Skinny Dipper

[description: "butt selfie" standing before a still lake in the evening]

The key to a good landscape portrait (under which category falls "nature nudes") is to start with a good landscape. Compose your shot, and make sure it looks good on its own. Then find somewhere to add a person, and do your modeling thing. If you nail it, the image will be doubly impressive!

While I was playing around at the lake on my new hard-shell kayak (using it as a cheap stand up paddle board), a group of teenage girls passed by along the shore and I heard them tittering about "guys in speedos". Previously, they had been debating whether I was a woman swimming topless, or just a guy with really long hair. (Sound carries far - perhaps surprisingly so - across the water). I only made out bits and pieces of their conversation, but I detected a negative general consensus about the very concept of men wearing swim briefs. Which is entirely normal. But the double standard still gets to me. Apart from having to wear tops, these girls weren't wearing anything significantly different (or less revealing) than what I was wearing. But the rules are different depending on your sex. (And that's not fair). The funny thing is, if I had just worn a top (an experiment I would try the next time I would visit that lake), they probably would have just gone on assuming I was a girl (not having had that close a look at me), and wouldn't have had any issue with what I was wearing.

If you think the notion of a guy in a pair of swim briefs is ridiculous, I think that's at least partially because men don't hold themselves to the same grooming standards that women do. But I do. Ideally, we would live in a world where men were accepted in the swimsuit of their choice regardless of appearance. You know, the way women are (as it's not just slim, young women who wear body-baring bikinis). But I would settle for, at the least, a more reasonable world that judges a man based on his individual qualities - whether he's fit and attractive, and looks good in a speedo - rather than automatically relegating the entire category of "men in speedos" to the loony bin because it conjures up a silly (if not downright repulsing) mental image. This is the same way male crossplayers, and crossdressers in general, are treated - in our minds, we juxtapose the traditional image of manliness with the outward cues of femininity, and the result is often a hideous frankenstein. So we write off the very concept, without acknowledging that, with a little bit of care and intention, some men (not necessarily the ultra-masculine ones) can actually look good in these styles! But this fact is completely overlooked in favor of judgment - the ability to point and laugh at another's expense.

I'm exaggerating a little bit for effect. I'm sure these girls meant no harm; they were just reacting to an uncommon and remarkable (in the literal sense of the term) stimulus. They said nothing directly to me, and made no indication whatsoever that they resented me sharing the lake. (And, of course, there is not infrequently a disconnect between what you express in public, and the private thoughts you entertain when you're alone). Anyway, every person who sees me wearing a swim brief and recoils in horror or disbelief - regardless of the negative nature of their reaction - is one more person who's actually seen a man wearing a swim brief. Whether one likes it or not, the idea that this is an acceptable fashion choice is entirely predicated upon the condition that it is one that [some] people are actually choosing. Which I sadly don't see happening. But if I can be the vanguard of that progressive force, bearing the brunt of negative reactions so that others who may one day follow in my footsteps will have an easier time of it, then so be it. It's far better than the alternative, which is to kowtow to conformist pressures and allow myself to be forced into wearing something I don't like, while the culture remains stagnant, refusing to change. I'll gladly be the trailblazer for a freer future.

[description: photos and videos of a man skinny dipping in a lake]

And on that note, after all the day trippers had left in the evening, and the sun was sinking toward the horizon, I was very excited to get a chance to go skinny dipping - if only briefly. I swim nude in pools at nudist resorts semi-regularly (in season), but it's a whole different atmosphere stripping off your swimsuit where it's not explicitly allowed - especially in a beautiful natural setting like this lake.

10/10. Would recommend. (Although I would advise a reasonable level of caution, for your own safety).

Garden Crawl

[description: series of photos and videos walking around a garden naked, with an erection]

Tell me walking around with an erection is indecent. There's not even any sexual behavior involved! Sexy behavior, sure. But that's not the same thing. There are tons of things that are sexy that are perfectly acceptable in public. And not only would it be unfeasible to ban them all, it would be unreasonable besides. I don't want to live in a world so prudish that anything that anyone could interpret in the privacy of their own mind as sexy is verboten, because of some stuffy notion of purity or whatever. I can understand that an unexpected erection could be shocking in certain contexts, just as the penis itself in a flaccid state (not least of all because they're generally hidden). But I still maintain that if you're comfortable with penises, then it really doesn't make that significant a difference whether it's soft or hard. You'd just as soon discriminate against the appropriateness of breasts based on their perkiness and cup size. Either take them as they come or leave them by the wayside - that's your choice. But let's don't be petty about it.

