| Author |
 Topic  |
|
VLM34
Forum Member
|
Posted - 09/14/2008 : 12:58:38 PM
|
Some thoughts:
1. I don't understand the intense dislike of gawkers. Being looked at never hurt anyone.
2. We all accept gawkers when we're clothed, as on the street or in the mall. Being gawked at when clothed may be mildly off-putting to the more insecure among us, but no one claims to be harmed by it and no one pretends to be. Why should that change when we're nude?
3. At a place where nudes congregate, why should anyone care whether a gawker is clothed or nude? The gawking is the same in both cases, and equally harmless.
4. As nudists we want (or ought to want) clothed visitors at places where nudes congregate. Visitors are potential nudists. If some of them gawk at first, so what? We should welcome textiles, including those who gawk. That's how we grow the movement.
5. If we truly want a clothing-optional society, we have to accept that there will be gawkers for at least the first 50 to 100 years, and probably forever. Getting used to them now is good practice.
6. One of the biggest obstacles to a clothing-optional society is the firm belief of textiles that a nudist majority would be just as intolerant of diversity and just as opposed to individual choice as they are. As a majority, they force everyone to be clothed. They fear that a nudist majority would force everyone to be nude. As long as nudity-required places exist, those textile fears are well founded and will continue to exist.
7. Public 'nude' beaches are, in fact, clothing-optional. So are all the other public places where people are nude. Well over 95% of social nudists are either NOT club members, or are club members who are also nude in public places. They all seem to survive quite nicely in clothing-optional environments. The miniscule number of nudists who go only to nudity-required places would learn to get along just fine in clothing-optional environments. The sooner they do so, the better!
So, let's all toughen up a bit. We should all get on with growing the movement as fast as we can, and with working towards a clothing-optional society.
To do that, all nudity-required places need to (voluntarily) convert to clothing optional.
|
|
Country: France
| Posts: 154 |
 |
|
|
mikehfh
New Member
|
Posted - 03/17/2009 : 10:20:43 AM
|
I have been a nudist most of my adult life and have been a member of several naturist clubs
I have recently re-married later in life as happens quite a lot my wife is not a nudist but has no problem in been around naked people but feels uncomfotable when naked herself
We find it difficult to find a good choice of clothing optional resorts where we can take our vacation
we usually find that i have to dress to access some areas and my wife is excluded from others
|
|
Country: United Kingdom
| Posts: 1 |
|
|
|
go n nude
Forum Member
|
 Posted - 03/17/2009 : 12:13:08 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by VLM34
Some thoughts:
1. I don't understand the intense dislike of gawkers. Being looked at never hurt anyone.
2. We all accept gawkers when we're clothed, as on the street or in the mall. Being gawked at when clothed may be mildly off-putting to the more insecure among us, but no one claims to be harmed by it and no one pretends to be. Why should that change when we're nude?
3. At a place where nudes congregate, why should anyone care whether a gawker is clothed or nude? The gawking is the same in both cases, and equally harmless.
4. As nudists we want (or ought to want) clothed visitors at places where nudes congregate. Visitors are potential nudists. If some of them gawk at first, so what? We should welcome textiles, including those who gawk. That's how we grow the movement.
5. If we truly want a clothing-optional society, we have to accept that there will be gawkers for at least the first 50 to 100 years, and probably forever. Getting used to them now is good practice.
6. One of the biggest obstacles to a clothing-optional society is the firm belief of textiles that a nudist majority would be just as intolerant of diversity and just as opposed to individual choice as they are. As a majority, they force everyone to be clothed. They fear that a nudist majority would force everyone to be nude. As long as nudity-required places exist, those textile fears are well founded and will continue to exist.
7. Public 'nude' beaches are, in fact, clothing-optional. So are all the other public places where people are nude. Well over 95% of social nudists are either NOT club members, or are club members who are also nude in public places. They all seem to survive quite nicely in clothing-optional environments. The miniscule number of nudists who go only to nudity-required places would learn to get along just fine in clothing-optional environments. The sooner they do so, the better!
So, let's all toughen up a bit. We should all get on with growing the movement as fast as we can, and with working towards a clothing-optional society.
To do that, all nudity-required places need to (voluntarily) convert to clothing optional.
