Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Nudism
The Other Side forums - suitable for mature readers! > The Other Side forums > The Issues Forum
Pages: 1, 2
Astarael
You really should try to explain what you post if you want people to pay attention. Try getting into a bit of detail to explain what you mean by "sexual equilibrium" and why you believe in it.
I don't want to pick nits here, but try using a few periods and commas in your posts to make your sentences flow smoothly and end firmly rather thab using ellipses to make one endless and confusing phrase. It's annoying to go back through and try to figure out what you meant. One question mark will certainly suffice unless you're trying to suggest a lot of intensity packed into your question, and you seem to use multiple question marks at the end of every question. Using one punctuation mark at a time and shortening your huge phrases into compact sentences will make your posts easier to read. smile.gif
believe
QUOTE
From the christian point of view I don't understand the issue with nudity either, we were, after all, created in his image. so wheres the problem in staring at an image of god? Adam and Eve were naked and that was fine by god?


Well.. Its clear from that nakedness wasn't the problem, but that the human response after sin entered the world was. I think its the difference between going from a childlike acceptance of it as natural and to an 'adult' one tainted by sin. The Bible doesn't spell out exactly what the problem was except that they realized they were nude in a sense that they never have before and it shamed them. Possibly just realizing that God was aware of them and what they were. Obviously, its hard to say.

The Bible doesn't support staring at graven images and things supposedly made in God's likeness. tongue.gif

But more seriously, thats why I don't have a particular objection to nudity in places where everyone does it. If everyone does it than being clothed is the shocking and risque thing or so I heard when I was younger. People might have lustful thoughts still, but clothing and even veiling doesn't stop those anyway.
Pikasyuu
I don't know if any of this has been said yet, but here's my take.

To get the entire world into nudism, there would have to be a HUGE reverse of culture. Take fashion hubs like France and New York - we are raised these days so that clothing has such a huge impact on our self-image that it would be near impossible for a modern society in somewhere like those two places to live that way. If nudism were to work globally, it would have had to have started back in times before fashion and clothing were so implimented into the media that we've begun to believe that clothes compile who we are.

However, in extremely poor countries? Nudism is not a fashion trend or a social commentary, it's how some people are forced to live because of poverty. And note, it doesn't throw their society upside down, and it doesn't get them looked at strange, it's simply one of those things that happens and is accepted as a sign of little money. Sad how you compare a rich, fashion-driven nation and how it would be thrown into utter chaos by nudity, to a place where nudity is occasionally not a choice.

Sorry if that came out jumbled. :P
aldis
Sexual equilibrium=Sexual tension in non-flux array.....



CommieBastard
... I give up.
aldis

Sexual Equilibrium and Tension

Anywhere, in anyplace there are persons of different genders moving around there is Sexual Tension, it may be dormant and almost imperceptible, or it may redolent and sharply and clearly observable. It depends on person, their mindsets (i.e., cultural upbringing and attitude towards sex). The degree of tension can be dubbed as Sexual Equilibrium of that particular environment.

in a businesslike environment there wd be least sexual tension… I mean sexual attraction mechanisms are dormant but very real forces beneath our skin, just like electro-magnetic fluxes, which varies at distances and on the power supplied…


Utilitarian Environment:

like in a dining table, an adolescent boy wd pay least attention to his sister in law’s open cleavage, same thing goes for living room, and most workplaces..(At least hopefully so). The attraction fluxes are coiled…and dormant.

Hedonistic Environment:

In an environment, (bath, bedroom, all intimate sexual encounter) the fluxes wd be high…and the air wd crackle with sexual tension.

Nudity:

In both environment, (even it some extreme, tropical culture where nudity is part and parcel of daily life) degree of nudity wd increase the sexual tension there fore affect the sexual equilibrium….
Phyllis
Sexual equilibrium? What the...?

I don't claim to be an expert by any means, but I have been majoring in psychology for the past 4 years. I have taken countless psychology classes, including many on sexual behavior. I have never heard this term referred to even in passing, so I'm curious.