And on the subject of penis dynamics, penises are fascinating organs. Why can't we show all the wondrous things they can do?

Dick Pics

If dick pics have a bad reputation (and they certainly do), it's not because there's anything wrong with them. Like erotic media in general, much of it is produced without taste or skill - but it is my mission to prove that though this is the norm, it is not, however, inevitable.

Which is not to say that any of these pictures belong in a museum (necessarily). But my goal is to produce interesting pictures, and as an erotic artist, I think the male genitalia is at least interesting. Certainly, some penises are more photogenic than others, and it matters how they're posed.

Aside from the crassness of a genital closeup, the main strike against the reputation of dick pics is that they are, like a flasher in a trench coat, presumed to be shared with unsuspecting and non-consenting strangers. I make no defense of this behavior.

The statement that "nobody likes dick pics", however, is flat out incorrect. I know this from personal experience. The people who do like dick pics may not be the women who disproportionately get them - they may, rather, be more statistically likely to be gay men - but the fact remains that there is an audience for them, and that means there is a place for them in this world.

If you want to argue where that place is, and propose methods of keeping them where they belong, then I'll not only support you in that endeavor, but I'll even go so far as to join you. I like to be part of these discussions, and I think they need to be conducted among representatives of all sides. (After all, isn't that the founding principle of democracy?).

But there is very little under the stars that can be dismissed outright, and that sort of dismissive attitude (the antithesis of patience and tolerance) I find very unappealing.

Continuing Adventures in Pink Panties

[description: a man in sheer, pink panties stands at a pull up bar, with muscles flexed]

Would it be weird if I said that, somehow, I feel more naked wearing this skimpy underwear than if I were completely naked? Maybe it's because, as a nudist, I've internalized nudity in my mind as a perfectly appropriate (and non-sexually suggestive) outfit to be worn even in social gatherings (under the right conditions). But even among nudists, you don't often see people in their underwear - that is a garment specifically designed to be covered up, and not generally shown to other people (except, again, in sexual situations, and even then usually only for a short period of time before they come off).

Are there such things as underwearists? Maybe I'd feel differently if I shot a lot of underwear portraits or lingerie models... I guess it's just the perfect boundary between nudity and being dressed - the very presence of an article of clothing covering the usual bits (not altogether unlike what you would see on a public beach) tricks your mind into contextualizing the scene as one in which people are dressed, yet the sheer skimpiness of the underwear leaves very little (indeed, almost nothing) to the imagination. So even though you would see more if the figure were naked, your brain would immediately contextualize it as "a naked situation", but with the underwear, you feel like you're seeing something you're not supposed to be seeing.

[description: a man spreads his legs and pulls his panties to the side, revealing everything]

Although, there will always be those who say that a little bit isn't enough - certainly there is still the excitement of full exposure. After all, you can't indulge in the joy of exposure without, you know, exposing something. Indeed, the tease of it may go a long way in explaining the allure of partial exposure.

I suppose a non-nudist would feel the same way about complete nudity - and I imagine that's what a lot of people mean when they say they don't want to "get used" to seeing nudity. But even with that realization, I still wouldn't give up the comforts and pleasures of a nudist lifestyle, among them the ability to appreciate, on occasion, the aesthetic virtues of a beautiful body unclothed and - not through a digital screen, but - in the flesh, as it were. ;-3

[description: a naked man with an erection sits at the steering wheel of a car]
Can you drive my stick?

Water Sports

[description: a man in a swim brief stands in front of an inflatable kayak at the lake]
Apologies if you were expecting something different. ;-p

Aside from pretending it's a bikini bottom in my back yard (and for that it works well, because it's skimpy like a bikini bottom, yet designed to keep my "equipment" contained), this was the first time I'd taken my new ultra low-rise swim brief for a spin out in public. I'll be honest, when I first stepped out of the car, I felt awfully exposed. [And this is an interesting situation, because in an environment where exposure is explicitly encouraged, I would feel perfectly comfortable. But, even being an exhibitionist, I am still affected by community standards. On my own, I'd feel great walking around naked. But the constant anxiety of worrying about the disapproval of others (and especially legal sanction) is a powerful demotivator. And I say that as someone who is not generally susceptible to peer pressure. (After all, look at me!)].

