@obliguhl: Hmm, its interesting to view the progression of this subject from a historical context. I will look further into the origins of the classification of body as "evil." In India, Buddha has also been known to practice body-denial and asceticism prior to enlightenment, in an attempt to transcend the body and thus achieve nirvana. There are also other cults that still practice penance to atone for sins, etc., so the history on the subject is certainly a wild eclectic mix of countless misinterpretations, myths, and fallacies, multiplied throughout generations.


Thanks for providing this perspective WildEdibles! Indeed, the reason for this is that our clothed culture (which associates nudity with objectification and sexual heresy) has pushed us in a certain direction with a certain momentum (wherein flesh, nudity and sex are all viewed through an objectified, material lens, due to our cultural conditioning), and it will take time before we are able to effectively integrate these changes into our society in order to achieve a higher order of openness, understanding and communion. And naturism is a bridge towards breaching that chasm in a gradual manner.


So true! and if humans walked naked through the streets in our civilization, these ads would certainly lose their charm.


In my opinion, viewing naked old bodies has the potential of providing perspective on the nature of several things - growth, decay, death, humanity, and last but not least, the brevity of time. Over time, it would even alter our definitions of beauty and compel us to challenge antiquated notions of objectified beauty.


Perhaps you'll want to in the future, to experiment with various states of consciousness. I agree with you that clothing does indeed enhance intimacy by building suspense, serving as foreplay, and maintaining sexual tension. I also think that it's a matter of individual opinion and assessment of whether the pros outweigh the cons, or vice versa.


Thank you for bringing this up! This is one of the reasons why I made this post, is to understand where the line must be drawn, and if it must be drawn in the first place. Why or why not? I would also love to hear more on this.
In my opinion, prohibition of any aspect of sexuality can and often does backfire. So perhaps masturbation, sex, and orgies in public should not be prohibited either..

There is one more point I want to point out while I have been thinking about it

walk out side now snow and ice everywhere clothes being a matter of protection not against ourselves but protecting us from the elements ...we could never be totally naked this is why we invented clothing in the 1st place to protect from the elements either cold or heat

I love a nice warm winter night the wood stove going and kids sleeping over at a friends house lock the door and be nude the whole night

Also when I 1st had my babies I bathed or showered with them man it is so much easier to hold the babies this way they really r slippery Mom and child have these moments too and I really believe them to be special ones but there comes a time that we draw a line when my babies were not babies anymore was my line

I seen my mom and aunt change when I was young I remember admiring their woman body's wondering when I would get my own ... I just wanted to let you know this cause u were asking about children lusting over adults well I didnt I just enjoyed knowing I was going to be a woman one day like them

Fascinating discussion!



I think we need to uplift these prohibitions. Look how "wonderfull" drug [prohibition worked out; They become "forbidden fruits" and thus their (ab)use rises significantly.

It's true that clothing build suspense; It makes us more sensitive to sexual stimuli as it
deprives us of sexual stimuli; Similair to drug tolerance in that if you do not overindulge,
you're tolerance will remain low and it'll only take a little to get you high. Like that,
lack of nudity makes us more sensitive to the sexual stimuli associated with nudity.

But I think we've overclothed and overprohibited to the point were most people on earth are EPICLY sex-deprived and WAY over sensitive sexually. Our excessive sexual prohibition has made us so sensitive we've all become perverts to some degree.

I think we'd be much healthier creatures if we normalised and desensitised sex significantly. We need to stop fearfully prohibiting a side of ourselves that is, not only natural and normal, but furthermore is beautyfull and worthy of celebration.

So to that end: YES, do lift the prohibition completely; Let people be naked, masturbate and even have public orgies if they so please. All those surpressed sexual desires we have now are just going to turn into frustration & eventually into agression. So I say: Let it out.

The only forms of Sexual behaviour that should be (strictly) prohibited, are those behaviours that violate the free will of others and are (psychologically and/or physically) harmfull to others. This would include unwanted groping, rape and pedophelia.