I'm in total agreement VLM34, respecting each others rights will help greatly towards a co/op world in the long run, most nudists bare without care anyway and careless who looks.
go n nude
|
|
Country: Canada
| Posts: 415 |
|
|
|
nude charles
Forum Member
|
Posted - 03/17/2009 : 8:21:37 PM
|
Well, mikehfh, you obviously have a problem. My suggestion would be to avoid nudist resorts for a while and go to nude beaches which accommodate both of you.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 210 |
|
|
|
msmykonos
Forum Member
|
Posted - 03/25/2009 : 4:14:05 PM
|
I prefer the option. While i would most def be nude i would like to be able to wear something. It's rather dictatorial wouldn't you say.
I also don't mind gawkers, if having the option means gawkers then so be it.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 15 |
|
|
|
msmykonos
Forum Member
|
Posted - 03/25/2009 : 4:20:28 PM
|
I think everyone fits into the 'gawker' classification. It's a social gathering, what are we not allowed to look at anyone or be offended when someone looks at us?
It doesn't bother me being looked at nude, it's the same as someone mentioned in the shopping mall. I'm very small on top so maybe if I had big breasts I would have dif opinion. i just pretend i don't see them and ignore it. I know its harmless.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 15 |
|
|
|
go n nude
Forum Member
|
Posted - 04/04/2009 : 07:28:34 AM
|
The times are or have changed since the days of very hidden away unpublic places (colonies) clubs, where one must be nude and never any exceptions, or you'd risk being tossed out. They've changed greatly for the better and people have a choice, just like public beaches allowing clothes optional and everyone's happy, provided they behave and respect each other. There are many places now tolerating our lifestyle and the public if they so choose can enjoy it with or without clothes, i know we've come along way since the day's of being hidden away and treated like odd balls or worse. Never telling one and being so secretive, why'd we hide it if was only mere nudity. It only opens many doors, for many to see this great lifestyle and the mythes that kept it there. Hopefully soon the day when mere nudism is excepted and welcome everywhere, appropriately of course.
go n nude
|
|
Country: Canada
| Posts: 415 |
|
|
|
COCR
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/15/2013 : 9:39:55 PM
|
Approaching this subject from the side of management, this is how we have handled it:
"At our clothing optional resort (small, with max 12 guests at a time), there will never be any pressure for you, or any guest, to do anything which you find uncomfortable. Our guests are mature and sophisticated; a live and let live philosophy is key to the enjoyment of an alternative lifestyle."
"Our resort is clothing optional, which means nudity is not required at any time. Most everyone goes nude around the pool area and inside the apartments, and you are absolutely free to go around free of clothes wherever you feel comfortable doing it and there is no view from outside.(Front door for two second-story apartments are above the height of the wall.)
However, not going nude at all might cause others to question your objective for being at a CO place. An imbalance between the number of people with and without clothes could also result in a loss of the clothes-optional ambiance."
"We will ask you about where everybody in your party falls on the "nude scale". That way we can make recommendations for the timing of your reservation so we can achieve the best balance between nudists and "textiles"."
"Actually, we decided to make this a clothing optional resort, so you have a choice whether you want to be nude or not. We want to offer a place where a couple can relax and enjoy their vacation together, even if only one is a naturist. We do expect that at least one of you is a nudist. This also applies if you bring guests. At least 50% of occupants of each apartment must be nude at least in and around the pool."
So far, it has worked out well. Many who come and don't think they are able to drop everything, quickly do so anyway. It is a small place and it doesn't take long until there is not a single "stranger" in sight.
It is actually funny to observe how quickly the nudists know and talk to everybody, compared to times when all guests are from the "other" camp and politely nod and say HI, but not much more.
Pura Vida Naturally
|
|
Country: Costa Rica
| Posts: 10 |
|
|
|
allnaturalwife
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/18/2013 : 7:28:38 PM
|
Personally I am not in favor of "optional" resorts. Quite frankly I think they almost discourage nudity. From personal experience over the years, I have noticed at my own club that more and more people are in some sort of "dress" more than completely nude. I have stated this position in many other threads, so I'm not going to "beat a dead horse here", but I do not think it makes people more comfortable to get naked when fewer people are naked..The logic in that is kinda silly. Furthermore all of these HUGE amounts of uncomfortable women who don't want to get naked..usually just don't get naked. And looking around at a bunch of clothed people at a resort...why would you want to?
I do not think a club or resort should be militant about it...however I wish there were more people who liked to "live nude" all the time..to set an example for everyone. Our family does, and I guess that's all we can control..hope others follow suit.
