Saw a link to this on reddit today - a list of tumblr posts on the topic of being a woman in modern society - and felt like responding to some of the points being made.
#4. I won't deny that there are issues of sexism in popular music, but I don't know if it's really fair to assume men find insecurity attractive, based on love songs written to women who don't know how beautiful they are. The fact is, I've known a lot of girls who truly were beautiful and didn't realize it. I'm a model now, and I didn't realize how beautiful I was until people (other than my family) started telling me that on a regular basis. As a photographer now, I am amazed by how many beautiful people I encounter who probably don't do any modeling. I wish I knew how to tell them that without coming off like a perv or a creep.
#5. With the understanding that men are perfectly entitled to have opinions about women's clothing, and what they think looks good (and what doesn't), yeah, I kind of have to agree: men's fashion is appalling. Obviously, it's largely subjective, and as a transgender person, I find women's clothing to be infinitely more interesting and appealing than men's clothing, but I honestly think the whole world would benefit if it suddenly became acceptable for men to wear women's fashions.
#10. This. So much this. Absolutely agreed. I have no respect for a man who disrespects women for turning him on. I think it's related to the Madonna/Whore Complex, which is the expression of a very perverse religious perspective. Men possess these biological desires, but are encouraged to shame the women who provoke them. If you're gonna treat a woman like trash because she does something (or wears something) to turn you on, or to otherwise express her sexual agency, then you don't deserve to be with her or even look at her. If you treat your sexual urges as a sin, or a necessary evil, then you shouldn't be allowed to indulge in them.
#12. A lot of these opinions, while containing a kernel of truth, are somewhat hyperbolic. But I guess that's just an expression of frustration. I would wager that it's a bigger deal for women to remove their body hair than men because men actually have these sexual preferences for women, and maybe women don't so much - or at least aren't as vocal about it, which is something I hope will change. But regardless, I agree, I think men and women should be held to the same standards of grooming. And while some people will prefer to keep their body hair (and prefer others who do), my personal belief is that men and women both should shave it off. I think it's disgusting on either sex.
#17. Hate this. Firstly, I like seeing women's bodies - don't know why other people are so bothered by it. Like, "oh my god, looking at your body is making me think about sex, that's so terrible, make it stop!" Really? Or is that even what's going on? Is there something offensive about a woman's body shape, or feminine garments (like bra straps), that thinking about them bothers you? What's wrong with you? Secondly, I'm a nudist - I see people naked. I can handle it. If seeing something does make you think about sex, get over it. If you're so neurotic or sexually frustrated that the slightest thought of something sexual (how do you even watch TV, much less walk to the store?) shorts your circuits, then you have issues, and you need to deal with them. Policing women's fashion is not the solution.
#23. I actually have an interesting perspective on this, that's been developing only recently. Obviously, since I'm a nudist, I don't see what the big deal about any sort of nudity is. People should be allowed to walk around in public naked, the only restriction being that they are considerate of sanitation concerns. So, a woman's breasts don't bother me, any more than her vulva, or a man's penis and testicles. On the other hand, breasts are a very distinctive feature, and one that is also highly sexualized in this culture. So, it kind of sort of makes sense that they must be kept under wraps. I know, it's not really "equal", since men can bare their chests, but it's only because we define sex organs differently for men and women. It's not that I don't support topfreedom, but it doesn't seem to me that much more radical than advocating for public nudity - which I do.
#24. This is a very clever point. Of course, my opinion is that the homophobe ought to just suck it up. In fact, this is a great example for my argument that locker rooms (and restrooms) should be unisex. Why should homosexuals get the privilege of seeing the sex they're attracted to in various states of dress, and maybe even in the shower, when there are all of these unfortunate restrictions in place to keep men and women from seeing each other naked outside of marriage? It's not fair. Hell, I'm a nudist - I shower with people of both sexes regularly. We don't attack each other out of an animal lust - because we know it's not proper behavior, and we're capable of controlling ourselves. I think if we threw men and women together more often, it would quickly become apparent how important it is that we all behave ourselves. Keeping the sexes apart just reinforces - to both women and men - that "men can't control themselves", which is not healthy, instead of raising men with the expectation to behave.
#25. This is actually funny, because I have this problem sometimes, although it happens slightly differently in my case. I have some dresses I wear that I don't sufficiently "fill out", on account of my lack of breasts. So, the way the dress is designed, on one side, instead of my breast sitting in the cup, the fabric tends to hang loosely depending on how I position my body, and somebody looking from the right direction could totally see behind it. My BFF, who is a total perv (which is one of the things I love about her), always delights in getting a peek when that happens, but it makes me very self-conscious about how someone else might react if they saw me. This is actually as good an argument as any for top freedom - if people were less hung up on the taboo of breasts, it wouldn't matter so much if you got a peek of one every now and then. The same argument could apply to women who don't always wear bras - I rarely wear a bra, because frankly I don't need the support, and it's just another tight-fitting garment that I, as a nudist, could do without. I get self-conscious sometimes if, like, my nipples are showing through my shirt or something, but if anybody has a problem with it, I'm pretty much like, "deal with it".
#26. I know there is a whole lot of discussion about this - representation of women in fictional media, especially video games. Frankly (and feminists will eat me alive for saying this, but I don't care), I don't see much of a problem. Maybe there's a lot of male influence going on in what has traditionally been male-dominated fields (and I hope that is changing). Maybe there are some games that are sexist - who would deny that? But I honestly don't have a problem with somebody creating a fictional character with idealized traits, even where that involves impossibly sexy women in improbably revealing battle armor. Yes, we could always use more depictions of women who are not Amazon Goddesses. But I will never criticize a game for creating a female character who is sexually appealing. That's my whole beef about feminism in a nutshell, actually. Men finding women sexually attractive is not a feminist issue.
#27. Very interesting point. I am honestly very curious about how real and how manufactured the differences between the ways that men and women approach sex are. Although I disagree with the part about how men are taught to treat women as objects. Frankly, I think the whole "objectification" thing is overblown, and way too easy a scapegoat for people uncomfortable and afraid of their own sexual feelings. Maybe it's true that women are disproportionately seen as "sex objects". But I think a better solution than attacking male sexuality is to actually legitimize the treatment of men as sex objects too. It happens, already, but the balance isn't quite the equivalent of the females. I'm probably attracted to personality as much as any female. But I'm also very strongly attracted to appearance. The one doesn't negate the other - the ideal mate would be visually stunning and have a great personality. I can appreciate a beautiful model for her looks, even if her personality is lacking. And I can be friends with someone who has a great personality, even if they're not beautiful. I guess it's just a matter of stereotypes, and gendered expectations. You're not gonna succeed in making men care less about looks. But it would be interesting if we could get more women to admit that they think looks are important too. Unless that doesn't reflect the biological reality. In either case, that men are attracted to visual stimuli is not evidence that women are being treated as "sex objects".
Monday, June 30, 2014
Sunday, June 29, 2014
Blurred Lines
In a moment of startling clarity, I realized today how much I enjoy blurring the lines between art and pornography. Obviously, if you know anything about my work as a photographer - or even my writings as a philosopher - you know that my position is that pornography can be artistic (and vice versa). A lot of people like to draw distinctions between the lifeless studio art nude and the explicit hardcore porno, but those are the extremes at either end of the spectrum. The truth is, there is a lot of gray area between, and when it comes to laying down rules that distinguish "art nudes" from "porn", I don't think enough people give enough credit to how much gray area there really is.
This is, as it turns out, the focus of a lot of my work (both written, and photographed), so I can't hope to go into every nuance right now. But when it comes to the argument of whether or not sexually explicit images should be hidden from unfiltered public view, there are essentially two approaches to take. The first approach centers on the fact that a lot of pornography is indeed vulgar, and that's not something that people want to be exposed to, willy-nilly, without warning. I could say the exact same thing about explicit, nonfictional violence (pictures of open wounds and such), pictures of spiders, or other things, but that's a different discussion.
