bloemen"in de winter"kind
2005-02-27 23:31:35 UTC
Why British Nudists are not Radical
Mark Nisbet is the editor of Starkers magazine which he started four years
ago because he was 'fed up with reading Health & Efficiency' and
disillusioned with the poor state of social nudism in the UK. Starkers
represents the interests and aspirations of a militant nudist generation fed
up with being typecast as weirdos and freaks, and who believe nudism is a
powerful force for social change.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
When nudists are asked by textiles, (nudist speak for the clothed) about the
appeal of social nudity, stock responses emerge, like communal nakedness
bestowing 'a wonderful sense of freedom', or that nudism is a great social
leveller; 'a bus driver or a lawyer, a secretary or a duchess' - all look
the same naked. Some argue nudism is a quality social scene where
friendships 'are made easily', are 'more polite, considerate, kind and
generous' than textiles, 'more open to new ideas' and less 'inhibited in
mind and body'.
All that liberty, equality, and fraternity - underpinned by celebratory and
de-mystifying nakedness - surely amounts to a form of revolutionary
activity, a radical option for a bored and de-socialised urban humanity?
Surely the fun loving nudists, in their sun clubs and on the beaches, free
of clothing and unhealthy sexual curiosity, have created something like
paradise on earth?
This is what social nudism or naturism in Britain could and should offer -
but unfortunately it does not.
I think nudists themselves are partly to blame for failing to convince a
wider public. Persistently misrepresented in the media, providers of raw
material for several generations of fourth division comedians, and vilified
by hordes of specious moralists, it's not surprising to find many nudists
wishing for privacy and a low profile. But not every nudist has given up
hope of achieving wider acceptance of the ideals, and real benefits, that
lie behind the seventy-year-old UK nudist movement. Once viewed exclusively
as figures of fun - bunches of naked nuts, paunchy volleyball players or
skinny ping-pong freaks doing naked gymnastics in remote woodland camps -
opponents attacked nudism as immoral, a wilful excitement of the senses,
just one step from hell and eternal damnation, a 'perverse activity',
something intolerable in a decent Christian civilisation. This reflex moral
stance persists - only a few months ago on a TV talk show a British wannabe
evangelist used these tired arguments against my advocacy of nudism.
Nudists, like many fringe groups, have been scapegoated with the changing
sexual anxieties of each decade. In the 1960's, when European beach
toplessness and nudity hit the headlines and it became easier to write and
talk about sexual intercourse, critics began to openly question British
nudists and their claim to be simply passive disciples of an imported cult
of sun and fresh air worship. Nudists were 'investigated' by newspapers and
television to fuel the debate on the 'promiscuous society' - and widely
suspected of 'sexual licentiousness', 'lax morals' and 'perversion'. The
nudist colonies-cum-sun-clubs, for the most part pre-fabricated huts and a
kettle on cheap land deep in remote woods, were presented for tabloid
consumption as hothouses of wife swapping and orgies. The public were
readily convinced that such 'depravity' was a regular feature of nudist club
life. 'Pandering' to voyeurs and perverts feature largely in 1970's
critiques and the 'threat' of homosexuals and pederasts surfaced in the
1980's. In the 1990's, of course, the 'danger' is child abuse. Nudists are a
soft target, unequivocally denying interest in one another, thus setting
themselves up for a simple 'no smoke without fire - no nudity without sex'
equation in the enfeebled minds of big print newspaper readers. Denying any
sexual dimension to social nudism has never advanced the cause. It would
surely benefit everybody, and undercut vicarious press interest in nudism,
if naturists promoted, amongst many other benefits, the sexually enhancing
aspects of nudism, but British nudists, unlike their European and American
counterparts, set themselves against assertive self-promotion and refused to
carry the argument to the enemy.
