Naturist Society Head Likens Nudist Resorts to "Calcified Retirement Homes"

Nudists/naturists are notoriously inept at public relations.

In an article published in the Wall Street Journal, Nicky Hoffman Lee, co-owner of The Naturist Society, made the following comments about the state of organized nudism today:

"The whole lifestyle will just disappear unless we attract a younger crowd," said Nicky Hoffman, head of the Naturist Society, one of the two big organizations of U.S. nudists. "The problem is, most of these resorts aren't geared to young people. They've become like retirement homes; they've sort of calcified."

Nicky, Nicky, what on earth were you thinking? Your ill-advised comments are now the centerpiece of an article which skewers nudists and naturists, painting them as basically dirty old men that are best to be avoided.

John Whitehead, 22, visited the Sunsport Gardens resort for the first time last year. He enjoyed being naked until he spotted a man his father's age he knew from work, then spent the day avoiding him."It's not that I have anything against old people," Mr. Whitehead said. "I just don't really want to hang out with them at the pool."

The article is a disaster, outlining the history of nudism as a series of arrests and beatings, and defining nude recreation as "undressing in front of strangers". Even worse, the Spring Break Bash at Sunsport Gardens organized by Florida Young Naturists is painted as a segregated event to avoid turning the younger people into "eye candy" for older people.

This story has gone viral and has appeared on many prominent blogs and does real damage to the image of naturists and nudists everywhere. From Jezebel:

If people of all ages can't come together to enjoy the freedom of standing around and feeling cold and slightly awkward, perhaps it's time to accept that the younger generation's interest in public nudity is mostly limited to occasional bouts of drunken toplessness.

The Village Voice even proclaims that "people should just wear clothes."

The Miami New Times reports:

That Spring Break Bash, held at a resort on the edge of the Everglades, only attracted 55 people, and the group's Facebook page keeps getting shut down because it's tricky to run a group with both "young" and "nude" in the title.

But if you really want to lose your lunch, read the comments section of the Wall Street Journal article, where Robbe White of the Florida Young Naturists adds his two cents:

Great article. Thank You WSJ and Doug Belkin for shedding some light on the nudist/naturist community. Check out our website: http://www.FYNude.org 

Great article? Really? Just because you got your name in print?

John Whitehead claims that his comments were twisted out of context, which is not a surprise considering the state of journalism today.

I am the John Whitehead mentioned in the article of all the things I said, they mention me seeing a guy from my work who I avoided the first time because he knows my dad. They seemed to leave out that I talked with him about it later on and then he said "Don't worry I won't say anything". Not only that but my second quote was explaining why I never went prior to the FYN event and I was saying I was glad about FYN because I could be around people my own age. I think they made me sound like kind of a jerk...I talked to the journalist for around 30 minutes. I said all kinds of things. Why of all things things that I said would you mention that I saw a guy from work. I casually mentioned that. I mostly talked about how great the event was and how I met a bunch or friendly and interesting people. Why couldn't you mention that WSJ?

The comments are filled with loathing for nudists in general, and Susan Weaver, President of The American Association for Nude Recreation, is smart enough to realize the negativity of the article.

It is unfortunate that this article makes a generalized statement about nudist clubs, campgrounds and resorts. Among the 267 that are affiliated with AANR, there is tremendous diversity. I have found them to be enormously relaxing and fun, and there has never been any criticism of my own body jewelry. The people I have met at AANR clubs are interesting people, much traveled, with fascinating hobbies and histories. The aanr.com website is much visited by people of all ages looking to discover where there is a club nearby to visit.

AANR has worked for 80 years to promote and protect nude recreation, and will continue to advocate for the rights of nudists for as many years as it takes to assure public awareness and acceptance of social family nude recreation as a joyful life experience.

Thank you, Susan, for showing some class in the middle of a disaster. There's not too much to salvage from this train wreck of epic proportions.

UPDATE: Time Magazine agrees with me that Nicky's comments were a total gaffe.

"The whole lifestyle will just disappear unless we attract a younger crowd," Nicky Hoffman, head of the Naturist Society, recently told the Wall Street Journal. "The problem is, most of these resorts aren't geared to young people. They've become like retirement homes; they've sort of calcified."'