As a person who is no stranger to the world of explicit pornography on the internet, I actually sympathize with this approach. I think most porn sites are a bit much to handle, personally. Sometimes, I might be in the mood for it, but even then, people's specific tastes vary widely, and so the difference between "oh my god, that's so hot" and "oh my god, that's so gross" can be remarkably arbitrary, and dependent entirely on the person doing the looking. But this goes for vulgar, explicit pornography. Artistic, tasteful renditions of human sexuality are another matter entirely. There is a world of difference between a snapshot of an anonymous stranger's hairy asshole, and an artistic photograph of an attractive model's backside. I have no problem with exposure of the former being restricted or at least accompanied by a warning, but when it comes to the latter, I would find no problem plastering it all over the sides of buses, or on billboards, let alone hanging uncovered in museums and art galleries.
The other argument, which is an obnoxious one, is to pull the "think about the children" card. Obviously, modern standards dictate that children should not be exposed to sexually explicit images, and this pretty much pushes everyone into the corner when it comes to making rules about where and how sexually explicit images are allowed to be exhibited. Personally, I hold the radical opinion that exposing children to the reality of human sexual activity is a healthy thing, and that hiding it from them actually stunts their sexual growth and fosters exactly the kind of dysfunctional hangups that are prevalent (to an alarming degree) in the adult population currently. But, unfortunately, one radical's opinion doesn't hold much sway in the face of the full threat of the law.
Nevertheless, that gray area still remains. What constitutes material of a sexual nature and what does not? Is it sufficient for a person's genitalia to be exposed? Nudists would argue otherwise. Does it make a difference if a person is in a state of arousal? Does the tumescence of a man's sexual organ constitute a "sex act"? I would argue that, unlike masturbation, intercourse, and other forms of sexual contact, erotic arousal is a state of being, not a state of doing. I don't see why anyone who is prepared to view a penis in its flaccid state should have any problem viewing it in its erect state - it is simply part of the natural function of the organ.
And then, of course, you have questions about implication. If a sex act is not explicit, can it be restricted if it is merely suggested? What about if it's only simulated? What do you do when you can't tell? If a photograph of two people having sex is not explicit, and doesn't even display either person's genitalia, is it pornographic merely because it suggests the thought of sexual intercourse? Does it matter whether the people in that photograph are actually having sex, or merely simulating it? Is there a difference?
What if a photograph is taken of two people having sex, but by the way it's taken, it's not immediately obvious that those people are having sex? What if they are having sex, but you really can't tell, just from looking at the picture? Is it pornographic? What if you don't know for sure whether or not they're having sex, and you can't tell from the picture, is there any possible way you could classify it as being pornographic? And what if you do, just to be safe, then later find out you were wrong? What kind of precedent does that set for the censorship of photos upon suspicion of sexual activity, rather than direct evidence?
As you see, there are a lot of difficult questions, all of which exemplify the thorny nature of the gray area. And I like to explore those questions, explore that gray area. If I can take a picture that makes someone think twice about the rules we have, and how simple we mistakenly believe the issue to be, I'll have succeeded in my mission. So many people think they've got things figured out, but they know nothing. Wisdom is not the acquisition of knowledge, but the realization that one lacks knowledge. If I can shatter their simplified, black-and-white view of the world, well then, that's the most I could ask for as an artist.
As Terry Goodkind once wrote, a true Seeker of Truth can make a king quake in his boots with the asking of a single question.
This is, as it turns out, the focus of a lot of my work (both written, and photographed), so I can't hope to go into every nuance right now. But when it comes to the argument of whether or not sexually explicit images should be hidden from unfiltered public view, there are essentially two approaches to take. The first approach centers on the fact that a lot of pornography is indeed vulgar, and that's not something that people want to be exposed to, willy-nilly, without warning. I could say the exact same thing about explicit, nonfictional violence (pictures of open wounds and such), pictures of spiders, or other things, but that's a different discussion.
As a person who is no stranger to the world of explicit pornography on the internet, I actually sympathize with this approach. I think most porn sites are a bit much to handle, personally. Sometimes, I might be in the mood for it, but even then, people's specific tastes vary widely, and so the difference between "oh my god, that's so hot" and "oh my god, that's so gross" can be remarkably arbitrary, and dependent entirely on the person doing the looking. But this goes for vulgar, explicit pornography. Artistic, tasteful renditions of human sexuality are another matter entirely. There is a world of difference between a snapshot of an anonymous stranger's hairy asshole, and an artistic photograph of an attractive model's backside. I have no problem with exposure of the former being restricted or at least accompanied by a warning, but when it comes to the latter, I would find no problem plastering it all over the sides of buses, or on billboards, let alone hanging uncovered in museums and art galleries.
[description: a moody b/w portrait of a nude figure, dynamically lit]
Art
Art
[description: a moody b/w portrait of a nude figure with an erection, dynamically lit]
Porn?
Porn?
The other argument, which is an obnoxious one, is to pull the "think about the children" card. Obviously, modern standards dictate that children should not be exposed to sexually explicit images, and this pretty much pushes everyone into the corner when it comes to making rules about where and how sexually explicit images are allowed to be exhibited. Personally, I hold the radical opinion that exposing children to the reality of human sexual activity is a healthy thing, and that hiding it from them actually stunts their sexual growth and fosters exactly the kind of dysfunctional hangups that are prevalent (to an alarming degree) in the adult population currently. But, unfortunately, one radical's opinion doesn't hold much sway in the face of the full threat of the law.
Nevertheless, that gray area still remains. What constitutes material of a sexual nature and what does not? Is it sufficient for a person's genitalia to be exposed? Nudists would argue otherwise. Does it make a difference if a person is in a state of arousal? Does the tumescence of a man's sexual organ constitute a "sex act"? I would argue that, unlike masturbation, intercourse, and other forms of sexual contact, erotic arousal is a state of being, not a state of doing. I don't see why anyone who is prepared to view a penis in its flaccid state should have any problem viewing it in its erect state - it is simply part of the natural function of the organ.
[description: a moody b/w portrait of a figure, erection bulging in a pair of panties]
What if the subject's not nude? Can it still be pornographic?
What if the subject's not nude? Can it still be pornographic?
And then, of course, you have questions about implication. If a sex act is not explicit, can it be restricted if it is merely suggested? What about if it's only simulated? What do you do when you can't tell? If a photograph of two people having sex is not explicit, and doesn't even display either person's genitalia, is it pornographic merely because it suggests the thought of sexual intercourse? Does it matter whether the people in that photograph are actually having sex, or merely simulating it? Is there a difference?
[description: two nude figures kneeling on a bed, their hips linked]
Does this even technically count as "explicit"?
Does this even technically count as "explicit"?
What if a photograph is taken of two people having sex, but by the way it's taken, it's not immediately obvious that those people are having sex? What if they are having sex, but you really can't tell, just from looking at the picture? Is it pornographic? What if you don't know for sure whether or not they're having sex, and you can't tell from the picture, is there any possible way you could classify it as being pornographic? And what if you do, just to be safe, then later find out you were wrong? What kind of precedent does that set for the censorship of photos upon suspicion of sexual activity, rather than direct evidence?
[description: a nude man stands in a doorway, viewed from behind]
A subject engaged in sexual intercourse (really!).
A subject engaged in sexual intercourse (really!).
As you see, there are a lot of difficult questions, all of which exemplify the thorny nature of the gray area. And I like to explore those questions, explore that gray area. If I can take a picture that makes someone think twice about the rules we have, and how simple we mistakenly believe the issue to be, I'll have succeeded in my mission. So many people think they've got things figured out, but they know nothing. Wisdom is not the acquisition of knowledge, but the realization that one lacks knowledge. If I can shatter their simplified, black-and-white view of the world, well then, that's the most I could ask for as an artist.
As Terry Goodkind once wrote, a true Seeker of Truth can make a king quake in his boots with the asking of a single question.