Where exactly are you getting this, aldis? If it's from the same sort of books you got the whole feminine archetype ideas, I am unimpressed. Psychology is meant to be a science...you can't just say such things exist without evidence (and there is no real evidence that a feminine archetype exists). So, where is your evidence that there even is such a thing as "sexual equilibrium?"

As an aside, I always found that people got irritated and/or bored when I would start spouting psychobabble at them if they were not doing the same courses as me. You'll probably find the same. It's one thing to talk about the concept using everyday language. It's completely different to use a whole array of terms as if they're common knowledge when really, they're not.
mooooooooooopo
QUOTE (aldis @ Sep 26 2005, 07:32 AM)
Sexual equilibrium=Sexual tension in non-flux array.....
*

Translation (for the layman):
A arrangement of a large number of static or non-flowing/non-fluctuating sexual tensions.

Still makes no sense, does it...and I'm pretty sure sexual tension can't be pluralised in that way

Further to what Cand said about not using excessive scientific language, the scientific language you do use needs to make sense too.
Mata
Aldis has clearly never worked in an office. Many people would say that there is far more sexual tension in their office than there is in their bedroom! biggrin.gif
Witless
I've always found that seeing someone nude relieves tension rather increases tension...

I have certainly found my imagination's far more sparked and alive when someone I am attracted to isn't showing a thing, than when they are leaving nothing to the imagination.

But then that must be just me.. I 'OD' on nudeness after a while and become rather apathetic towards it. I like the whole idea of something you get to see on special occasions than something that's in your face all day everyday.

I'm like that with all things though.. favorite foods, fave films.. anything I like.. I prefer to have seldom but enjoyed rather than all the time.. and nothing special anymore.

I have nothing against nudists themselves.. it's great that they feel that uber comfortable. But... I don't think it's a life style I'd want.. I'd lose the 'specialness' it currently has of seeing someone naked from time to time. biggrin.gif
aldis
Now I am getting tired, you berated me when I quoted scripture,…. that I don’t think, have nothing original to contribute…and now you are finding fault cause I am not quoting Freud/Jung and rest of the Schrink Tribe’s assorted shibboleths???….that my opinion does not belong to officially sanctioned holy canon of Establishment??

Again do you know everything ???

Candice I never try to impress anybody and that includes myself….and yes I did not ever said that office environment has less sexual tensions…but it SHOULD be….(cause it should have Utilitarian Environment)

Witless, may your imaginations be blessed…but I was talking about general populace…they get horny & sweaty when they say flesh bared to an excess degree and they shriek and put their hands over their precious brats eyes…..

And who says I am for or against nudist ???

now fluxes of animus is rising in this room.......

Phyllis
QUOTE (aldis @ Sep 26 2005, 09:28 AM)
and now you are finding fault cause I am not quoting Freud/Jung and rest of the Schrink Tribe’s assorted shibboleths???….that my opinion does not belong to officially sanctioned holy canon of Establishment??
*

No, no. You misunderstood what I said. I merely asked where your evidence was. I didn't say it had to be a well-known psychologist, did I? And who said I liked Freud or Jung? I would have taken you to be a Jung fan with all that talk of archetypes and animus (since, you know, he's the one who came up with those ideas and all), but I don't care for him. Even less for Freud. All I wanted from you is information about where you are getting these ideas. Did I ever once say that it had to be a name I would recognise? No.
Astarael
What part of "ellipses and multiple punctuation marks make your posts hard to read" did you not understand, aldis? mad.gif I'm not trying to be rude, but your posts consist of long, vague phrases that are jumbles of many sentences.
When exactly were you "rebuked" for quoting scripture? All we've said about that is to supply a context for the scriptures and your views on them.
People here are genuinely trying to understand what you're saying about sexual equilibrium. Don't get huffy when your views are questioned. This happens to everyone in these discussions sometimes. Try to answer questions and tell us where you're getting all the obscure psychological terms instead of pouting. We don't know everything, and we'd be happy to learn something from you if you'll give a source for the information and reasons to believe in it. It sounds interesting, but what is there to back it up? It all seems very vague.
"Fluxes of animus" could do with a bit of explaining too.
PsychWardMike
*points to my originaly post*

