Reading this, I couldn't help thinking of what an early naturist - Walt Whitman - wrote:
"Nature was naked, and I was also. It was too lazy, soothing, and joyous-equable to speculate about. Yet I might have thought somehow in this vein: Perhaps the inner never-lost rapport we hold with earth, light, air, trees, &c, is not to be realized through eyes and mind only, but through the whole corporeal body, which I will not have blinded or bandaged any more than the eyes. Sweet, sane, still Nakedness in Nature! – ah if poor, sick, prurient humanity in cities might really know you once more!"
But there are plenty of nudists who don't have much real connection to nature. Here in the US the word is commonly used interchangeably with nudist. Nothing to be done for that.
I consider myself a "nudie" but I'll answer to any label as long as it is used in a positive fashion. I generally don't like labels because people take a label and assume a complete collection of beliefs and behaviors from the one aspect. Labels become stereotypes and are the foundation of identity politics. They are often used as a way to separate "us" from "them."
My provocation is -- are they truly interchangeable? When I was writing and researching this, I was thinking about how "naturist" is sometimes used as a word when people don't want to say "nudist." Sometimes it seems they seek to want to associate with the nonsexual aspect of nudity and feel that "naturist" may support that better. Or else, "nudist" might just feel uncomfortable for them to say. But for those who are deliberate in their use of the word "naturist", the role of nature should play an equally important role as being naked does.
I hear you on identity politics and I don't want this to be about driving wedges between people. Rather, I encourage people who do prefer to identify as a naturist to reflect on what that means to them and to mobilize appropriately. Given the current state of the Earth, that is something that is not best left to tomorrow.
Within the deeply committed nudist/naturist subculture, they have clearly different meanings. Outside of the niche, they are largely used interchangeably. You could say that's because the masses don't know the meaning of the words. Even the majority of people who those words might cover don't use them in that way.
Maybe the masses are the source of the true definition of a word and it is a local dialect if a person or group tries to define what their label means.
I've been on websites where they present a list of traits you must have to qualify as a naturist. Ditto nudist. Not a fan of gatekeeping. So I despair and call myself a nudie. I try not to use it as a label whereby you can predict my entire belief system but rather one independent facet of a long and varied life. I just like being naked when the opportunity presents.
Reading this, I couldn't help thinking of what an early naturist - Walt Whitman - wrote:
"Nature was naked, and I was also. It was too lazy, soothing, and joyous-equable to speculate about. Yet I might have thought somehow in this vein: Perhaps the inner never-lost rapport we hold with earth, light, air, trees, &c, is not to be realized through eyes and mind only, but through the whole corporeal body, which I will not have blinded or bandaged any more than the eyes. Sweet, sane, still Nakedness in Nature! – ah if poor, sick, prurient humanity in cities might really know you once more!"
Love this and WW!
"There is no naturist without nature. "
But there are plenty of nudists who don't have much real connection to nature. Here in the US the word is commonly used interchangeably with nudist. Nothing to be done for that.
I consider myself a "nudie" but I'll answer to any label as long as it is used in a positive fashion. I generally don't like labels because people take a label and assume a complete collection of beliefs and behaviors from the one aspect. Labels become stereotypes and are the foundation of identity politics. They are often used as a way to separate "us" from "them."
My provocation is -- are they truly interchangeable? When I was writing and researching this, I was thinking about how "naturist" is sometimes used as a word when people don't want to say "nudist." Sometimes it seems they seek to want to associate with the nonsexual aspect of nudity and feel that "naturist" may support that better. Or else, "nudist" might just feel uncomfortable for them to say. But for those who are deliberate in their use of the word "naturist", the role of nature should play an equally important role as being naked does.
I hear you on identity politics and I don't want this to be about driving wedges between people. Rather, I encourage people who do prefer to identify as a naturist to reflect on what that means to them and to mobilize appropriately. Given the current state of the Earth, that is something that is not best left to tomorrow.
Within the deeply committed nudist/naturist subculture, they have clearly different meanings. Outside of the niche, they are largely used interchangeably. You could say that's because the masses don't know the meaning of the words. Even the majority of people who those words might cover don't use them in that way.
Maybe the masses are the source of the true definition of a word and it is a local dialect if a person or group tries to define what their label means.
I've been on websites where they present a list of traits you must have to qualify as a naturist. Ditto nudist. Not a fan of gatekeeping. So I despair and call myself a nudie. I try not to use it as a label whereby you can predict my entire belief system but rather one independent facet of a long and varied life. I just like being naked when the opportunity presents.