consensus, the moral evaluation I have described tends to hold. It's what we teach our children, and it's what they mainly continue to believe throughout their lives.

My experience witnessing people telling others to "cover up" is that they always do it in a moralizing, preachy kind of way. It touches on the deep roots of sex negativity and gymnophobia (fear of the human body) and the underlying current of self-loathing that stains our culture. It's as if they're on a holy crusade to "clean up the streets" (does the world really need more Travis Bickles?), and fix other people's "sinful" behaviors, presumably in an effort - no doubt goaded on by faith handlers of various stripes - to guide them towards what they conceive to be a more saintly existence.

Although natural instinct pulls us in the opposite direction (and why shouldn't it?), you don't really see people going around telling others to "take it off" (or similar) - because most people know how such a suggestion would be received (skin exposure is viewed as indecent, and the desire to see more of it is therefore suspect), and have the social consciousness not to want to be perceived as a degenerate pervert. Unfortunately, the type of people who flout society's conventions and impulsively speak their mind anyway tend to be unscrupulous, instinct-driven animals (otherwise they would have put more stock in those conventions, regardless of whether they agree with them or not), and lo, the sordid reputation holds, because there's no polite way in this society to say "naked is more beautiful".

[description: a naked tourist stands in front of a raging waterfall]
A quick pose, before that Amish family glances up from their picnic.

I'd just like to ask, why should the moral value of modesty in dress necessarily have to flow in one direction and not the other? And why does it do so in practice? What religious mythology has been woven into the tapestry of our society, so firmly as to even influence secular culture, about the extent to which the devil reaches his hand into the "pleasures of the flesh"? And why should it have to be that way? We have the freedom to decide our own beliefs; I have the freedom to believe not only that the human body is not evil, but that it is divine, and that physical pleasure is a virtue and not a sin. I have the freedom to believe these things, but if I go around expressing these beliefs, I risk being cast as a villain, and eyed with suspicion.

One of the greatest scientific discoveries of the early twentieth century was Einstein's revelation that space and time are not absolute, but that our experience of them is relative, dependent on a frame of reference. From my perspective, these "modesty warriors" who go around spreading shame and judgment upon those who revel in the celebration of what little joy our mortal bodies can give us - to me, they are the ones who are evil. When there are two opposing vantage points, who gets the authority to decide which one is proper, and which is distorted? Should we simply adopt the one that is more common, or the one whose adherents are the most vocal? Remember, there was a time when most people believed the Sun revolved around the Earth and not vice-versa; a great scientist named Copernicus was vilified by the church for proposing an alternate theory that we now know absolutely to be true.

Without reason, can speech ever truly be free? I would love to be able to feel comfortable expressing my beliefs about the human body. To talk about its beauty and the pleasure it can bring. To encourage those people who I think deserve to be seen, to show off more of their bodies and flaunt what they've got. People can agree or disagree with my opinions on these matters. That's fine. What I can't stand is the thought of becoming a pariah for stating them. Of being looked at and treated like nothing more than a pervert. (Yes, I'm a pervert - aren't we all? - but I'm so much more than that). Or, worse yet, being considered a sick predator, diseased in the mind, dangerous and unholy. All because I bow to the temple of naked beauty, unbound by any arbitrarily constructed social laws of propriety.

And so I remain silent, more often than not. But it has a dispiriting, isolating effect on my psychology. It's not healthy. I want freedom of speech. I'm not asking for freedom from other people's reactions to my speech. That's a strawman concocted by people who claim to support liberty, while hypocritically attacking free speech defenders they accuse of the equally ridiculous notion of only wanting to spew hatred without repercussion. I just don't want to live in a society where people are habitually - to the level of making it a predictable outcome - predisposed toward exaggeration, and maliciously misrepresenting people's views and statements (exacerbated by a cancel culture - which goes by another name: "cyber-bullying").