*streaks through this topic*
believe
Aldis, people asking for further explanation is not a personal attack. I have trouble following your posts and connecting your arguments to what your original point might have been and would appreciate the clarification. Its discouraging when you respond like that to legit questions.
Pikasyuu
I have to agree with Witless. I think that nudity makes such an impact today because it's out of the norm - anything that strikes a person as 'different' can either intrigue or frighten them very, very easily. If nudity were an every day thing, it would .. not begin to get boring, but it'd most likely lose its caveman effect real fast.

And Aldis, please don't take what other members say out of context - we just want to be able to understand you a little bit better. Remember they're not trying to be offensive to you and that this is a friendly debate. :)
Museum Girl
Who says there has to be sexual tension between members of different genders. There can be tensions between the same genders, likewise there can be no tension between different genders. We are not automatically attracted to anything of the opposite gender, and there would only be tension there if there was also attraction there.

Also many people are considerably less attractive without their clothes, or vice versa. It's more the imagination than full frontal nudity that's exciting. I find that if there are nude people behaving in a non sexual way then they are not at all erotic, more like pieces of furniture than anything else.
PsychWardMike
Anyone ever see that episode of Seinfeld with the bad nudity? I think it kind of applies. Nudity can be sexy and everything, but doing the mundane normal things (coughing, opening a pickle jar, etc.) aren't enhanced.

Anyway. I like boobies.

( . Y . )

Peace!
Witless
QUOTE (aldis @ Sep 26 2005, 05:28 PM)
Witless, may your imaginations be blessed…
*


My imagination is a wonderful place indeed.. the filth... my god the filth!
pgrmdave
QUOTE
I mean sexual attraction mechanisms are dormant but very real forces beneath our skin, just like electro-magnetic fluxes


Are you comparing sexual attraction with electricity???
Sexual attraction is an emotion...electro-magnetic forces are measurable...they can do work...sexual attraction...is not comparable...to...electro-magnetic forces...
(I..........am not.........mocking.........aldis.........at.......all........)
Jatopian
QUOTE (pgrmdave @ Sep 26 2005, 11:12 PM)
QUOTE
I mean sexual attraction mechanisms are dormant but very real forces beneath our skin, just like electro-magnetic fluxes


Are you comparing sexual attraction with electricity???
Sexual attraction is an emotion...electro-magnetic forces are measurable...they can do work...sexual attraction...is not comparable...to...electro-magnetic forces...
(I..........am not.........mocking.........aldis.........at.......all........)

*

Ah, but neural impulses are electrical in nature, and hormones electrochemical...
*trying not to sound serious*
Astarael
Being naked is a choice. If you're comfortable with that, fine. If not, wear clothes around other people. Why all the agonizing over subconcious impulses?
The deep phsychological explanations with no sources are confusing me, aldis, and I'd like to hear why you believe it and where you found it. It sounds interesting, but I'd like to see a bit of background. I'd also like to see this background in complete sentences that end with one period instead of three, if that's at all possible. tongue.gif
Witless
I was going to start a topic.. but then I remembered froggies old one and thought it would be better here.

I recently came into the knowledge that in a survey.. 25% of men asked had never seen their long term partner naked. This was a survey only asking people in relationships involving sex mind.

This I find utterly baffling.. I'm more concerned about people seeing me naked than most... but not letting the person I'm with seeing me naked.. wow.. I can't believe people that were on the program had gotten as far as marriage and still not seen. But I thought about it.. and now that I think back.. I have heard a lot of people say that same thing.

