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.
Thursday, July 4, 2024
Monday, July 1, 2024
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.
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.
Thursday, June 20, 2024
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.
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.
Friday, June 7, 2024
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.
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.
Saturday, June 1, 2024
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.
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.
Thursday, May 23, 2024
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.
Sunday, May 19, 2024
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.
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...
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.
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
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)