I was on this topic https://www.anaturistworld.com/forums/topic/128/are-we-shaped-by-naturism-or-do-we-shape-naturism and I found myself wondering "can we as a naturist community be too tolerant and accepting?" (if people can ever be described as such?)

For many years we have shoved ourselves at the end of beaches, and hidden in clubs behind pine tree lined fences in more recent years our beaches and dunes have been brought into disrepute by inappropriate behaviour, the internet has misused our lifestyle and unfair protests have easily ended some family fun. Does our want not to cause offense encourage us to too readily cover up, give up and/or ignore negative behaviour around us or directed at us. In short has our character of being fair and understanding allowed us to be walked over and our reputation tarnished? After all if we don't demand our rights and fight for proper recognition and stand up against behaviour that is damaging our ability to be naturists then are we not in danger of eventually tolerating ourselves out of all opportunities to be naturists?  

In our Article https://www.anaturistworld.com/article/45576/bad-behaviour-on-beaches-it-isn-t-something-we-can-afford-to-ignore we wrote about confronting a couple of men for being sexual on a naturist beach next door to where we had already set ourselves up with our children. One comment came to their protection - body positivity and sex positivity should protect people from being shamed. Something as naturists we should understand. Yet another comment said that the action of minorities does damage to our reputation and could result in the loss  of our opportunities - giving those that disapprove of naturism the ammunition to attack. 

Can our want as a minority to be treated fairly ourselves lead us to be too ready to turn a blind eye to other minority behaviour? Should we not put the protection of naturism first? Is certain behaviour just wrong and it shouldn't matter if it is on a naturist beach or a dressed beach? Should we be intolerant of any anti-social behaviour and in doing so show non-naturists that we basically have the same codes as most of society and the only difference is is that we are naked? 

Are we not also in danger of discriminating? Can rules be different for male couples, female couples, male and female couples or individuals? Can rules be different for people of different colours, religions, genders, ages, cultures...? Can body positivity and  sexual positivity mean anything if we allow our body to be abusive, our sexual activity to be inappropriate and act in a way that shames us as individuals? After all is not bad behaviour that is shameful rather than the understandable reactions of others? Is the best way to find positivity to understand that certain behaviour is positive and other behaviour negative?

Anyone who behaves incorrectly can claim (and probably rightly so) that their own pain and history led them to it but should that ever mean their behaviour should be tolerated? Would we accept physical or sexual attacks, wife/husband beating, child abuse, aggressive behaviour through drugs, drink or just high emotions? How about theft, violent destruction, damage, pollution and littering? Would a completely tolerant society have any rules and any prisons? 

I think as naturists we do have empathy for others but where do you think that should lead us? Should our empathy ally us with rule breakers (after all many see naturism as breaking rules - even if it is supported by the law!) or should it allow us to have empathy with those who find the behaviour of some to be disturbing and offensive?  Where do we draw the line? Do we have to sell out to protect naturism or are we just doing the right thing for ourselves, naturism and humanity? 

What stands do we have to take to encourage the growth and understanding or naturism? Do we have to get tougher and harder to protect our lifestyle against protestors and do we have to be less timid to encourage others to notice naturism and learn to live with it and maybe even try it? Do we need to stop politely heading to the far edge of the beach and instead mingle throughout the beach?

What do you think? Are we too eager to please, too ready to turn a blind eye, or have we currently got the right balance of  live and let live?

I think one of the big problems with the protests is that they are outside third party locations and these venues don't care enough about naturism to stand by the naturist event against a handful of aggressive protestors. There have been a few regular swims that have had to change their admission because the venues have feared the bad press, protesting and wish to protect their staff from the violent attitude of the protests. To me that is all the more reasons to stand firm and chose the side of naturism - after all it is basically allowing terrorist style activity to win. Bullies should be confronted and not just by naturists but by the venues and the other people who use that venue. Where do the venues allegiances lie? With regular, harmless and positive cliental or a handful of thugs with dogs who are probably not even local let alone use the facilities. 