I don't want people not to have the freedom to come to their own conclusions about the things I say. I just want to live in a culture where I feel safe enough to say those things, with good intentions, knowing that people will evaluate them fairly and without misrepresentation, with patience and rationality - not knee-jerk emotionalism fueled by memes and propaganda designed to manipulate the masses - and with reasonable allowance for thinking outside the box and considering unconventional viewpoints before rejecting them outright. Just like I strive to do.

Do I have over-inflated standards for Homo sapiens, or what? But why should I be forced to settle for less? I want so much more than that. And we're just talking about talking! Heaven forbid, I should try to actually pursue the things that make me happy, and attempt to make my vision of a naked paradise (similar to a nudist resort, but more like an artists' retreat than a retirement community) a reality. I have no desire to hurt anyone physically or psychologically, or compel them to do anything against their will. But some ideas are so dangerous... I fear that, to quote the bard (not Shakespeare, I mean Bob Dylan), "if my thought-dreams could be seen, they'd probably put my head in a guillotine." And that's just for the fantasies alone!

Beauty's Privilege

The truth is, not everyone has a body that demands to be shown off. And, unfortunately, the people who want to show off, and the people who ought to show off, aren't always the same people. In other words, you don't have to be attractive to enjoy exhibitionism, but there are also a lot of attractive people who don't enjoy exhibiting themselves. But none of this should be used as justification for preventing attractive people who want to show off from doing so. I know it raises ethical concerns regarding equal rights (and anyway, beauty is subjective) - who gets to show off and who has to cover up - but that's all stuff we can hash out while we're admiring the eye candy, and not before we allow ourselves to do so. If there is both beauty and ugliness in the world, then we should work to maximize the beauty we get to experience while minimizing the ugliness, instead of gouging out our eyes so we can see nothing at all.

---

Whether a person should think about sex when they see someone in a skin-baring outfit is beside the point. (It's perfectly natural for them to do so, but that's beside the point - as I said). Even if a person sees someone and wants to have sex with them, that doesn't justify any kind of inappropriate or uninvited behavior - in other words, harassment - much less assault or rape. Telling men not to think about sex is pointless, but telling women to cover up so as not to tempt men - that's missing the point, too. The only thing that needs to happen - the ONLY thing - is that men need to learn to control themselves. And the best way to do that is to parade women's naked flesh around as much as possible, and simply weed out the men who can't handle it. And by weed out, I mean remove them from society. Throw them in jail, and forcibly eliminate them from the gene pool. That would result in a far more pleasant outcome than policing women's wardrobes, and leading a literally buttoned-up lifestyle.

Platonic Erotica

Sexuality is a broad spectrum, and human diversity is vast. My own brother identifies as asexual, and I'm still wrapping my head around all the different kinds of asexuality there are. I told him I sympathize with the feeling that the raw sex act is kind of unappealing in all its messiness, but that I do not identify with asexuality because I still unmistakably experience those strong feelings of physical attraction and desire.

It was a revelation to me, reading Perv: The Sexual Deviant In All Of Us by Jesse Bering somewhat recently, that our disgust reaction is typically subdued with regard to people we find attractive. It's not rational to want to, e.g., put your tongue between somebody's legs, or let them excrete bodily fluids onto or into you, but we're programmed to find even the suggestion of such acts appealing - provided they're performed (or imagined) with somebody who stirs in you a physical desire.

It's helped me to understand some of my own feelings. Most people know instantly when they're attracted to someone, but if you notice somebody suspiciously dropping their standards of what they would usually find unappealing, targeted toward a certain person, that could be an indication that they're attracted to that person. I think some people have a broader range of attraction than others - and that's why, for example, it seems like some guys will fuck anything with a hole - but I think it's perfectly normal to have a narrower range and not want to engage in such behaviors but with a much smaller subset of the population. In the case of certain kinds of asexuality, that subset could well be zero.