In the mid 1960's they formed a top heavy organisation and expended much
energy on endless constitution debates and small scale fund raising. Forced
unity homogenised the diverse set of previously fairly acrimonious but
vibrant nudist groupings, many with different ideas and interpretations of
the nudist life. Recast more palatably as 'naturists', as opposed to
nudists, (no longer any point in calling a spade a spade), and now a
'movement', they hid from the textile world. As proud members of a national
organisation for the first time - the Central Council for British Naturism,
(CCBN), these naturists distanced themselves from those who refused to adopt
restrictive codes of behaviour and edicts from sinecured elders. Those who
brought a negative charge to 'the naturist movement' were exiled.
Independent nudists who wanted something more exciting than a clubhouse and
a sand pit for the children, and proprietorial clubs who did not wish to
belong to the CCBN, could go it alone. Some did and succeeded, but they were
far outnumbered by the many officially approved clubs that failed.
Far from bringing together the best people and popularising nudism with an
active programme, as in Europe and America, the CCBN centred itself on
middle England - becoming self-justifying and introverted, true inhibitors
of development, unclear as to precisely what they hoped to achieve and with
an anti-commercial streak that amounts to ideology. Bogged down with rule
making, signed up 'official' naturists endured (and still do) a love-hate
relationship with those paid to advance their interests. Many nudists have
never bothered joining either a club or the CCBN. The textile public - the
source of new blood - remain sceptical, uninformed, unaware and, frankly,
uninterested.
To counter routine Sunday newspaper charges of sexual intercourse, and
plenty of it, as being the prime motivation for being a naturist, the CCBN's
implausible defence was to blithely insist that naturism had nothing to do
with personal liberation or sex whatsoever. They held fast to a nudity
equals freedom philosophy - but did not define this, and made club life
sacrosanct. This was to prove fatal. Young people, the future if you like,
were not attracted to a Spartan cult of prim and proper clubbiness, where
alcohol was frowned upon, dancing unknown and, what is more important,
nobody to meet. Club rules against the presence of young single people
effectively squashed their hopes for a bit of rebellion and some adventurous
socialising - the mainstay of early adult life. Sons and daughters of
nudists, once they reached puberty, left the club as soon as possible.
Outsiders saw no reason to join.
While it would have been stupid to agree that sex was the only reason for
being a nudist, to deny it, mantra like, was crass. For many, social nudism
is a definite tonic for their 'sex-lives'. There are sensations, physical
and mental, amongst people in naked groups, and these are often sexually
based. They do not necessarily translate into sexual activity. After all,
sex and nudity generally agree with one another - and why should nudists be
any different? People who belong to other social groupings have sex with one
another - even if the overt purpose of the group is something innocuous like
golf, bridge or dancing. The national organisation seems incapable of
discussing the part sex plays in the lives of naturists. After all, the
cherished family unit in naturism is a result of sexual activity and most
naturists will argue that naturism is good for a child's sexual development.
Of course there are some people who sample organised nudism for sexual
purposes - but they soon tire of the scene when, invariably, it does not
(and cannot) live up to their 'swinging' expectations.
There are at present fewer naturist clubs in the UK than existed in the
1960's. The decline set in once the national organisation was formed. Many a
club has an age profile that is pensionable and faces decline and closure.
The reasons why social nudism is expanding rapidly everywhere except in the
UK are closely linked with British attitudes towards sex, sociability,
sensationalism and the law - including those of the naturists.
No such problems exist in Europe - the French campaigned for grants and
legal reforms and won government backing - naturist sites are readily
promoted by the French Tourist Board. In Germany, Holland, Denmark and
elsewhere, major changes in the laws regarding public nudity were won by
lobbying, protest, naked bodies on beaches and in parks. Protest with a
confrontational, assertive, and political dimension. EC money has built
facilities on mainland Europe while British naturists have retreated to the
woods and argued over the tea rota.