Any people here that would never let their partner (who they are having a physical relationship with) see them naked.. and why?
Kitty
QUOTE (PsychWardMike @ Sep 26 2005, 04:46 PM)
Anyone ever see that episode of Seinfeld with the bad nudity?  I think it kind of applies.  Nudity can be sexy and everything, but doing the mundane normal things (coughing, opening a pickle jar, etc.) aren't enhanced.
*


Hah, I thought about that when I first saw this thread. If and when I was in a position where I could walk around the house naked at any time, I wouldnt for the sheer fact that some things are really not so pleasent when you're nekkid.
PsychWardMike
Again, know your termonology, people! tongue.gif

naked - adj; to be without clothes
nekkid - adj; to be wtihout clothes and to be up to something
Kitty
QUOTE (PsychWardMike @ Nov 12 2005, 12:35 AM)
Again, know your termonology, people!  tongue.gif

naked - adj; to be without clothes
nekkid - adj; to be wtihout clothes and to be up to something
*


*sticks tongue out at*
Nyaaa!

unsure.gif Sowwy
Astarael
I don't really understand this one. If you're married or in a long-term sexual relationship, then what's the problem with letting your partner see your whole naked body? I understand that there may be some body shyness or insecurity early on, but I don't understand how it would persist long into a relationship. If you're comfortable with the other person and in love, what's the issue?
PsychWardMike
My general philosophy is this: if my partner is comfortable enough to be naked around me, I'll assume they feel the same way about me that I do of them (love or lust) and then I'll extend the same curteousy.

I can't really have sex with clothes on either.
Kitty
One of my friends brought up the issue "What's a 'long term' relationship" I said there was probably a time set up for the survey but I'm not sure. Would they consider 'long term' a month or a week? Or a year? blink.gif

I really dont understand it either though, if you're not comfortable with your body around your partner there's something a bit wrong there. And if you're hiding that from them, what else are you hiding?
Witless
QUOTE
One of my friends brought up the issue "What's a 'long term' relationship" I said there was probably a time set up for the survey but I'm not sure. Would they consider 'long term' a month or a week? Or a year?


You know... I am starting to understand why people find my desire for precise exactness and everything to have a defined value annoying.

Let's just say a long term relationship is when a relationship is no longer just a 'casual' fling. Where you'd emotional attachment to someone has become more permanant.

Hmm.. I should have phrased my earlier post differently. I'm not saying it's wrong to be honest.. I find it odd.. but not wrong. Some couples lead entirely happy lives together that way.. happier and more fulfilled than some more mordern couples with their buzz words like "openess" and "comfortable".

I just want to know what goes through the mind of someone that goes through years of relationship without ever letting their partner see them naked with the lights on. Or through the mind of someone that has never seen their partner naked in full view.
Museum Girl
QUOTE (Astarael @ Nov 12 2005, 11:25 PM)
I don't really understand this one. If you're married or in a long-term sexual relationship, then what's the problem with letting your partner see your whole naked body? I understand that there may be some body shyness or insecurity early on, but I don't understand how it would persist long into a relationship. If you're comfortable with the other person and in love, what's the issue?
*


I don't understand it either but several close friends of mine told me it's much tartier to let your long term boyfriend see you naked than to have sex with randomstarngers with the lights off. I think that's stupid and also kind of insulting but there we go.
PsychWardMike
*shrug* I'd actually be pretty weirded out if I was having sex with someone who I've not seen naked. This is partially because I'm a fairly visual person, but more because I'd think that they were so insecure that the sex was something unimportant or mechanical to them (I like a little passion in the sack, thank you.) I'd be down right insulted if they saw me naked with my consent and wouldn't let me see them. It takes a lot of trust for me to show my body to someone, and when I do, all bets are off - I'm with this partner. I kind of need the same commitment.
Snugglebum the Destroyer
QUOTE
I don't really understand this one. If you're married or in a long-term sexual relationship, then what's the problem with letting your partner see your whole naked body? I understand that there may be some body shyness or insecurity early on, but I don't understand how it would persist long into a relationship. If you're comfortable with the other person and in love, what's the issue?


