Good naked, bad naked
Challenging society's skewed perception of nudity and embracing body positivity
I wonder if there is any naturist in North America who has not heard a reference to Seinfeld when the subject of nudity comes up with a non-nudist. It is up there with “don’t cook bacon naked” as one of the most cliche responses to nudism. It always bothered me, even before I was a nudist.
In the Seinfeld episode, Jerry starts dating a nudist, Melissa. At first, he is delighted by the idea of being able to see his girlfriend nude all the time, but soon, he dislikes it because she is not as attractive while coughing or opening a pickle jar. Jerry concludes that there is “good naked and bad naked” and we should keep the bad naked to ourselves.
I know that others have referenced this idea when they learned I am often nude at home. And to someone unused to non-sexual nudity, it makes sense.
In our society, we only see carefully curated nudity—in advertising or pornography, mainly—and we typically only see the nude bodies of regular people being played for ridicule and laughs. Our society is conditioned to think in these terms. Attractive views of the opposite sex are good; all other nudity is bad.
I wonder if those who lean on this idea of good naked and bad naked understand what they are really saying.
The impact of sexualized nudity on societal values
Because when we call the attractive nudity “good naked” and the non-attractive nudity “bad naked,” it’s making a very particular judgment. That judgment is this: sexualized nudity is good, and non-sexualized nudity is bad.
What a strange place to draw the line! This idea actively encourages, even demands, that simple nudity be sexualized. It rejects nudity that is not sexualized—nudity that shows our wrinkles or rolls or other imperfections in their true state.
And that’s what’s at stake here: the truth itself. The human body in its true form, human beings as their true selves. The idea reinforces some extremely damaging societal concepts. Women are to be sexualized and objectified. Older people, fat people, injured or scarred people are all to be rejected. We cannot be our true selves without first qualifying ourselves with a whole series of filters and checks and limits.
We are not allowed to simply be, just in case our being is “bad,” as judged by others.
The real value that this exposes is that a person’s intrinsic worth is solely tied to their attractiveness, as judged by society. Is this really a value we want to promote? Is this something our society truly wants to espouse?
Now, I don’t think Jerry Seinfeld is someone to look to for philosophy or ethics—and never has been. But this idea somehow permeated society’s consciousness and made the good naked/bad naked duality practically universal.
As a nudist, you’re bound to run into someone parroting this phrase. It would be a good thing, I think, to make whoever is saying it stop and think about what they are saying.
And as nudists, we need to loudly confront the idea that nudity is only good if it can be sexualized. Naturists must become leaders in our society, both with our values and our actions.
Embracing all bodies: A call for change
We must ensure our own judgment of people embraces all bodies, and we must avoid judging people, nude or clothed, according to their sexual attractiveness.
And we must avoid promoting the “good naked” and negatively judging the “bad naked” and celebrate the nude human body for its intrinsic value, no matter how it compares to our society’s standards of beauty.
The Seinfeld episode aired about thirty years ago, but our society’s attitude towards nudity has barely changed. Making that change happen is necessary, and it can start with us. 🪐
 | A guest post by
|
Good article. I want to suggest that there may be a layer beyond sexualized/non-sexualized nudity that comes back to that old adage "sex sells." I think what we need to take into account is that generally, what we see depicted in media are bodies than can be sexualized for profit. That, ultimately, the nudity we see depicted in movies and TV are unlike our true selves in exactly the same way that the living rooms and kitchens we see depicted on our screens are unlike the living rooms and kitchens in our homes. I remember when the TV show "King of Queens" was on the air there was a lot of commentary about the "attractiveness mismatch" between the two main actors, and that it was unbelievable that a "average looking" UPS driver would have an "absurdly hot" wife. But when I watched the show I was more struck by seeing a UPS driver in bed underneath a $2,000 duvet. It seems like the "aspirational" nudity in media is not so different than that "aspirational" duvet. In a world where everything is for profit, the line between good nudity and bad nudity may really be between profitable nudity and unprofitable nudity. Good naked, we are told, is naked that you can spend lat least a King of Queen's duvet's worth of money annually to achieve for yourself. If there is a solution to be had, it may be in working to restore public spaces where communal nudity is accepted and where not everything has to always be for sale.
Great article! 🎉 I think we can start even sooner, before nudity, to support celebrating every kind of body. Compliments are so easy to give and can really make someone's day if they do not hear them often. "You look great in that colour" is one that stays away from any kind of body commentary but still promotes lifting up someone's self-acceptance. For people who tend to criticizd others, some can be brought to awareness and others are simply narcissists. It is helpful to make a first entreaty, always.