British naturists have never been radical because they lack confidence and
are burdened by secrecy - a legacy of our collectively intolerant past,
perpetuated by our sensationalist and intolerant present. In the early days
of 'nudist colonies' it was normal for pioneering members to know nothing
about their fellow nudists other than their first name. In the late 1920's
it was perhaps useful - but in the 1990's? Contemporary naturists are still
extremely secretive. The family members, friends, and even spouses of some
nudists are in the dark as to 'where they go on holiday' or what they 'do at
the weekend.' Naturist magazines are still asked for in 'plain brown
envelopes' by subscribers - and presumably read in secret. If the main
participants cannot publicly mention their nudism then expansion is
impossible. This fear of exposure and ridicule has knocked the stuffing out
of the practical and ideological advancement of social nudism; the British
nudist is going nowhere.
The main purpose of nudism is to be sociably lazy with a group of naked
people and everything else follows. Indulging under the sun and
disconnecting oneself from the destructive stress patterns of everyday life
wins back some self-awareness, the simple acceptance of other people, and
the diversity of their bodies and personalities. In a group of nudists it is
not long before one forgets everybody is naked. It is difficult to explain
to those who have not experienced group nudity just how much of a
psychological burden the body itself actually is - made worse by media
exploitation. I suspect this is what most people mean when they claim the
'sense of freedom' that social nudism provides. Put simply, an oppressive
weight is lifted because people will feel less anxious about their bodies,
specifically body fat levels, penis size and breast shape etc., when they
see the diversity existing in others. Tall, thin, fat, hairy, disabled, big
or small, judgements seem to vanish. It allows one to concentrate on other
things - 'freedom' of sorts. For a young person the sight of a mature adult
removes some curiosity, for senior nudists the sight of younger bodies
undercuts their value as icons - valuable de-mystifying functions of nudism.
Society consistently promotes young flesh as socially and sexually desirable
and condemns the old. This is a major pre-occupation, a global industry of
repression.
To undo the damage this marketing of body perfection has caused, the rather
simple catch phrase of the American Naturist Society - 'body acceptance is
the idea, nude recreation is the way' - encompasses a great deal and unlocks
the cell door. Such sloganeering and 'up-front' defences are simply alien to
many British naturists. The American focus on body acceptance ensures a
genuine egalitarian thrust is backed up with an extensive philosophy, an
active political programme, and a growing number of places to 'recreate'
naked, and strong criticisms of society's obsessions with sex and body
presentation. Their brand of social nudism offers the usual trappings -
sociability, etc., but seeks to arm nudists with an understanding of the
material world and the commodified body. This is achieved through a couple
of excellent magazines, a trade association and a lobbying unit that takes
matters to the top. Thus American nudists confidently take their attitudes
into the clothed world and exert a wider influence amongst colleagues and
the media. All the British nudist ever had as the public face of naturism
was the CCBN who said 'join a club' and Health & Efficiency magazine. With
its obvious bias towards glamour naturism, superficial propaganda and a
secondary role as the mainstay of adolescent masturbatory fantasy, H&E makes
for a poor manifesto.
The principal British problem is getting nudists to admit to others they are
nudists. (Turn up on one of the biggest nudist beaches on the south coast of
England with a video camera crew and the crowded beach empties in minutes).
Some are 'coming out' and a growing number of nudists are beginning to
articulate an updated philosophy and are fighting to remove the boundaries.
Nudists now regularly walk in the hills and dales of Yorkshire and the Lake
District. Some go nude on any beach and blatantly ignore the seven or so
'official' beaches. Sports centres and swimming complexes are hired for
nudist use, nudists hold parties in private homes, nudist massage and
holistic therapies are thriving, the seasonal absence of the sun no reason
to halt nudist socialising. There is a lot more to social nudism than sun
bathing.
So why are traditional British naturists, still in a bit of a mess? The
self-contained club ethos is largely responsible. Naturism in the UK is
officially promoted for 'couples and families only'. Club access is rarely
granted to single men or women and only a few offer places on a 'strict
quota basis'. In some clubs it has been known for a wife to die and the
husband is forced to leave. There are a couple of 'singles' groups,
dominated by solo men - for various reasons men are more attracted to nudism
than women.