With statements like that, we can see why young, vibrant Americans aren't clamoring to join ranks and take their clothes off.

Nicky needs to apologize for her disparaging remarks, or at the very least, she should explain that she was misquoted, or taken out of context.

The Century Project Weathers a Storm

Dr. Paul Rapoport chronicles the obsession of Oklahoma State University professer John Foubert with Frank Cordelle's "The Century Project".

Although images of nudity may occasionally surprise, confuse, or bother some people, and individuals may misuse some, naturists need to oppose the claim that the existence or viewing of such images causes or increases sexual violence or crime. Countering it may be a tough task. But the mythology and censorship surrounding nudity, especially the non-sexualized variety in naturism, are large and hysterical, and as disturbing as John Foubert’s fabrications and bullying.

You can read Dr. Rapoport's full article here, published in the latest issue of "Nude and Natural" magazine.

One Arrest Reported in TNS Delray Beach Incident

NBC News in Miami is reporting that one arrest has been made for the incident involving 10 naturists getting naked on public Delray Beach.

One man involved in the nude display has already been arrested, and it sounds like there could be more busts for indecent exposure.

The man who was arrested, David Armstrong, said Delray needs to give peace a chance.

"There's a bunch of us lying there and we're doing a peace sign," Armstrong told WPEC. "They fear us, they think we're freaks."

Freak is as freak does.

David Armstrong is an area representative for The Naturist Society in Palm Beach County, and a member of South Florida Free Beaches and other organizations. He was arrested on May 11 of 2009 for disorderly conduct on Delray Beach and was found not guilty on November 15. (source here)

Armstrong proposed a nude beach back in early 2008 but was laughed at by city officials.

The NBC story also reports, somewhat sensationally, that local police are "in a tizzy" and that local residents, including the vice mayor, don't want a nude beach in their community.

More brilliant public relations from The Naturist Society. Members need to demand a statement of explanation from the organizer of this fiasco.

Ten TNS Members Could Be Arrested

Looks like 10 naturists at the Mid-Winter Naturist Festival at Sunsport Gardens Family Naturist Resort decided to defy public nudity laws by appearing naked on public Delray Beach with the intent on making a human peace symbol for an aerial photo.

The nine men and one woman were not arrested.Police recommended an indecent exposure charge but the State Attorney's Office will decide whether the birthday-suit peaceniks will be arrested.

Stupid, stupid, stupid. Whose idea was this? Was Morley Schloss or any other TNS or NAC official involved? I'm dumbfounded as to why these 10 decided to pull this idiotic stunt and generate more negative publicity for nudism and naturism.

Sweet Grapes?

All of you are certainly familiar with the Aesop tale about the fox and the grapes, where the animal tries and tries to reach some grapes hanging on a vine, and when unable to get to them exclaims "the grapes are sour anyway".

What you don't know about is the fox's friend who was watching nearby. When the first fox fails, the second one, who is bigger and stronger, comes along and says that the grapes are the sweetest in the world and that he can get them. The second fox jumps and jumps, and finally manages to bite off a single grape. When he bites down, it is the most unripe and sour fruit he has ever tasted, but he turns to his friend and exclaims that it is delicious.

Such is the case with some recent nudist and naturist news, with people putting a positive spin on some bad news, and declaring it all good.

In the February 2010 Naturist Action Committee newsletter, Morley Schloss tries to turn a visit from child protection authorities into something positive for naturism.

The officials looked at the photos of the children enjoying the Youth Camp. They remarked something to the effect of, “No problem, it looks like the kids are having fun.” We then shook hands and they left.

And over on the rec.nude Google group, John Purbrick seconds the "victory":

This is just more proof that we don't have anything to fear, if we live right. In fact, as Morley says, we actually prove our innocence when children are invited to join in, and enjoy themselves, and anyone at all can visit and verify that.

The truth of the matter is that the visit by the police and a social worker to Sunsport Gardens Family Naturist Resort is an ominous development in an era when all nude depictions of anyone under 18 years of age can be considered child pornography. We live in a society where a Pennsylvania district attorney can announce that he has the power to prosecute young girls in bikinis on a beach because they are dressed "provocatively'.

