As a naturist, I feel many of us tend to try to subconsciously separate ourselves from what we observe in society. We overcomplicate and overthink who and what we are, and in the long run, forget ourselves along the way. I personally feel that the answer is simple: We must simply accept our sexuality, and our status as sexual creatures in general, and learn not to be so afraid of it.

Naturism is a movement that allows us, who inhabit a modernized society, to reconnect with the purity of being one with the earth. It lets us get back to our roots, to times where our distant ancestors were likely more tribal, less clothing oriented outside practicality, and much more deeply connected to the nature around them. We can learn much from our experiences of being naked in the world, and we can also find an instinctual comfort from the innocent bliss of the experience. Tribal people around the world, to this day, exist and function successfully, living the same way as their past generations for hundreds, if not thousands of years. Some tribes even go nearly, if not entirely, without clothes. That said, they still host provocative dances, have beauty standards, and of course reproduce.

How could we, in a naturist society, be any different? Did clothing stop the sexualization of the human body? Are we really to think that, if the world were to allow public nudity, that we wouldn't dare establish venues with sexual expression involved? In a naked world, would we really wholly refuse to look at the body as sexual in any way? Would nudist media, in it's entirety, simply never sexualize the naked body to sell products or entice the public?

To me, it just sounds ludicrous. Each and every one of our brains is naturally wired to find aspects of human anatomy as appealing and stimulating, and I think it's much more sensible to become comfortable in one's own sexual nature and accept ourselves, than to try and deny it or resist it, for resistance causes pent up frustrations which can lead to even more problematic behaviors in time. This does not mean we engage sexually in each social instance, by any means; rather, we simply establish the correct cues and situations where it is appropriate and welcomed. This is personally why I think it is fantastic that there are resorts that are for more provocative behavior for those that want it, and it might be beneficial to have some other spaces where mature individuals, particularly naturist couples, can more safely explore naturism sexually as well, albeit with better dictation and clear indication of what such places are. Sex and sex appeal is just as natural and beautiful a gift as our own bodies, especially when utilized appropriately. The thing that we as naturists should be focusing on is improving our conduct and behavior with each other from past social norms, in the ways the sexes relate to each other and especially to those not yet sexually developed and whose innocence must be protected.

We share the same societal problems as the clothed world, and it would be wonderful if, in time, we (naturists) found our balance with human sexuality first!

I think with our current blog post https://www.anaturistworld.com/blog/46295/a-naturist-family-beach-visits-50-carlyon-bay-polgaver-beach-cornwall-england and our current notice for action https://www.anaturistworld.com/notice/46297/support-the-use-of-naturist-beaches-around-the-world-on-anw it is interesting to revisit this topic and after a year of quiet it is also interesting that James has just shared a post on this topic. 

When I consider the idea of the desexualisation of the naked body I feel there needs to be some clarification. We should not attempt to desexualised humanity. Being attracted to each other is part of our core instincts. "Fish gotta swim, birds gotta fly." 

We should not even suggest that naturists should not find each other attractive far from it. It would be unhealthy if we didn't. In fact just this week I had a message from two ANW members who have got together through getting to know each other on ANW. If they read this I wish them every future happiness. 

To me the idea is that simple nudity in itself should be viewed in a non-sexualised context.  I am reminded of a story Steve shared about a security guard talking to his good in guy at his shop in Oxford street, London. The man had been to a local park off Oxford where young women were sitting in underwear during their lunch breaks. The security guard had returned all hot and bothered and claimed with great pride and wonder "I saw a nipple, Martin." Steve overheard this and would impersonate the security guard to the goods in guy when ever he past "I saw a nipple, Martin!" and it became a running joke in the shop among the staff with anything that was slightly risque.  The point is that seeing a nipple should not be so shocking and such a thing of undiluted joy. While nipples and other parts of the body remain sexualised in people's heads just for existing - it makes nudity shocking, it allows nudity to sell and it encourages the porn industry and other such marketing practices. And while that happens it is very hard for many people to understand that nudity can be innocent and even decent. 

When I visit a naturist beach I am surrounded by naked people. I am attracted to only one, Steve. Now I am not saying that that is the same for everyone. If you are looking for a partner then your eyes are bound to be more active. But that does not mean that I am not aware of other people. Some women and some men are going to be more appealing than others - just as they are in any situation. It is not a sexual thing but a harmless reality. I may wish I looked more like her - I may wish I had her youth! I may be impressed by a super healthy body - but equally may not be impressed when someone takes that to an extreme. I will see bodies of all types and all ages, different colours, different sizes, different genders. And to me there is nothing sexual in that. That is how I view the idea that we can desexualise the human body and how by doing so we can allow people to see why naturism works.