Anyway, my brother told me he was "aegosexual" (as in, a-ego-sexual), which I understand to mean that you can still experience sexual feelings, but without having any desire to participate in sex. For example, you can have fantasies about other people (or characters) having sex, without wanting to insert yourself into the act. As someone who's obsessed with their own reflection, I think it's kind of sad not to have that experience of feeling sexy in your own body (and as an exhibitionist, feeling that your body is desired by others). But I was thinking that maybe I have something of a similar approach to erotic art.

When I create a magnificent piece of art, I want to share it with people. It just so happens that the type of art I'm most passionate about is art that showcases the beauty of the human body. Sometimes that's erotic in nature, other times it's not. But I distinguish such art from pornography in that its purpose is not strictly or even primarily sexual (what goes on in the viewer's head is their own private business). In my mind, it's divested from any kind of intimate relationship. So, aside from the public censure of genital exposure (which usually limits me to coyly posed nudes), I should be able to share it with friends, family, and strangers alike.

The thing is, I feel the same way about an excellent piece of art whether it's a "simple" nude or an erotic portrait. Obviously, not every picture I take is something I would be comfortable sharing broadly, with family and friends, or any other people I would feel weird about having sexual thoughts or feelings about me. But a really good piece of erotic art? Not cheap smut, but a carefully crafted diamond of eroticism?

It doesn't matter that I'm fully exposed. It doesn't matter that I'm presenting myself to the camera. It doesn't matter that my penis is throbbingly erect. I still think I should be able to hang it over the fireplace and print it on Christmas cards distributed to my family during the holidays. Yes, it's blatantly sexual. But it's not an invitation. It's not flirtation. It's not foreplay. It isn't about engaging in a sexual relationship with me. It's about a general celebration of human sexuality. In a way that's more impersonal, despite how personal such a depiction might seem.

Not everybody can be depicted in such a way. But I'm not an average-looking person; I'm a model. And although beauty is subjective, on some kind of objective scale I must be more to the attractive end of the spectrum (at least in my best moments - which is what I try to capture in these pictures). Those views aren't designed for private intimacy. They're designed to be plastered on billboards, and I don't think it would be inappropriate to put them there. And if I had friends or family who engaged in the same artistic pursuit, I'd be more than happy to share an appreciation for the fruits of those labors, without any kind of expectation of sexual intimacy.

All of these are things I've been saying for years. But now I'm thinking, maybe it could be related in some way to this asexuality stuff. The sexuality is present, conceptually, but divested from the subject of the photograph (me). It's like a Platonic form of eroticism - not in the sense of crossing a sexual boundary with your Platonic friends, but in being able to enjoy the erotic delights without reacting in a way that is explicitly sexual. Like appreciating the appeal of a sex scene in a movie enjoyed with friends, without treating it like a porno to be masturbated to. Or, you know, just talking or joking around about sex without creating an expectant atmosphere of sexual tension (like I know a lot of friend groups are capable of doing).

---

On a related subject, I've noticed for a long time now that my appreciation of eroticism - especially in an artistic context - both in myself and others, manifests in a way that is sometimes absolutely sexual, but often isn't. I browse naked pictures of beautiful people almost daily, and most of the time there isn't even a physical response. That's not why I do it. Mostly. But I still enjoy it. It still stimulates me on a psychological level. After all, not every part of attraction is purely sexual. When a man spots a beautiful woman and stumbles over his words, it's not (necessarily) because there's a bulge in his pants. I just think you can also appreciate the physical attributes on a level that's almost Platonic, too.

Maybe this is part of what I've been trying to explain as the difference between sexuality and eroticism. It's like when nudists say the human body is beautiful. Is there a sexual component involved? Of course there is! But there's more to it than that. And you can admire the same aesthetics that promote desire, also in a way that's not explicitly sexual. Most people can appreciate somebody who's attractive on some kind of generally objective level, regardless of whether or not they'd invite them into bed, given the opportunity. As a sex-positive activist, I don't think we should discount the potential sexual element, as nudists fervently do. But at the same time I don't think it should be a foregone conclusion. There is eroticism without explicit sexuality.