I applaud Morley for standing up for his principles. He is right - there is nothing lewd about a nude child having fun at camp. Morley is one of the last naturists with the courage to keep posting nude photos of children enjoying nude recreation.

I wish him continued success, but I fear that the day will soon come where an ambitious politician or district attorney in Florida will make children in nudism a hot-button issue, and unlike Mark Foley's failed attempt several years ago, the social climate has changed, and the next attack could prove to be successful.

Another "victory" has been declared by AANR over a recent incident at an Oregon shopping mall where a banner touting nude recreation drew complaints and had to be removed from a local chamber of commerce event.

From time to time, I am asked, “Why do we even need an AANR?” I hope this story provides another answer. We’ll continue to do what we have done since 1931: advocating for nudity within appropriate settings and educating the public about the wholesome benefits that enjoying nudity offers.

Again, the truth of the matter is that AANR was censored at a public mall, doing more harm to nudism. Executive Director Erich Schuttauf can talk all he wants about other stores in the mall with provocative advertising, and that a "well-stated" letter was fired off the the chamber president, but the banner showing "discreet" nudity probably should not have been raised in the first place.

You cannot advocate for nudity "within appropriate settings" and then raise a banner in a shopping mall with depictions of nudity.

Is this really the best our national organizations can do?

California Paper Runs Story on NEF Nude Sunbathing Poll

The Orange County Register has a story today on the Naturist Education Foundation / Zogby Poll showing that 79% of California residents support nude sunbathing.

"I think this poll mainly shows that the Parks Department should go ahead and designate clothing-optional beaches in California because that's what the people of the state want. The people want to have safe, legal, clothing-optional beaches," said Allen Baylis, a Huntington Beach attorney who led the fight against the nudity ban at Trail 6.

Naturist Education Foundation 2009 California Poll

If you ever had any doubt that the California Department of Parks and Recreation was going against the will of the people in banning nudity at San Onofre Beach, the 2009 Naturist Education Foundation poll shows that in California there is strong support for nude sunbathing, overwhelming acceptance for the personal rights of people to be nude in their homes or on their property, and clear rejection of the notion that most Californians are offended by nudity. A whopping 62% believe that the DPR should establish clothing-optional areas in state parks.

The Naturist Action Committee Advisory on the poll can be found here, and the entire poll results are here.

This is a scientific poll conducted by Zogby with a margin of error of plus or minus 3.4 percentage points.

Highlights are that 79% of respondents agree that people should be able to enjoy nude sunbathing, 70% agree that areas should be set aside for nude recreation, 68% agree that people have the right to be nude in their homes or on their property even if occasionally visible to others, and 60% disagree that they are personally offended by the non-sexual nudity of others.

Another astounding number is that 40% or respondents have personally gone skinny-dipping or nude sunbathing with others. That calculates to approximately 10 million people in the state of California alone.

Contrast this important work being done by the NEF with the lame self-serving poll conducted by AANR last month on its blog.

Congratulations and thanks to the NEF and this watershed poll on which naturists can begin to build a system of public lands for the personal liberty and human right of being nude in nature.

Nude and Natural Magazine Issue 29.2 Now Available

The Winter 2009 issue of Nude and Natural Magazine is now available through The Naturist Society. The table of contents and the staff pick article are available for free viewing online here. Copies of N magazine, TNS memberships and other items can be purchased online at the Skinny Dipper Shop.

When I get my copy in the mail I will comment further on the contents.

Culture is Politics

"Culture is politics."

So exclaims Frank Rich in his essay today on the Sarah Palin phenomenon. Whatever your political lean, there can be no doubt that Palin's rise stems from her connection to cultural issues, such as abortion and religion, and her seemingly effortless ability to resonate with people who are fearful of change. It's an apocalyptic message, repeated in an equally populist way by Glenn Beck, that America, and life as we know it, is about to end if leftist and progressive ideas and agendas are allowed to thrive.

Suddenly, with the election of our nation's first African-American President, these fears have bubbled to the surface, with teabagging masses descending upon Washington DC like the torch-wielding mobs in "Frankenstein", trying to kill what they simply do not understand. It's totally irrational, but people who are afraid do not take time to seek out the facts, they only know what they feel, and voices like Palin and Beck, with their incessant demonization-du-jour, tap into that raw, visceral emotion.

