How strong is the sexual element of nudism?

True social nudity is not about sex, sexual excitement, or arousal. It is about enjoying the freedom to be natural as God intended. It is not about being an exhibitionist or about seeing others nude, although those may be a small part of it. After all, I do enjoy seeing a good looking woman with a nice body, but I rarely see that.

Most of the women I see are old and often very overweight. I'm 63--so you know what I mean when I say OLD. However, that doesn't matter for me since I'm a nudist simply because I HATE wearing clothes.

I also see guys that I envy who have a nice body or a large penis. I envy anyone with a nice tan since all I do is burn despite living for years in Florida. Maybe my European ancestry has something to do with that.

 

U realy have a worped idea of nudity!Let me ask a counter question,when going for a drink in your local pub with your buddies or to a game or movies,its realy sexual,is it?OF COURSE NOT!U like being around them,u share comon intrists,a comoradery,like an army patrole!The same goes for nudists!Nudists are nudists bcus we like being naked!THAT ALL THERE IS TO IT!Like any other group,eg. Athletes,accountants,ganiters,lawyers,preachers,teens,bingo players,nudists ar'nt immune to stimuli and feelings.Should a hocky team talk sex,they get arroused,same with nudists,we also would get arroused.When u go to nudist places,we do'nt go genital spotting,like basket ball players dont go sneaker spotting!We love being naked and free,like othes like surfboarding.

 

A related question is how do nudist fathers feel about their young daughters being looked at in a sexual way?

 

I don't see any sexual connection until for instance sleeping with a partner or friend. The natural attraction of another naked body (and its heat) close by in bed stokes the fire of sexual eroticism. It's also important to note that what nudists do in private, e.g. at night, in bed or their own home, is not related to their behaviour as nudists on a beach, for instance; nudity is just a display of the human body in an open, permissable place (beach, resort, club etc.).

 

Like for my first week as a nudist will it be normal for me to be walking around with an erection?

 

The demand raised by radicialised youth in the 1960s was the right or freedom to go naked, to cast aside the unnecessary restrictions of society. This demand was very popular so nudity was a feature of Woodstock and the many music festivals which followed. The Rainbow Family today continue the traditon of holding clothing optional gatherings. There is a sexual element there, but it is is incidential and is not decisive and relevant to the question. Does anyone comment endlessly on say the sexual element of motor racing, the sexual element of swimwear, the sexual element of lycra sports clothing, the sexual element of Coca cola bottles and so on.

 

Long tie nudist couple here, sure there is a sexual element to it. Not as much as most would think though.

 

how is this a question?

 

the question is,what is the difference between textiles and nudists?The plzin fact is that we are all human,and share the same feelings,we also have sex,get arroused.
The problem comes with motivation.What motivates textiles to see and connotate nudism with sex?Pornography!Poen is nakes,and people associate nudism with porn.
The main ellement from'the textile is curiosity.The textile is raiswes genital shy,and genital shame is embedded in them,and the single textillian only gets naked when bathing or msturbating,and the married with batthing and sex.
Due to this connotation,they fantasize about nudism in a sexual manner,and that distorts the nudist understanding from'the textiles perspective,and the view of nudiistxm in the textile is sexually limited to the genitals alone.
In the nudist establishment,the curiosity element is removed,and there is a more openness around sexuality.The nudist is exposed to the nude person,in mny cases from a young age,and the nudity is not associated only with sexuality,but sexuality is seen as a holistic part of nudism and humanity,and is not sugested by fantacy.
Nudists dont see the sexual element as dominant,but part of the norm.Many times,textile curiosity leads to fantacy,and that leeds to arrousaal,and the nudeness per se becomes the cztalist and source of sexual experience.
In the nudist establishment,the nudeness does not source the arrousal,but love and compannionship.The clearest proof is the nudist child,he/she does not experiemce nudism as lustfull,but the norm,and so also the adult.
Suxuality is a subsiduarry of nudism,not catalist or reason to be nakes.







In the nudist establishment











.

 

I have no problem being around naked people who enjoy the eroticism, but I have to say that the sexual element just doesn't make sense to me.

While I do not deny that sexual attraction is inevitable no matter what you're wearing or doing, I'd really enjoy it if nude were the "neutral ground" of sexual attractiveness. I don't see it as anything but natural - to say that being nude is erotic completely goes against every reason that I enjoy and love nudity. Dressing up in certain clothing is erotic to me - it's the human equivalent of a bird displaying it's characteristic plumage to a mate. The mystery of clothing can be exciting. I do not get aroused by the naked human form - I am comforted and awed by it. It's just not sexual to me. I don't know why.