Thursday, June 26, 2014
The Gender Scale
One of Kinsey's most famous and lasting contributions to our collective understanding of human sexuality came in the form of "The Kinsey Scale", which emphasizes the fact that most human beings are not exclusively hetero- or homo-sexual, but exist on a graded continuum between those two extremes - some being either more predominantly hetero- or homo-sexual, and many being somewhere in the middle (what we would probably call "bisexual").
In my personal experience, I used to be pretty homophobic (editor's note: in the sense of being fearful, not hateful), in no small part due to my cultural conditioning (a tradition which is thankfully starting to change). But in the process of embracing the truth and my own sexuality, I've become increasingly more comfortable with homosexuality, understanding that it is as beautiful and natural a part of human sexuality as heterosexuality is. Knowledge of the Kinsey Scale also helps in this regard, as it reassures those who are afraid of being incorrectly labeled to understand that, rather than being gay or straight, incidental gay experience or desires (and the suspicion thereof, whether by oneself or one's peers, and whether founded or not) does not necessarily mean that one is not still predominantly attracted to the opposite sex.
Although, if you do turn out to be more or less "gay", the ultimate conclusion is that it doesn't matter, because being gay is fine, too. And with this understanding, I've been able to acknowledge to what extent I may be stimulated by homosexual triggers, without being frightened or threatened by that awareness. In fact, it makes me feel more tolerant, and like a more well-rounded person - especially as someone who spends time studying human sexuality and exploring, as an erotic artist, what turns people on - since I can, at least to some extent, understand how "the other half" feels. (And as long as we're talking about being sexually attracted to men, does it even matter if the one being attracted is male or female? A straight female is just as "gross" for thinking men are sexy as a gay male, from that perspective).
That having been said, I find that I am still far more interested in and attracted to female human beings, both physically and mentally. Though I can acknowledge the erotic symbolism of the phallus, for example, I still find guys to be mostly gross and unappealing, and girls, on the other hand, to be incredibly alluring and desirable (leading me to at one point utter the phrase, "sex is just so much more fun with girls!"). Of course, this is not true of every female human being, but then the terms "hetero-" and "homo-sexuality" imply a certain amount of generalization (or at least the existence of further specifications), as few people are attracted to 100% of the male or female population.
Now, to switch gears a little bit - since my sexuality is fairly straightforward, but my gender is not - the transgender community has applied something of a similar approach to the Kinsey Scale to the question of gender identity - criticizing, in the process, the concept of the "gender binary", which presumes that a human being is either male or female. Let's call this "The Gender Scale".
On one side of the Gender Scale, you have stereotypical males exhibiting stereotypical masculine behavior, and on the other side, you have stereotypical females exhibiting stereotypical female behavior. And in the middle would be the "androgynes", those persons exhibiting some blend of masculine and feminine behaviors so as to mark their gender somewhat ambiguous.
Now, here's a caveat - since, as the transgender community understands, one's sex is not always aligned with one's gender, your position on the scale doesn't really depend on whether you are "sexually" a male or female (referring, usually, to your sex organs). You could place yourself somewhere on the scale by using a male or female symbol, indicating your sex (with alternative options for hermaphrodites, the intersexed, and other non-binary sexes), and then your degree of trans- or cis-ness would simply depend upon how close your sex symbol matches the end of the gender spectrum that's stereotypically associated with that sex.
But, nice as all this sounds, there are some problems. Firstly, I've been wondering a lot about whether I can truly consider my gender to be male or female. While I identify more with my femininity, I find sometimes that I do have some qualities that I feel are traditionally masculine. Ultimately, it might be true that I have different qualities associated with different genders (and I really don't think this is rare, even among non-transgender, cis-persons). And while I've thought in the past that it might be the case that I can switch back and forth between male and female (this is mostly true only with regard to visual cues like fashion), the closer truth may be that I am actually something of a bigender person, simultaneously (rather than consecutively) possessing qualities of the different genders.
And that's where the Gender Scale becomes complicated. There are just too many different qualities that distinguish the sexes. And while society imposes a lot of pressure for one gender to align with its own set of stereotypes, I think most people are going to stray somewhere. Maybe you're a girl and you wear pants more than skirts. Maybe you're a guy and you wear makeup. Maybe you like the color pink and action movies, or the color blue and playing with dolls. And how much weight do any of these qualities have in determining your overall gender identity? Can you be a gendered girl and have masculine interests (or vice versa), or does that, in fact, mean you are a form of transgender individual? And none of this even brushes on the complication of the fact that most gender stereotypes are arbitrary - why should girls be expected to like pink, and boys to like blue, in the first place?
So, you see, it does get complicated, and far from straightforward, when you actually take the time to think about it. Although, if anything, I think this emphasizes the importance of de-emphasizing the differences between the sexes. And isn't that really the goal of feminism after all? Except, in practice, feminism just reinforces gender opposition in the form of the war between the sexes. As a person with transgender experience, I have a hard time getting behind that, and it seems to me that a more enlightened approach would take into account the greater diversity of human individuality.
In the interest of true "sexual equality", we should stop judging people on their sex or gender, and whether those two things match up in the way they're expected to or not. Don't assume that women are feminine, or men are masculine. Don't assume they will always have the personality attributes, make the fashion choices, and share interests that are "expected" of their sex/gender. Don't assume that males always have penises and females always have breasts - if there are reasonable distinctions to be made, indicate that they are to be made based on the anatomy a person possesses, not on their sex or gender, assuming that only certain sexes and/or certain genders will have certain combinations of anatomy. I really think this is the enlightened way to do things. Am I being too radical?
In my personal experience, I used to be pretty homophobic (editor's note: in the sense of being fearful, not hateful), in no small part due to my cultural conditioning (a tradition which is thankfully starting to change). But in the process of embracing the truth and my own sexuality, I've become increasingly more comfortable with homosexuality, understanding that it is as beautiful and natural a part of human sexuality as heterosexuality is. Knowledge of the Kinsey Scale also helps in this regard, as it reassures those who are afraid of being incorrectly labeled to understand that, rather than being gay or straight, incidental gay experience or desires (and the suspicion thereof, whether by oneself or one's peers, and whether founded or not) does not necessarily mean that one is not still predominantly attracted to the opposite sex.
Although, if you do turn out to be more or less "gay", the ultimate conclusion is that it doesn't matter, because being gay is fine, too. And with this understanding, I've been able to acknowledge to what extent I may be stimulated by homosexual triggers, without being frightened or threatened by that awareness. In fact, it makes me feel more tolerant, and like a more well-rounded person - especially as someone who spends time studying human sexuality and exploring, as an erotic artist, what turns people on - since I can, at least to some extent, understand how "the other half" feels. (And as long as we're talking about being sexually attracted to men, does it even matter if the one being attracted is male or female? A straight female is just as "gross" for thinking men are sexy as a gay male, from that perspective).
That having been said, I find that I am still far more interested in and attracted to female human beings, both physically and mentally. Though I can acknowledge the erotic symbolism of the phallus, for example, I still find guys to be mostly gross and unappealing, and girls, on the other hand, to be incredibly alluring and desirable (leading me to at one point utter the phrase, "sex is just so much more fun with girls!"). Of course, this is not true of every female human being, but then the terms "hetero-" and "homo-sexuality" imply a certain amount of generalization (or at least the existence of further specifications), as few people are attracted to 100% of the male or female population.
Now, to switch gears a little bit - since my sexuality is fairly straightforward, but my gender is not - the transgender community has applied something of a similar approach to the Kinsey Scale to the question of gender identity - criticizing, in the process, the concept of the "gender binary", which presumes that a human being is either male or female. Let's call this "The Gender Scale".
On one side of the Gender Scale, you have stereotypical males exhibiting stereotypical masculine behavior, and on the other side, you have stereotypical females exhibiting stereotypical female behavior. And in the middle would be the "androgynes", those persons exhibiting some blend of masculine and feminine behaviors so as to mark their gender somewhat ambiguous.
