bringing children up naturist

Moderator: melsbells

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

bringing children up naturist

Post by Angelica » Sun Sep 11, 18:26 2016

Does anyone here have any views on this? I'm a naturist and I strongly believe this philosophy applies to everyone, not just adults, and that naked children does not mean pedophilia. Some naturists, however, hold the view that it should be strictly 18+. Non-naturists tend to think nudity is for adults only as well. Nudity around children is generally considered out of bounds except in naturist areas; I find this extremely frustrating, as there is no logical basis for it.

If I ever have a child, she/he is going to be raised to believe that nudity is normal until she/he is old enough to understand the concept of "repressed people think we need to cover up our love organs and the vast majority of the world is repressed". That means I will avoid school for her/him until that age is reached (since I work at home, this would be perfectly feasible). Socialization inculcates patriarchy; the longer I can delay her/his exposure to society while teaching her/him from a liberated feminist perspective, the better.

You might think it's a stretch to consider naturism feminist. I will explain. The female is biologically programmed to bring life into the world, which means nature wants her to satisfy her physiological desires. One of these is nudity, unless the temperature is too low. Males, on the other hand, are biologically programmed to repress their physiological desires, as they were the hunters in the times in which we evolved, and satisfying oneself as a hunter meant losing the meal or becoming prey. You probably still think this is a stretch, and possibly misogynist. I don't mind people criticizing my views in this manner; I'm very confident that I've internalized a very minimal amount of misogyny if any at all, but there are differing views on what constitutes misogyny.

Naturism is good for people's health, as it allows the skin to cool off and breathe. Respecting one's own health is feminist. I would never deny my child her/his physiological necessities. Physiological liberation is a feminist way to bring up a child. She/he will learn that her/his body is perfect and always will be; no shaving or fat shaming as a parent is feminist. Since my circumcision poll has been responded to already, I'll announce here that my view is strictly against it. He will have his whole body; as an extremely strong female influence I will make him loving and therefore his love organ will be used for love.

Mods, please delete this paragraph while leaving the rest of the post if I'm out of line with this one: I believe the parents should make love in full view of the children. This teaches the children about love. If they do it among themselves, that's perfect. No pedophilia is being espoused here. Once she/he hits puberty, I consider that she/he can make decisions about her/his sexuality and therefore can choose to have sex with adults at that point. Before that, I think I would be venturing into very dangerous territory if I said there were any circumstances under which this would be OK. I don't want this thread to be about pedophilia, but rather about nudity and its benefits to the physical and emotional health of children. But as a liberated family, seeing the parents make love and imitating them is an inevitable behavior for the child.

I think I've said enough for now, hopefully this will start an intelligent discussion. No flaming in my thread, please.

Taurwen
member
member
Posts: 199
Joined: Sat Jul 2, 9:33 2016

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Taurwen » Sun Sep 11, 18:45 2016

I was raised to not care much about nudity. Neither of my parents bothered to cover up around the house (My dad famously walked out of the bathroom with nothing on while my mom had all the neighbourhood ladies over. He was surprised to see them, but they were shocked to see so much of him!)

That being said, once I hit puberty my body felt much more like it was mine vs. public property. In my neighbourhood it was normal for small children to run around naked in the summer, so just about everyone I knew had seen me. Once my body changed I got much more private not because I was repressed but because I felt more ownership and didn't want to share.

It seems we have intrinsically different views on sex, so I probably can't contribute much to any discussion you want about it.

Oh, but it might be worth noting that women did plenty of hunting, just not the big game. The group still had to eat when the men were out hunting mammoths.

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Angelica » Sun Sep 11, 18:52 2016

Interesting post. I enjoyed reading it. You've definitely already contributed a huge amount to this discussion. I hope I didn't give the impression that I wanted everyone to agree with me.
Taurwen wrote:Oh, but it might be worth noting that women did plenty of hunting, just not the big game. The group still had to eat when the men were out hunting mammoths.
Well, I think my point still stands, as repression of physiological necessities isn't necessary for hunting rabbits and so forth.

User avatar
Enigma
member
member
Posts: 3829
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 10:22 2004
Location: Canada

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Enigma » Sun Sep 11, 21:42 2016

I'm suddenly reminded of the ferengi.
"Human beings are amazing... we might be horrible, horrible, but we're wonderful too. Otherwise, why go on?"

User avatar
Nachos
member
member
Posts: 4707
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 6:42 2004
Location: Next Tuesday
Contact:

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Nachos » Mon Sep 12, 5:12 2016

In Continental Europe you often see small naked children at the beach or at lakes and it is fine. Children generally don't have any body shame. Once children get a little older though they start to want to cover up themselves, and that is fine.

I disagree with you completely on the sex thing.
Ugh, I'm tired of my signature.

User avatar
Sonic#
member
member
Posts: 5155
Joined: Sat Nov 7, 9:37 2009
Location: Georgia, US

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Sonic# » Mon Sep 12, 6:49 2016

I don't think intentional exhibitionism with children is appropriate. Nor is working statutory rape into your discussion.