Matt Taibbi, in a must-read column, hits the nail on the head.

At the end of this decade what we call “politics” has devolved into a kind of ongoing, brainless soap opera about dueling cultural resentments and the really cool thing about it, if you’re a TV news producer or a talk radio host, is that you can build the next day’s news cycle meme around pretty much anything at all, no matter how irrelevant — like who’s wearing a flag lapel pin and who isn’t, who spent $150K worth of campaign funds on clothes and who didn’t, who wore a t-shirt calling someone a cunt and who didn’t, and who put a picture of a former Vice Presidential candidate in jogging shorts on his magazine cover (and who didn’t).

It doesn’t matter what the argument is about. What’s important is that once the argument starts, the two sides will automatically coalesce around the various instant-cocoa talking points and scream at each other until they’re blue in the face, or until the next argument starts.

A month ago I wrote about AANR's director Erich Schuttauf and his public comments about two cultural issues - the man arrested in Virginia for being nude in his own home, and the parents in Arizona who were arrested for taking nude photos of their children. Schuttauf got caught up in the noise on these issues, the 24 hour news spin, and made them official AANR issues, when in fact they were of marginal passing interest, fodder for blogs and forums, and not worthy of official comment or statement from nudist organizations. As I predicted, both of these stories dropped off the radar just as quickly as they appeared.

The challenge for nudists and naturists today is to separate the real issues out of the incessant noise of cultural argument, and to formulate a plan for future acceptance of nude recreation in society.

The recent battle over San Onofre Beach illustrates how the cultural divide is threatening nude sunbathing. Without rehashing the entire case, suffice it to say that California Parks officials banned nudity at San Onofre more on cultural reasons than practical. As the Naturist Action Committee reported on 5/30/08: "It is their (Parks Department officials) firm belief that the only way to rid the park of the criminals in the parking lot, on the Marine Base and the occasional miscreant on our beach is to remove the most supportive and positive influence there, the honest naturists at Trail 6."

This is a clear case of public officials taking on a "cultural enemy" rather than deal with the real issue at hand, both as a matter of expediency and to create the illusion that they were on top of the issue. Allen Baylis outlines the irrationality behind the San Onofre decision in his "Fact or Fiction" essay.

As I've noted before, I supported the NAC's lawsuit at San Onofre, even though the chances for success were slim. It was important for nudists and naturists to band together and fight, even for a lost cause, in order to bring attention to the issue, and gather support. When AANR chose not to support the NAC and pursue a course of appeasement and negotiation, they effectively threw San Onofre Beach under the bus, and revealed nudists and naturists to be a divided and weakened force.

In this particular battle in the culture wars, the NAC decided to fight the real battle, while AANR decided to run with what Taibbi refers to as a "brainless soap opera", blaming the NAC, claiming "victory" through appeasement, and scoring political points at the expense of a real loss for nude recreation.

It's truly shameful, especially from an organization that calls itself "the credible voice of reason for nude recreation." Even the use of such a slogan is divisive, inferring that The Naturist Society or other organizations have no credibility. It's just like Fox News when it refers to itself as "fair and balanced."

On the other hand, TNS proclaims as part of its mission statement: "The Naturist Society believes the interests of naturists are advanced through education and community outreach. TNS recognizes it is part of a larger community and welcomes the challenge of spreading the naturist and nudist message."

Taibbi goes on to say:

Complaining about the assholes we interact with on a daily basis is the #1 eternal pastime of the human race. We all do it, and we get to do it every day, because the world is full of assholes...and when we get home from work, this is usually what our loved ones hear about for at least the first hour or so.

Not health care, not financial regulatory reform, not Iraq or Afghanistan, but — assholes.

AANR and the NAC have been engaging in the assholes debate for the last year and a half. AANR blames the NAC for endangering nudity on all California state beaches, and the NAC blames AANR for giving Parks officials the impression that San Onofre was expendable. Plenty of assholes to blame on this one.

The blame game has reached epic proportions in today's culture. Don't like health care reform? Blame Obama, blame Pelosi, blame Reid. Don't like the lack of health care reform? Blame Boehner, blame Bush, blame all the obstructionist Republicans.