Clubs rely upon membership fees that limit the development of facilities.
The most luxurious clubs in the UK have a 'making do' ambience. Many are
nothing more than a hut in a clearing, often depressing places. There is no
flagship 'national' naturist centre as in most European countries. No venue
has tried or ever secured a leisure development grant from the public purse
to my knowledge.
A majority of club members, with few exceptions, are over fifty. There is a
generation chasm - one would be hard pressed to find young people between
the ages of thirteen and thirty present in any great numbers. Clubs are
usually committee led, and do not approve of 'in club extra marital
affairs.' When discovered, with few exceptions, expulsion or self-imposed
exile follows. Clubs are invariably remotely sited with 'tall fences and
foliage screening'. This is as much to protect those inside from being seen
as it is to frustrate those outside trying to look in. As single men and
women are largely excluded, and clubs are 'family environments', the
question of homosexuality is seen as irrelevant. Club naturists, in general,
are homophobic. Blinkered on the subject of sexuality, club leaders do not
see married men and women as bisexual or gay or see married men and women as
child abusers. Therefore no child abuse problem can 'exist' in British
naturist clubs. As most clubs are enclaves of petty middle-class types,
protective of their investment - 'when we started thirty years ago, it was
just a patch of grass and some trees, now we've a pool and a clubhouse'-
most vet all applicants. Their claims to heightened sociability are thus
undermined. Clubs are not places in which singles can meet each other - a
recipe for slow suicide. There are few ethnic nudists - they are neither
encouraged to join and are perhaps uninterested. Club naturists are fairly
racist and the club scene exercises an appeal to reactionary elements in the
middle classes.
British club naturists are not a radical bunch because they do not want to
be. They have not linked up with the outside world. The last thing on their
minds is the growing spectre of social repression, enshrined in law and the
ready made hostile attitudes of a media schooled populace just outside the
club fences. I recall a Kent social services manager, talking off the record
in 1995, who stated that parents who took their children to naturist clubs
were ipso facto guilty of child abuse. He was interested in getting all
children barred from nudist clubs in Kent - a county with one of the highest
concentrations of clubs in the country. Since 1978 several new pieces of
legislation have appeared that could be applied against nudist assemblies on
beach or land but few naturists could name them. Having largely given up
trying to attract younger people many club naturists concede that club
naturism is largely an adult activity. Come puberty and adulthood young
people are expected to depart. Few, if any, return.
To be fair it is not all doom and gloom. There is a growing element of
militancy amongst 'unregistered' or 'free-range' nudists, those who are not
members of clubs and the CCBN, who are heartily sick of limits to their
freedom. Homosexual nudists, schooled in defending their position in textile
society, are rightly and increasingly vociferous. While people are still
arrested for sunbathing naked on beaches in the UK, and still cautioned by
the police for relaxing naked in their own summer gardens, the European
acceptance of nudity, now witnessed by practically everybody who goes to the
Mediterranean for a holiday, is having a salutary effect on attitudes. The
usual archive of outmoded and patently redundant British law, regularly
employed to prosecute the naked soul catching a few rays, make magistrates
and judges look increasingly stupid amongst their EC counterparts.
A public declaration by nudists of a campaign, and some carefully placed
propaganda and pressure, may succeed in forcing the UK into accepting the
right of the individual to be naked in more or less any reasonable location
at any time - as nudists are in Denmark for example.
Yet this will require effort and action. Nudists generally take much
pleasure in lying around doing very little, but life under a munificent sun
will not be missed by nudists - until Mr Plod casts a shadow as he stands
between the sun and the easily removed 'freedoms' under the growing arsenal
of politically motivated English law.