I also don't think that biological programming has much to do with this at all. That sounds like another rationalization of gender binaries that draws on some pseudoscientific language for veracity.

Otherwise, I don't really care one way or the other for naturism. I just think, as you're illustrating, that sexist structures can easily emerge around many of the activities we do, even if our intent (promoting sex positivity in children) seems right.

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Angelica » Mon Sep 12, 8:17 2016

Enigma wrote:I'm suddenly reminded of the ferengi.
What? What does my post have to do with extreme misogyny and sex slavery?

Taurwen
member
member
Posts: 199
Joined: Sat Jul 2, 9:33 2016

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Taurwen » Mon Sep 12, 8:21 2016

The ferengi forbade their women from wearing clothing (I believe the reasoning was that it prevented their enemies from undressing them, but it's been awhile since I've watched any Trek)

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Angelica » Mon Sep 12, 8:24 2016

Nachos wrote:Once children get a little older though they start to want to cover up themselves, and that is fine.
This is physiological repression resulting from the inculcation of the body taboo.
Taurwen wrote:The ferengi forbade their women from wearing clothing (I believe the reasoning was that it prevented their enemies from undressing them, but it's been awhile since I've watched any Trek)
Right, but I'm not talking about that at all. Females and males should be naturists to promote physical and emotional well-being.
Sonic# wrote:I don't think intentional exhibitionism with children is appropriate.
"Exhibitionism" has a sexual connotation. My intention was for this discussion to not be about pedophilia, as naturism is not at all related.

Mod: combined three posts into one

User avatar
Nachos
member
member
Posts: 4707
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 6:42 2004
Location: Next Tuesday
Contact:

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Nachos » Mon Sep 12, 9:00 2016

Please don't double or even triple post. You have an edit button for a reason.
Ugh, I'm tired of my signature.

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Angelica » Mon Sep 12, 10:11 2016

Nachos wrote:Please don't double or even triple post. You have an edit button for a reason.
Sorry! I'm in the habit of replying to each post separately. I'll try not to do this anymore.

User avatar
Sonic#
member
member
Posts: 5155
Joined: Sat Nov 7, 9:37 2009
Location: Georgia, US

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Sonic# » Mon Sep 12, 12:27 2016

Yes, exhibitionism has a sexual connotation. That was specifically in reference to intentionally having sex in front of kids:
I believe the parents should make love in full view of the children.
I'm not saying that children are automatically and irredeemably scarred if they come across parents having sex or that the event need even be traumatic. (Many medieval sleeping arrangements would lead one to conclude that this happened as a matter of course, since familial bed-sharing was common and there weren't other rooms in most houses.) However, intentionally making children or adults into visual participants is a form of exhibitionism.

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Angelica » Mon Sep 12, 12:37 2016

Oh, right! I forgot I'd said that in this post. You're totally correct, it is in fact exhibitionism, which I think is perfectly OK.

User avatar
melsbells
member
member
Posts: 755
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 6:45 2014
Location: Finland

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by melsbells » Mon Sep 12, 14:06 2016

Nachos wrote:Once children get a little older though they start to want to cover up themselves, and that is fine.
If my spouse's nieces are any indication, kids significantly start wearing clothes more when they hit puberty.

Sauna culture is really important in Finland, and that's what I generally credit for nakedness not being a big deal here. Children start being taken to the sauna soon after birth. There's a limit due to the climate (it's either cold or there're mosquitoes), but I haven't noticed shame related to nudity.

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Angelica » Mon Sep 12, 14:52 2016

melsbells wrote:kids significantly start wearing clothes more when they hit puberty.
I know this is true, but it's very unfortunate. It means repression of the highly sexually charged pubescent being is an institution. It leads to nothing but repression throughout the rest of an individual's life. Body shame is horrible, kids should be taught to love their bodies rather than think "oh shit, my dirty parts are showing".

User avatar
rowan
member
member
Posts: 9565
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 11:01 2004
Location: US

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by rowan » Mon Sep 12, 18:18 2016

I'd like to see a citation for that actually meaning some kind of repression.
spacefem wrote:All your logical argue are belong to us!

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Angelica » Mon Sep 12, 23:40 2016

Liberated, natural, feminine intuition.

iamthegate
member
member
Posts: 304
Joined: Sun May 17, 10:26 2015

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by iamthegate » Tue Sep 13, 0:43 2016

Angelica wrote:Liberated, natural, feminine intuition.
I think your intuition is wrong and potentially harmful, and since that is all you use as evidence, I'd prefer it if you stated is as opinion and not fact.

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Angelica » Tue Sep 13, 0:47 2016

iamthegate wrote:I think your intuition is wrong and potentially harmful, and since that is all you use as evidence, I'd prefer it if you stated is as opinion and not fact.
OK, this is my opinion then. I believe it is the opinion of a divine messenger of the Holy Mother.