Sarah Palin fits perfectly into this new meme, never taking responsibility for her own failures, but rather blaming all of the assholes in her life, like Katie Couric, Steve Schmidt, Newsweek, or any other person or entity which dares to stand in the way of her ordained mission to save America. She is the self-proclaimed "credible voice" of the people.

The problem with all of this brainless cultural chatter is that it accomplishes nothing. We leap from one argument to the next without ever solving real problems. Issues like health insurance reform, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the current economic crisis should not be fodder for petty political posturing, but rather battles that need to be fought together as the common interests of all the American people. Life and death issues should not be debated "Hardball" style day in and day out - there has to come a time when doing the right thing trumps doing the political thing.

Same with San Onofre. The time has come for the asshole arguments to cease. I don't give a damn who is the "credible" voice on the public beaches issue, I just want results.

There's a scene in the Pixar movie "Up" where a talking dog is engaged in conversation when he suddenly turns his head and exclaims "Squirrel!". This sudden animated canine distraction says more about our culture as Americans than it does about the dog. In the midst of world-shattering crises, we are all to willing to focus our attention on the inane, such as Balloon Boy, Jon and Kate, and the Thrilla from Wasilla who winks and says "You Betcha" as part of her political platform.

Mixing culture with politics not only further divides people, it over-simplifies issues into black and white, completely erasing the gray. Nuance and subtelty are the backbones of any meaningful debate, and the essence of problem solving, so when we reduce these complex matters into stick figure cartoons, we render ourselves ineffective and irrelevant. As Matt Taibbi says, we are in danger of waging a "virtually endless war over nonsense."

Nudists and naturists need to realize than in a culturally explosive atmosphere, the nude lifestyle loses. We have practically no political power, and even less when divided into opposing camps. We are also in the odd position where non-sexual social nudity is taboo for most of mainstream America, and too tame for the swinger and porn culture which is a thriving sub-sector taking over traditional nudist venues.

We are literally caught in the middle.

So what is the prescription for nudists in dealing with this society where culture and politics are one and the same?

The floor is open for intelligent debate.

USA Today Covers the California Nude Beach Story

USA Today picked up on the banning of nudity at California's San Onofre Beach, and both Bob Morton and Allen Baylis are quoted. It's noteworthy that AANR was not interviewed for the article.

Park Superintendent Richard Haydon warns:

"We are going to be moving forward with starting to enforce the nudity statute down at San Onofre, and basically returning that portion of the beach to all people who want to go down there without fear of running into something they didn't think they would," Haydon said. "People should very well be under notice."

I really despise this so-called "rationale". How can you exclaim that you are returning the beach to "all" people by banning those who most frequent the area? This is clear discrimination. All that needs to be done is put up a sign or two warning about nude sunbathers so people don't have to live in "fear" of seeing too much flesh.

Most of the article is retread material, but Baylis does note that people are ready to be arrested in order to bring the matter before the criminal courts as a matter of civil disobedience. Unfortunately, with a government intent on robbing people of basic freedoms, sometimes that's the only way. I only hope that Baylis has the numbers of people necessary to make such a protest effective.

"Unless you intend to raise them as nudists"

"Curious in Maryland" writes to "Dear Annie":

I am the father of two sons, 7 and 11. At what point do you stop dressing or being naked in front of your children? I come from a minister's family, and my wife comes from a somewhat dysfunctional family. Let's just say they are at the other end of the spectrum and leave it at that. My wife still gets dressed and undressed in front of the boys, and thinks nothing of coming out of the shower naked while the boys are in our bedroom watching TV. I sometimes get dressed in front of them at home or at the changing room at the pool. What do you think?

Annie's answer:

Parents of the opposite sex should not be undressing in front of their children after the age of 4. Unless you intend to raise them as nudists, both of your boys are too old for this. The 11-year-old will be going through puberty soon and will become plenty confused if he is inadvertently aroused by his mother. Insist that every member of the family have some privacy.

There's a lot wrong with this little exchange, but let's focus on the phrase "unless you intend to raise them as nudists". I tend to think that Annie meant to use the words in the sense that nudism was completely out of the question, such as when you would advise someone who was loading a gun with the safety off with "unless you want to blow your head off".