It's the difference between talking about sexual acts, and talking about sexual attitudes. Which is where I think a lot of nudists misunderstand me. Are we not able to appreciate erotic media and stimuli in ways that are, for lack of a better description, non-sexual? I get it. It's complicated. The language doesn't do justice to the complexities inherent in these concepts. The human brain is so complex. How is it that humans are frequently too dumb to understand the capacity of their own brains? We're trapped inside our closed minds, unable to imagine anything we weren't taught when the world was simplified for the benefit of children. And it's frankly repugnant, the way humans reject any attempt at increasing the resolution in our understanding of our own nature. They'd rather shut their eyes, and clamp their hands over their ears. We have so much more potential, and yet people just waste it. But it's not those people I cry for, it's the rest of us who are subjugated by the inability of the ignorant masses to imagine anything beyond their own tiny worldview. That's why I hate democracy. It's a tyranny of idiocy.

Naturism and Naturisn't

I know I'm the one that's out of the ordinary, but from my perspective, it seems bizarre that anyone would go to enjoy the outdoors, and not spend at least some of that time naked (depending on the weather - I'm writing this in the midst of a heat wave). Now, I don't expect everyone to enjoy nature the way I do. But it's frustrating that everyone else expects me to enjoy nature their way, and gets frazzled when I don't. I'm not demanding that anybody else get undressed. Yet, I'm expected to wear clothes against my own wishes!

I can understand, to a certain extent, why public nudity is verboten (there's a certain disconnect with reality when you look as good as I do). Although, there are times and there are places that are more reasonable than others. A campground in the woods, a public bathhouse, a river bank on a hot, summer day - these are places that practically demand nudity, and weep when it's censured. Yet indecent exposure is treated like a strict liability crime. If somebody sees your anatomy without consenting to it, that constitutes some kind of transfer of "unlawful carnal knowledge". At the very least, it's considered a severe breach of social etiquette, instead of just part and parcel of being organic creatures possessing physical form (as it should be).

[description: a naked camper stands in front of a tent in the woods]

To me, getting naked in nature is not just an integral part of my personal pursuit of happiness, it's legitimately part of my spiritual identity. I do go out of my way to engage in it without "spooking" anyone, even though I question whether it's fair that I should have to. Even so, I'm haunted by the anxiety that if somebody catches me, it won't be considered an invasion of my privacy, but rather that I've committed some kind of atrocity against the interloper. And in the wrong set of circumstances, it could be a severe crime indeed.

Whether or not reality reflects these fears, these notions are commonplace, and so people will behave as though they are true. All I want is peace - to be, and to be let be, enjoying nature the way it was intended. Without alcohol. Without trashing the environment. I'm just a gentle animal, unclothed, who respects the planet that bears us graciously upon its surface. Why do I feel hunted, like I'm some kind of vicious predator whose population needs to be culled? I'm harmless, and I'm endangered. The law should protect my way of life.

The Limitations of Cross-Fashion

The thing with transgender (and nonbinary) fashion is that our cis-normative society has catered certain fits to certain anatomy. This isn't solely a cultural thing - as men and women's chests and crotches are shaped very differently. But there's a lot that can be done to reduce the impact of a person's anatomy when they, e.g., want to dress in a style that's more conventionally associated with the opposite sex. For example, you can design a dress that's feminine without requiring an ample bosom to fill out the top, and there are certain styles that are more effective than others at disguising a bulge in the skirt.

What frustrates me (I was going to say "surprises", but it's really not surprising) is how much commercial, mass-produced pride gear is just conventional men or women's clothing with a transgender pride flag print slapped on it. In a certain sense, a lot of transgender individuals ultimately just want to pass as the gender they identify as - but for a lot of these people, for a significant portion of their journey, it's not always (sometimes, but often not) as easy as putting on clothes that were made for somebody with a different body.

