The Dilemmas of Nudism and Sexuality Openly Discussed:

Nudism and Sexuality appears to be a hot issue nowadays. We at Naturist Portal get a ton of of emails and questions each and every day concerning this very issue.
This week we got one such e-mail, from a youthful individual, who needed to know how do we separate naturism and sexuality?
His e-mail read as follows:
“How does one separate sexuality from nudity? Do not get me wrong; I’m not attacking naturists, I want to be one. I guess my question is: When does it become overly sexualized? I think that is what gets textile folks’s textiles in a group. Where’s the circumstance?”
Instead of give a straight answer to those questions, Jordan Blum decided to break them down a little in a dialog with Paul Rapoport, the former, longtime editor of Going Natural.
Below is the Q & A Between Jordan and Paul about naturism and sexuality:
What do you think of the questions?
They are basic and significant. Although most naturists may understand the principal response to their own satisfaction, I Had like to start with a little context, as the questioner asks. Let us contemplate the sex issue from a cultural viewpoint, and the difficulties it poses for naturists.
American culture, fed if not directed by its mediamovies and pop music along with communications and advertisinghas turned sex into big business and a huge obsession. To use that obsession for commercial and political ends on a large scale, sex needs to be oversimplified and narrow.

Going Natural Magazine
What is the result?
Because public expressions of explicit sexuality are normally prohibited, in conventional mass-market visible representation a couple square (or round!) inches of body parts readily become the oversimplified, narrow focus for that prohibition. You know, You can not show that!
But nudity is everywhere in the media, we’re told.
In basic mass media, just coy variations of nudity: a censored, fictitious nudity, with no revealing this or that constantly running, and an overwhelming emphasis on young women of a specific type. All that should really annoy naturists.
But does it help naturism any?
Maybe, but it comes from an alternate area, the exploitation of the obsession with sex. That’s targeted at the chief decision makers: middle aged, middle class, heterosexual guys.
Naturism’s real nudity of a number of actual people doing anything but hanging around in passive poses would wreck the game by making the manipulation considerably harder.
What’s the easiest way to assault that?
We’re able to try logic! To most folks, if there’s an picture of sex, it must affect nudity. So, if there’s an image of nudity, it must call for sex. Is that plausible?
Naturists know the answer to that.
I had put this to non-naturists, afterward: If there’s an image of a man, it must be a human. Therefore, if there is an image of a individual, it must be a man.
That illogicality is exactly like the one involving nudity. Sadly, sense is an enemy of forces of mass victimization.
Why do not we just say that nudism is not sexual and leave it at http://nudests.net ?
Because it’s complicated, and on a simple level I do not believe it’s accurate. If it were, there would be no quotas on single men at private naturist places, no gay naturists as different groups, etc. The issue may well be: life is sexual.
How can nudists deal with all that in practice, rather than theory?
The simplest manner to distinguish nudity from sexuality is to keep to the practice of nonsexualized nudity. The -ed is significant, making nonsexualized mean not overtly sexual. To put it differently, naturist actions have no additional sexual element beyond what bodies usually have when clothed.
But even that’s a tough sale. To non-naturists, eating, swimming, or playing volleyball without clothing is either absurd or sexually provocative. They’ve bought into the wrong two-way automatic association between nudity and sexual expression.
Do not naturists have an even harder time understanding? They’re often critical of behavior that would be acceptable in a non nude event.
Naturism and Sexuality – What’s Overly Sexual For Naturists?
Politically in the united states, particularly during its more repressive phases, naturists have had to disavow any connection with sex. To fight the impression they are sexual deviants or menaces, they try to act less sexual than everyone else.
Part of that’s a reasonable defense, particularly for women in the existence of men: when clothes come off, more borders are on. Social boundaries are fortified. But it may surely be overdone.
How may it be overdone?
In the 1940s, naturists generally in most places cannot hold hands or, in some, touch each other even on a shoulder. That looks odd now. As of late, there are other naturist taboos. There must always be some. Different naturists may have different views on them.
Such as?
Some say that genital jewelry is a sexualized display, or that placing sunblock on the generally taboo body touches in the presence of others is too much. Some say that men shouldn’t be let erections, or that girls shouldn’t sit with their legs apart.