YAY! I might actually re-join AANR
Bryan Simmons
in years. We don't really go to clubs other than to Oaklake Trails
every year or two, and I think it's been over three by now. I wasn't
going to give them a penny if they wouldn't kick out PL. I did some
further looking and it seems like they've also gotten rid of Seminole
for similar reasons. Is AANR really getting its act together?
--Bryan
pa...@fkk.dynnospamalias.net
Could you explain why it you think it was correct that it was kicked
out?
D. Kirkpatrick
@news.albasani.net:
Well first we need to correct misperceptions. Paradise Lakes was not
booted out - nor was Caliente.
AANR has a specific process of complaint, investigation, and motion to
revoke a charter. This is followed by a vote. The process can take
months.
In the instance before us, both clubs opted to resign their charters
when the complaint and investigation commenced.
Both clubs have been engaged in a marketing process that caters to
adult, sexually-oriented interests.
It has been a long standing policy of organized naturism in the USA to
distance itself from that genre. This is why a complaint was made and
the investigative process started.
In essence neither club made no secret of their marketing interests and
there was cross marketing between their clubs and certain sexually-
oriented "lifestyler" web sites. I think it was clear from the
beginning that both clubs knew fully what they were doing and that the
process with AANR was inevitable.
By resigning the charter they retain an option to re-affiliate at a
later date and with no black marks on the records. With the resignation
of the charter the investigative process essentially ends without
finding.
Elsewhere, The Naturist Society which operates akin to a sole
propriatorship, has a different process. A management peson made the
decision to de-list the clubs from interet and printed meaterials they
publish. Unlike AANR, TNS's affiliation agreement has less requirements
and is terminated easier.
Bryan Simmons
wrote:
> p...@fkk.dynNOSPAMalias.net wrote in news:ifop3d$ept$1
Can you imagine the majority of other clubs being willing to allow PL
to re-affiliate? This was about 20 years overdue. I have absolutely
no problem with swingers, or any other sexual arrangements between
consenting adults, but clubs that promote sexual activities should not
fall under the umbrella of nudism.
--Bryan
Jenny6833A
> I have absolutely
> no problem with swingers, or any other sexual arrangements between
> consenting adults ...
You and the law agree.
> ... but clubs that promote sexual activities should not
> fall under the umbrella of nudism.
Hmmm. I think you're saying that allowing swinging is OK, but
advertising that you allow it is not. Is that it? If so, what's
wrong with truthful advertising?
:-)
Jenny
Bryan Simmons
I was unclear. I really don't care what people do in most ways
regarding sexuality, but don't think that it should be conflated with
social nudism, and clubs that wish to have swinging and clothing
optionality should not fall under the same umbrella as regular nudist
clubs. So really, I'm saying the opposite of what you suggested. I
want truthful advertising. Long, long before I ever had any inkling
that I would become involved in a nudist club, I though of such places
as camps where people played naked sand volleyball, where you played
lawn darts naked with your parents and aunts and uncles. It was beach
balls and sand castles and croquet and pot lucks with picnic foods
like potato salad that I didn't like with clothes on, and I wouldn't
like naked either. It wasn't until I actually joined a club that I
learned about the swinger thing.
These days if consenting adults want to have a private club that's
clothing optional and even if they want to go so far as having huge
group sex on the lawns, I'm completely OK with them doing that. What
they shouldn't do is hide behind the image of naked lawn darts, and
traditional nudists shouldn't let them do so. We shouldn't have 20
years ago, when ASA decided that what mattered most was the number of
DUES PAYING members, and we shouldn't now. And they don't need to put
up a front these days. They don't need to pretend to be what they're
not to avoid prosecution or whatever. More truth in advertising is
good.
>
> :-)
>
> Jenny
--Bryan
Jenny6833A
> On Jan 16, 1:06 am, Jenny6833A <Jenny68...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 2, 7:18 am, Bryan Simmons <bryangsimm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I have absolutely
> > > no problem with swingers, or any other sexual arrangements between
> > > consenting adults ...