But the true result of Annie's advice is that she basically told the man that family nudity was perfectly OK only in the context of nudism.

This is very strange. If the boys are too old for nudity at home, what is it about nudism that would suddenly make it appropriate? If the 11 year-old is susceptible to arousal by the sight of his nude mother, what would make him less inclined to get excited by the sight of a crowd of nudists? Annie's answer is far too ambiguous.

The correct answer to "Curious" is this: There is nothing wrong with the human body. Many studies show that children who are exposed to normal, natural nudity at home grow up with healthier attitudes about sex, and their own bodies. Chances are your boys are not even paying attention to your casual nudity, and that of your wife, and are much more interested in watching television. Since you are all comfortable with nudity, you might consider family nude recreation, which will further normalize your bodies to each other, remove the societal stigma or taboo, and wash away any shame you are feeling. More information on family nudism can be found at the websites of the American Association for Nude Recreation and The Naturist Society.

Three More TNS Naturist Interviews

Laura Leyrer Throws Nudism Overboard

"Detroit Nudist Adventures Examiner" Laura Leyrer has continued her descent into adult lifestyles recreation with her latest column touting a French Nude Cruise, which has an affiliation with Caliente Resorts, recently outed by AANR as having ties with swingers groups.

This is not the sort of promotion needed by nudist and naturist groups. There is nothing wrong with adult cruises, or swingers groups, but AANR, TNS and the NAC must distance themselves from those who seek to sell sex vacations under the guise of nudism and naturism.

I really don't know what motivaed Ms. Leyrer to turn from family-friendly nudist activities to hedonistic vacations. She showed such promise in her early writings, too.

I encourage all readers to post comments on Ms. Leyrer's articles urging her to stop promoting adult lifestyle resorts and travel agencies under the guise of nudism.

It's About Time!

The Naturist Society has finally joined the 20th century, even though we are now nine years into the 21st, by putting up some promotional videos on YouTube. The interviews with Scott, Krystin and Karen can be found here.

Nude and Natural 29.1 Available

Issue 29.1 of the Naturist Society's Nude & Natural Magazine is out, and the table of contents and one article are online for anyone to view. You can join TNS and get a subscription to the journal here.

Take note that the TNS web site is filled with broken images and links, which is inexcusable for a professional organization.

An Open Letter to Tom Mulhall

Tom Mulhall reports that he has been elected to the AANR West Board of Directors. I wholeheartedly congratulate him on this well-earned honor.

Tom and his wife Mary Clare are experts in public relations and have made their Terra Cotta Inn clothing-optional resort a model for success in the nudist industry. They are by far the most enthusiastic and friendly spokespersons in the industry, qualities which they will no doubt bring to AANR.

In his announcement, Tom writes:

If people have questions about AANR, feel free calling me at 800-786-6938. If you want me to bring something up to the board, let me know.

OK, I'll bite.

It's no secret that I have been critical of AANR's failure to support the NAC's initiatives in trying to save the clothing-optional status of a section of San Onofre Beach. It is my opinion that by ignoring the legal front and attempting to come to some sort of "deal" with the California Department of Parks and Recreation, AANR has not only thrown San Onofre Beach under the bus, it has endangered the status of all clothing-optional beaches on state lands. AANR is blaming the NAC's lawsuit for creating the hostile atmosphere, but the real truth of the matter is that the DPR made a unilateral decision to ban nudity at San Onofre, would not bargain with the NAC, and left no alternative but to sue to protect nudist and naturist rights.

I would hope, Tom, that as a private business owner with a successful resort, that you will not forget the public lands issue. There is a common belief out there that AANR is deliberately sabotaging the public beaches because it will drive more people into private AANR affiliated resorts like the Terra Cotta Inn.

I don't subscribe to this misconception. From my point of view, the more public lands are set aside for nude recreation, the more people will become accepting, and overall participation will increase. In Florida, the creation of Haulover Beach appears to have contributed to a boom in private resorts throughout that state, and now Key West is looking for its own clothing-optional beach in order to increase tourist revenue. Crowded nude beaches means crowded nude resorts.