 

There is a broad range of motivations in the practice of nudism. There are the purists, almost religiously fanatical in the belief that anybody who introduces any bit of sexuality into the setting is not really a nudist. There are the exhibitionists, both blatant, or more discreet. There are the voyeurs, both blatant, or more discreet. There are the eroticists, who have no limits or boundaries to behavior that is inappropriate in certain settings. There are those who live and let live (with limits). There are those who admit that there can be, and sometimes actually is sexual tension, eroticism, looking at bodies and other sexual issues in nudist settings, and, may even engage in these activities sometimes. There are those who are sexual predators. You find them all and more at nude venues.

Comment: "But is it ok to stare at someone because you find it erotic?" and, "stare? No way, people don't like it when you stare while fully clothed.."

Staring at a stranger, nude or not, in a blatant way? No. But, some people enjoy it. If you haven't noticed, perhaps you are not paying attention. The body language by the person being looked can clearly show approval or disapproval. If clearly consensual, then why not?

Comment: "You cannot completely disconnect nudism from sexuality, and you shouldn't even try. People that are insisting adamantly that the two are completely unconnected are engaging in a kind of political correctness. That attiutde is the one that's not natural."

Completely true.

Comment: "This is a preposterous question that assumes nudists are sexual deviants."

I am not sure if this is directed at the last paragraph of the initial post. If so, it seems to be stating that a nudist husband who likes his wife to be looked at in a sexual way is a sexual deviant. If so, a nudist wife who likes women to look at her husband in a sexual way, is a sexual deviant; a nudist wife who likes men to look at her in a sexual way, is a sexual deviant; if they both together enjoy this activity they are sexual deviants. Some like it and seek out opportunities to do what is above; some don't. As the saying goes, to each his own.

Comment: "There is no sexual intent in being nude if you go to a nudist beach."

Simply unfounded. You can't know what is in the mind of any person going to a nude beach, unless they tell you what they are thinking. I have seen sexual activity at nude beaches plenty of times. Most of the time in the gay area, but not always. Cops have been called. True, some may have no sexual intent, but, experience proves that some do.

Comment: "No, it is not OK to stare at someone if you find him/her erotic: do not stare as you are voiding your presence as a legitimate nudist. But you can make eye contact and maybe even strike up a friendship to get to know him/her on mutually agreeable terms: if you like the body there is nothing to stop you commenting on that. Standard fare for naturists in groups. Just don't stare."

A nudist is a person who practices nudity in a social setting with other people. There are polite nudists and rude nudists, good nudists and bad nudists, smart nudists and stupid nudists. The adjective better describes what type the person is rather than if he/she is one.

If staring "voids presence as a legitimate nudist," then you'll have to boot out quite a few of those people who consider themselves "legitimate" nudists. I don't find anywhere that some nudists have any right to define "legitimacy" on their own terms. If this were the case most "legitimate" nudists might find themselves to be declared "not legitimate" by early nudists.

Comment: "True social nudity is not about sex, sexual excitement, or arousal. It is about enjoying the freedom to be natural..."

Another subjective opinion on what "true" social nudity is, as if this opinion is fact. This opinion has no more weight than an opposing opinion. While social nudity may not be "about sex, sexual excitement, or arousal" to one person, that does not mean it isn't to another person. Just because one doesn't see or notice it, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

There is a real possibility that some may even, due to the need to be politically correct may say one thing, yet not agree with it themselves. Who is to know?

Comment: "U realy have a worped idea of nudity!...Nudists are nudists bcus we like being naked!"

Perhaps we should add to the first part: "because I decide what is normal nudity. If you believe what I believe, and assign my values then and only then is nudity, anything that deviates from my beliefs and values has warped what I have the absolute right to define."

By the way, just in case nobody noticed, there are plenty of other people who find the practice of nudism and nudists as abnormal and warped.

On another note: those whom the comment writer considers to have a "worped idea of nudity" also like being naked. Maybe those who don't subscribe to an exclusionary term of "nudist" could claim the title of "nakedist," lol.

There is a group to be found, as one might expect at many nude beaches. They are the dressed ones that you will absolutely see at more than a few nude beaches. They aren't nudists, and they do not engage in social nudity. They are gawkers; they are there to see nude men or women.

