Naturism going soft on male erections???
Stuart
sort of. We were members of CCBN 10 years ago but didn’t renew because
we’re not “dedicated” naturists, more like sun-lovers really. Our CCBN
membership did count though when we joined a club near us. And just to
make it clear: though we like to think we have a rational, open-minded
approach to sex we are not “swingers”, have no interest in “swinging”,
don’t want to meet anyone else sexually in real life or via the
Internet, thanks.
I have browsed this group in the past but have never been a member but
used to post on the American-oriented nudist resorts forum (but which
is still too American oriented, not enough UK posters really.)
One of the longest running topics I can ever remember on that forum
was about erections, it went on long enough but resolved nothing (no
consensus.) I only posted once about people being free to be as they
want so long as children or family groups are not present and so long
as they do not press unsolicited / unwanted attentions on others
otherwise I (as a male) would object on the commonsense basis that
there is a time and a place for everything.
Anyway, I recently came across a post on this Group from the manager
of a UK naturist club with a website link. Turned out the club isn’t
far from where my partner’s parents live and it also offers overnight
accomm so seemed like a good idea for summer visits.
Reading through the website though I was struck by the way the club
*seems* to be taking a very different approach to naturist behaviour
than I have seen anywhere before.
For example, this club’s events include dance nights (like the club of
which we’re members) but whereas our events are clothed, this club’s
are not. The website says that men attending the dance nights must be
nude but it’s discretional for women. *It also says in effect that if
men get erections on the dance floor that’s nothing to worry about,
it’s perfectly natural, other dancers will ignore it or may perhaps
choose to admire it.*
This is the first time I have ever seen any club stating this.
I asked my partner what she made of this and she said she didn’t think
it would bother her / arouse her so long as she was not the focus of
an erect male’s attention. If it was an adults-only gathering then it
“probably” would not matter (probably, because as she said, who could
anticipate their own reaction until they experienced the actual
situation?)
Further reading of the club website took me to a forum which isn’t
actually a forum (very poor, no topic threads or anything like that,
no ability to seek the views of other members etc) and a sort of
‘magazine’ bulletin which in one recent issue talked about the way a
“for fun” event involved the measuring of male “feet”.
Further reading made it obvious that this reference was cringingly
coy, quite why whoever wrote it couldn’t bring himself / herself to
say measuring penises, I don’t know – if you’re not ashamed to do it,
then why be ashamed to say it??? This is 2010, not 1910. We do not
cover up the legs of pianos any more.
I did mention to my partner what I’d been reading and she like me was
struck by the fact that this club’s approach was different (though
wasn’t impressed with the daft “feet measuring” thing, we both loathe
school playground prurience.)
If the club website in question had had a forum where questions could
be asked I would have done so there but as noted, it doesn’t. In fact,
calling it a “forum” seems to me to be deliberately deceptive and if
an organisation of whatever kind starts to deceive in one aspect then
you do wonder how far it is prepared to deceive in others. So that’s
the first “doubt” that I have (and my partner.)
Some aspects of the way that particular club represents itself also
raise niggling doubts, for example, the rule that men *must* be naked
for a dance but women not necessarily so. Why the difference? Nudity
should surely be mandatory regardless of gender?
Anyway. My reason for posting was originally to ask if anyone else
here has any experience of this particular naturist club’s
accommodation facilities, seeing as how this was what interested
myself and my partner in the first place.
But my curiosity is also raised because of what I read about the
club’s policy on male hard-ons (coyness apart.) So my questions then
(finally!!!)
Does in the opinion of others here this cluib's stated approach signal
the beginning of a change in the evolution of naturism?
Does it seem that naturism is beginning to go “soft” on the issue of
sexuality (in particular circumstances only, for example, in the
context of something like a club event nude dance for adults only – in
fairness, I don’t wish to misrepresent that club’s views here.)
And if naturist thinking is going “soft” on this, and the erect penis
is no longer a strict taboo (subject, as ever, to context and
environment) then is this a change for the better or the worse?
pa...@fkk.dynnospamalias.net
> Anyway, I recently came across a post on this Group from the manager
> of a UK naturist club with a website link. Turned out the club isn't
> far from where my partner's parents live and it also offers overnight
> accomm so seemed like a good idea for summer visits.
Is it Eureka, by any chance?
> Reading through the website though I was struck by the way the club
> *seems* to be taking a very different approach to naturist behaviour
> than I have seen anywhere before.
> And if naturist thinking is going _soft_ on this, and the erect penis
> is no longer a strict taboo (subject, as ever, to context and
> environment) then is this a change for the better or the worse?