The banning of nudity on public lands in California only serves to propagate the myth that nude recreation obscene and dangerous and should be made illegal. Nudist resorts are always at risk from government encroachment and could be next.

I humbly suggest that you keep in mind that in accepting a board position with AANR you are representing all of the hard-working dues-paying members who all share the same basic philosophies that wholesome family-friendly nude recreation should be a basic human right, and not just for people who can afford expensive resort vacations.

I also suggest that you help to find some way to secure greater cooperation from AANR with TNS, NAC and local free beaches associations in helping to protect naturist rights.

I wish you great success in your new position with AANR West, as well as continued success to you and Mary Clare at the Terra Cotta Inn.

Public Relations Disaster

No, I'm not talking about the AANR skinny-dipping event, that was a public relations coup.

Over at the Nudist-Resorts.org forum they're talking about positive depictions of nudity in the mainstream media. The administrator provided this article as a "fine" example. One of the members called him out on it, saying that while it was not a hit piece per se, it is a disaster for nudism.

The member is right. Upon second glance, the article is a giant step backwards.

Writer Sarah Perry certainly doesn't set out to portray nudism in a bad light. Her article appears to be open-minded, fair, and well written. The disaster comes from the mouths of the folks at Wildwood Naturist Park, who haven't a clue about how to handle a journalist in order to create positive public relations.

There's all the usual whining about how young people aren't interested in nudism, how the average age is 45, and touting darts, horseshoes and water volleyball as activities isn't going to draw the college crowd.

The owner whines about nobody returning her calls when she tried to buy ads at radio stations and college newspapers. Well, try a little harder, visit these outlets in person.

An 18 year-old naturist is interviewed, but in the process manages to let the writer know that telling her friends is a problem, and generally she doesn't actively try and recruit new members.

Then there is this damaging paragraph:

On the private road leading to Wildwood, visitors reach a red iron gate and a sign that says "Nudity may be encountered beyond this point." Wildwood isn't "clothing optional." Visitors to the resort are asked to disrobe - Taylor and many other naturists think it's the people who keep their clothes on, while looking at people who've taken theirs off, who are perverted.

A friendly welcome sign is far better than such a stern warning, which basically says "keep away", and calling people who wear clothes "perverted" is beyond stupid. Instead, the folks at Wildwood should have presented a more understanding and sympathetic policy, saying that they will work with first-timers to allow them to disrobe at their own pace.

(Manager and part-owner Beatrice) Taylor, 59, theorizes that it's tough to attract young people to nudist parks because they're more self-conscious about their bodies than people a little older. When college students do visit Wildwood, she said, they usually do so out of curiosity and aren't repeat customers.

If people aren't comfortable with their bodies, then becoming nudists isn't right for them, Taylor said. There's a certain time in one's life, usually later, when self-acceptance is achieved, she said - and when people stop worrying about staring and being stared at.

Again, bad public relations, basically saying that college students aren't mature enough to be nudists. C'mon, college students invented streaking, they throw their clothes off on a whim, and their bodies will never look better for their entire lives. You want to know why they never come back? It's the defeatist attitude, the lame activities like the potluck dinners, card games, and the plastic spider decorations at Halloween.

AANR and TNS need to develop a real public relations strategy for these clubs, and educate them on how to deal with the press. Nudism needs talking points with positive phrases and catch words, a list of subjects to avoid or explain in an effective manner, and a real plan for reaching out to communities. The national organizations are wasting their time with their own positive message when the individual clubs are undermining their efforts whenever a reporter sets foot inside their gates.

TNS Proclaims Nude Recreation Week July 6-12

Well, that's just fine that the NAC decided to pass on this information, but the problem is that the message was posted on July 9 just as Nude Recreation Week was ending!

Meanwhile, AANR has been running away with the public relations war with all the hype surrounding their attempt at a skinny-dipping record, an event that should have originated with The Naturist Society.

Update on San Onofre

Allen Baylis of Friends of San Onofre reports that he spoke with Ken Kramer, California State Park District Superintendent for the Orange Coast District, and he reports that no citations for nudity will be issued for the remainder of the summer; however, the department intends to replace the "nudity prohibited" signs and conduct a public educational campaign for enforcement next year.

