Nudity in Photographs

I'm surprised that anyone in a nudist forum would have had a negative reaction. I almost posed nude for some art classes while I was in college but my conservative upbringing got the best of me. Always wished I had done it. The good thing for you is that YOU have the option of showing the photos to whom you choose when you choose to do it. Cheers.

 

Thanks for your comment. I appreciate it. Honestly, ever since I had the incident with the nudist forum I've felt ashamed and embarrassed by my pictures. Your comment made me feel better about them.

 

Hey, I'm glad if I made you feel a little better about things and am also happy that I stumbled across this forum. Folks here really seem to "get it." Perhaps someday the rest of society will catch up.

 

You might find that nudists, or even more particularly people who call themselves "naturists", would be more annoyed about sexualized pictures in one of their forums than non-nudists. The point would be that they're trying to see nudity as non-sexual, and here comes someone who posts something that looks like porn, or has an erotic side to it, or however it would be expressed (depending on how it's seen by the person describing it). That's why I said in an earlier posting that naturists would hate to see censored pictures, because that would imply that something needed to be hidden--which is exactly what naturists say shouldn't happen. They'd say, if you're not ashamed of it don't be afraid to let it be seen, but if you are ashamed, it's better to keep the whole thing private.

I'd still like to see the pictures, though. After all this fuss, I'm curious.

 

OK, Noic did send me a picture. And I do now understand why people on a nudist discussion group didn't like it. It's what you might call a "crotch shot", a picture that seems to be set up to emphasize the genitals. It's his responsibility to share the picture, so I won't do that, but I'll describe it (and I told him I'd talk about it here, and gave him time to ask me not to). It shows him lying down, taken from a low angle and with the camera placed more or less level with his feet, looking along the length of his body. He has one knee and the same hip raised, tilting his pelvis toward the camera, and his penis is draped over the other thigh in the same direction, turned so as to provide a good look at his scrotum as well. It seems as though the whole pose is set up so as to point that penis at the viewer.

Naturists are all in favor of nudity, but they believe it shouldn't be sexualized. The genitals aren't obscene, but when they're obviously the focus of an image, it seems as if sex is intended to be the theme. Maybe that makes it "pornographic" or not, depending on your definition, but it's sexual in intention, I've got no doubt about that. Now, if I'm a heterosexual male, I'm not incredibly turned on by the sight of another man's penis, but it looks as if Noic and the photographer wanted the viewer to get a good look at this one. It might be an image that some people would be pleased to see somewhere, but not in a naturist context.

If you think about how to make a picture which naturists wouldn't be offended by, it can be a bit difficult. We have such an emotional reaction to the idea of the genitals being seen, that we may go too far in one direction or another if they're shown. Too much emphasis and it's exhibitionism; too little and you seem to be ashamed. In our society, our instincts are against acting as if the genitals are just another body part which goes to make up a complete person, which might or might not be seen--"What shows, shows." It might be difficult to magine a man not caring whether his penis is visible or not, but really that's what a naturist would do. As if, I don't know, your shirt sleeve might ride up to show your elbow or not. Or are there elbow fetishists who'd make a big deal out of it?

If you're planning to any more photos, Noic, I'd say try to make your whole body look as though every part is equally valid, and equally attractive and interesting. Could you do that? I think naturists would like it a lot better.

 

Holly, I'll send you mine with everything showing...

 

I bet you will, but now I really want to see the unedited pictures of Noic!

 

nearly all of our family photos are in the nude, I don't see a problem with that. there's noting obscene about being naked.

 

The reason you got such a negative response from the "nudist community" is that your photos emphasized your sex organs, instead of treating them as something that is just shown by necessity. This is a "no-no" in legitimate nudist circles.

Establishment nudist types are pretending that they are not really naked but just in a state of "non-clothed", and that the necessary nakedness is merely a minor part of what they are all about.

But, as many others know, most "normal" people, when confronted with a naked person, whatever the setting, will look almost immediately at that persons sex organs. If that person is a woman, they will also look at her breasts. However, to get along in nudist circles, this is something we must deny, and help them to play the game that says "Nudist doesn't really change anything. We are still the persons we were when fully clothed!"

The truth is, as I see it, that to be naked does change any situation in which it occurs. Your brother was naked, with his sex organs fully exposed, and even emphasized, and that is what disturbs establishment type nudists.

 

I have ideas for some nude shots but havent found the right model to try out with whos open to the idea