Because those that don't get naturism and do not understand that nudity in itself is not a sexual thing will not be able to differentiate. That may be why some people feel naturism is wrong for children. Because they assume all nudity is sexualised. It is more than simply damaging to naturism. It is socially damaging. The inability to desexualise the naked body could well be argued to be part of the cause of rape, child abuse, sexual harassment and guilt fed problems. We should be able to be sexual animals without sexualising our very existence - and I think that part of our inability to do that is our fear of nudity and that fact that society spends to much time covered up. In short it sends people out looking for nipples - it creates a craving and that craving becomes distorted and in some cases perverted. If all nudity is linked in the human mind to guilt then it is very easy to allow that guilt to manifest itself into the idea that one is perverse and once you accept that you are guilty of perversion then how do you differentiate one perversion from another?

To desexualise the naked body we should be able to see nudity simply as nudity (like we see dogs and cats naked) and be able to concentrate our attraction on more than simply nudity but actually on the individual. He or she is not sexualised simply because they are naked but because I am attracted to them. 

Before signing off I would just like to make reference to James' well argued post above which I feel makes a lot of sense. 

In relation to resorts or locations that are more "provocative" in nature. I feel that having these connected to naturism in anyway is ultimately damaging to naturism. While we live in a world that misunderstands naturism and is unable to separate nudity and sex then these places are proof positive that naturism is about sexual social sharing. Proof that it is unsuitable for families and a good reason for the average person not to approve or get involved. These places are seen (rightly or wrongly) as places for swingers. As mentioned in the blog post linked to above. The connection to "dogging" and other sexual activities is damaging the reputation of beaches, resulting in locals demanding that naturism is outlawed and discouraging people from trying naturism - especially families.  We are already misunderstood and we are already fighting a world that wants to see a nipple, we can not afford to blur the edges by allowing naturism to cross over into libertine practices.  Not just for our reputation but also for the rules. If it is OK in some places then people will argue it is OK in all places. I have read people in the past say it is OK to have sex in the dunes if there are no children around. But how can anyone be certain that there are no children around, and also can anyone think that it is OK for other random adults to see people having sex? It may not offend some but it will offend others and there is no way of judging who will be offended and who will not with such random acts of display. Someone may be put off naturism for life, the next person may enjoy it too much and the next person may be a victim of a sex crime who is already working hard to cope with life. 

I am not saying libertine venues should not exist (they may do good) but they should not be linked to naturism and should not be allowed to seep into public spaces. Their very existence damages naturism and although I feel James makes really great points I do feel that naturism simply cannot afford to be connected to that aspect of social life.

Taking into account all of the above, we feel it is very important that Naturism remains as wholesome and none sexual as possible, and that image is projected from within naturism outward. We still feel the message that none sexual nudity in a social setting is not really reaching the masses, and maybe we all need to be more aware of that and help more towards education and information of those who do not fully understand the concept of naturism. 

That can only be achived through self policing of our sites and behaviours.

Rob really understands the dynamics of open relatioships, sexual sharing and public exhibitionist sexual behaviour, he worked with people who had ended up in damaged relationships and who had bad experiences within those activities, he also understands some of the positives for some relationships, and yet knowing and understanding these dynamics, his opinion is that they have no place within naturism.

Is their a need for them and should they be given a place within society, yes, because as stated, there are benefits to some, a need is catered to that does have positive outcomes. The point is, Libertine behaviouir has a place within society, and not naturism, but it is promoted alongside naturism, and that is the problem, because it is the opposite extreme from naturism. The two are very different, one is about naked persoanl reflection, comfort and soicablity on a self awareness level, and the other is group sexual activity which just happens to include nudity. 

If one attends a textile party, there is a protocol, which is enjoy yourself, be respectful, and if you do happen to be single and find another person attractive, you talk, socialise, have fun, and if the relationship appears to be working, you arrange to meet elsewhere. That is considered normal behaviour.

If the party is a naturist party, nothing changes, the behaviour is the same, and that is the point, naturists are just ordinary people living a normal life doing all the same things sans clothing.

If you attend a couples sharing, wife swapping or car key type party, it matters not if you are dressed or naked, the result is the same, everyone ends up naked and sexual. That is not naturism, it is a completley different beast, and the two do not belong in the same venue.