I know transgender customers are an exceedingly small minority, but how common is it, exactly, for cis people to wear clothes printed with pride flags? It's great that allies can show their support, but not at the expense of overlooking the impacted population's ability to boost their own visibility. Or, you know, just to have something to wear. I really think there's untapped potential for fashion that caters to people who want to project a certain gender, while occupying the body of a different sex. Like, that pride flag string bikini might look incredible, but there's no way it's ever going to fit me well enough that I can actually wear it in public...

[description: a feminine male models a skimpy string bikini with transgender pride flag print]

And do you know how hard it is to find thong underwear with the storage capacity to carry a package? You don't even need to be transgender to appreciate the advantages of wearing a thong! I tell you, men really miss out on so much living in a neurotically homophobic culture.

More To Nudity

It's sad that some people will go through their entire lives thinking that nudity's only function is a sexual one. Think of all the opportunities that will be missed, to enjoy the feeling of freedom that comes from being unclothed - alone, while not engaged in sexual activities, but especially in the company of platonic friends. Think of the artistry, and the beauty of the human form, that will go unappreciated in life, because every instance of exposure is interpreted purely in the context of the pursuit of sexual gratification. People are terrified to even glance at specific parts of other people's bodies, assuming that such anatomical knowledge is reserved for a sexual relationship. In the fitting room. At the pool. Lounging at home. We bend over backwards to make ourselves uncomfortable, all on account of an arbitrary taboo. Think of all the art, the entertainment, the humor, that will be passed up, written off, and ignored, treated as nothing more than simple-minded pornography.

I'm not saying it's wrong to enjoy the erotic appeal of the human body. I'm a passionate advocate for sex-positivity. It's not either/or. I just want to emphasize how much further the virtue of nudity extends. If you only ever get so far as to recognize its sex appeal and stop there, you'll be missing out on so much. Nudity can be an element of fashion (it sounds counter-intuitive, but it's really not - after all, you can't change clothes without getting undressed first); it can be an element of fitness and athletics (as in antiquity, and the original Olympics of ancient Greece). The human body, properly cultivated, has the potential to be a shining beacon of joy and inspiration in our frequently dour lives. If you only ever allow yourself to indulge in it in a sexual context, limited to a few private relationships, you're excluding yourself from so much pleasure and happiness. But it's not just about you, because this belief shared by society prevents other people from experiencing that joy also.

In My Defense

Some people's idea of freedom is to get drunk, drive recklessly, and shout obscenities to strangers. My idea of freedom is to get out into nature, away from people, and take off my clothes. One of these activities is more popular than the other. It's also the one that's more disruptive of society.

Pool Rules

or Swimsuit Sexism vs. a Free Body Culture

Preface: With Memorial Day just around the corner (and therefore the start of the summer season), I've had swimsuits once again on my mind. I probably sound like a broken record at this point, but I'm going to keep bringing this up until the culture changes (if it ever does). If you're annoyed of hearing about it, just know that I'm annoyed coming up against the same limitations to my freedom year after year after year. It's tiring, I know. That's the point. But if you want to shut me up, then change the culture. If you won't give me freedom, then at least give me equality.

[description: a figure in black swim shorts stands next to a figure in a black bikini]
Pool Day vs. Lake Day

Sexism is...

1) equating briefs on a man to a thong on a woman (because we're used to seeing more of women's bodies, I suppose),

2) outlawing both at the pool, yet

3) permitting young girls to habitually wear thongs without fanfare, while

4) any man appearing in a brief is singled out and censured, and

5) assumed to be a pervert or, worse, a sexual predator - because

6) the pool is a "family-friendly" environment.

Like, in what universe is a man dressed in what is considered appropriate for the Olympics more of a threat to the innocence of children than those selfsame children wearing thongs?