I just don't see any harm done to anyone when a bunch of people decide to have a public orgy in the park. Some people may feel very uncomfortable about it, but how can they say they are being harmed by it?

I say they have a feeble mind and they shouldn't expect all the people in the world to tiptoe and live sexually prohibited just so THEY can be comfortable. That is intolerance and in fact downright tyranny.


We defenitely need another sexual revolution. Like in the 60´s, but more determined and persistant.

I agree about the definitions of beauty, but isn"t it antiquated in that it has been around for a long time because it works? We seek out mates that are attractive to us in order to propagate the species. Old people are barren and therefore not sexually attractive.
Getting older has radically altered my perception of the brevity of time. When i was younger i don"t think seeing old bodies would have made a difference. I just thought i had all the time in the world because that is what you feel when you are young.



I couldn"t agree more. I would like to add that i like to trip naked and, although i think that my body is a bit manky, i do very much enjoy observing it in altered states. I just wouldn"t subject the general public to it in all it"s glory. And that is ok for me.




About 20 years ago i was working in a garage and me and my fellow workers were having a little banter when for some reason the subject came around to child abuse. I explained that perhaps one of the main reasons that children become traumatised by underage sex is that society tells them that it is wrong. A deathly silence followed and there was tumbleweed rolling across the workshop for the rest of the day. I might add that this was not necessarily a serious belief of mine, just a concept that i hoped to put out to promote a debate. My anecdote is designed to underline the fact that a lot of people don"t want to even discuss children and sex in the same breath. I don"t mind doing it because i am not a parent but if i did have kids i suspect that my objectivity might take a knock due to an instinctive, parental desire to protect them.


A friend of mine was arguing with someone at the pub at closing time. The argument became quite heated and my friend exposed himself to his opponent. The police were called. Long story short, my mate was put on the sex offenders register (political correctness gone wrong). My take on the flashing during a fight scenario (i have also done the same thing) is that you are exposing your most vulnerable, sensitive parts during a physical confrontation to illustrate that, not only do you have absolutely no fear, but also complete disdain for your opponent. The "no fear" is an instinctive response and the "disdain" is cultural. This may illustrate that sensitive and reproductive organs should be covered, primarily for protection of said parts. Having a bit of extra protection in addition to my testicles receding during fight or flight situations is a godsend IMO.

I think it is a real toughie about the whole sex in public thing and i really do not think the lack of it is entirely down to some sort of cultural repression although i do think that our society is a little fucked up about sex (amongst many other things). I have tried the public sex thing a few times and have even had some Japanese tourists stop to observe us for a while and another time, in a park, a woman with her children came past. But on that occasion i was unable to continue.

As for public orgies, if my girlfriend or wife was taking part in them, i do not think that i would like it. I know that this could be down to my hang-ups about letting someone whom i love be free and do as they want, but i also think that it is far more related to my desire to be number one for her. The alpha mate for her. I also think if someone masturbated in front of my girlfriend i would give them a slap. Not because i think masturbation is disgusting. I think it is great and enjoyable, but no one messes with my mrs because i am numero uno, alpha, top dog, the stag with the biggest horns. Atleast as far as me and my girl are concerned.



I used to (puppy) lust over adults when i was young but i would definitely bathe and shower with my kids. Once they reached their teens they would have to start bathing alone.
I would hope to be as honest as possible with them but, like you, i think i would keep the act of sex for myself and my partner. Not because it is bad but because, for me, it is a private thing between 2 people.

But i very much see that my bias will also be influenced by cultural conditioning (which is also natural if not a little disfunctional).

This has really been a fascinating discussion so far, and it has illuminated upon numerous facets of this subject, of which I was previously unaware; so thank you for participating and sharing everyone!


Indeed, I did discuss this in the OP:



I do think that this line is a reflection of our cultural norms and traditions. Acceptance of social nudity would erase these lines, just as its prohibition created them.


