Experimenting with nudity in our culture

Actually, no. It's really not about men perceiving other men's erections. It's about how women perceive men's penises when they are erect, because that is perceived by a lot of women to be a sure sign that the men are thinking with their "little heads", and thus a potential threat(sexual harassment, rape, that sort of thing). I'm a man, and I couldn't give two shits about whether or not some guy next to me can maintain boners better than I can.

Also, whether or not one perceives the either sex to be more pleasing to the eye is definitely subjective. I might find specific female forms alluring, while you might find specific male forms alluring. But generally speaking, most women I've spoken to would tell me the female form to be more appealing. Being a guy, I can't say that I disagree.

 

It's not fair to put the blame on religion, Deidre. You mean, you have a way of being shamed by religion. It doesn't shame us. Object vs subject.

Shame comes from our conscience. Our actions deviating from own beliefs of what's right/wrong. Religion (Jesus' teachings at least) teaches us to seek Him and love our neighbors as we do ourselves. There is no mention of nudity as being sinful in itself. And it's not. So if you're feeling shameful about sexuality and/or being nude, it's totally a man-inflicted belief you've espoused.

I'm certainly not ashamed; we are made in His image and it's glorious. It's all about a loving/caring motivation vs a hateful/hurtful one. Man wants to impose restrictions on others but we have to put blame where it lies lest we deceive ourselves.

 

I find this curious if they call themselves heterosexual. I know what an attractive woman looks like, but who do I find more appealing? Men. Always. And if you are speaking about photographs of men, there are almost none shown with erect penises in art. A portrait of an aroused man threatens no one. Yes, women do have to be on their guard. But HAVING an erection does not mean USING an erection, wanted or unwanted by a woman. Threatening men are usually threatening LONG before a woman knows they have or sees they have an erection. I've been sexually harassed by fully clothed men. Told I wanted sex when I didn't when undressed with a man. I was with men who understood "No" was not an insult to them or their penises. It was my personal choice at the time to stop going further. Luckily, I seemed to choose safe men who accepted what I said and might've been disappointed, but not angry or aggressive.

 

I don't even know if the majority of the human population is actually "heterosexual" in a strict sense, if we get into that question. I've spoken to a Cree woman who said it's nearly impossible to find a Cree woman who isn't bisexual. The impression that I've gotten is that, in the Cree culture, bisexuality has been accepted and enjoyed as a natural part of life from centuries ago. This also was put to use as a means of survival when all the men had to be out hunting, and thus absent from their camp for an extended period of time.

Remember, though, that the erect penis is generally perceived as a highly sexual thing. A non-erect penis is just a penis that isn't excited, thus not nearly as threatening. A female full nudity is simply full nudity, though, nudity is general, whether we're talking male or female, can be regarded as indecent depending on how prudish you are. The whole erection concerns related to visiting nudist environment exist for a reason. There are women, heterosexual women, who would NOT want to see erections on beaches, for example. These women are right here on HF. Prudish? Yeah. But we do live in a prudish world. That's why we have discussions such as this. If nudism was actually how we lived our lives by default, we wouldn't even be talk about it like we are here. It's like talking about how amazing it is to wear clothes. If our entire world lived by nudism, then I'm pretty sure we'd have rebellious people who'd wear clothes and call themselves "clothesists" or whatever.

 

Yikes. An erect penis is not threatening. People may feel threatened by it, but that's on them; it's not threatening in and of itself.

OTOH, a person with or without one can act threatening. That's an entirely different thing.

I'll agree on the norm vs rebel point. "clothesists" - now that's funny right there.

 

I think it's unrealistic to think that in a nudist colony or a clothed one either, that men aren't going to have erections. They're spontaneous. Women are similarly stimulated, but don't have penises to SHOW temporary excitement. The only analogous structures on our bodies that show are our nipples. They become erect when COLD, or stimulated or for a host of nonsexual reasons, cloth rubbed against them...a thought, just like penises. So clothed or naked women might have erect nipples and not be aiming to have sex. But when stimulated, sex might come to mind, just as with an accidentally erect penis. ... On the other hand any group of men or women can choose bi- or homosexuality if that is the only sex other than masturbation available. Heterosexuality is certainly not necessary to keep the human race going. It only takes a few sexual encounters with normally fertile people, so just about anyone can close their eyes and make a baby. And sexual stimulation feels good no matter who is doing it to one. But partner preference is another thing.

