There's a serious debate going on in the U.S. these days, about "equity" vs. "equality".
Proper definitions are that equity is defined as equal outcomes (apart from property law which is a different animal). If someone's life is worse than another's , and that creates an unequal outcome, it is argued that it should be fixed by the government and some sort of legal coercion (such as admitting someone to university who is not qualified).
Equality is defined as equal opportunity. Equality is a great virtue of democracy and the rule of law.
These definitions are important to emphasize that the two terms are absolutely not the same at all. Most of us agree, and believe in, equality for women. The courts, the legislative bodies, non-profits, and the people have been working hard on that and making serious progress.
So, naturalism embraces equality quite easily given that we shed our clothes happily!
As to gender, I think it bears keeping in mind that the sex chromosome is embedded in every single cell of your body. There is nothing you can do to change that.
Females have XX, and males have XY. The female egg, before being fertilized, has one X. At the moment of fertilization and cell division, the egg either receives another X, or a Y, but not both. Gender is determined for that individual forever and permanently. Gender is not "assigned at birth" as some are promoting these days. Gender is not a choice either, it is in our cells. (I'm not a scientist or medical person, but read a book on genetics recently.)
So, echoing Marc a bit here: males and females are irrevocably different. Equality is God given and good; it is the essence of free men and women; equity is an invention of politicians and identity politics.
The naturalism movement does not have to address "equity", and it has already lived and embodies the concept of equality and will continue. I also think that, while accepting all, we should not involve ourselves in the debates about gender identity, or concern ourselves with equity.
at June 23, 2024 9:17 PM BST 
We agree with you completely Steve W. Anyone who has listened to our Podcast will already know, we feel we need to side step all of the gender ideology that is currently being slipped into naturism by certain invested parties. Equality is exactly that, one rule that is fairly applied to all and that should be the focus of naturism.
Most of this equity and subjective ideology surrounding sex and gender currently is based in the work of John Money, a 1960’s social psychologist, who has had all of his work debunked for several decades, and yet here we are having it forced into society by politicians who do not even understand his research.
Naturism is about the natural, the normal, and acceptance of the body, and that should be our focus, ensuring we provide a place for everyone who wishes to join in with us. The bed partner of a person is irrelevant within naturism, as it has nothing what so ever to do with sexual behaviour.
Males and females regardless of age, marital status, sexuality, or ethnicity should be welcomed with open arms and embraced equally, to report anything else, goes against nature and naturism.
at June 23, 2024 9:18 PM BST 
It is interesting how some ANW topics that aren't at first aimed at naturism find their way towards naturism, maybe because in some ways naturism is life and life is naturism.
If George Orwell was writing about naturism he would probably write with ironic awareness that "All naturists are equal, but some naturists are more equal than others." It is sad that our life choice is falling into this trap as it does seem to not fit with the idea of naturism at all. Just as Karl Marx would not have approved of Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin, I think it is fair for all genuine lovers of naturism to not like the way naturism is being twisted into something it was never meant to be.
There is a purity in naturism that doesn't sit well with what is going on in the name of equality just as it doesn't sit well with the "adult marketing" that is oozing in to naturism. Some people are sexualising and adding inequalities to this life choice and we will see something very different to naturism when they are finished. They may make money from it, gain attention and get kicks but in doing so society will no longer have naturism. That is not just a loss to naturists, but also all the non-naturists who could maybe live in a brighter, fairer and less perverse world if real naturism was allowed to flourish.