Thank you so much for sharing all your perspectives SKA! That is a great analogy, and certainly helps me gain a greater degree of insight into the implications.
You have brought up numerous valid points, which will also help me to address the counter-points in an effective, logical manner.



In my opinion, there are countless things that are "antiquated," and have perpetuated, but not necessarily because they are the most effective route. Do they work? Certainly. But is there room for further improvement? Certainly.


That is where I feel the problem lies...in the acculturated minds of people, who are conditioned to naturally associate nudity with sex, even though this association is merely subjective. However, this association seems like a strong one because we have grown up in a clothed culture, which only reinforces this association further via prohibition.


Indeed, and like I mentioned above, clothing is not the problem here, for it serves many useful purposes; the problem is the prohibition and repression of nudity/sexuality. I also believe that social nudity strengthens communal bonds between people; so perhaps, the fight/flight situations among group members will gradually wane.

I'm sorry for not taking the time to read everything through, but some possible observations I have made + my cousin has made...

I think it is quite possible our relationship to sex and our need for sexuality is conditioned (I know we like to think it's not that way, with our system of psychology being kinda based on Freud's sex obsession and such, we like to believe that it's our human/animal nature to want to get kinky) by various aspects in our society, including the covering of body parts. If breasts, penises, vaginas and the like were to be uncovered permanently, it would strongly remove the draw for urges to undress and posess "carnal knowledge".

This is what makes laws and social attitudes against scant clothing so ineffective (just like Prohibition made alcohol drinking a national hobby), including the Muslim stance on decency.

My cousin pointed me towards an interesting article on Japanese teens, with whom sex is not a priority (or even despised) as part of an old societal system, he says it goes far to show how we (the west, and specifically the US, a country permanently in denial about its issues - not handing out condoms, promoting abstinence only while teens are fucking like rabbits...) take the "need" for sex for granted.

This has been another edition of MAO's 2 cents.

Thanks for reading.

[I did some skimming and have seen similar thoughts, sorry for reiterating.]

Speak for yourself. I think, if you are having sex with a partner (or yourself) and you are both in agreement over the particular act that is taking place between yourselves, no matter how depraved it may seem to the outside world, then there is no deviancy taking place.



I can see a whole load of gray areas surfacing here.




I have no problem with this. If i see something on the TV that i do not like i just change channels.



I see that statement as a little bit tyrannical in itself. What if the people who feel uncomfortable are in the majority? Are they just wrong and you are right?



Why do you see the 60s movement as not persistent? I think it has had a lasting effect on our society.. contraception, feminism, pre-marital sex, and same sex relationships (legal in England and Wales since 1967).



I agree, there is always room for improvement.



I think the prohibition of sexuality/nudity is on the descent. When i was a lad it was almost impossible to see pornography. Now its is everywhere at the touch of a button. I remember watching a film that was made in the 1930s with my grandad. The starlet in the film explained to her co-star that she was not wearing a bra under her dress. My grandad told me that this particular scenario was considered to be pornographic in the extreme. Now i am not placing too much value in the porn thing, as a lot of it is a bit crap and can promote sexuality in a negative light. But i think changes like these take time and, perhaps, we may have to go up some blind alleyways in order to find our way. Especially in the case of public masturbation/orgies.



In what way? I can understand that people in a nudist colony would have a strong communal bond because they all have a similar interest in being naked together. Do you think people will become more peaceful because they are naked? If so, why? Or do you think that people who are more open minded about being naked are more likely to be peaceful and community minded?

If someone was to annoy me to the point of wanting to hit them it wouldn"t matter a jot whether they, or i, were naked or not. In fact if their testicles were on show that would be the first place where i would hit/kick them . That last sentence was purely theoretical. I do not advocate violence unless it is beyond necessary. Unfortunately there are a great many folk that do. And i cannot see that changing in the near future. Whether they be naked or not.



I very much enjoyed that article... Plenty of food for thought.



I think that it is entirely possible. They changed the worldwide motorcycle industry (for the better IMO). So why not also how we view our relationships ?