It's easy to get totally butt arsed with someone you may never ever see again - any flaws that you dislike don't seem to count so much. However, in a long term relationship you can be very very aware that you intend to be with that person for many years. Therefore, you worry more about what that person actually thinks about your body and perhaps become even more nervous about flashing it. There have been times that I've stood in front of a mirror and thought to myself 'Damn, can I really keep him interested in this body for the next 50 years?!' If that makes sense?

It's been years since I've been terribly shy about my body - after getting into better shape after having a kid and generally breast feeding in front of everyone and his dog, I'm damn proud of it and show it off as often as possible. smile.gif
Astarael
That makes a good bit of sense, now that you mention it. Long-term worry about interest looks to be more powerful than short-term body shyness. But then, all my friends and I are really scarily modest due to early childhood brainwashing and having gotten used to not showing off the bodies much. Interesting to hear that perspective. smile.gif I suppose I might feel the same way if I ever managed to get married or in some sort of long-term relationship.
Witless
QUOTE (Snugglebum the Destroyer @ Nov 13 2005, 11:16 PM)
QUOTE


It's easy to get totally butt arsed with someone you may never ever see again - any flaws that you dislike don't seem to count so much. However, in a long term relationship you can be very very aware that you intend to be with that person for many years. Therefore, you worry more about what that person actually thinks about your body and perhaps become even more nervous about flashing it. There have been times that I've stood in front of a mirror and thought to myself 'Damn, can I really keep him interested in this body for the next 50 years?!' If that makes sense?

It's been years since I've been terribly shy about my body - after getting into better shape after having a kid and generally breast feeding in front of everyone and his dog, I'm damn proud of it and show it off as often as possible. smile.gif
*



I'm totally the opposite to that! For me in the short term, I don't feel a need to have to go through the long process of being naked in front of someone.. (and that takes forever and a day for me). But in the long term I can slowly but surely get used to it and just get over it nutil I feel alright and comfortable. I can see where your coming from with the opinions of people you intend to be around long term mattering more.. but I strive to feel what's the term...
Damn you thesaurus.com and dictionary.com for letting me down...

I guess you could say, I'm desperate to take my defenses down.. but I'm loathed to do it until I feel safe? Does that make sense?
Marriegold
QUOTE (Astarael @ Nov 14 2005, 10:35 PM)
That makes a good bit of sense, now that you mention it. Long-term worry about interest looks to be more powerful than short-term body shyness. But then, all my friends and I are really scarily modest due to early childhood brainwashing and having gotten used to not showing off the bodies much. Interesting to hear that perspective.  smile.gif I suppose I might feel the same way if I ever managed to get married or in some sort of long-term relationship.
*


Good to know I am not the only one. I am always covering up. I would never feel confturable with some one else seeing me with out cloths on. I don't even like short skirts.

I don't know if this makes sence but wouldn't you feel more vunrable (sorry can't spell the word) wearing no clothing infront of some one? How could you feel confturable with some one else looking at you with no cloths on?

I think I am going to be the same when I am older thats if I could ever trust anyone to be in a long-term relationship with. wink.gif
pgrmdave
Yeah, being nude in front of somebody feels very vulnerable, but when you're with someone you care about, who you know cares about you, it makes it a lot easier, because you know they're not judging you.
Astarael
I do understand some long-term worries about maintaining a body, but *never* seeing your partner naked even on a steamy honeymoon is the bit that puzzles me the most, I think. Even if you only show it once or twice, surely there's times when you feel sexy and want to show off.
PsychWardMike
It seems hard to me that you actually couldn't see the naked body. Even in darkness, one does see something. I think the issue is the willingness to show the body, but still...

Anyway, sex should be had in the light every once in a while, just to change things up.
Astarael
There's always blindfolds and wearing opaque lingeree (why can I not spell that word? *mutters* Let me know if it's right.) But blindfolds would make the whole business awkward and you'd have to rip off whatever underclothes you were wearing to do the deed. Ubless you're going by the rule of always wearing something, even a shirt if you're naked waist-down and underwear if you're naked waist-up. Seems incredibly awkward to bother for years, though.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.