Nude Family swim at Stoke Waterworld

it's obviously going to be one of the most, if not the top source of attraction for paedophiles and voyeurs.

There is no evidence to bear that out. I refer to the NSPCC link above - most abuse is perpetrated by someone known to the child - not by strangers at a naturist event.

I am not saying that has never happened. But again, referring to the links above, to avoid placing a child in any situation where abuse has ever been known to occur, let alone the most common grooming scenarios (family members, schools, football coaching, church groups) would mean never allowing a child to do anything.

Grooming happens when an adult has consistent access to a child when they aren’t with their parent/s. So the responsibility lies with us parents to assess times when that might be the case and to assess which adults we trust with our children if those situations are occurring. That is true for all areas of a child’s life, including naturism.

But, this whole thread started because of a single naturist swim, where children are with their parents, so grooming is quite an unlikely event in this instance.

Yeah, whilst I understand the pleasure that many people take in being naked, and don't think that there is anything necessarily dodgy about it, it's obviously going to be one of the most, if not the top source of attraction for paedophiles and voyeurs.

And personally, on that basis alone, it deserves a lot of scrutiny.

Outings to a water park, to which, apparently, a registered sex offender can go, is obviously something that shouldn't go ahead. And people defending it need challenging.

And women on here who have asserted that being expected to disrobe around strangers as children, has quite a lasting psychological affect, should be listened to. At length.

Naturism, by its nature, as it were, is a niche activity. There will be many people who are profoundly affected by what their parents put them through.

The safeguarding is impossible.

It should be an adult only activity, in my opinion.

It's inaccurate to say the organisation is 'devoted to endorsing the nudity of children'. The organisation exists to facilitate naturism for all.

Yes, sorry. Devoted to the nudity of children.

And adults.

The difference is, that any teacher, priest, football coach organising a "nude family swim" would be looked at very differently to the "naturists"

Would they? I don't think people who endorse naturism would look at them any differently from an accountant or estate agent or shop worker organising naturist events.

And people like you who don't are not giving naturists a free pass regardless of their occupation, so I really don't see any logic in this comment at all.

Why does an adult want to be naked in front of children they don't know?

They don't. Children might happen to be present while they are enjoying naturism but - with the exception of depraved individuals whom you might find in any environment they are not going along because there are naked children there.

It's inaccurate to say the organisation is 'devoted to endorsing the nudity of children'. The organisation exists to facilitate naturism for all.

I wouldn't describe beaches as 'full' of naked children but it's rare you don't see any.

I have skinny dipped before, in total privacy, outdoors in the sunshine and it was lovely. Not lovely enough to take my naked children to a public pool full of naked adults though.

I think I am going to have to leave this thread now, your children your rules I suppose.

If someone wants to see small children walking round naked, they can do so on practically any British beach in the summer when the weather is fine.

I don't generally see beaches full of naked children, to be honest. The odd one, maybe.

But when your entire organisation is devoted to endorsing the nudity of children, it's a little different.

We are going round in circles now. People within football, teaching, scouting, churches etc. have been found to be paedophiles. You can't dismiss an entire organisation because some of its members are abusers.

You can if one of its founding tenets is that little children walk around naked.

none of the nudist parents on this thread have explained how nudist events benefit children above normal clothed swimming

I'm not a parent, but as above, did some naked swimming as a teenager. I can only say that it feels nice - it's a pleasant sensual experience to have nothing between your skin and the water, especially in a natural environment such as a river.

It's like you said though, we are going around it circles, none of the nudist parents on this thread have explained how nudist events benefit children above normal clothed swimming. I really want to try to understand why parents do this, because at the minute my mind is boggled!

But the same applies to any type of event or activity where children might be present - and far more to situations where children are routinely unchaperoned or unaccompanied.

You can't vilify naturism just because some people abuse it, any more than you can vilify football, scouting, choristry etc.

Masturbating over people isn't 'naturism' though. I'm sorry you had this traumatising experience on a nudist beach.

But it happened in a nudist environment! Same with that paedophile in the OP, he went to legitimate nudist events and let's face it, the man was there to eye up naked kids. If you had been to one of these events and found out later on that a convicted paedophile was in attendance, how would you honestly feel?

Just to clarify, I don't have kids. But if I did have kids, I'd not want to put them into that environment just in case.

The other thing I've found is that some men ogle women's bodies. I get this done to me with my clothes on.

Anyway, I'm not hating on the naturist community, I'm hating on pervy men. Who are literally everywhere whether we like it or not.

As you can see from the news reports in the OP and elsewhere in the thread, people within British Naturism have been found to be paedophiles

We are going round in circles now. People within football, teaching, scouting, churches etc. have been found to be paedophiles. You can't dismiss an entire organisation because some of its members are abusers.

Did you miss the part of my post which was about being masturbated over - on a nudist beach!! Was this OK too, because it was on a nudist beach?

Masturbating over people isn't 'naturism' though. I'm sorry you had this traumatising experience on a nudist beach.

My point is that being the victim of someone who masturbates in public is traumatic whether you are naked or not. It's an unacceptable thing to do in any environment.

I’m sure like many women I have been flashed at and had a man rub himself against me on the tube (I was young and had enough doubt not to want to make a scene). It had nothing to do with naturism. And, as mentioned above, I am no naturist and in fact shy about taking my clothes off.

You may be practicing 'true naturism' but others there may not be. As you can see from the news reports in the OP and elsewhere in the thread, people within British Naturism have been found to be paedophiles, so for a while they passed as 'true naturists' and probably got off on the fact that people were none the wiser as to thier true intentions.

As a teenager I

a. Went 'skinny dipping' with a mixed group including other adults and teenagers, around the ages of 12-14.
b. Got flashed at a bus station when I was 17
c. Was the victim of a peeping tom in the showers at university when I was 19.

Guess which experiences disturbed me? The answer is not 'a'.

I think the people on this thread who think naturism is A-OK are those people who are very lucky not to have been sexually assaulted, flashed at, rubbed up against, etc

I was flashed at as a teenager. I was fully dressed and so was the flasher, apart from getting his tiny, pathetic penis out. Flashing has nothing to do with naturism - flashing relies on the shock factor. Naturism is actually the one environment in which it's impossible for someone to flash you.

How would you know?