Public sexual behaviour, regardless of how liberated you may feel, is illegal and for good reason. Sex does not belong on beaches, country lanes, sand dunes or anywhere the public may wander into it, be you a textile or a naturist. the law is written to protect the majority. Sex is a part of every life, and it is actually a very important aspect of a persons self worth, and for those who wish to do it, go at it, just do it in such a way that it is enhanced by making it a special act between individuals in "private," and enjoy it.

We would say desexualising anything is a difficult battle, especially when you consider how just about every aspect of life has now been sexualised as props of gain or control, it is however, the job of every single naturist to at least try to educate those around them with the very clear message, that naturism is "None Sexual Social Nudity"

Does Pornography Exist Because Naturism Doesn't? 

This is a question that Steve raised in today's live meet, and I felt it needed a place in the Forum, and this existing topic seemed to fit. 

If we lived in a world where nudity was common place, why would people turn to naked imagery for a thrill? 

Does society actually crave pornography as a natural response to knowing that it is natural to want to see others naked, and therefore look for it in the only way they know how. A way that leaves them feeling guilty and perverse? 

It is the most natural thing in the world to be drawn to nudity, what is unnatural is the way that most of us do it. Through magazines, websites, strip clubs, films, peeping at strangers etc that sexualise the nudity. Similarly it is natural to want to be naked, but posing for pornography, flashing strangers, and other such negative ways to be naked is not helpful. 

I am reminded of an article Steve and I read some years back while researching for ANW where a diary referred to clothing being introduced to a community by Western "do-gooders" and the natural balance between genders was ruined. Previous to the clothes there was a peaceful coexistence between men and women, afterwards there was resentment, discomfort, misogyny and after a short period rape. 

We live in a world where clothing has had an almost evolutionary effect on us as a society. How can we ever embrace nudity naturally without carrying the emotional history and baggage that years and years of clothing has created. 

In recent years, particularly since the rise of the internet, pornography has become more readily available and on average more graphic and extreme. Seemingly like the idea that people move from one drug to another to fill the need for their kick after becoming immune to the earlier subtleties, and the ease and abundance of what they can find. But the argument remains in my eyes. 

One that seems to fit with our campaign of Naturism being The Natural Choice. 

If the world was a naturist world, how would pornography have ever taken hold? And does pornography exist as failed attempt for humans to find a way to bring natural nudity back into their lives? 

Anna, such a powerful and necessary question.

I think you’re absolutely right to draw a connection between the absence of normalised, everyday nudity and the rise of pornography. In my experience, most people aren’t inherently looking for sex when they seek out images of naked bodies—they’re looking for beauty, connection, or even just the freedom to see and be seen without shame. But because society has demonised nudity and stripped it from everyday life, the only place many people learn they can see a nude body is through porn.

And porn—by its very definition—sexualises nudity. It associates being naked with arousal, performance, and fantasy. It creates an addictive loop: we are taught that nudity is ******, we look for it in ****** ways, and then we come to believe that all nudity must be ******. It’s a vicious circle, and one that naturism breaks—gently, radically, and beautifully.

When we’re naked in a non-sexual environment—on a nude beach, at a naturist resort, or simply in our homes—we experience the human body as it truly is: vulnerable, beautiful, and normal. We learn that nudity doesn't have to be secret or sexual. We discover that respect, equality, and peace can flourish when bodies are no longer hidden, judged, or objectified.

Your reference to Western missionaries and colonisers bringing clothing—and shame—with them is spot on. They didn’t civilise anyone; they dismantled a natural balance. And we’ve been living with that cultural trauma ever since. Clothing has evolved into a kind of armour. And with it, we’ve created taboos, barriers, and systems of control that keep us from living freely and authentically.

To answer your question: Yes, I believe pornography does, in part, exist because naturism doesn’t. Because we’ve repressed the natural expression of nudity, people seek it out in distorted, commercialised ways. If naturism were the norm—if our societies embraced everyday, social, respectful nudity—then the hunger that fuels the pornography industry would likely diminish. Not disappear completely, perhaps, but lose its dominance.

Naturism is not a cure-all, but it’s a profound antidote. It reconnects us with our bodies, each other, and the natural world. It teaches us that nudity is not shameful, and that it can be shared without exploitation.

Let’s keep spreading this message: that Naturism is the Natural Choice—for a more human, respectful, and balanced world.