Now, here's a caveat - since, as the transgender community understands, one's sex is not always aligned with one's gender, your position on the scale doesn't really depend on whether you are "sexually" a male or female (referring, usually, to your sex organs). You could place yourself somewhere on the scale by using a male or female symbol, indicating your sex (with alternative options for hermaphrodites, the intersexed, and other non-binary sexes), and then your degree of trans- or cis-ness would simply depend upon how close your sex symbol matches the end of the gender spectrum that's stereotypically associated with that sex.
But, nice as all this sounds, there are some problems. Firstly, I've been wondering a lot about whether I can truly consider my gender to be male or female. While I identify more with my femininity, I find sometimes that I do have some qualities that I feel are traditionally masculine. Ultimately, it might be true that I have different qualities associated with different genders (and I really don't think this is rare, even among non-transgender, cis-persons). And while I've thought in the past that it might be the case that I can switch back and forth between male and female (this is mostly true only with regard to visual cues like fashion), the closer truth may be that I am actually something of a bigender person, simultaneously (rather than consecutively) possessing qualities of the different genders.
And that's where the Gender Scale becomes complicated. There are just too many different qualities that distinguish the sexes. And while society imposes a lot of pressure for one gender to align with its own set of stereotypes, I think most people are going to stray somewhere. Maybe you're a girl and you wear pants more than skirts. Maybe you're a guy and you wear makeup. Maybe you like the color pink and action movies, or the color blue and playing with dolls. And how much weight do any of these qualities have in determining your overall gender identity? Can you be a gendered girl and have masculine interests (or vice versa), or does that, in fact, mean you are a form of transgender individual? And none of this even brushes on the complication of the fact that most gender stereotypes are arbitrary - why should girls be expected to like pink, and boys to like blue, in the first place?
So, you see, it does get complicated, and far from straightforward, when you actually take the time to think about it. Although, if anything, I think this emphasizes the importance of de-emphasizing the differences between the sexes. And isn't that really the goal of feminism after all? Except, in practice, feminism just reinforces gender opposition in the form of the war between the sexes. As a person with transgender experience, I have a hard time getting behind that, and it seems to me that a more enlightened approach would take into account the greater diversity of human individuality.
In the interest of true "sexual equality", we should stop judging people on their sex or gender, and whether those two things match up in the way they're expected to or not. Don't assume that women are feminine, or men are masculine. Don't assume they will always have the personality attributes, make the fashion choices, and share interests that are "expected" of their sex/gender. Don't assume that males always have penises and females always have breasts - if there are reasonable distinctions to be made, indicate that they are to be made based on the anatomy a person possesses, not on their sex or gender, assuming that only certain sexes and/or certain genders will have certain combinations of anatomy. I really think this is the enlightened way to do things. Am I being too radical?
Wednesday, June 25, 2014
Spending a Day at a Nudist Resort
So you've decided to spend a day at a nudist resort? Here's what you might be able to expect. Keep in mind that my experience is limited to only a couple resorts in an isolated section of the United States, but I think some generalizations can be made. Certainly, one of the biggest differences between resorts will be the location, and I can't speak for how similar or different resorts are in other countries. Also, beaches may operate a bit differently than private resorts, possibly having more freedom and less of a "club membership" sort of atmosphere (I don't know, I haven't yet had the opportunity to visit one).
Unfortunately, those that participate in social nudism still constitute a minority of the population, and the understanding and acceptance of nudist practices by the public at large is spotty at best. So, private resorts where nudists can gather and practice their preferred lifestyle without interruption tend to be few and far between, although they are scattered liberally across the country (try AANR's club locator [broken link] to find one near you). Unless you are lucky to be living very close to one such club, you will likely find that you have to head out on the road to reach the nearest designated clothing optional resort.
As you approach the resort - being located in a remote, out-of-the-way place, in the interest of privacy - you will likely find that the last leg of the journey constitutes a long and winding country road through what appears to be undisturbed wilderness. It is perfectly natural for some nervousness to settle in at this point - I've been going to nudist resorts for five seasons now and I still get that feeling sometimes. The resort will be clearly marked, although it may not be evident from the outside that it is, in fact, a clothing optional facility. There will be a tall fence around the property (or other privacy measures in place), and a gate to control access. At some times, and on some days, this gate may be open in anticipation of visitors. On other days, you may need to utilize the call box to announce your arrival, and ensure that there is someone in the gatehouse or office to receive you.
At the office, you will be met by a friendly proprietor (or volunteering member) of the resort, who may or may not be clothed. Either way, he or she will not have a supermodel-rate body. If you do not have a lot of experience in social nudism, this may understandably be a jarring sight; but once you get your own clothes off (which usually may occur at any point of your convenience, after you've entered the property), and are surrounded by naked people who are not all fashion models, you are bound to become accustomed to such sights remarkably quickly. At the office, you will be expected to check in (with positive ID), pay whatever fees are required for the time you'll be spending at the resort, and (especially if this is your first visit to this particular resort) sign a form acknowledging that you understand the rules of the resort.
Among these rules will be a blanket prohibition of cameras (often including the use of cell phones outside of designated areas), restrictions on any kind of overt sexual behaviors, a warning about engaging in any sort of inappropriate conduct with children (especially children that are not your own), and a reminder to use a towel when sitting on shared community resources (for hygiene and simple politeness). Penalties range from a friendly reprimand to being banned from the resort, to the involvement of law enforcement, depending on the severity of the infraction (as common sense dictates). You may feel that these rules are a little strict (personally, I think nudists are too uptight about photography, though I understand their reasons), but they are merely designed to keep the resort in business and its visitors safe, and to maintain a family-friendly (i.e. non-sexual) atmosphere.
Aside from these specific social taboos, and with the exception of the outsider who may not have internalized the nudist ethos yet, nudist resorts tend to foster an exceptionally friendly and laid-back atmosphere. People are there to relax and enjoy the good life. You'll find that nudists are notoriously friendly to one another. I've lived in the suburbs, in the city, on a college campus - and nowhere outside of a nudist resort is the friendly wave and greeting of two strangers more ubiquitous. This is keeping in line with the "social" part of social nudism, and though introverts like myself might find it a little awkward, it ultimately reinforces the welcoming and accepting attitude of the community.
After you have been checked in, you may be given a tour of the grounds if this is your first visit. Either way, you will eventually make your way to the campgrounds to pick out your campsite (or to find the campsite that's been designated for you). Often times there will be a common area close to the central action of the resort, as well as a more distant (and larger) campground for people who like a little more quiet and privacy. My experience has been exclusively with tent camping, but trailers and RVs are very popular, and some resorts have lodge rooms or condos for rent (you may have to call ahead for reservations). In spite of this, and the tourist-friendly label "resort", I've found that nudist clubs are more accurately described as nudist camps, albeit with a number of amenities. But your experience may vary.
At this point, you may be wanting to familiarize yourself with the nearest bathhouse. Contrary to what you may be thinking, it's more of a public restroom than a Roman spa, but with curtains instead of doors in front of the stalls - probably owing to nudists' general openness regarding the body. If this concerns you, rest assured - I am very shy about these sorts of things, and this type of environment has actually helped me a lot to get over my anxieties. Outside the building will be installed a row of communal showers for all to use - male and female, the young and the old - without dividers or privacy screens. If you're new to the nudist lifestyle, you might find showering out in the open, with complete strangers, to be unusual, but it's a valued part of the nudist experience. You might just find yourself making a new friend one day in a conversation while washing up. Those who want more privacy, however, will usually be able to find more secluded stalls inside the bathhouses.
So, you've set up camp, and you're ready to explore the resort! If you're lucky, and the weather's nice, you're bound to see lots of nude people engaged in sports and recreation, many of which will have dark all-over tans, showing their dedication to the lifestyle. But you can't always count on the weather, and if it's cooler, it's not unusual to see people in robes, or t-shirts (the infamous "shirtcock", as goofy as it looks, is well represented among nudists who are more concerned with practicality than vanity), or wraps, or other forms and combinations of full or partial clothing. Volleyball is the official sport of nudists; if you have the opportunity, you should give it a try! Nothing is more fun than sweating out in the sun with nothing but your sunscreen on - and do remember to put on sunscreen, or else you'll be red and tender by the next morning.