 

Trust me, I agree with you. I've always been the one to say erections aren't harmful in a nudist environment. But like I said, we live in a prudish world.

 

One thing I have forgotten to say is that I actually more or less agree with your perception of what nudity and erection should be. All I've been doing here is to express that our world is rather unforgiving when it comes to nudity, much less the erect penis.

 

In other words, there's hipocracy involved.
'You should enjoy your life as you wish. Unless some aspect makes me feel inadequate.'

 

And I hope we can move forward and forgive the poor penis for its innocent arousals. I find it rather charming, and erections, though sexy in some circumstances, are silly in others, just as cold women don't want their nipples poking out when they're discussing politics or how to change the oil. One solution to the penis problem is just to use it as a hat or dishtowel rack when it presents itself inappropriately. The ensuing laughter will mean hats and dishtowels will immediatey be deposited on the ground...

 

Hahahaha

 

Yes and dont we all get erect?

Nothing wrong with it if there is no sex involved....

 

Oh, absolutely. Hypocrisy can be observed everywhere. I won't even get into the details because I'm sure most people will be able to imagine based on their own experiences.

 

Yeah, all my life I've looked at people point the finger at me with those words. Ha. That's one of the kinder things to be called lol.

 

An argument to that would be, what's so wrong about sex? I mean, I get it, trust me. I also am a believer that sex shouldn't take place just anywhere. Although, if I were to be more precise, I believe, ultimately, that it should be a tolerated activity performed anywhere provided that there's no disrespect expressed toward someone. How how the world views sex essentially is an example of how hypocritical the humans can be. So many people say sex is beautiful, and then turn around and say it should be hidden(from children, strangers, parents). At the same time, some of these people who say the same thing will also turn around and broadcast their hot sex via webcam for all the world to see.

My philosophy has always been that nudity and sexuality are to be perceived in the positive light, where our bodily functions, including our sexual responses and activities, provided that such activities are done safely, are perceived as natural and positive. But the unfortunate thing is that we don't quite live in a world as such. Some of can live by this sort of philosophy, but we still need to be discreet, or else we'd get the law enforcement's attention which isn't what we want, especially when we aren't even doing anything to harm others.

 

Hehehe good points!

And it would be one thing if we were asked to move our sexual activities elsewhere because it's disrupting someone.

But to arrest people, take them to jail, put them through hell, sex "offender" list for lifetime, all such extreme foolishness - "how far have we advanced" in society???

 

Well dude, we all have erectile tissue, but usually only the big wands are referred to as "erections" though nipples and clitorises get erect too.... and I'm gonna argue with you, dude, it's a shame to have a good erection go to waste between two loving people... I had a very amusing father who was always teasing my mother by grabbing her and kissing her in front of us two siblings... and she was always defending herself against him!!! by grabbing his, as he would put it.. family jewels... she was always doing this "not in front of the children"... but we found it amusing because we knew daddy was fun loving and mom was a bit of a stick in the mud and he liked the game of chasing and she liked the game of being chased and saying no. we were just an excuse for the faux presentation... It was like Shakespeare with sex for us... I appreciate that my dad was so loving and open in front of us... we got the idea that sex was fun and my parents enjoyed each other. We didn't need to see them have sex to know this. I think a little privacy for sexual congress is called for. I don't want to see people humping on the streets in general. Open kissing, hand holding, butt squeezing, arms around waists of people of whatever orientation are fine. But when you throw conservatism and some religions into the mix all sorts of walls and rules are thrown up. Nudist areas are fine with me. They outrage some people who think the human body is dirty. This is a shame and sad. But we all know it exists. I hope more healthy toleration comes along.