I think that, in general, there has been no change here. Most nudists
are of the "family nudist" variety, with the basic idea that sexual
overtones in a nudist context are as inappropriate as they are in
society at large. (I put "family nudist" in quotes since most nudists
don't want a sexual atmosphere even if no children are present, and many
of those that do and/or don't mind would question why the presence of
children should influence whether erections are OK or not.) However,
there are all kinds of people, and a more sexually open nudist club like
Eureka does cater to a certain population. I don't think much has
changed much here, either, but in the internet age it is easier to come
across specialised places which cater to only a small group of people.
So, there doesn't seem to be a change. Should there be a change? At
some level, objecting to public sex is the same as objecting to public
nudity. One solution to avoid conflict is to confine oneself to a place
where it is accepted, be that a nudist club or a swingers' club.
Another approach is to work for more tolerance---even if you don't like
it, don't object to other people as long as they leave you alone. This
can apply to public nudity or to public sex.
Caveat one: some people might think that tolerance of public sex is OK,
but don't advocate it from a practical point of view, since this would
probably lead to less acceptance of nudism in general. (To be sure,
some people take the same attitude to toplessness: they don't advocate
tolerance of full nudity, either because they don't want it or because
they think that it would hurt the case for tolerance of toplessness.)
Caveat two: one shouldn't object to something which is obviously
sexually oriented, like a brothel, advertising something as "naturist"
(assuming that it is). At most brothels, people are clothed (except,
perhaps, when "doing it", but even there there are people who prefer
(usually certain types of) clothing), so if on certain days or whatever
nudity is the rule, then it seems OK to advertise "naturist days"; it
doesn't imply that naturism = sex any more than a naturist cruise, say,
implies that all nudists like to travel on ships.
Stuart
regarding the naturist club I was referring to.) We're not familiar
with it in any way so perhaps it has a more libertarian bias than the
traditional club. Perhaps the manager (who seems to post here
regularly) would like to contribute his thoughts, too. We're rushing
off out now so if I can respond more fully tomorrow, I hope that will
be OK.
pa...@fkk.dynnospamalias.net
> Sincere thanks for that very thoughtful post (and yes, you are correct
> regarding the naturist club I was referring to.) We're not familiar
> with it in any way so perhaps it has a more libertarian bias than the
> traditional club.
Definitely. It might even be one of a kind. Having said that, the
casual visitor won't notice anything overtly sexual. Yes, the vibe is a
bit different, there are several different types of people there, some
of which would probably not go to a traditional club, and the activities
are a bit different than those at a traditional club. The sexual
activity is confined to one room off the main room and a few small rooms
off the hallway between the main room and the sauna. They are
off-limits to single men. People disappear there during other
activities, have their fun, then reappear. If you're not looking for
it, you might not even notice. This really does strike a good balance
between a liberal approach on the one hand and keeping it discreet and
not "in your face" on the other. So, more prudish people would find
something to object to only if they object to activity behind closed
doors and/or if they object to the mere presence of more open-minded
people.
Never seen an erection there.
If you and your wife want to go to a party there and/or spend the night,
then I would expect any problems.
I too find the dress code a bit dodgy, but IIRC the "men nude, women
maybe" was more an observation of what happens, not a rule which is
enforced.
pa...@fkk.dynnospamalias.net
> Stuart wrote:
>
> > Sincere thanks for that very thoughtful post (and yes, you are correct
> > regarding the naturist club I was referring to.) We're not familiar
> > with it in any way so perhaps it has a more libertarian bias than the
> > traditional club.
> If you and your wife want to go to a party there and/or spend the night,
> then I would expect any problems.
That should be "I would NOT expect any problems".
Stuart
>
> That should be "I would NOT expect any problems". The amendment's appreciated! <g>
Thanks for taking the time to deal with my OP, you've clarified the
situation and answered all the questions raised. As to the club under
discussion, your conclusion about the "balance struck" there is
reassuring, because finding an equilibrium between excess and
proscription is never easy, whatever the subject. Naturism has never
conflicted with our sexuality (perhaps because we don't obsess about
either) so we've no anxieties now about visiting the place for
ourselves on an accommodation basis. (As to the party nights, my
partner stopped playing miniten nude a long time ago, for no other
reason that discomfort of a superstructural kind robbed the activity
of enjoyment. It's dawned on her that a naked dance night could as
equally as well result in the same discomfort. . . so on that basis, I
now don't see us jigging around nude to the disco beat!)
As to the possibly wider implications of the club's ethos, I take your
point that this seems to be a niche operation and, as such, signals
nothing insofar as naturist clubs outside that niche are concerned.
Thank you again for all the help.