Mark Nisbet is the editor of Starkers magazine which he started four years
ago because he was 'fed up with reading Health & Efficiency' and
disillusioned with the poor state of social nudism in the UK. Starkers
represents the interests and aspirations of a militant nudist generation fed
up with being typecast as weirdos and freaks, and who believe nudism is a
powerful force for social change.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
When nudists are asked by textiles, (nudist speak for the clothed) about the
appeal of social nudity, stock responses emerge, like communal nakedness
bestowing 'a wonderful sense of freedom', or that nudism is a great social
leveller; 'a bus driver or a lawyer, a secretary or a duchess' - all look
the same naked. Some argue nudism is a quality social scene where
friendships 'are made easily', are 'more polite, considerate, kind and
generous' than textiles, 'more open to new ideas' and less 'inhibited in
mind and body'.
All that liberty, equality, and fraternity - underpinned by celebratory and
de-mystifying nakedness - surely amounts to a form of revolutionary
activity, a radical option for a bored and de-socialised urban humanity?
Surely the fun loving nudists, in their sun clubs and on the beaches, free
of clothing and unhealthy sexual curiosity, have created something like
paradise on earth?
This is what social nudism or naturism in Britain could and should offer -
but unfortunately it does not.
I think nudists themselves are partly to blame for failing to convince a
wider public. Persistently misrepresented in the media, providers of raw
material for several generations of fourth division comedians, and vilified
by hordes of specious moralists, it's not surprising to find many nudists
wishing for privacy and a low profile. But not every nudist has given up
hope of achieving wider acceptance of the ideals, and real benefits, that
lie behind the seventy-year-old UK nudist movement. Once viewed exclusively
as figures of fun - bunches of naked nuts, paunchy volleyball players or
skinny ping-pong freaks doing naked gymnastics in remote woodland camps -
opponents attacked nudism as immoral, a wilful excitement of the senses,
just one step from hell and eternal damnation, a 'perverse activity',
something intolerable in a decent Christian civilisation. This reflex moral
stance persists - only a few months ago on a TV talk show a British wannabe
evangelist used these tired arguments against my advocacy of nudism.
Nudists, like many fringe groups, have been scapegoated with the changing
sexual anxieties of each decade. In the 1960's, when European beach
toplessness and nudity hit the headlines and it became easier to write and
talk about sexual intercourse, critics began to openly question British
nudists and their claim to be simply passive disciples of an imported cult
of sun and fresh air worship. Nudists were 'investigated' by newspapers and
television to fuel the debate on the 'promiscuous society' - and widely
suspected of 'sexual licentiousness', 'lax morals' and 'perversion'. The
nudist colonies-cum-sun-clubs, for the most part pre-fabricated huts and a
kettle on cheap land deep in remote woods, were presented for tabloid
consumption as hothouses of wife swapping and orgies. The public were
readily convinced that such 'depravity' was a regular feature of nudist club
life. 'Pandering' to voyeurs and perverts feature largely in 1970's
critiques and the 'threat' of homosexuals and pederasts surfaced in the
1980's. In the 1990's, of course, the 'danger' is child abuse. Nudists are a
soft target, unequivocally denying interest in one another, thus setting
themselves up for a simple 'no smoke without fire - no nudity without sex'
equation in the enfeebled minds of big print newspaper readers. Denying any
sexual dimension to social nudism has never advanced the cause. It would
surely benefit everybody, and undercut vicarious press interest in nudism,
if naturists promoted, amongst many other benefits, the sexually enhancing
aspects of nudism, but British nudists, unlike their European and American
counterparts, set themselves against assertive self-promotion and refused to
carry the argument to the enemy.
In the mid 1960's they formed a top heavy organisation and expended much
energy on endless constitution debates and small scale fund raising. Forced
unity homogenised the diverse set of previously fairly acrimonious but
vibrant nudist groupings, many with different ideas and interpretations of
the nudist life. Recast more palatably as 'naturists', as opposed to
nudists, (no longer any point in calling a spade a spade), and now a
'movement', they hid from the textile world. As proud members of a national
organisation for the first time - the Central Council for British Naturism,
(CCBN), these naturists distanced themselves from those who refused to adopt
restrictive codes of behaviour and edicts from sinecured elders. Those who
brought a negative charge to 'the naturist movement' were exiled.