It seems to me that this is the time for TNS, the NAC and AANR to all get on the same page here and organize a massive display of support for San Onofre Beach. On July 12 there will be a beach cleanup and barbecue, and people are encouraged to attend and show support for proper behavior.

If San Onofre is to be saved, it will be from a groundswell of support, and not from further court action. While I supported the NAC in its efforts to keep San Onofre open, which basically bought naturists two more seasons of freedom, it appears the time has come to pursue other means of fighting the battle.

NAC Bashes AANR

While TNS (The Naturist Society) members frolic at the annual Eastern Gathering, the NAC (Naturist Action Committee) has released an update on California's San Onofre Beach which is basically an attack on AANR (American Association for Nude Recreation).

The tempest is based upon AANR's receipt of a letter from Tony Perez, Acting Deputy Director for Park Operations in California, which basically reiterates the 1979 "Cahill policy" which states that nude recreation is allowed in all state parks unless there is a complaint by a private citizen. While the original policy makes no exceptions as to which public lands fall under the rule, apparently the new Perez letter designates "remoteness" as a condition for clothing-optional use.

NAC appears to have a valid point. AANR does not mention the "remoteness" limitation in its "Government Affairs" column in the May 2009 bulletin. Alonzo Stevens, AANR Government Affairs Chair, implies that the Perez letter offers assurance that "the Cahill Policy was not threatened in the state of California, with the exception of San Onofre, because of the litigation." In fact, the exact words in the letter are as follows:

Since 1979 the Cahill Policy has tolerated nude sunbathing in remote state park areas up to the point where a complaint is received from a member of the public. It remains in effect as a practical approach to enforcement of CCR Section 4322 in remote areas.

The original Cahill letter makes no mention of "remoteness" as a condition, so this is indeed a new interpretation.

I agree with NAC that the notion of "remoteness" as being a necessary component of a clothing-optional beach is dangerous, because keeping such areas away from populated areas will only further stigmatize nude sunbathing, and will no doubt draw unwanted sexual activity.

The question also seems to be whether of not the Perez letter is official policy. In the case of the 1979 Cahill Policy, a letter was sent to park officials statewide, and I don't see any evidence that the "remoteness" condition has been widely distributed, but its clear that at the very least, Perez considers it to be his policy.

AANR claims that California's Parks and Recreation Department "wishes to partner" with AANR on a "neutral project", whatever that means. This could just be an effort to "appease" the nudist community by offering a remote piece of land for clothing-optional use, and to make the issue go away.

Or, AANR could be playing the fool, cleverly drawn out of the current beach fight by the DPR with the promise of a partnership which will ultimately be reneged upon if and when the state succeeds in banning naturists from San Onofre.

Or, for all you cynics out there, AANR could be deliberately trying to derail the public lands issue in California in order to force more people into private clubs and resorts.

As Abraham Lincoln once said, "a house divided against itself cannot stand." NAC and AANR should be united on this issue, but blind ambition and foolish politics are pitting the two organizations against one another. It's getting ugly, and ultimately members of both organizations stand to lose more than they gain. But who is right on this issue?

NAC claims that AANR is willing to throw San Onofre Beach under the bus in order to further its own agenda. That does appear to be the case.

AANR has sold its soul to the devil on this issue. Since the Court of Appeals is set to issue a ruling soon on the San Onofre case, AANR is betting that the Department of Parks and Recreation will ultimately win, even if it loses in the short run. While the DPR is currently obligated to enforce the Cahill Policy, it will likely attempt to make changes through administrative process, and the "remoteness" condition appears to be their goal.

Clothing optional beaches must be accessible, visible, legal and family-friendly. Banishing nudists and naturists to remote areas only further marginalizes the lifestyle, attracts the perverts and the creeps, and ultimately makes it easier for governments to shut down the activity altogether.

AANR needs to join the NAC in fighting to keep the Cahill Policy in effect as it was originally written in 1979. Anything less is a defeat for nudists and naturists everywhere. In the short run, by siding with the DPR, AANR will no doubt continue to claim victory, especially if an official clothing-optional area is created in a remote area of California. Such a "victory" would be short-sighted and hollow.

You can donate to the NAC here.