Jenn
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 689 |
|
|
|
NaturistDoc
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/19/2013 : 1:31:12 PM
|
I'm slowly coming around to Jenn's point of view. I just spent a few days at a well-known resort in California. It was a bit cool in the mornings, so I can fault people for covering up. But in the afternoons, aside from those in the pool area. virtually all the women were clothed. And most of the guests were either 'regulars' or residents. I couldn't quite figure out what they were doing there.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1054 |
|
|
|
COCR
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/19/2013 : 2:17:17 PM
|
Personally, I am happy and content with or without clothes, but I hate to be cold. It is also very much against everything I believe in to MAKE somebody do something (except the kids of course ;-) ) or to be MADE to do something. If we are at a nudist venue where it is either not that warm, or the A/C is blasting because others are too hot, I have a problem if nudity is a firm requirement, and I will not come back.
As business owners/managers of a very small nudist complex (in the tropics, so I am fine! ) we still don't want to TELL anybody what to do and find it more important that a couple who might not be quite on the same page regarding nudity can vacation together. "To cover or not to cover" has not presented any problems to date.
The die-hard nudists don't seem to care, and most of those on the fence have quickly decided to just jump in and toss everything. From what we have seen, it has actually been the men who were the most hesitant and took the longest to convert.
Don't know if size of the place matters or not.
Clothesfree, Naturally,
PURA VIDA
|
|
Country: Costa Rica
| Posts: 10 |
|
|
|
Daretobare
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/20/2013 : 06:29:49 AM
|
I go to a beach or a resort in order for me to enjoy my own self being naked in a safe and friendly environment. I couldn't care less about others dress or undress. They probably have as many reason why they stay dressed as I do to be undressed. I don't go to judge them and I'm pretty sure they aren't judging me either while there. So CO doesn't bother me at all.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 218 |
|
|
|
free2be
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/20/2013 : 08:44:46 AM
|
Well said Daretobare...my feelings are the same.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 706 |
|
|
|
gnarlyoldman
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/20/2013 : 12:14:07 PM
|
I am of two minds about this. For years I frequented a CO resort in Colorado. Often I was the only naked person. Most people got naked in the afternoon around the swimming pool, or in the hot springs in the evening. Most people got dressed immediately when they left the pool area. What was important to me was that i could be naked without criticism even if nobody else wanted to be naked. In mornings I could fix breakfast naked in the communal kitchen, or spend an afternoon walking about the grounds naked among clothed people. I could spend an evening using the computer Internet in the lodge, all naked while others were clothed, and the management was supportive of naked as a choice everywhere.
On the other side, I kind of agree with Jenn that when clothing is "optional" it tends to encourage clothed people and even members of "nudist clubs" are clothed most of the time. As a management perspective, a lot of their paying guests would not be there if they were required to be naked. So allowing the textiles supports the costs and creates a larger place for a naked choice. I would like naked to be optional everywhere in the world, but at least clothing optional is better than clothing required.
Bob
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 254 |
|
|
|
Nudony
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/21/2013 : 08:09:16 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Daretobare
I go to a beach or a resort in order for me to enjoy my own self being naked in a safe and friendly environment. I couldn't care less about others dress or undress. They probably have as many reason why they stay dressed as I do to be undressed. I don't go to judge them and I'm pretty sure they aren't judging me either while there. So CO doesn't bother me at all.
And I don't think there's anything wrong with that philosophy. If I had a "naked for me" philosophy, I might be happy just going about my business in my appartment nude, going to C/O yoga every Saturday and practice nude regardless of who is wearing what around me.
But my philosophy of nudism is perhaps a bit more romantic and less pragmatic (i.e just being more comfortable nude for oneself). Social nudity is for me a break; a getaway. An escape from the day-to-day-conventions that I find myself trapped in. A break from the mask(s) and barriers that I have to put on and that people around me put on. It's not just that I prefer everyone else around me being also naked; it's that it allows me to relate to them at a very human and simple/natural level. It also allows me to "connect" in a more authentic and profound way; even if it just three words or some glances that are exchanged.
When I was a nudist Dad, I also felt it was important for my daughter to interact with other nudist children; she was typically comfortable in C/O situations, but to me her being bale to interact, relate to and play with other nude children was a fundamental part of what I wanted nudism to teach her.
And again, that's just my philosophy. :)
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 503 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Nudist-Resorts.Org Discussion Forum Bulletin Board Nudism Clothing Optional Resort Naturism Nude Beaches |
© 2002-2020 SUN |
|
|
|
What are your views on clothing optional resorts?