Independent nudists who wanted something more exciting than a clubhouse and
a sand pit for the children, and proprietorial clubs who did not wish to
belong to the CCBN, could go it alone. Some did and succeeded, but they were
far outnumbered by the many officially approved clubs that failed.
Far from bringing together the best people and popularising nudism with an
active programme, as in Europe and America, the CCBN centred itself on
middle England - becoming self-justifying and introverted, true inhibitors
of development, unclear as to precisely what they hoped to achieve and with
an anti-commercial streak that amounts to ideology. Bogged down with rule
making, signed up 'official' naturists endured (and still do) a love-hate
relationship with those paid to advance their interests. Many nudists have
never bothered joining either a club or the CCBN. The textile public - the
source of new blood - remain sceptical, uninformed, unaware and, frankly,
uninterested.
To counter routine Sunday newspaper charges of sexual intercourse, and
plenty of it, as being the prime motivation for being a naturist, the CCBN's
implausible defence was to blithely insist that naturism had nothing to do
with personal liberation or sex whatsoever. They held fast to a nudity
equals freedom philosophy - but did not define this, and made club life
sacrosanct. This was to prove fatal. Young people, the future if you like,
were not attracted to a Spartan cult of prim and proper clubbiness, where
alcohol was frowned upon, dancing unknown and, what is more important,
nobody to meet. Club rules against the presence of young single people
effectively squashed their hopes for a bit of rebellion and some adventurous
socialising - the mainstay of early adult life. Sons and daughters of
nudists, once they reached puberty, left the club as soon as possible.
Outsiders saw no reason to join.
While it would have been stupid to agree that sex was the only reason for
being a nudist, to deny it, mantra like, was crass. For many, social nudism
is a definite tonic for their 'sex-lives'. There are sensations, physical
and mental, amongst people in naked groups, and these are often sexually
based. They do not necessarily translate into sexual activity. After all,
sex and nudity generally agree with one another - and why should nudists be
any different? People who belong to other social groupings have sex with one
another - even if the overt purpose of the group is something innocuous like
golf, bridge or dancing. The national organisation seems incapable of
discussing the part sex plays in the lives of naturists. After all, the
cherished family unit in naturism is a result of sexual activity and most
naturists will argue that naturism is good for a child's sexual development.
Of course there are some people who sample organised nudism for sexual
purposes - but they soon tire of the scene when, invariably, it does not
(and cannot) live up to their 'swinging' expectations.
There are at present fewer naturist clubs in the UK than existed in the
1960's. The decline set in once the national organisation was formed. Many a
club has an age profile that is pensionable and faces decline and closure.
The reasons why social nudism is expanding rapidly everywhere except in the
UK are closely linked with British attitudes towards sex, sociability,
sensationalism and the law - including those of the naturists.
No such problems exist in Europe - the French campaigned for grants and
legal reforms and won government backing - naturist sites are readily
promoted by the French Tourist Board. In Germany, Holland, Denmark and
elsewhere, major changes in the laws regarding public nudity were won by
lobbying, protest, naked bodies on beaches and in parks. Protest with a
confrontational, assertive, and political dimension. EC money has built
facilities on mainland Europe while British naturists have retreated to the
woods and argued over the tea rota.
British naturists have never been radical because they lack confidence and
are burdened by secrecy - a legacy of our collectively intolerant past,
perpetuated by our sensationalist and intolerant present. In the early days
of 'nudist colonies' it was normal for pioneering members to know nothing
about their fellow nudists other than their first name. In the late 1920's
it was perhaps useful - but in the 1990's? Contemporary naturists are still
extremely secretive. The family members, friends, and even spouses of some
nudists are in the dark as to 'where they go on holiday' or what they 'do at
the weekend.' Naturist magazines are still asked for in 'plain brown
envelopes' by subscribers - and presumably read in secret. If the main
participants cannot publicly mention their nudism then expansion is
impossible. This fear of exposure and ridicule has knocked the stuffing out
of the practical and ideological advancement of social nudism; the British
nudist is going nowhere.