Nudism doesn't belong to any one particular group that practices nudity. Common sense in different situations taking into account ages of people present, atmosphere, appropriateness of conduct to surroundings would go a long way to create an amiable solution to the various groups insisting that they, and they alone have the right to decide who and who is not a "legitimate" nudist.

 

This thread has to be the most interesting, intellectual and educational one on this entire site!!! Bravo!

And the best part.. is not a troll in sight....

 

My personal favorites are those who play a hit and run game, afraid to enter except for cute one liners.

 

Clothing is a barrier, it is also an image, so when these barriers and images are gone. Then there is more relaxation between people, the environment is more comfortable, peoples bodies are who they are, they are not the clothes nor the image that they carry around with them. So a naked person is being more honest sharing their naked body, instead of hiding in an immature childish manner. And this can be taken to the next level with sexuality but humanity is not that mature as yet.

 

Since Naked Guru has revived this topic, I am going to have my two-penn'orth.

There is no sexual element in nudism.

Naked people are not sexually arousing simply by reason of their nakedness. A person may be led to believe that the sight of naked bodies, or parts thereof, will be sexually arousing, but this is purely the result of the teaching of a social convention. In countries following the Moslem convention, women will cover their hair and legs, and sometimes faces, in the belief that those parts of the body may inflame male passions and therefore such exposure should be avoided for reasons of modesty. In countries not following that convention we know that this is simply untrue. We may appreciate the turn of a shapely leg, or admire a handsome face, but we do not immediately have an overwhelming desire to hump their owners. If we were in a society where the convention was that no part of the body need be covered for reasons of modesty, we would simply get on with life, naked when it suits us, as normal, donning clothes of various sorts for protection, identification, decoration, and so on, but not for reasons of modesty. This is demonstrated by the existence (or former existence) of exactly such societies in tropical and subtropical regions of the world. Naturist locations within our societies are no different and can be regarded as enclaves within a broader society where the clothing convention is relaxed. Nothing else is different. No hotbed of sexual desire.

Damn it all, we already live in a society where practically everything can be uncovered in public. Only the genitals and (female) nipples seem to be taboo. When the bulk of the female breast seems to be on show on occasion, I cannot see why exposure of the nipples should make any difference whatsoever to the sum of sexual arousal; I certainly don't find other blokes' penises arousing, and nor do I consider the sight of a vulva to be a necessary or sufficient trigger for arousal, so my view is that we might as well drop the remaining pointless legal and conventional bias against nudity altogether and let people be in the altogether wherever and whenever they want. When nudity is commonplace, normal people would soon drop the false association they have in their heads between nakedness and sex.

 

Ya many dont..... BEING NAKED IS BEAUTIFUL...... Nothing gross or disgusting about it!!!!!!!

 

People get aroused when they see nudity because the vast majority of the memories they have of nudity are in a sexual context. The media doesn't help with this. But, if there were other forums for nudity that were not sexual, it would break up this automatic association. If you just get a bunch of people together to be nude, they'll go back to what they remember. Nudist clubs are adamant about it not being a sexual thing, so they sort of get into a control thing. But, if you had something non-sexual for people to think about while they're socially nude, and maybe some physical activity, I think you could break this up. Long distance nude hikes, nude kayaking, nude book discussions would be things like that.

 

I'm 100% certain there's a big sexual element, I've been several times and definitely notice men looking at me, OK I have very large breasts but men also look at my pussy.
My thing is I get very aroused and wet.
I went a couple of times with an ex partner who was not very big and he would always get erect, this drew attention mainly, I think, because of this size 3" erect.

 

I agree, every experience we have had has been the same. My wife is constantly getting checked out but we don’t mind at all. It’s part of the experience. My wife is in her late twenties and once there was a man in his late 40s maybe who was clearly trying to hide his glances at her body. I noticed it and told her so she decided she would stand out of her beach chair, turn her back to him (he was about 10 feet away) and slowly bend over to get her sunglasses his face was priceless!!

 

I consider myself a realist as well as a nudist. My wife and I both know that true nudist will look at each other. Not gawk or stare. I would be lying if sexual thoughts did not enter into the my mind. But,That’s where it ends. If sexual connotation begins, that is done in private discussions. Being a realist also tells me that at Non swinger nude resorts, there are swingers getting together in private. So is there a sexual context to being a nudist/naturalist. Yes.