Profile pics are your intro to the world

On social media chat sites like Bluesky, we are ambassadors of naturism and social nudism

(Source: Eric Bailey/Wikimedia Commons)

I’ve had a few days to check out the Bluesky site, and it is heartening to see so many naturists there. I’m still learning, though. Particularly about talking with people in DMs (direct messages). It wasn’t something I did often in Twitter — but then again, I wasn’t seeing many tweets by naturists there, despite the fact I followed a lot of them. I’m seeing many more posts by naturists in Bluesky, and some of those following me have sent me direct messages.

One of those followers — now an ex-follower — who identifies as a “nudist” was offended by something I said in our direct messages, so he “blocked” me. I guess I didn’t explain myself well, plus I was kinda watching the Grey Cup game at the same time. Lesson 1: the tone of direct messages can be hard to convey or interpret, so put more focus and thought into it.

It had to do with one of his profile pictures, the smaller circular one where people often put head shots. It had been blurred by the Bluesky folks, but I could still make out enough of it that I thought it would make a good discussion point for us in our direct messages. He appeared to be sitting naked in a deck chair, facing the camera with his legs wide open.

Most of the profile photos — the bigger ones and the smaller ones — at the top of naturists’ profile pages are tasteful (some people don’t post any pics at all). There may be nudity in them, but they are cropped so their most intimate parts aren’t in the faces of people viewing the profiles for the first time. If you scroll through their feeds, you may see fuller nude shots, but the profile pics are generally more reserved.

I’m no prude, honestly. But I can tell you that most women do not want to see a guy’s genitals first thing when they look at a profile page as they consider whether to follow him or not. Another person, a naturist, reported in a post there that she got “blocked” when she tried to discuss it with him.

I get that some nudists feel they should be able to let it all hang out at any time and anywhere, but it will draw a backlash, in this case from two naturists who are not prudes in any sense of the word.

It seems to me that most naturists and social nudists in social media forums like Bluesky and Twitter are ambassadors. We’re promoting naturism and social nudism. We’re trying to encourage other adults to take an interest in what we view as a healthy lifestyle.

One male naturist who responded to the woman’s post had this to say:

Anyone who presents themselves genitals first in their photos is not a naturist. I block 90% of people on all these sites. While others are proud to have thousands of followers, I remain proud to have genuine naturist followers. Even if it means I never break 200. It's about quality, not quantity. (Link here)

In truth, I feel a little bad about it all. I probably should have said nothing. But the thing is, if I was going to have regular conversations with this guy — and he seemed nice enough — I didn’t want to have to see that pic in every conversation, even if it was blurred.

That’s on me, and maybe it’s a hangup. I’m not sure. But I am not alone with that one, as noted above. I just wish I had talked it out with him, in the spirit of discussion.

But I thought it was worthy of discussion here. It has sparked discussion in the above-mentioned woman’s thread.

Aside from that: many people on Bluesky, and probably Twitter, too, turn off the DM option. I might do that, too, if only to keep me from sticking my foot in it again.

I haven’t turned on the option for “Adult photos” in Bluesky, which is probably why I saw a blurred version of the picture. When I think of adult photos, I think of porn —which doesn’t interest me. I’m seeing plenty of naturists’ photos there now that show full nudity in their various posts.