Naturist photos can be wonderful things. But nudity doesn’t always equal naturist.
The Internet is a godsend and a curse to naturism. On the good side, it provides access to a world previously kept entirely hidden behind walls and on the top shelf of the magazine rack, right next to Playboy, Penthouse, and Hustler. It allows people curious of a clothesfree lifestyle or simply a desire to learn more about being nude as a hobby, a virtually endless source of information.
However, the Internet is also naturism’s worst enemy. It inner mingles sex with nudity with ease, creating and confirming the belief that the two are inexplicably linked. This is especially true among naturism photo sites.
Naturist photos can be a very positive thing. Along the lines of “a picture is worth a thousand words”, naturist photos illustrate all of the positives associated with naturism — joy, beauty, contentment, confidence, acceptance, harmony, etc… But, often times, they are lumped in with photos whose objective isn’t extolling naturist virtues, but rather proving sexual titillation and fantasy.
Take for instance one particular nudist photo blog, whose name I will skip. This blog goes out of its way one day a week to highlight male nudity. I fully endorse this approach as a means of normalizing male nudity, or at least removing some of the stigma associated with it. However, of those posts, the vast majority of them, upwards on 80% feature men in a very sexual light, usually fully nude and fully erect with clothed women appearing spellbound, amazed, and fascinated by the sight of the mans penis.
Now, I’m not going down the path of whether or not this ever happens, is this realistic, is this photo acceptable, or would most men crave such a reaction. But I think all would agree that this isn’t necessarily “naturist”. I’ve discussed my thoughts on erections in a previous post. I think they share an unnecessary negative stigma and, within reason, should be much more accepted in naturist circles. So it isn’t simply the erection that’s the problem. It’s the sexual setting.
On the ladies side, there are an infinite number of photos showing women with the legs spread, taken from the front, the back, below….you name it, showing every possible millimeter of skin from every possible angle. Now, just as with male nudity and the penis, I don’t see an inherent evil associated with seeing a woman’s labia, vagina, or anus. If they happen to be visible in a photo, more or less by chance, I don’t mind at all. Because, guess what, they are occasionally visible in life too! Just as I don’t think men should have to fight and hide an erection, I don’t think women should have to keep their legs continually crossed or avoid bending over. It’s up to them. However, so many photos out there have women contorting themselves in the most unnatural positions in order to provide a clearer view of their genitalia. Are they attractive and enjoyable to look at? That’s not the point. The point is, they aren’t naturist.
There is a time and place for most things. And sexually oriented videos and photos likely fall under that heading as well. But cloaking them under the term “naturist” is simply untrue and does a disservice to a practice and movement characterized by the most wholesome and purest of ideals.