We would love to see the various large organisations talking and communicating here on ANW. To show their thoughts and attitudes, to promote themselves, gather support, encourage new members and get to know how individuals are thinking all over the world. Encourage growth here and importantly start to actually take part in a wider and global community. There is not enough unity. We have actually had some organisations say that the ANW community isn't based in their country and would need something more local/nationally based - an attitude we find bewildering. Isn't a large part of naturism about travel and tourism anyway? But more importantly isn't naturism a universal lifestyle that encourages a lack of "pigeonholing" into nations, religions, gender, age etc. Isn't that part of the whole attraction? Removing our badges, uniforms and labels? 

I think it is great that the national/regional societies are supporting the clubs within them but to bring people to those clubs they also need to reach out. Similarly clubs rely on the national organisations for their promoting/memberships so what you end up with is a closed circuit. Nice and cosy but where does the fresh blood come from? 

There is a danger that individuals and smal groups fighting for naturism can actually have an adverse effect. Someone protesting against being made to cover up can be seen by the general public as a trouble maker and exhibitionist. This can actually make people think that naturists are just oddballs. I remember when I first became a vegetarian many people still considered that as odd and others found it threatening (as people often do with things that don't fit their own beliefs). Today in the UK it is seen as a normal part of life for many and supermarkets and restaurants all embrace the choice and many products have also changed their ingredients to not lose out on this % of society. However. some countries still see vegetarians as very alien.

I think this is part of the issue with naturism - some societies seem to get it, others are completely against it, some find it threatening and others fear the sexuality of it. Then some countries have more people who do misbehave under the name of naturism more than others and that doesn't help. We need stronger tactics and a more unified attitude and we need it to be organised. 

On a local level I feel naturists should work with non-naturists to clean up beaches  both sexually and environmentally and clearly show their true colours. Clubs should run locally based events that show a care for the community and also shows that they have nothing to hide and that they are welcoming. It may sound crazy but they could have dressed open days for local families from a nearby school to come and let their children use the facilities and get to see how pleasant it all really is with the idea that they understand that the only difference is that normally people do this without clothing. Take away the secretive idea and offer those that visited a chance to return the next week and try it naked...I think the biggest thing we have to fight is mistrust and misjudgement and if anything on a worldwide scale this is probably getting worse - partly due to the internet encouraging paranoia and also being so sexual. Parts of the world are reacting with a prohibition type fear and confusion and it isn't just bad for naturism - it is bad for everyone. As the divide between good and bad sexual behaviour and possibly behaviour in general and basic standards  seems to be widening.

All of these comments are interesting and point to the complexity of the situation.  Perhaps we as a group are not "forceful" enough but changing attitudes takes time.

What comes to mind (since movies often enter discussions here) is the movie "Money Ball", the story of how Billy Bean transformed baseball by using advanced statistics.  The scene that comes to mind is the one where Billy (played by Matt Damon) is meeting with the owner of the Boston Red Sox.  The owner of the Red Sox makes the comment that the first one through the wall is going to get bloody, the reception Billy got from his scouts when he started making his changes.  To change the perception of naturism is not going to be easy but progress is being made.  Florida's Pasco county is the home to the largest number of naturist resorts in the US, but one of them (Caliente) has a dubious reputation.  Here in my area, I visited one about 40 years ago (prior to being married).  I was informally told very quickly that it was more of a swingers resort and without a partner I was not really welcome.  Fast forward and the same venue cleaned up their act.  They're now members of the local chamber of commerce and have hosted (clothed) chamber meetings on site.  They are also running ads in local publications that plainly state what they are.  Change is possible but it takes time.

Will I see more of this?  Not likely but for the younger members on this forum there is always hope.

I think it's always a virtue to be tolerant and accepting.  In the past, it's called "none of my business", and so I moved on doing something else.  Today, social media created a business out of making everything our business.  The problem of our world now is that it's too easy to pass on judgement based on too little information.  People are no longer willing to spend time to learn about anything but they are still encouraged to form and express an opinion on everything and everyone.  As a result the voices at both ends of the spectrum shout out extra loud, and the silent majority in between becomes extra quiet.  Social media takes this populace view of the world to the extreme.  In time, people are conditioned to taking a side in everything, even though they really don't care about the issue at all to begin with.

