Brrr! We are heading into the deep freeze here as an Arctic chill moves in on Quebec, with daytime temperatures expected to hit a high of minus-25C (minus-13F) and nighttime lows of minus-32C (minus-25.6F). “Frigid” is how the Weather Network is describing the situation through till Sunday, when more seasonal temperatures return.
It’s not abnormal for the province. We always get a deep freeze in the winter. But suffice to say strolling around naked is not an option outdoors or indoors — our heating systems struggle at times like these.
As Tony Graham pointed out in a piece reviewed here two posts ago: “The vast majority of naturists wear clothes inside, and normally outside too if its cold. It's not just the sun, it's the warmth - a lot of naturists look forward to warm sunny weather to go somewhere and strip off."
Amen to that. Being naked during the daytime in my house at this time of the year is not an option, though I can still sleep naked at night.
When I reviewed the various versions of the article on Graham that appeared with different headlines and content treatment in several papers, I was unaware of something: he apparently had some editorial control over the piece, according to something Peter Stokes shared in the comments section:
Just for added information, the following is an email NAG sent to members this weekend with reference to the news item:
Hello NAG persons. Your Acting NAG Chair Tony has had a degree of success with achieving a “news” story in national media. It was intentioned to have a quasi “sensationalist” headline(s) in order to attract readers. It seems to have worked!
FYI: For this first article I collaborated with a lady journalist who works for a news agency who approached NAG. I agreed all her words and supplied the photos. I had power of veto over what she said (and removed some of her initial content) but didn’t have that “power” over the headlines that got used once the article was syndicated to the national press. This is standard and known procedure in all journalism. I’m working on a second article with another journalist and collaborating with a well know lady naturist that will feature as a feature in magazines aimed towards ladies. That should be out soon
The Naturist Action Group Team.
Graham’s intent was to raise awareness about naturism, and it seems he was OK with “sensationalizing” it to draw in readers.
I’m not here to criticize Graham or second-guess him. I do that to media, not other naturists. Graham was given a platform, and that’s how he chose to use it — with the blessings of the various media outlets, it seems. And both Peter and Charles Daney have reminded me how the British tabs operate — though as “national media,” to use Graham’s words, I’m not giving them a free pass on their treatment of naturism/nudism and the subjects of their reports.
In this case, though, I am wary of planting negative ideas about naturists in the minds of the uninitiated, whether they be true or not. As I noted in my review, the article played up what we are not: "a cult of raving sex freaks."
Graham is quoted saying this: "Some people think we're a cult of raving sex freaks or some kind of secret society but we're nothing like that. Or some people think we're perverts or lunatic flashers - but we're just normal people who happen to like sunbathing and swimming naked.”
So, here is something readers might discuss in this month’s open forum: Have you come across people who think those things about naturists/nudists? Do they think we are some kind of freaky sex cult? Or perverts? Or “lunatic flashers”?
I had never heard anyone refer to naturists with those words, except for Graham. But I fear he has planted that idea in people’s minds now, that we are viewed by some (how many?) as "a freaky sex cult — and that they might think there may be something to it.
If you have heard or read comments like these from people, could you give us the context in the readers’ comments section, please.
As always, the monthly forum here is a place for readers to talk about all things naturism/nudism. I’ll often throw in a subject to get a debate going, but feel free to talk about other things.
And even if you don’t comment on the various posts in this newsletter platform, do check out the comments by others: we have some very experienced naturists here who often share their wisdom. Consider their comments as a bonus to your subscription, whether paid or free.
I don't know about "raving sex freaks." I did work with a guy who insisted that it was all sweetness and light in the day but at night nudists all scurried off to hump away. Nudists as swingers. Being naked in the day was just prep for it. Would not be dissuaded because that's what he wanted to be true.
Definitely a lot of people in my area consider it to be perversion. It would be enough to get you fired from a sensitive position dealing with children. Even if the employer had no issues, there are parents who would raise hell and put a prop under it. A young single white female who was public about being a nudist would probably be subjected to serious harassment from males and other females - in different ways.
There are the fundamentalists who are very Puritan in their POV and consider it as sin. (Got a lot of those where I live.) Seeing nudity contaminates you and children are the most vulnerable. There are self declared feminists who consider nudity to be inherently exploitative of women and an exposed penis to be a rape threat. Nothing they can do about it as long as we stay in our closets but they want to keep us restricted to our ghettos because of all the damage nudity would cause if it were let loose.
There are textiles who don't object to nudity but deny the possibility - or even desirability - of nonsexual nudity. Since nudity is a source of sexual pleasure to them, why would they ever change?
The northeast is having the winter storm of the century. But wherever you are, you don't have it as bad as Mt. Washington.