Not that I want to police anybody's wardrobe. As a nudist and a civilized human being, I believe that we should all be able to swim naked without incident.

The general public is unfortunately far from being capable of realizing that possibility, but we should at least write our rules in a way that treats the sexes as equal, and not assume that a man's character can be judged by what he's wearing.

Oh, who am I kidding? I'm giving humanity way too much credit. We're illogical, superstitious animals. I just can't figure out how I managed to get stuck in the middle of this terrestrial zoo...

actual photograph (emphasis added)

Evaluation: Let's take a closer look at the very rule that is frequently the bane of my summer plans. At face value, it would seem that these restrictions are being applied equally to both sexes, but there is one important exception - men's "Speedos". Yes, men and women both are prohibited from wearing thongs. But consider that I've seen women wear thongs without fanfare, and you would absolutely NOT get away with it if you were a man. That rule is primarily directed at women - even without explicitly saying so - because it's the limit (despite not being enforced) on how little they can wear. If men can't even wear "Speedos", then clearly thongs are out of the question for them; that goes without saying.

Now, when I say that I've seen women (including underage teens) wearing thongs, I'm not talking about completely brazen g strings. But that doesn't mean when I say "thongs", that I don't mean "thongs". Women have a lot more variety in their swimsuits than men, and there are a lot of different styles of bikini bottoms that offer a wide range of coverage - both in the front and back. And for those young women who are interested (and they are out there), there are options that have gotten progressively closer to what we traditionally call a thong. I've even witnessed teenage girls intentionally giving themselves wedgies to create the appearance of a thong. And nobody bats an eyelash. This is part of our culture.

Again, I'm not concerned about it - I'm just jealous that these young girls can get away with so much, when it feels like as a biological male, my options are so much more limited. Yeah, it's a switch from the way things usually go, but this is something that actually matters to me. I'm not interested in being a CEO. I support women being paid as much (if not more) as men. I just want to wear the same kind of swimsuits women can wear. Or at least, a fair equivalent, given our differences in anatomy. It's just so much easier to be a [person who enjoys confidently showing off their body]* as a woman, because these kinds of women are celebrated, while these kinds of men are reviled.**

*There's a much simpler word for this, but I hesitate to use it because it's dripping with unwarranted stigma.

**While it's true that body-confident women do tend to get some blowback, and that men's bodies are frequently sexualized from the waist up, the culture nevertheless normalizes a higher percentage of exposure of women's bodies, while casting disproportionate shade on any suggestion of the male anatomy, due to a misandrist perspective (I would say homophobic, but women join in too - it's really more generally androphobic) on anything associated with male sexuality. If you think my hypothesis is flawed, I would love to hear an alternate explanation for why skimpy bikinis are not just more popular (a matter of personal choice), but less ridiculed (condemning other people's choices) in American culture than men's swim briefs are. Please, let me know.

Getting back to our evaluation of the posted pool rule, men can effectively ignore the prohibition on thongs, because they can't even wear "Speedos", which provide considerably more coverage. And women can certainly ignore the prohibition on "Speedos", not just because they're called men's "Speedos", but because it makes absolutely no sense to prevent a woman from wearing "Speedos", when every single bikini bottom (and every single one piece, for that matter - if we focus on where the legs meet the torso) provides as little or - in most cases - less coverage than a typical men's "Speedo".

[description: a man in a star-studded bikini brief stands on the shore of a lake]

Even the fuller coverage bikini bottoms that are marketed to small children offer no more coverage than a typical Speedo-brand swim brief. I know this, because sometimes I buy them in XL so I can have something feminine to wear that still provides the adequate "support" that most adult women's bikini bottoms lack (because they're so skimpy). So, this rule about "Speedos" clearly applies just to men and not women. (We'll just gloss over the fact that the Speedo brand makes other kinds of swimsuits beside the swim briefs they're known for, or the fact that women's "Speedos" usually refer to fairly more modest one piece swimsuits, because most people use the term to refer to the style and not the brand). So you see, although the rule superficially appears to ignore a person's sex, in effect, it actually does provide different rules for the different sexes.