For naturism, it used to "none of my business" for most textiles.  Now, the internet made a business out of nudity by providing so much of it in the line of pornography, that the millions of textiles accessing it in secret felt imperative to publicly condemn it.  This hypocrisy combined with the easy flow of information erases the space for our existence.  20 years ago you could join a naturist club, spent all the weekend there, without having to worry about "people finding out".  The only people who knew, were the same naturists you met every week.  There was no public posting of what you did in a social setting.  Photos and videos could not be duplicated unless you allowed it.  There was no "Forward" or "Share" or "Like" or "Dislike" to worry about.  There was a safe space for naturism to exist and flourish, and it's evident through the vast number of clubs, publications, and organized activities.  People felt protected and brought along the whole family, and then became confident enough to invite their curious friends and neighbours.  That sense of security disappeared together with the space to live a nude and private life.

I am not against being vocal about the argument for naturism nonetheless.  Many aspects of life once considered alternative have come to the forefront of seeking normalization.  Naturism should have its voice among these.  The problem is that if people are tolerating and accepting naturism because they decided to be the tolerant and accepting kind of people, then it is missing the point.  I want to see naturism go back to that "none of my business" state for good.  There's no need to force textiles to be naturists, or accepting naturists.  I just need the hypocrites to move on and leave us alone, as opposed to making rules on how much skin is too much in a non-pornographic picture, when the same rules in fact allow all the skin you want in a pornographic one.

Steve mentioned this topic earlier in the week and it has made me consider it for this week's Forum Friday. 

At the end of Marc's recent blog: https://anaturistworld.com/member-blog/can-you-be-a-naturist-and-enjoy-porn-a-conversation-we-ve-avoided-for-too-long Marc writes

"So… Can You Be a Naturist and Enjoy Porn?

Yes. Completely. Peacefully. Without guilt.

You can lie on a naturist beach and feel the breeze on your skin, knowing that later, in the privacy of your home, you might explore your erot-ic imagination through porn. One experience doesn’t stain or diminish the other.

They belong to different emotional landscapes. They coexist because we do.

And if naturism can’t make room for the full human being, then it’s not a philosophy of freedom anymore — it becomes another place where people feel the need to hide.

I don’t want that. And I suspect you don’t either.

Naturism should remain a place where honesty feels safe, where bodies feel welcome, and where humanity — the whole messy, sensual, curious, beautiful spectrum of it — doesn’t need to hide in the shadows."

There are a fascinating group of comments in response. They are worth reading, and as ever Marc supplies fair and reasonable arguments in defence of his claim. 

One of Steve's comments brings this topic into the conversation: "Philosophically I agree with the idea that there is a freedom of choice that should be a sacred and powerful part of being a human. We want the power to be naturists although other people do not like the idea. We should fight for our human right to be innocently naked without condemnation and censorship. Just as we should for example fight for the power of having free speech. Yet free speech is abused by some and used to promote hatred, bigotry and harm. As naturists we want to see the world be a more understanding and welcoming place, giving people the freedom to chose because that freedom of choice is something we understand as valuable to naturism. But I am reminded of this Forum topic https://www.anaturistworld.com/forums/topic/145/are-naturists-too-tolerant-and-accepting-for-their-own-good in as much as good intentions and fair play are very fine in principal but in reality it can often be used against us. One example, and there are several I can think of: I have heard/read many naturists defend people rights to have sex in the dunes. "Who are we to judge? Each to their own. I wouldn't do it but as long as children do not see...." Such a stance can seem very fair, but it ignores a whole string of social issues not least that it is not just children who can get hurt by seeing such behaviour, the environmental implications of being in the dunes at all and the harm it does to the reputation of naturism: in our acceptance of it and also people assuming the people doing it are naturists. Surely we as naturists can be accepting of many things and many people but recognise that some things are just wrong, damaging and harmful to society and naturism and we need to draw moral lines.
It seems to me that we have a moral duty in embracing naturism to recognise the social harm created by pornography. True to the definition if naturism itself: "a lifestyle in harmony with nature, emphasizing communal nudity for self-respect, respect for others, and environmental appreciation, promoting health and well-being without sexual connotations" pornography is encouraging people to not just see nudity as sexual but also to disrespect themselves (as a voyeur or as a contributor to porn) and disrespect others (seeing people as sexual objects that exist for gratification). We also have to look at the wider social implications. Why people take part in porn, how it makes them feels about themselves, the crime and abuse involved, the lessons it teaches young and old, the knock on effects it can have on people being abused, objectified and miss used in other aspects of life, and much more.
It seems to me that naturism should be on the opposite side of porn and be proud to make that stand in defence of a more respectful society. We are all human, we all have our failings, and we should want to be as fair and kind as possible, but sometimes we have to decide how we show respect, and what we respect, and that can mean making some tough calls on exactly how accepting we should be with various traits of being human. It isn't our job as naturists to morally judge and police the world and condemn aspects of human weakness, but that doesn't mean we have to embrace it and give it the thumbs up either. The passion for porn does a lot more harm than good, and we shouldn't be afraid of encouraging others of seeing that. It does feel to me that being a naturist and liking porn is a little like being a health fanatic who likes smoking. The connection doesn't really make sense. They are opposing ideas."