Nudist resort activity - on warm, sunny days - will be expectedly centered around the pool. Many people will be laid out in the sun, tanning, and others will periodically take a dip in the pool. Note that even where clothing is optional elsewhere in the resort, nudity is usually required in the pool area. That means absolutely no swimsuits! But what would you need a swimsuit for, anyway? Also remember to wash up in the shower (there'll usually be some located right next to the pool) before hopping in the pool or the hot tub, to keep it clean and easier for the owners to maintain. Kids will be drawn to the water for the excitement and recreation it promises - they tend to be far more active than the adults, who more typically like to wade around and chat with one another; the pool is a great place to pick up gossip!
The resort may have a snack bar or restaurant where you can buy food. There may be any number of other amenities that are specific to the particular resort, including libraries, clubhouses, activity rooms (sometimes designed specifically either for children or adults), and various recreational facilities, such as tennis courts, basketball courts, and what have you. Massages and body painting are also popular nudist pastimes, but I have yet to try either one. Most resorts make an effort to keep their guests entertained on weekend evenings during the summer. They may have live bands scheduled to perform, or DJs ready to spin discs while people let loose on the dance floor - some dressed up for the occasion, many others still nude. There may be potlucks or raffles or other festivities. Drinking is popular, and loud music may play until late on Saturday nights.
When you're all partied out, you'll probably make your way back to your campsite to get some rest. And in the morning, you can get up and do it all again - until it's time for you to leave. The resort tends to get a little empty on the last day of the weekend, as people shuffle out to return to their everyday lives. Exit from the nudist resort is usually much more streamlined than entrance - chances are that once you have your stuff all packed up and ready, you can simply drive out. If you experience a little sadness due to vacation withdrawal - do not be alarmed, this is completely normal. If you've enjoyed your stay, chances are you'll find yourself wanting to repeat the experience sometime soon. Congratulations, you are now a social nudist! Welcome to the club. :-)
Unfortunately, those that participate in social nudism still constitute a minority of the population, and the understanding and acceptance of nudist practices by the public at large is spotty at best. So, private resorts where nudists can gather and practice their preferred lifestyle without interruption tend to be few and far between, although they are scattered liberally across the country (try AANR's club locator [broken link] to find one near you). Unless you are lucky to be living very close to one such club, you will likely find that you have to head out on the road to reach the nearest designated clothing optional resort.
As you approach the resort - being located in a remote, out-of-the-way place, in the interest of privacy - you will likely find that the last leg of the journey constitutes a long and winding country road through what appears to be undisturbed wilderness. It is perfectly natural for some nervousness to settle in at this point - I've been going to nudist resorts for five seasons now and I still get that feeling sometimes. The resort will be clearly marked, although it may not be evident from the outside that it is, in fact, a clothing optional facility. There will be a tall fence around the property (or other privacy measures in place), and a gate to control access. At some times, and on some days, this gate may be open in anticipation of visitors. On other days, you may need to utilize the call box to announce your arrival, and ensure that there is someone in the gatehouse or office to receive you.
At the office, you will be met by a friendly proprietor (or volunteering member) of the resort, who may or may not be clothed. Either way, he or she will not have a supermodel-rate body. If you do not have a lot of experience in social nudism, this may understandably be a jarring sight; but once you get your own clothes off (which usually may occur at any point of your convenience, after you've entered the property), and are surrounded by naked people who are not all fashion models, you are bound to become accustomed to such sights remarkably quickly. At the office, you will be expected to check in (with positive ID), pay whatever fees are required for the time you'll be spending at the resort, and (especially if this is your first visit to this particular resort) sign a form acknowledging that you understand the rules of the resort.
Among these rules will be a blanket prohibition of cameras (often including the use of cell phones outside of designated areas), restrictions on any kind of overt sexual behaviors, a warning about engaging in any sort of inappropriate conduct with children (especially children that are not your own), and a reminder to use a towel when sitting on shared community resources (for hygiene and simple politeness). Penalties range from a friendly reprimand to being banned from the resort, to the involvement of law enforcement, depending on the severity of the infraction (as common sense dictates). You may feel that these rules are a little strict (personally, I think nudists are too uptight about photography, though I understand their reasons), but they are merely designed to keep the resort in business and its visitors safe, and to maintain a family-friendly (i.e. non-sexual) atmosphere.
Aside from these specific social taboos, and with the exception of the outsider who may not have internalized the nudist ethos yet, nudist resorts tend to foster an exceptionally friendly and laid-back atmosphere. People are there to relax and enjoy the good life. You'll find that nudists are notoriously friendly to one another. I've lived in the suburbs, in the city, on a college campus - and nowhere outside of a nudist resort is the friendly wave and greeting of two strangers more ubiquitous. This is keeping in line with the "social" part of social nudism, and though introverts like myself might find it a little awkward, it ultimately reinforces the welcoming and accepting attitude of the community.
After you have been checked in, you may be given a tour of the grounds if this is your first visit. Either way, you will eventually make your way to the campgrounds to pick out your campsite (or to find the campsite that's been designated for you). Often times there will be a common area close to the central action of the resort, as well as a more distant (and larger) campground for people who like a little more quiet and privacy. My experience has been exclusively with tent camping, but trailers and RVs are very popular, and some resorts have lodge rooms or condos for rent (you may have to call ahead for reservations). In spite of this, and the tourist-friendly label "resort", I've found that nudist clubs are more accurately described as nudist camps, albeit with a number of amenities. But your experience may vary.
At this point, you may be wanting to familiarize yourself with the nearest bathhouse. Contrary to what you may be thinking, it's more of a public restroom than a Roman spa, but with curtains instead of doors in front of the stalls - probably owing to nudists' general openness regarding the body. If this concerns you, rest assured - I am very shy about these sorts of things, and this type of environment has actually helped me a lot to get over my anxieties. Outside the building will be installed a row of communal showers for all to use - male and female, the young and the old - without dividers or privacy screens. If you're new to the nudist lifestyle, you might find showering out in the open, with complete strangers, to be unusual, but it's a valued part of the nudist experience. You might just find yourself making a new friend one day in a conversation while washing up. Those who want more privacy, however, will usually be able to find more secluded stalls inside the bathhouses.
So, you've set up camp, and you're ready to explore the resort! If you're lucky, and the weather's nice, you're bound to see lots of nude people engaged in sports and recreation, many of which will have dark all-over tans, showing their dedication to the lifestyle. But you can't always count on the weather, and if it's cooler, it's not unusual to see people in robes, or t-shirts (the infamous "shirtcock", as goofy as it looks, is well represented among nudists who are more concerned with practicality than vanity), or wraps, or other forms and combinations of full or partial clothing. Volleyball is the official sport of nudists; if you have the opportunity, you should give it a try! Nothing is more fun than sweating out in the sun with nothing but your sunscreen on - and do remember to put on sunscreen, or else you'll be red and tender by the next morning.
Nudist resort activity - on warm, sunny days - will be expectedly centered around the pool. Many people will be laid out in the sun, tanning, and others will periodically take a dip in the pool. Note that even where clothing is optional elsewhere in the resort, nudity is usually required in the pool area. That means absolutely no swimsuits! But what would you need a swimsuit for, anyway? Also remember to wash up in the shower (there'll usually be some located right next to the pool) before hopping in the pool or the hot tub, to keep it clean and easier for the owners to maintain. Kids will be drawn to the water for the excitement and recreation it promises - they tend to be far more active than the adults, who more typically like to wade around and chat with one another; the pool is a great place to pick up gossip!