The main purpose of nudism is to be sociably lazy with a group of naked
people and everything else follows. Indulging under the sun and
disconnecting oneself from the destructive stress patterns of everyday life
wins back some self-awareness, the simple acceptance of other people, and
the diversity of their bodies and personalities. In a group of nudists it is
not long before one forgets everybody is naked. It is difficult to explain
to those who have not experienced group nudity just how much of a
psychological burden the body itself actually is - made worse by media
exploitation. I suspect this is what most people mean when they claim the
'sense of freedom' that social nudism provides. Put simply, an oppressive
weight is lifted because people will feel less anxious about their bodies,
specifically body fat levels, penis size and breast shape etc., when they
see the diversity existing in others. Tall, thin, fat, hairy, disabled, big
or small, judgements seem to vanish. It allows one to concentrate on other
things - 'freedom' of sorts. For a young person the sight of a mature adult
removes some curiosity, for senior nudists the sight of younger bodies
undercuts their value as icons - valuable de-mystifying functions of nudism.
Society consistently promotes young flesh as socially and sexually desirable
and condemns the old. This is a major pre-occupation, a global industry of
repression.
To undo the damage this marketing of body perfection has caused, the rather
simple catch phrase of the American Naturist Society - 'body acceptance is
the idea, nude recreation is the way' - encompasses a great deal and unlocks
the cell door. Such sloganeering and 'up-front' defences are simply alien to
many British naturists. The American focus on body acceptance ensures a
genuine egalitarian thrust is backed up with an extensive philosophy, an
active political programme, and a growing number of places to 'recreate'
naked, and strong criticisms of society's obsessions with sex and body
presentation. Their brand of social nudism offers the usual trappings -
sociability, etc., but seeks to arm nudists with an understanding of the
material world and the commodified body. This is achieved through a couple
of excellent magazines, a trade association and a lobbying unit that takes
matters to the top. Thus American nudists confidently take their attitudes
into the clothed world and exert a wider influence amongst colleagues and
the media. All the British nudist ever had as the public face of naturism
was the CCBN who said 'join a club' and Health & Efficiency magazine. With
its obvious bias towards glamour naturism, superficial propaganda and a
secondary role as the mainstay of adolescent masturbatory fantasy, H&E makes
for a poor manifesto.
The principal British problem is getting nudists to admit to others they are
nudists. (Turn up on one of the biggest nudist beaches on the south coast of
England with a video camera crew and the crowded beach empties in minutes).
Some are 'coming out' and a growing number of nudists are beginning to
articulate an updated philosophy and are fighting to remove the boundaries.
Nudists now regularly walk in the hills and dales of Yorkshire and the Lake
District. Some go nude on any beach and blatantly ignore the seven or so
'official' beaches. Sports centres and swimming complexes are hired for
nudist use, nudists hold parties in private homes, nudist massage and
holistic therapies are thriving, the seasonal absence of the sun no reason
to halt nudist socialising. There is a lot more to social nudism than sun
bathing.
So why are traditional British naturists, still in a bit of a mess? The
self-contained club ethos is largely responsible. Naturism in the UK is
officially promoted for 'couples and families only'. Club access is rarely
granted to single men or women and only a few offer places on a 'strict
quota basis'. In some clubs it has been known for a wife to die and the
husband is forced to leave. There are a couple of 'singles' groups,
dominated by solo men - for various reasons men are more attracted to nudism
than women.
Clubs rely upon membership fees that limit the development of facilities.
