Nude Family swim at Stoke Waterworld

It’s a lifestyle where nudity is accepted for the simple thing it is - people are comfortable in their own skin, and spend time with other naturists because they have the same beliefs - if you know someone else is comfortable with simple nudity, it makes sense to be part of that community. No one is worried about nude sunbathing or swimming because we know we all feel the same about it.

I teach my kids about privacy and consent the same as I imagine most parents do - age appropriate information and discussion and an open family where any question is ok.

Naturist children and (people) experience a naturist environment ie non sexual nudity. It doesn’t mean we would accept inappropriate sexual behaviour, in a naturist or non naturist environment.

Also good to remember that naturists also live in a non naturist world, so we do all sorts of things clothed too.

Has anyone collected data on the frequency of sexual offences occurring in naturist clubs and events? Do they occur with more, less, or the same frequency as elsewhere? Having answers to these questions could certainly affect my opinion on this issue.

Sterfran what do naturist families do when the children hit puberty & become embarrassed about nudity? Do they encourage the child to make their own decisions or expect them to embrace nudity?

DreadPirateLuna

There's a massive difference between exposing your genitals and leaving other body parts uncovered.

My DS has sensory issues, but we have found swimsuits to meet his needs. I don't feel particularly comfortable in a bikini (or many other clothes for that matter) but I just don't see why that justifies dragging your kids along to your adult hobby.

I also wonder how nudists teach thier children about privacy and consent when they teach them it's perfectly fine for non-related adults and children to be naked around each other.

Naturist children are brought up in a naturist positive environment, where naturism is a part of their family values and lifestyle, but of course they have choices, and a voice too.

The same as I imagine most people would hope children aren’t being coerced into doing anything they don’t want to do as part of their family life where a choice is available and appropriate.

Wearing a swimsuit at least means the pervert has to use thier imagination a bit.

And wearing a burkini would mean the pervert would have to use their imagination even more. Although some might prefer that extra effort. Basing clothing decisions on what may or may not be going through a pervert's mind is an exercise in madness.

While I don't really get the appeal of events like this (each to their own) I'd argue that children are much more at risk from sex offenders in their own homes than at an organised event like this.

You can use that argument to justify pretty much everything.

This is just wrong-adults can consent to being naked with other adults but children can't. It makes me extremely uncomfortable that children might be coerced into being naked in the presence of other adults, against their will.

While I don't really get the appeal of events like this (each to their own) I'd argue that children are much more at risk from sex offenders in their own homes than at an organised event like this. How many people really know 100% who their kids are talking to online?

DreadPirateLuna

It's about risk vs benefits, I am under no illusion that beaches and pools are free of peadophiles, however the benefits of swimming as exercise and the enjoyment they get from playing in sand outweigh the risk. Wearing a swimsuit at least means the pervert has to use thier imagination a bit.
These people may get off on the thought of exposing themselves to kids, why would risk your child being involved in that kink. Why would a pervert risk prison by flashing when they can just sign up to a nudist club?

I think it’s a good idea to be careful that preconceptions about nudity aren’t affecting how we think about something ie if you think naturism is about exposing a child’s genitals, then that’s just not an accurate view of naturism.

Seeing other people naked isn’t upsetting for naturist children, they’ve been brought up seeing all sorts of bodies and it isn’t an issue.

So for us, it is normal and continues to be so. For others it isn’t, and that’s fine too.

Our naturist friends with now adult children aren’t reporting that their children are looking back at their naturist upbringing with horror - they are either still naturist or naturist/nude friendly in their own lives.

Paeophile restrictions seem to be quite limited, my neighbour lives beside a school. He hadn't had to move, possibly because the school age group is different to the age of the child in the incident he was convicted for. However he always chooses to walk his dog at school hometime. It's particularly noticeable because people living close to schools tend to avoid going out at that time as much as possible as it's busy and we know 20mins wait will make a big difference.

Nudity is not inherently sexual, especially not for young children. My parents (fairly conservative types) have a photo of me and my brother (about 4 & 2 at the time) running around in the altogether, and they never thought much about including it in the family album.

Naked swimming is not really my thing (most opportunities would be outside, which would probably end up with either hyperthermia or a sunburnt bum). But what exactly is the risk here? Are we going to restrict our children's behaviour on the possibility that some scumbag might have bad thoughts about them? That could happen even if they were wearing swimsuits, or shorts, or burkas.

I agree with Goosefoot that "an example of non-sexual associations with the naked human body" would be a good thing.

What kind of parent takes their child to an event like this? As a PP said, children cannot consent to being exposed to a strangers genitalia. It's not fair on them.

I can't think of anything worse as a child than having to go to an event full of strange blokes todgers everywhere.

If you want to all be naked in the privacy of your own home, and for your kids to be comfortable with that, then great. But why would you want to take your kids to public places where there will be naked adults that they don't even know?

I don’t have a particular issue with this from a feminist perspective. Is there any evidence that nudist events are a particular risk to children that I have missed?

SterFran00

What is the point in being naked for a swim though? What do you actually get from it? I just can't see how any benefit can outweigh exposing your child's genitals to strangers. They may be respectful to your face, but how many of those men are using that mental image of your naked child to masterbate to later?

They may be used to it now, but as they grow they will realise that it is not a normal thing to do and the memories may be upsetting, don't forget, you are at eye level with the other members of the 'community' they are not.

I've been on holiday to Germany a few times and it's normal to swim naked and take saunas etc, lots of kids and no issues. Some kids were in costumes (probably the Brits) and a few adults, personal preference. What to do about restrictions on convicted paedophiles is different, they shouldn't be allowed to join sports clubs or use facilities when kids are present anyway.

I tend to think the fact that the parents are with the kids is what makes the main difference in that kind of setting. I don't see it as quite similar to the example in BC where kids and others were invited without the parents. That being said, I do think if I were running such a thing I would only be opening tickets up to members and I'd want some way to keep track of or vet them. Not random people in the public.

I have too real concerns with the thinking behind shutting anything like this down. One is that although I'm not a nudist, I don't think that relegating all nudity to the sexual is a very positive thing, or even very safe in the long term. I don't think that we could or should try and live like it's desexualised entirely - and I think that sending sexual signals in some contexts, like through clothing worn in schools, is a bad idea. But IMO the societies that have the most healthy attitudes to sexuality and the body do have certain contexts where non-sexual nudity is practiced, public baths of some sort being a common one. Our society might be in a better place if we could ramp down some of the overt sexualisation of women in fashion or advertising and in the media, and have some sort of example of non-sexual associations with the naked human body to draw on.

The other is that I am worried about attempts to somehow control the thoughts of any paedophile or other perverts that happen to be around by outlawing or otherwise suppressing behaviours that are otherwise fine or even good. (So, I am not talking about porn, which is in itself bad and as a result of that specific badness encourages certain sexual behaviours.) It's a hopeless task for one thing, you just can't control people's thoughts and the fact that you can't know them either lends itself to a purity spiral sort of situation. As we know, if we think covering flesh in itself prevents desire, we soon realise that the bar moves and we require more covering up of flesh. (again, this is different than deliberately provocative scenarios.) If we are saying a situation is risky, that should mean a material risk and we should be able to define what that might look like. A risk that someone might have bad thoughts will end up in a crazy place.