The resort may have a snack bar or restaurant where you can buy food. There may be any number of other amenities that are specific to the particular resort, including libraries, clubhouses, activity rooms (sometimes designed specifically either for children or adults), and various recreational facilities, such as tennis courts, basketball courts, and what have you. Massages and body painting are also popular nudist pastimes, but I have yet to try either one. Most resorts make an effort to keep their guests entertained on weekend evenings during the summer. They may have live bands scheduled to perform, or DJs ready to spin discs while people let loose on the dance floor - some dressed up for the occasion, many others still nude. There may be potlucks or raffles or other festivities. Drinking is popular, and loud music may play until late on Saturday nights.
When you're all partied out, you'll probably make your way back to your campsite to get some rest. And in the morning, you can get up and do it all again - until it's time for you to leave. The resort tends to get a little empty on the last day of the weekend, as people shuffle out to return to their everyday lives. Exit from the nudist resort is usually much more streamlined than entrance - chances are that once you have your stuff all packed up and ready, you can simply drive out. If you experience a little sadness due to vacation withdrawal - do not be alarmed, this is completely normal. If you've enjoyed your stay, chances are you'll find yourself wanting to repeat the experience sometime soon. Congratulations, you are now a social nudist! Welcome to the club. :-)
Friday, June 20, 2014
My Life in Nudism (Part 2)
My Life in Nudism (Part 2) - Social Nudism
(Continued from here)
About a year after graduating from college, I finally found myself in a unique position, given my shared living arrangements, to have the house all to myself for at least one full 24 hour period. Shortly before, my curiosity about nudism had been piqued by a happenstance comment I had overheard during a social gathering. These were not serious nudists (to my knowledge), but they joked about nudism as a way of expressing their generally liberal approach to society's textile mandates. I had heard of nudism previously, but I had never really given it much thought, and I had honestly never associated nudism with the secret naked experiences I had had. But I did a little research about the lifestyle online, and I became intrigued.
The day of my domestic freedom came, and I decided that I would use the opportunity of not having to go out of the house, and having noone inside the house to interact with all day long, to try out the experience of being naked for a full 24 hours straight. From the time I climbed out of bed that day (having slept nude the previous night), until crawling into bed that night (and then sleeping nude again), I wore not a stitch of clothing, or other kind of covering. It was like one of my younger nude experiences but on overdrive. I didn't have to sneak around. I didn't have to strip my clothes off and quickly put them back on, depending on surrounding conditions and the fear of getting caught. And I could go about my normal, everyday tasks - including, in particular, sitting down to dinner - and wander all about the house, all while being nude!
That must have been the turning point, because after that, I was hooked. My opportunities to practice nudism were few, as I was still keeping it a secret from others, since it is often viewed as an abnormality, and non-nudists frequently complain about other people going nude around them. But especially during the night, and sometimes even outdoors after dark, I would take advantage of the opportunity to practice at-home nudism a little bit at a time. The following winter, I started a blog to write about my unconventional life, and, having mulled it over in my own head, I announced my interest in nudism to my inner circle of friends. It felt great to be able to explain myself and actually admit to the experiences I was having.
As a result, I became even more enthusiastic about my new dedication to nudism. My primary New Years Resolution for the year of 2008 was to make an effort to spend more time in the nude. That was also the year I did my Daily Nudes project, which ignited my passion for nude photography, and was at least in part a documentation of my experiences spending time nude around the house and in the yard at night - and occasionally down the street and in nearby parks in broad daylight! I could tell you myriad stories about my experiences in those days, and in the ensuing years, but I don't have the time right now, and anyway a lot of those stories have been told already on this blog or elsewhere (especially my Flickr account, where those photos were originally uploaded). Suffice to say, my nudist experience grew in leaps and bounds, but it wasn't until two years later that I tried social nudism for the first time.
It was largely thanks to meeting a kindred spirit who, although not being a nudist herself, was free-thinking and open-minded enough to try it out with me. You see, I was much too nervous to go and visit a nudist resort by myself. But with her by my side, we dove into the magical world of social nudism! I'd be more upfront about the specific place I visit, but a certain amount of discretion is appreciated in these sorts of matters, and anyway I have a considerable amount of internet followers who know me as much for my erotic art as my dedication to nudism, and I wouldn't want to burden said resort with attention from people whose zealous desire to see me (or others) naked in person may not jibe with the nudist ethos.
Now, I'm not a very social person to begin with - which, incidentally, is why, although social nudism is a very different environment than solo home nudism, and one with checks and balances in place to keep the sexual element at bay, I don't think it's fair to say that home nudists are not "true" nudists - but I very much appreciate the opportunity to go somewhere where I can be freely nude without fear of getting caught or how people will react, to engage in recreation and other activities indoors and out, with other people who have the same beliefs about nudity as I do (more or less). You don't know how important that is, in a world where most people think you're bizarre for being a nudist, and where something as simple and innocuous as taking a stroll around the block could potentially lead to an uncomfortable conversation with a police officer.
So, despite the time and money required to repair away to a secret nudist resort every so often just to practice my preferred lifestyle, I've been going back every summer since then - making this the fifth(!) summer I've participated in social nudism. I even stayed a whole week there two summers ago, expanding my record for consecutive days spent entirely nude from one all the way up to eight! People recognize me there now, and their passion for volleyball has totally rubbed off on me. The reason I'm reminiscing now is because I've made plans to visit a different nudist resort that I've never been to before. Since I've only ever been to one, it should be interesting to compare and contrast, and see how much different - or how much the same - this other resort is. I can't wait to find out!
(Continued from here)
About a year after graduating from college, I finally found myself in a unique position, given my shared living arrangements, to have the house all to myself for at least one full 24 hour period. Shortly before, my curiosity about nudism had been piqued by a happenstance comment I had overheard during a social gathering. These were not serious nudists (to my knowledge), but they joked about nudism as a way of expressing their generally liberal approach to society's textile mandates. I had heard of nudism previously, but I had never really given it much thought, and I had honestly never associated nudism with the secret naked experiences I had had. But I did a little research about the lifestyle online, and I became intrigued.
The day of my domestic freedom came, and I decided that I would use the opportunity of not having to go out of the house, and having noone inside the house to interact with all day long, to try out the experience of being naked for a full 24 hours straight. From the time I climbed out of bed that day (having slept nude the previous night), until crawling into bed that night (and then sleeping nude again), I wore not a stitch of clothing, or other kind of covering. It was like one of my younger nude experiences but on overdrive. I didn't have to sneak around. I didn't have to strip my clothes off and quickly put them back on, depending on surrounding conditions and the fear of getting caught. And I could go about my normal, everyday tasks - including, in particular, sitting down to dinner - and wander all about the house, all while being nude!
That must have been the turning point, because after that, I was hooked. My opportunities to practice nudism were few, as I was still keeping it a secret from others, since it is often viewed as an abnormality, and non-nudists frequently complain about other people going nude around them. But especially during the night, and sometimes even outdoors after dark, I would take advantage of the opportunity to practice at-home nudism a little bit at a time. The following winter, I started a blog to write about my unconventional life, and, having mulled it over in my own head, I announced my interest in nudism to my inner circle of friends. It felt great to be able to explain myself and actually admit to the experiences I was having.
As a result, I became even more enthusiastic about my new dedication to nudism. My primary New Years Resolution for the year of 2008 was to make an effort to spend more time in the nude. That was also the year I did my Daily Nudes project, which ignited my passion for nude photography, and was at least in part a documentation of my experiences spending time nude around the house and in the yard at night - and occasionally down the street and in nearby parks in broad daylight! I could tell you myriad stories about my experiences in those days, and in the ensuing years, but I don't have the time right now, and anyway a lot of those stories have been told already on this blog or elsewhere (especially my Flickr account, where those photos were originally uploaded). Suffice to say, my nudist experience grew in leaps and bounds, but it wasn't until two years later that I tried social nudism for the first time.