The most luxurious clubs in the UK have a 'making do' ambience. Many are
nothing more than a hut in a clearing, often depressing places. There is no
flagship 'national' naturist centre as in most European countries. No venue
has tried or ever secured a leisure development grant from the public purse
to my knowledge.
A majority of club members, with few exceptions, are over fifty. There is a
generation chasm - one would be hard pressed to find young people between
the ages of thirteen and thirty present in any great numbers. Clubs are
usually committee led, and do not approve of 'in club extra marital
affairs.' When discovered, with few exceptions, expulsion or self-imposed
exile follows. Clubs are invariably remotely sited with 'tall fences and
foliage screening'. This is as much to protect those inside from being seen
as it is to frustrate those outside trying to look in. As single men and
women are largely excluded, and clubs are 'family environments', the
question of homosexuality is seen as irrelevant. Club naturists, in general,
are homophobic. Blinkered on the subject of sexuality, club leaders do not
see married men and women as bisexual or gay or see married men and women as
child abusers. Therefore no child abuse problem can 'exist' in British
naturist clubs. As most clubs are enclaves of petty middle-class types,
protective of their investment - 'when we started thirty years ago, it was
just a patch of grass and some trees, now we've a pool and a clubhouse'-
most vet all applicants. Their claims to heightened sociability are thus
undermined. Clubs are not places in which singles can meet each other - a
recipe for slow suicide. There are few ethnic nudists - they are neither
encouraged to join and are perhaps uninterested. Club naturists are fairly
racist and the club scene exercises an appeal to reactionary elements in the
middle classes.
British club naturists are not a radical bunch because they do not want to
be. They have not linked up with the outside world. The last thing on their
minds is the growing spectre of social repression, enshrined in law and the
ready made hostile attitudes of a media schooled populace just outside the
club fences. I recall a Kent social services manager, talking off the record
in 1995, who stated that parents who took their children to naturist clubs
were ipso facto guilty of child abuse. He was interested in getting all
children barred from nudist clubs in Kent - a county with one of the highest
concentrations of clubs in the country. Since 1978 several new pieces of
legislation have appeared that could be applied against nudist assemblies on
beach or land but few naturists could name them. Having largely given up
trying to attract younger people many club naturists concede that club
naturism is largely an adult activity. Come puberty and adulthood young
people are expected to depart. Few, if any, return.
To be fair it is not all doom and gloom. There is a growing element of
militancy amongst 'unregistered' or 'free-range' nudists, those who are not
members of clubs and the CCBN, who are heartily sick of limits to their
freedom. Homosexual nudists, schooled in defending their position in textile
society, are rightly and increasingly vociferous. While people are still
arrested for sunbathing naked on beaches in the UK, and still cautioned by
the police for relaxing naked in their own summer gardens, the European
acceptance of nudity, now witnessed by practically everybody who goes to the
Mediterranean for a holiday, is having a salutary effect on attitudes. The
usual archive of outmoded and patently redundant British law, regularly
employed to prosecute the naked soul catching a few rays, make magistrates
and judges look increasingly stupid amongst their EC counterparts.
A public declaration by nudists of a campaign, and some carefully placed
propaganda and pressure, may succeed in forcing the UK into accepting the
right of the individual to be naked in more or less any reasonable location
at any time - as nudists are in Denmark for example.
Yet this will require effort and action. Nudists generally take much
pleasure in lying around doing very little, but life under a munificent sun
will not be missed by nudists - until Mr Plod casts a shadow as he stands
between the sun and the easily removed 'freedoms' under the growing arsenal
of politically motivated English law.
--
"Je mag alles over mij zeggen,echt alles maar zeg alsjeblieft nooit dat je
op
mij lijkt".
Veel liefs van Bloemenkind®
http://www.lyricsvault.net/songs/13856.html
"Je mag alles over mij zeggen,echt alles maar zeg alsjeblieft nooit dat je
op
mij lijkt".
Veel liefs van Bloemenkind®
http://www.lyricsvault.net/songs/13856.html