As a final disclaimer, I should confess that I haven't actually tried wearing swim briefs to this particular pool, or ever seen another man do so (as if anybody else in this culture would want to). So I'm only speculating on what would happen. I could be wrong. Clearly, the staff is fairly permissive, given the number of thongs and see-through-when-wet swimsuits I've stood behind on the stairs waiting in line for the water slide (and again, I'm not complaining :-p). I've worn swim briefs just about everywhere else, including public pools with less explicit dress codes. I do tend to stand out and draw a lot of attention - because, even more so than a young girl in a thong, it's not something most people are used to seeing.

Maybe that's the worst that would happen. I'm pretty brave when it comes to these sorts of things, but the truth is, when there's an explicit rule forbidding something, I'm scared to break that rule. I like to push the boundaries, but I don't want people to see me as somebody who doesn't respect the social order. I just want a social order that includes - rather than excludes - me. Especially because most times when I go to the pool, I'm not looking to make a political statement at the risk of expulsion; I'm there with family and I just want to have a good time. And in defense of my claim that what I'd like to wear isn't threatening to a "family-friendly" environment, the kids in my family are always begging me to take them to the lake, where I usually wear a swim brief or even a bikini, and they accept it without issue. In fact, they're very supportive of me. One of them has even made it a habit to go shopping with me to pick out matching bikinis. Nobody thinks twice when a woman does this. Why should I be treated differently, based on what could be considered an accident of birth - my anatomy?

[description: a figure in a girls' bikini stands on a rock overlooking a lakeside vista]

I'm grateful for the level of acceptance I get within my own family - it really means the world to me. But it all comes down to the fact that I'm literally unique. I don't know a single other person who is like me. (Consider that time I went to a large water park in a big city, and I was literally the only guy wearing a swim brief, and I actually witnessed one girl averting her eyes, despite wearing a barely-there bikini herself). So I'm all alone in that respect. I want to push the boundaries, but I'm also scared to be alone out there on the front lines. If I had some friends like me, a community to draw courage from, to support me if I come under fire from a conservative majority, things might be different.

You don't know how hard it is for a man to find acceptable swimwear if he really doesn't like the only style men in this culture are expected to wear - the dreadfully baggy "board short". I can't just swing by the mall and be drowned in options like women are. I have to order stuff online from fetish shops (because they're the only ones in the market for skimpy men's swimwear) at premium prices, and hope that I estimated the fit of the Chinese sizing accurately (spoiler: I didn't). I'm not trying to wage a war on everything you consider holy. I'm just trying to live my life authentically, and pursue the things that make me happy. Human diversity is larger than the neat little boxes we've constructed to contextualize everything we encounter. And people on the fringes deserve respect and happiness as much as you do. I don't want to make you uncomfortable; but I also don't want to be uncomfortable. I want to wear what I'm comfortable wearing. And not have people assume that my body is a weapon, when I have no desire to use it as one. Isn't that what we're supposed to be able to do in a free country?

What was the point of Memorial Day again? To celebrate the freedoms we've gained thanks to those who made the ultimate sacrifice? You can go ahead and make a show of saluting the flag. It's easy enough to do, and requires no test of conviction. But it doesn't mean a damn thing if you turn around and continue to oppress your fellow citizens - especially the disadvantaged ones. And I'm sorry if I sound cynical, and seem unappreciative, but it bothers the spirit of justice within me to know that the more likely a person is to pay lip service to the murderous military-industrial complex, the more likely they are to be an active contributor to the erosion of the very freedoms the sacrifices we're honoring were made to protect. So you'll have to forgive me if I don't want to associate myself with that crowd.