User avatar
Nech
member
member
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 13:50 2015
Location: Canada

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Nech » Tue Sep 13, 13:42 2016

I'm definitely of the school of thought that nudity is natural and shouldn't be shamed and that children should be taught this in one form or another. However, hands on also isn't the only way to teach this and that's also okay. Part of the evolution process for humans was wearing clothes even before patriarchy was a thing. Back when they were hunters and gatherers and they were muuuuuch more hairy. We've actually evolved with the influence of clothing to keep us warm/body temperatures regulated. So if someone wants to be nude (just nude, no performing. I'll get to that shortly) that's okay. But so is allowing the idea only to be taught but with everyone fully clothed.

If a parent wants to teach that nudity is okay but isn't comfortable being nude themselves (either due to upbringing, something ingrained or otherwise) a child will notice this and just see "Well parent was uncomfortable being naked, so it must secretly be bad". Children have insane intuition and will pick up on stuff like that and it will simply hinder the message/lesson trying to be taught. So whether in theory or practice it is taught, neither is inherently wrong.

But also what Sonic said, where forcing people to watch sexual acts is not okay. It's pretty barbaric actually and was used as a form of punishment/domination by raiders (back when that was a thing). So subjecting anyone to this, especially children, is pretty wrong. Now if a child walks in then you obviously want to sit them down and have a chat with them about stuff. But arranging it to happen or forcing it to happen is simply not okay.
Where there's smoke, there's fire. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. So just shut up, and bring some water.

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Angelica » Tue Sep 13, 15:01 2016

Nech wrote:But also what Sonic said, where forcing people to watch sexual acts is not okay. It's pretty barbaric actually and was used as a form of punishment/domination by raiders (back when that was a thing). So subjecting anyone to this, especially children, is pretty wrong. Now if a child walks in then you obviously want to sit them down and have a chat with them about stuff. But arranging it to happen or forcing it to happen is simply not okay.
It's about teaching children to make love so that they do it themselves. Love has no age or genetic requirement. It's healthy for young siblings to make love, and it's unhealthy if they don't. Sexual repression of children fucks them up as adults. Because the parents are secretive about it, children get the idea that it's bad, which starts the process of sexual repression.

User avatar
Sonic#
member
member
Posts: 5155
Joined: Sat Nov 7, 9:37 2009
Location: Georgia, US

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Sonic# » Tue Sep 13, 16:42 2016

What evidence do you have that it's unhealthy if siblings don't have sex with one another? That sounds like another instance of something you're making up. Intentional exhibitionism with children is legally crime in many countries, let alone the problems with being able to consent to seeing one's parents involved. There's no consent there; as a parent you are forcing them into that, which becomes really coercive when it involves sexual boundaries.

ishtarlover

Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Sep 8, 14:58 2016

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by ishtarlover » Tue Sep 13, 17:52 2016

Angelica wrote:
Nech wrote:But also what Sonic said, where forcing people to watch sexual acts is not okay. It's pretty barbaric actually and was used as a form of punishment/domination by raiders (back when that was a thing). So subjecting anyone to this, especially children, is pretty wrong. Now if a child walks in then you obviously want to sit them down and have a chat with them about stuff. But arranging it to happen or forcing it to happen is simply not okay.
It's about teaching children to make love so that they do it themselves. Love has no age or genetic requirement. It's healthy for young siblings to make love, and it's unhealthy if they don't. Sexual repression of children fucks them up as adults. Because the parents are secretive about it, children get the idea that it's bad, which starts the process of sexual repression.
Until the 19th century it was common for families to sleep in the same bed. Children got a very upfront lesson in sex. Even Puritans were not that puritanical in this regard. Sex was considered an important part of family life as it made more family members. It was openly talked about and parents openly had it in front of their children.

User avatar
Sonic#
member
member
Posts: 5155
Joined: Sat Nov 7, 9:37 2009
Location: Georgia, US

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Sonic# » Tue Sep 13, 21:39 2016

^ We're talking about intentional exhibition to kids, which is illegal, violates a kid who cannot consent to being involved in a sexual act, and goes against psychological advice. Generally being open about discussing sex is okay, and being walked in on incidentally is not the worst thing in the world.

If such a thing ever happened in history (and there's no reason to believe that intentionally having sex in sight of one's kids was a thing - sex that did happen in bed would be pitch black [pre-modern lighting] and show nothing, and sex was frequently done elsewhere: the article "The Consenting Spinster in a Peasant Society: Aspects of Premarital Sex in "Puritan" Somerset 1645-1660" in the Journal of Social History is antiquated in a lot of ways but demonstrates the range of sexual options, none of which include intentionally having sex in view of kids), what was historically done is not necessarily common or right. See also spousal rape and not having the right to vote.

User avatar
Nech
member
member
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 13:50 2015
Location: Canada

Re: bringing children up naturist

Post by Nech » Wed Sep 14, 2:56 2016

Angelica wrote:It's healthy for young siblings to make love, and it's unhealthy if they don't.
Where in the hell did you read that? Please tell me you have a legit citation for that Lannister level claim.
Where there's smoke, there's fire. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. So just shut up, and bring some water.

Locked