It was largely thanks to meeting a kindred spirit who, although not being a nudist herself, was free-thinking and open-minded enough to try it out with me. You see, I was much too nervous to go and visit a nudist resort by myself. But with her by my side, we dove into the magical world of social nudism! I'd be more upfront about the specific place I visit, but a certain amount of discretion is appreciated in these sorts of matters, and anyway I have a considerable amount of internet followers who know me as much for my erotic art as my dedication to nudism, and I wouldn't want to burden said resort with attention from people whose zealous desire to see me (or others) naked in person may not jibe with the nudist ethos.
Now, I'm not a very social person to begin with - which, incidentally, is why, although social nudism is a very different environment than solo home nudism, and one with checks and balances in place to keep the sexual element at bay, I don't think it's fair to say that home nudists are not "true" nudists - but I very much appreciate the opportunity to go somewhere where I can be freely nude without fear of getting caught or how people will react, to engage in recreation and other activities indoors and out, with other people who have the same beliefs about nudity as I do (more or less). You don't know how important that is, in a world where most people think you're bizarre for being a nudist, and where something as simple and innocuous as taking a stroll around the block could potentially lead to an uncomfortable conversation with a police officer.
So, despite the time and money required to repair away to a secret nudist resort every so often just to practice my preferred lifestyle, I've been going back every summer since then - making this the fifth(!) summer I've participated in social nudism. I even stayed a whole week there two summers ago, expanding my record for consecutive days spent entirely nude from one all the way up to eight! People recognize me there now, and their passion for volleyball has totally rubbed off on me. The reason I'm reminiscing now is because I've made plans to visit a different nudist resort that I've never been to before. Since I've only ever been to one, it should be interesting to compare and contrast, and see how much different - or how much the same - this other resort is. I can't wait to find out!
Thursday, June 19, 2014
My Life in Nudism (Part 1)
My Life in Nudism (Part 1) - Youthful Explorations
Nudity plays a part in every person's life - even if that part is the conventional regimen of changing clothes, bathing, and having sex. There are other activities - like sleeping nude, or skinny dipping with friends - that may be less common, but are still not altogether out of the ordinary. Children, in particular - and especially at young ages - are notoriously comfortable with nudity, and lend evidence to the view that humans are natural born nudists, and must be taught modesty and body shame to become the textiles most people beyond the age of young childhood are. And taught these things they most certainly are. Even into adulthood, society exerts a lot of pressure to conform to the textile ideals.
So it is that most nudists who were not raised in a nudist environment come to the lifestyle at some point (frequently later in life) after which they've overcome their textile indoctrination and rediscovered the natural pleasures of going nude. Where this impetus to revert to a nudist outlook comes from will depend on the person. Some are encouraged by friends, family, and acquaintances, and upon trying it, decide that they like the lifestyle. Others - and these are often the most fervent nudists - have some inward impulse that drives them to be naked more than the average person, usually because they enjoy it in a distinctly strong manner.
The latter resembles my case. I was unfortunately not raised as a nudist, but I can remember having a special attitude towards being nude that goes all the way back to my childhood. Back then, there were isolated incidents where I would strip off for the mere thrill of it - and this is perhaps not uncommon behavior for children in general. But these were usually private, fleeting moments, tempered with the realization that what I was doing was taboo, and that I must not get caught. I can remember two such incidents with some clarity: one involved jumping on the bed, and the other involved exposing myself outdoors - not to any person, but to the trees and the open air.
These secret "rendezvous" with the unclad life continued into adolescence, although at that point they took on a decidedly more sexual context. I can't say for certain why this is, but if you combine the taboo of nudity - in the absence of any positively nudist role model - with the sensual feeling of being naked, it doesn't seem so far-fetched. There were times when I would sneak out of the house after dark, and strip off all my clothes and wander through the bushes. There was no overt sexual element involved - these experiences occurred years before I discovered that the genitals could be manipulated to orgasm via masturbation - but they were almost certainly accompanied by a feeling of sexual excitement. This was obvious to me in at least one particular incident that I remember well, which occurred most likely during my middle teens, in which I recorded a video of myself (that I promptly deleted, for fear of getting caught) frolicking about my room naked.
Naive though I was, I look back on those experiences of my adolescence fondly, for they were filled with the novelty of new adventure, and the excitement of discovery. It's no mystery to me, the appeal of the "sexual awakening" story, which has a long-standing literary tradition in the form of "coming of age" tales. I only lament that it's treated as something of a taboo to indulge in, in this day and age. People talk about the dangers of experienced adults (never mind the adolescents' more experienced peers) "interfering" with "natural" adolescent development (if you think silence, shame and taboo are part of the "natural" course), but I can tell you this: I would have been in no way inconvenienced if I had not been preemptively shamed into deleting that video, so that others could view it now and share vicariously in the excitement of my youthful explorations.
I didn't even contextualize my experiences at that time as having anything to do with S-E-X. I was blissfully ignorant of the doom-and-gloom agenda of pro-abstinence sexual conditioning (I refuse to call it "education"), which would soon mold and distort my experiences of human sexuality - which, much like the nudity taboo, was an obstacle I would have to overcome in the ensuing years, on my path to a more enlightened state of being. On the other hand, I finally discovered masturbation, and began experimenting with relationships, although my sexual progress was stunted by the aforementioned conditioning.
At that point, I think that my secret nude experiences took a backseat to my new overt sexual experiences (now including browsing images on the internet!), but they never went away completely, and my feelings toward nudity never changed. I do recall at least one instance during high school, while sleeping over at my girlfriend's house, that I slipped out into the yard in the middle of the night, just to wander around a bit without clothes on. When I went away to college, my opportunities for such expeditions were reduced, what with the crowded living spaces and my focus on coursework. My exhibitionist tendencies were similarly siphoned off with my burgeoning interest in self-portrait photography (although that wouldn't flare up into a serious hobby until several years later). It was only after I graduated from college that the world of nudism opened up to me.
To be continued...
Nudity plays a part in every person's life - even if that part is the conventional regimen of changing clothes, bathing, and having sex. There are other activities - like sleeping nude, or skinny dipping with friends - that may be less common, but are still not altogether out of the ordinary. Children, in particular - and especially at young ages - are notoriously comfortable with nudity, and lend evidence to the view that humans are natural born nudists, and must be taught modesty and body shame to become the textiles most people beyond the age of young childhood are. And taught these things they most certainly are. Even into adulthood, society exerts a lot of pressure to conform to the textile ideals.
So it is that most nudists who were not raised in a nudist environment come to the lifestyle at some point (frequently later in life) after which they've overcome their textile indoctrination and rediscovered the natural pleasures of going nude. Where this impetus to revert to a nudist outlook comes from will depend on the person. Some are encouraged by friends, family, and acquaintances, and upon trying it, decide that they like the lifestyle. Others - and these are often the most fervent nudists - have some inward impulse that drives them to be naked more than the average person, usually because they enjoy it in a distinctly strong manner.
The latter resembles my case. I was unfortunately not raised as a nudist, but I can remember having a special attitude towards being nude that goes all the way back to my childhood. Back then, there were isolated incidents where I would strip off for the mere thrill of it - and this is perhaps not uncommon behavior for children in general. But these were usually private, fleeting moments, tempered with the realization that what I was doing was taboo, and that I must not get caught. I can remember two such incidents with some clarity: one involved jumping on the bed, and the other involved exposing myself outdoors - not to any person, but to the trees and the open air.
These secret "rendezvous" with the unclad life continued into adolescence, although at that point they took on a decidedly more sexual context. I can't say for certain why this is, but if you combine the taboo of nudity - in the absence of any positively nudist role model - with the sensual feeling of being naked, it doesn't seem so far-fetched. There were times when I would sneak out of the house after dark, and strip off all my clothes and wander through the bushes. There was no overt sexual element involved - these experiences occurred years before I discovered that the genitals could be manipulated to orgasm via masturbation - but they were almost certainly accompanied by a feeling of sexual excitement. This was obvious to me in at least one particular incident that I remember well, which occurred most likely during my middle teens, in which I recorded a video of myself (that I promptly deleted, for fear of getting caught) frolicking about my room naked.
