Promoting naturism at Pride?
Backlash after Toronto event raises questions
.jpg){kind=link}
Are Pride parades appropriate events to be promoting social nudism and naturism?
I’ve found myself wrestling with that question since I read a piece on the Planet Nude site about a Toronto event in June. Most of you have probably read the article. But to recap: A conservative Canadian publication called True North reported that Toronto police turned a blind eye to public nudity — which is illegal in Canada without a permit — at “family-friendly” Pride parades in that city. True North also reported that a recreational naturism group called GTA Skinnydippers had set up a kiosk at one of the parade events and wrote about its policy on memberships for teens between 14 and 18.
There was an immediate social media backlash, and the GTA Skinnydippers have since changed their policy and their website — basically raising the minimum age for teens to attend swims without parents or guardians, and tweaking their website, True North reported in a followup piece July 13.
I’m being as objective as possible here, and somewhat vague on the details of what went down both during the parades and afterward. This is not a report on all that. But I will say that True North’s followup piece is somewhat more conciliatory, and quotes Greg Snow, the president of the Federation of Canadian Naturists, who is given the opportunity to explain the non-sexual nature of social nudism.
But back to my dilemma: should naturists be promoting social nudism at Pride events?
On one hand, as a naturist at heart, I understand that many feel we should promote it anywhere and everywhere we can. Many naturists participate in other events that tend to show a lot of skin, such as the clothing-optional World Naked Bike Ride — to the point that I think WNBR is more a social nudism event now than it is a protest event against oil dependency.
On the other hand, as a member of the besieged LGBTQ community, I fear that the raison d’être for Pride could also be lost while at the same time naturists could become victims of the same elements attacking LGBTQ people.
Now, I know we are a long way from social nudists dominating Pride events and making people forget why Pride exists in the first place — it, too, is a protest event. And let’s face it: naturists in Canada and many other places probably face more discrimination than the LGBTQ community does.
But there is no “N” in LGBTQ. Our beefs with the textile establishment have nothing to do with sexual orientation and gender identity — even if many of our members are LGBTQ people. In theory, sexual orientation and gender identity are irrelevant to naturists — as is body size and shape and social standing etc. We literally strip away social labels and all related hangups as well as our clothes when we get together.
I don’t have an answer for my question at the start. But I do fear that naturists could both dilute the Pride message while bringing a lot of unnecessary grief down on the entire naturism community at a time when some conservative-minded people are very vocal and are getting a lot of attention.
And I wonder: Why aren’t we holding “Naturism Pride” events (for lack of a better name)? Why piggyback on other causes when we could hold our own protest events?
I welcome your comments and remind you that this is not a forum to be offering opinions on LGBTQ issues and politics. Let’s stick to the naturism/nudism angles, please.
A reminder for newbies: To comment, do not reply to the email if you are reading it in your inbox. Instead, click on the link below or go to our website.
If one's identity is only that they are a nudist or gay or black or whatever, I consider that very sad. One's identity should be a rich and complex web of traits. Making one trait the only important thing in your life leaves you vulnerable to influencers and echo chambers. It should shift as the environment requires. Depending on what I need at the moment, I'm a nudist, a soldier, an engineer, a daddy, a lover, a grandpa, a husband. a hiker, a photographer, a student, a paid sex object, a writer, a political activist, and a host of other things as needs require. I have a variety of psychological traits that help me intuitively understand certain problems. A completely "normal" person is pretty ineffective in helping neurodiverse folk without a whole lot of training.
I regret none of those things. All things that I am now or have been in the past continue to influence me.
Having a multifaceted personality protects you from being a ditto-head. I may be a naturist. I may be an engineer. Most nudists ate not engineers. I get mostly non-nudist POVs from the engineers and mostly non-engineering POVs from the naturists I know. Democrats should have Republican friends. Christians should have atheist friends. This helps you make up your own mind about issues and (partially) immunizes you against the "us v. them" disease that is so rampant.
If you don't have friends you disagree with, that is the definition of a social bubble. Online, it is an echo chamber.. It is in the nature of influencers, social bubbles, and echo chambers to treat diversity of view points as treason, not interesting questions to be explored. Strength in absolute conformity is the objective of fascism.
If I write a blog, it is at one time or other going to include ALL of those aspects. Posts will be derived from my life. Since one of my aspects is that I'm a nudist, there are posts about that. There are military posts. There are philosophical posts. There are sexual posts. There are posts about social issues. There are posts about aesthetics. I figure that if you are not willing to be completely honest about yourself to the world, even if it is just on an anonymous blog, you have a problem. You do not like yourself and fear being disliked by other anonymous people you'll never meet.
If you are a nudist who supports gay rights, you should be supporting nudism at gay events and gay rights at nudist events. You should not care about optics because "optics" does not care about you. Be who you are wherever you are. The haters will hate you regardless of where you hide.
I posted here about the reaction to my discussion of the WNBR on a forum. Two different people hated me quite vocally. But... several people who were NOT nudists supported me. If I were gay, not a single thing would have changed. If I were in a closet about the WNBR, or didn't participate because nudists should never mix with textiles, I would have avoided the hate but never known the support. In my book, that would be a huge loss.
Nudity is a touchy subject for the public and the nudity of a minor is an extreme case of touchiness. Perhaps nudists don't see anything sexual about it but that is not true of large portions of the public. They perceive the nudity of a child as making them sexually vulnerable and clothing is armor. There really are pedophiles out there. Parents can reasonably worry. That worry is easily weaponized.
GTA may well be an extremely virtuous and pure organization but a minor isn't going to be able to make that judgement, nor is an external viewer. Most people are going to assume the worst because it is the safest thing to do when children are involved.. That this didn't occur to GTA is problematic.
The best policy is not to have "memberships" for minors. If parents are members, they should be allowed to bring their minor children, but only as long as the kids are appropriately supervised.