>
> > You and the law agree.
>
> > > ... but clubs that promote sexual activities should not
> > > fall under the umbrella of nudism.
>
> > Hmmm. I think you're saying that allowing swinging is OK, but
> > advertising that you allow it is not. Is that it? If so, what's
> > wrong with truthful advertising?
>
> I was unclear. I really don't care what people do in most ways
> regarding sexuality, but don't think that it should be conflated with
> social nudism, and clubs that wish to have swinging and clothing
> optionality should not fall under the same umbrella as regular nudist
> clubs.
I'm not sure what you mean by "the same umbrella." What umbrella?
Must there be an umbrella? I hope you're not saying that a nudist
club _must_ be a member of some national or international
organization.
> So really, I'm saying the opposite of what you suggested. I
> want truthful advertising. Long, long before I ever had any inkling
> that I would become involved in a nudist club, I though of such places
> as camps where people played naked sand volleyball, where you played
> lawn darts naked with your parents and aunts and uncles. It was beach
> balls and sand castles and croquet and pot lucks with picnic foods
> like potato salad that I didn't like with clothes on, and I wouldn't
> like naked either. It wasn't until I actually joined a club that I
> learned about the swinger thing.
I'm pleased that you didn't assume, with an envious leer hidden
beneath a puritanical frown, that nudity equated to sex.
> These days if consenting adults want to have a private club that's
> clothing optional and even if they want to go so far as having huge
> group sex on the lawns, I'm completely OK with them doing that.
Ah, ha! I think I broke the code. It apears that, to you, "swinging"
means intercourse (of whatever variety) conducted in full view of the
multitudes. I don't know of any place that calls itself nudist where
public intercourse is anything but highly unusual. It draws insects,
soils the pool table, makes the dogs howl, and causes folk to slip on
the dance floor. It might even, depending on circumstances, add a
certain spice to the potato salad. You might develop a liking for the
stuff.
More importantly, were that definition to prevail, me and hubby would
be swingers if we got it on in public -- solely because others could
see. I don't think that's what swinging means.
I think swinging means sex with others who are not spouses or
partners. It may be casual one-shots or recurrent activities among
individuals, couples, or groups. It does not require, and seldom
involves, putting on a show for unwary bystanders.
Such activity is far more common in neighborhoods like yours, wherever
yours may be, than at nudist clubs. I mean, think of neighborhood
pool parties and all those cases where one couple goes across the
street for dinner with another couple. Do you really think that beds
are always used solely for coats that won't fit in the coat closet?
And then there's Joe who works nights who goes to see Jane whose
husband works days. Hey, they're friends.
> What
> they shouldn't do is hide behind the image of naked lawn darts, and
> traditional nudists shouldn't let them do so. We shouldn't have 20
> years ago, when ASA decided that what mattered most was the number of
> DUES PAYING members, and we shouldn't now. And they don't need to put
> up a front these days. They don't need to pretend to be what they're
> not to avoid prosecution or whatever. More truth in advertising is
> good.
Then how about we really do tell the truth. We say, "Life in a nudist
place is just like life in your neighborhood. We obey the same laws,
aside from the one against mere nudity, and follow the same
conventional societal rules. You take care of your property, and we
take care of ours. You don't make a racket all night, and we don't
either. You don't engage in obnoxious, arm-twisting hits for sex and
we don't either. You don't do sex on your front lawn, and we don't do
sex on ours. Your community is just like our community, except of
course for the prevalence of non-sexual nudity."
That would be truth in advertising.
Of course, such a message would be anathema to those who want to
pretend that nudist neighborhoods are somehow radically different from
the neighborhoods that nudists live in when they're not actively being
nudists. Such myth-mongers would have to admit that nudist places
never were, and never will be, camps where people ONLY play naked sand
volleyball, and lawn darts naked with your parents and aunts and
uncles. It never was entirely beach balls and sand castles and
croquet and pot lucks with picnic foods like potato salad.
Hey, such a message might also shake their faith in Santa Claus.
:-)
Jenny