And I think the whole blog and all the comments that follow so far are in tune with the debate in this topic. 

Naturists do have a want to come over as fair and accepting people. And maybe because, as Steve points out above, we want our lifestyle to be accepted. We know it is healthy and harmless, but that some people find it shocking. Some people just do not want to see other people naked and they find naturism offensive and what could be described as pornographic because of that. So maybe we stereotypically feel that we have to be a little  more accepting of other choices to play in a fair and equal field. We also feel people should be able to make choices for themselves.   

We want naturism to be good and fair - as Marc says: "And if naturism can’t make room for the full human being, then it’s not a philosophy of freedom anymore — it becomes another place where people feel the need to hide."

But we have a fair argument that naturism is something people shouldn't be against, it may be misunderstood, and people may not be interested in seeing other people naked, but real naturism is something that is positive. And maybe we also need to contemplate the idea that we are not naturists because we want to see other people naked. Those that say they do not like naturism for this reason fail to see the deeper point. I am not a naturist because I want to see other people naked, I am a naturist because I do not feel that it is always necessary to wear clothes, that there is nothing shocking about the human body, and it is the constant sexualisation of it that makes it appear offensive. I want to be able to be naked when it is sensible and comfortable to do so, and feel no one should care. We do not do it because we enjoy seeing other people naked. Though we may enjoy seeing them happy, relaxed and at ease with themselves and others. Just as it is nice to see children playing without it being creepy, the world has lost this, and there is a paranoia that being a person who enjoys seeing humans happy, interacting and simply participating in this world is somehow voyeuristic. People are afraid of what makes them human - social interaction. Just as we are afraid of our human bodies. I feel many people object to naturism because they think that if they do they are showing they are not perverts who like seeing people naked. They do not want to see that this is a non-sexuality to nudity that they can be relaxed about. It is like the Emperors New Clothes. They feel there is a need to find the naked form offensively sexual because they are told it is. They have to voice that it is to be part of that thinking, and by voicing it they feed the thinking encouraging society to believe it. 

So back to this topic and Marc's argument. Maybe there are times that we are too fair? If we always look to embracing the "full human being" does that mean we need to accept the negatives of the human condition? War atrocities, rape and abuse, violent crime and robbery. Do we welcome people taking drugs on the beach next to our picnics, or standing in the dunes playing with themselves as they watch us sunbathe? Do we welcome big  things like child abuse to be rampant on the internet, or little things like litter to be thrown on our streets, beaches and countryside? There is a lot of negativity in the world that aspects of the human race embrace. Without decisions on what is acceptable and unacceptable we have anarchy and a world that is fairer for some but a lot unfairer for others. 