Nevertheless, all I ever have to do to calm myself is just look around at the things women are getting away with wearing (without anybody batting an eyelash). I do this not just because this is what I want to wear, but for the principle of equality of the sexes. Therefore, I feel justified, even if I'm pushing against other people's expectations of what's "normal" or "appropriate". If you think men in swim briefs is indecent, you're entitled to that opinion, but if you don't have as much of a problem with women wearing little triangles connected by strings, then you're a hypocrite, plain and simple. Regardless, they must either both be restricted, or both permitted. (You not liking it isn't justification for restricting the freedom of others to do it). And obviously, I lean toward the more liberated alternative. So until women's bikinis are banned (and Goddess forbid that should ever happen - I don't think I'd want to live in that world), I'm going to keep pushing for equality, whether you like it or not. So either arrest me or leave me alone.

Here's a great little anecdote on that subject: I was actually waved down by a park ranger at one point and grilled for not wearing my life jacket while I was out on my kayak. I was confused, and understandably perturbed by this uncomfortable encounter - as the ranger was being especially strict on me, while other boaters just behind him went about their business without life jackets. I found out later, as it turns out, that the park ranger actually thought I was a child under the age of thirteen (for whom the wearing of life jackets is mandatory), and wanted to "put the fear into me". Can you believe that? I guess it doesn't help that I'm so hairless, and was riding a kid-sized kayak at the time. But he never once asked me my age, or let up even when he got a real close look at me. I was actually more concerned that somebody would glance at me and think I was a topless woman (as I've had that happen before), but a kid?!

Here's the upshot, though: during this entire encounter, the park ranger never said a single thing about my swimsuit. Obviously, he had more important things on his mind (and rightly so - we shouldn't be policing people's wardrobes when there are things like mortal danger to deal with). But like the convention staffer who told me to stuff my Pikachu briefs (but tellingly did not ask me to change into something more covering), I'll take that as tacit approval of what I was wearing!

See/Show/Hide (Redux)

As I teased back in February, I've been wanting to reshoot this one concept [NSFW] from a long time ago. It wasn't actually part of my original Daily Nudes project, but from the year following, after I bought my dSLR. Comparing the two greatly demonstrates a change in my life and photography that I've emphasized before - how I used to go around lurking in the shadows, but now have stepped out into the light. Even just having a place I can shoot outdoors in the sunshine (if only at certain, convenient times), is an exciting change that has only occurred in the last year.

[description: three nude figures respectively cover their face, genitals, and nothing at all]
See No Body, Show No Body, Hide No Body

Photographers will tell you that overcast conditions are preferable to full, direct sunlight - and there are good reasons for this. Direct sunlight provides a number of challenges, such as harsh shadows and overblown highlights (especially if you're shooting a pale model all or mostly undressed). But that doesn't mean that bright sunlight should be avoided completely. It's more challenging to work with (especially if it's partly cloudy, and your light conditions are constantly changing), but it can also be more rewarding. The colors are just more vibrant and alive in the sunlight, and especially for shooting a lifestyle like nudism, the sun itself can be an important character in an image. All that having been said, I think the sunlight was more trouble than it was worth for this particular shoot.

[description: alternate to last image, this time in full sunlight]
See No Body, Show No Body, Hide No Body

In any case, the concept behind the shoot (a play on the proverb "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil", often depicted using three monkeys) is to demonstrate three different approaches to censorship, and the sharing of sexually suggestive or explicit material. The first figure covers his eyes, because he doesn't want to see it. This approach emphasizes personal responsibility. By contrast, the second figure wants to block out the offensive material, preventing others from seeing it, because it makes him uncomfortable. This approach is far too common in society, and is the antithesis of personal freedom and choice. The third figure, meanwhile, is completely open and confident and isn't bothered by what's on display.

Similarly, the concept can be seen to demonstrate three different approaches to exposure - the first figure blocks his identity to remain anonymous; the second figure, his identity known, refrains from sharing sensitive materials; while the third owns his choices and is willing to stand up for his beliefs.

Washing Dishes

[description: short video of a naked man standing at the sink, washing dishes]

If you're wondering why I'm sporting a hard-on in this video for no apparent reason, it's not because I'm sexually attracted to housework (although it is more fun to do naked). This was the third take; on both of the first two takes, I splashed soap suds on my penis, and the coolness and wetness, coupled with the rubbing motion of rinsing it off, contributed to the erection you see here. There's nothing specifically sexual about it - I wasn't engaged in masturbation, and I wasn't even doing it to show off in front of the camera (as I've been known to do); it just kind of happened.

There's nothing indecent or threatening about "incidental" erections like this one, and there's no reason why they should have to be covered up. It's just basic human (specifically male) physiology. You don't even have to bring up its sexual role if you're explaining it to a naive observer - you can just say that a man's penis sometimes grows and stiffens and stands up. There's nothing alarming about that. It's a fact of life. If the mere sight of a phallic object leaves you in hysterics, then you need help - because that's not healthy.