Naive though I was, I look back on those experiences of my adolescence fondly, for they were filled with the novelty of new adventure, and the excitement of discovery. It's no mystery to me, the appeal of the "sexual awakening" story, which has a long-standing literary tradition in the form of "coming of age" tales. I only lament that it's treated as something of a taboo to indulge in, in this day and age. People talk about the dangers of experienced adults (never mind the adolescents' more experienced peers) "interfering" with "natural" adolescent development (if you think silence, shame and taboo are part of the "natural" course), but I can tell you this: I would have been in no way inconvenienced if I had not been preemptively shamed into deleting that video, so that others could view it now and share vicariously in the excitement of my youthful explorations.
I didn't even contextualize my experiences at that time as having anything to do with S-E-X. I was blissfully ignorant of the doom-and-gloom agenda of pro-abstinence sexual conditioning (I refuse to call it "education"), which would soon mold and distort my experiences of human sexuality - which, much like the nudity taboo, was an obstacle I would have to overcome in the ensuing years, on my path to a more enlightened state of being. On the other hand, I finally discovered masturbation, and began experimenting with relationships, although my sexual progress was stunted by the aforementioned conditioning.
At that point, I think that my secret nude experiences took a backseat to my new overt sexual experiences (now including browsing images on the internet!), but they never went away completely, and my feelings toward nudity never changed. I do recall at least one instance during high school, while sleeping over at my girlfriend's house, that I slipped out into the yard in the middle of the night, just to wander around a bit without clothes on. When I went away to college, my opportunities for such expeditions were reduced, what with the crowded living spaces and my focus on coursework. My exhibitionist tendencies were similarly siphoned off with my burgeoning interest in self-portrait photography (although that wouldn't flare up into a serious hobby until several years later). It was only after I graduated from college that the world of nudism opened up to me.
To be continued...
Tuesday, June 17, 2014
The Nude Life Model
This was a spontaneous idea that arose during a photoshoot the other day. The dominating thought in my head at the time was how ridiculous it seems to me that anyone could object to the treatment of the naked human body as a subject for art. Obviously not all bodies are built the same, and some are more "polished" than others, but certainly the physical ideal exists as an object of beauty to be admired. The Greeks understood that. And there is an unbroken strain of the fine art world that continues to believe that, in spite of those who may oppose it. When I look at an attractive body unclothed, I can't imagine how anyone could possibly fail to see the beauty in it.
I can't ignore the fact that there is a subjective element involved in the aesthetic appreciation of art, and particularly other people's bodies. But at the same time, it baffles me that anyone could fail to acknowledge that some bodies are, indeed, beautiful - or, at the very least, aesthetically interesting enough to be the subject of an artistic exploration. If you were, for example, to observe a nude life model with an appealing physique both in and out of his clothing - while he may still be appealing in his clothing, and it may be possible to take an interesting portrait of him that way - I can't get into the mindset of the person who would say "leave the clothes on."
I mean, seriously, who but an enemy of Beauty would require such a thing to be covered up and censored and hidden from the view of others? Why are people offended and frightened by beauty? How insidious is the culturally-ingrained but largely religiously-motivated indoctrination of innocents to make them believe that bodies cannot be beautiful, or if they can, that indulging in the appreciation of that beauty is some kind of sin or vice? There has to be a puritanical element to it - that any enjoyment in life is poison, and that any earthly indulgence of the bodily pleasures is a stain on the divinity of your immortal soul. That all such pleasures in life are a temptation conjured by the Devil to lure you away from God. Again, I ask - how insidious is that?
And as much as the religious themes are interwoven into these attitudes (sometimes subconsciously), much of it relates to a very negative approach towards sexuality and the body in general. People are so uptight about sex, that their attitudes extend to treatments of nudity as well. Noone is allowed to see your naked body except the one (and only) person you're having sexual relations with. Viewing other people's naked bodies is a temptation of the flesh, designed to incite libidinal feelings. A person who shows off their naked body to others outside of a committed sexual relationship is bizarre, and has twisted morals, and is probably sexually promiscuous. An artist who deems the appreciation of naked beauty a higher virtue than his own sexual purity (and the sexual purity of the communities he "inflicts" his art upon), is a deviant, a moral outcast, and quite possibly a dangerous predator. Forget how the artist is treated who believes that actual sex can be beautiful, too...
Well, I'm sorry to say that these attitudes seem to be disturbingly prevalent, even among those who wouldn't normally consider themselves to be either particularly religiously devout, or even sexually prudish (there is a cultural acceptance, especially among males, for a certain level of sexual license, provided it follows an approved course, and is accompanied by participation in the shaming of anyone who deviates from that course). But I don't believe in them. And frankly, I think that their error is obvious, when one looks at the true nature of the world around. I challenge you to look at a beautiful body unclad (and it doesn't have to be a particular one, but the one that would most appeal to you) and claim - not just to me, but to yourself, in your own heart - that it is vulgar, and not beautiful. And if you can do that, then you and I are at a fundamental disagreement, and I would appreciate it if you refrained from trying to mold my views and regulate my lifestyle so that it more closely resembles your own.
I can't ignore the fact that there is a subjective element involved in the aesthetic appreciation of art, and particularly other people's bodies. But at the same time, it baffles me that anyone could fail to acknowledge that some bodies are, indeed, beautiful - or, at the very least, aesthetically interesting enough to be the subject of an artistic exploration. If you were, for example, to observe a nude life model with an appealing physique both in and out of his clothing - while he may still be appealing in his clothing, and it may be possible to take an interesting portrait of him that way - I can't get into the mindset of the person who would say "leave the clothes on."
[description: diptych - a male model stands draped in a robe; and with the robe at his feet]
A man is not the clothes he wears.
A man is not the clothes he wears.
I mean, seriously, who but an enemy of Beauty would require such a thing to be covered up and censored and hidden from the view of others? Why are people offended and frightened by beauty? How insidious is the culturally-ingrained but largely religiously-motivated indoctrination of innocents to make them believe that bodies cannot be beautiful, or if they can, that indulging in the appreciation of that beauty is some kind of sin or vice? There has to be a puritanical element to it - that any enjoyment in life is poison, and that any earthly indulgence of the bodily pleasures is a stain on the divinity of your immortal soul. That all such pleasures in life are a temptation conjured by the Devil to lure you away from God. Again, I ask - how insidious is that?
And as much as the religious themes are interwoven into these attitudes (sometimes subconsciously), much of it relates to a very negative approach towards sexuality and the body in general. People are so uptight about sex, that their attitudes extend to treatments of nudity as well. Noone is allowed to see your naked body except the one (and only) person you're having sexual relations with. Viewing other people's naked bodies is a temptation of the flesh, designed to incite libidinal feelings. A person who shows off their naked body to others outside of a committed sexual relationship is bizarre, and has twisted morals, and is probably sexually promiscuous. An artist who deems the appreciation of naked beauty a higher virtue than his own sexual purity (and the sexual purity of the communities he "inflicts" his art upon), is a deviant, a moral outcast, and quite possibly a dangerous predator. Forget how the artist is treated who believes that actual sex can be beautiful, too...
Well, I'm sorry to say that these attitudes seem to be disturbingly prevalent, even among those who wouldn't normally consider themselves to be either particularly religiously devout, or even sexually prudish (there is a cultural acceptance, especially among males, for a certain level of sexual license, provided it follows an approved course, and is accompanied by participation in the shaming of anyone who deviates from that course). But I don't believe in them. And frankly, I think that their error is obvious, when one looks at the true nature of the world around. I challenge you to look at a beautiful body unclad (and it doesn't have to be a particular one, but the one that would most appeal to you) and claim - not just to me, but to yourself, in your own heart - that it is vulgar, and not beautiful. And if you can do that, then you and I are at a fundamental disagreement, and I would appreciate it if you refrained from trying to mold my views and regulate my lifestyle so that it more closely resembles your own.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)