The last time I posted for ANW on social media I read a post by a "naturist woman" that was basically saying two things Nudity is not always sexual fair point, but then When it is sexual there is nothing wrong with it. That we should be allowed to have sex in public and on beaches. That sex is a beautiful and natural thing and no one should mind seeing it. Though we should hide it from children. Once again we step into a world where we are looking to be fair and make excuses and say everything goes. Maybe somewhere along the line we diverted from a natural world of having sexual connections in public. After all many animals do not hide away. But it is a world that we now have and we have to find a way of living within it. The fact that She believes we should hide it from children shows that she knows this world cannot really accept such an idea. It is not OK for children, protect the innocent. But if it really is something that deserves a place in the public arena then why would it be something that is shocking to children? And if it is shocking to children, when do you draw a line? At a certain mental or physical age? How about those people who are carrying emotional trauma that places them in a childlike state when it comes to sexual encounters? 

This argument is something that we want naturism to consider. Every time someone says "naturism is OK but not in front of the children" they are condemning it into a damaging and dangerous experience for some, suggesting it is sexual and minoritising it into a darker world. Sadly this idea is being played out by genuine naturists, naturist events, naturist venues and even naturist bodies - they should know better!  Not in front of the children means not in front of anyone who doesn't want the adult world of nudity thrust upon them. 

The world of porn is the world of "adult nudity - not in front of the children" and that world is not a pleasant one. Through using general social media to promote naturism I have had literally thousands of close up of penises sent to me in various states of arousal, come across countless sexual acts, been promised all sorts of sexual encounters, threatened with rape and murder, and worse (there is worse believe me!) This is because the world sees the human body as pornographic. And sadly pornographic for some does not include not in front of the children (as it can involve them and is also often aimed at them), and child safety measures do not work. Our sons have seen horrific stuff on mobile apps - sexual, violent and more. Luckily we limit the apps they can use, have banned some and they talk to us about the stuff they see and the things and people they encounter. 

At our son's school discussions in "careers advice" have involved talking about making money from porn! How the nudity on the internet and in making videos can make you very wealthy and is seen as a possible pathway to wealth. One of the mothers of our son's peers in Cornwall did exactly that and was making a small fortune! Why worry about education when all you need is a body (or two) to sell? Ironic that such things are talked about in class, but naturism is seen as something that should be hidden. 

The main problem we face in promoting naturism is that the human body is seen as sexual, that nudity is seen as pornographic, and because of that naturism is seen as unsuitable for families. Naturists fear being seen as perverts, but also fear being abused. On beaches, at events and on the internet. The rise in women only events is attempting to convey a message of safety, but pushing an idea of escaping danger. The rise in adult only is offering naturism to people who feel more comfortable being naked away from families, but it promotes the idea that nudity is basically sexual and unsuitable for minors. And a big part of why we are doing this is because we are trying to be too amenable. Trying to embrace the full human spectrum of wants and needs. Too afraid to say somethings are unacceptable, because we want to appear fair. 

When naturism was at it zenith it was quite common for clubs in various parts of the world to have strong rules: no alcohol, no meat, no smoking, no clothes, daily exercise, daily prayers....That is not a naturism I particularly want but it did offer something - an idea that people were behaving and family friendly. Events are often sold now on the idea of adult only, late night, drinking discos. Great fun for some, but confusing for others. An easy step in the imagination for nudity= sex, as sold by pornography. Strip clubs offer alcohol and women dancing naked - so does a naturist event. How do we draw a line between one and the other? Those that understand naturism know the difference, but how many people do not?

It is the difference between pornography and naturism. We do not have to be tolerant of pornography to be good naturists, we should not be tolerant of sex in the dunes, we need to protect naturism and also society. 

Things that are damaging to naturism should be seen as "enemies of naturism." To be fair human beings is not just about tolerating anything, we have laws and prisons to protect us because people do not play fair. Fair human being should be tolerant of things that are not harmful to society, and not encouraging of things that cause harm to individuals and communities.   

The question then becomes what is harmful, and what should be tolerated. Experience, the human condition, history, laws and more help us make those decisions. We may want to just say "all is good" but in reality we know that somethings are not good, and cause all sorts of hurt. Maybe as naturists we should be proud to be understanding, but also proud to take a stand against certain things too.   

What do you think?