Sundial

Sun Don't Shine

Shining light into the dark places.

I'll admit I have a little "thing" about exposure. I don't want to scandalize anybody. And certainly it's been a journey getting to the point where I'm comfortable photographing myself this way. But when you create a taboo, you're creating a vacuum - a black hole of censorship, beyond which you're not allowed to peek. And in the human mind, that invites transgression, in the form of curiosity.

Anyway, you can't get much more fully exposed than this (at least not without crossing some very weird lines that I am not interested in crossing). And in full daylight, too! Outdoors, no less! I guess I find that phrase "where the sun don't shine" a bit humorous. I mean, it's normally true. But it also kind of sounds like a challenge. Don't you think? Or maybe I'm just possessed by the Imp of the Perverse. >.<

The Photoerotic Effect

In 1905, Albert Einstein provided an explanation for the photoelectric effect, whereby a photon - a "particle", for want of a better term, of light - hitting a surface transfers some of its energy to the surface, sufficient to eject an electron (or, in a similar process, to create an electric current - this is how solar panels work). Similarly, when the warm sunlight comes into contact with my bare skin (especially if it's been a while since I've been out in the sunshine), occasionally it produces an erotic effect, causing me to become sexually aroused.

In a nudist context, this can be somewhat inconvenient, although I have to wonder why this should necessarily be the case. What does it matter if the pleasure you receive from baring your body to the elements is sexual in nature? Presumably, nudists want to prevent nudist situations from "devolving" into licentious orgies. This is understandable. But if we separate "passively receiving erotic stimulation" from "active sexual behavior", then where is the harm in the former? This kind of sexual stimulation is independent of typical acts like intercourse or often even masturbation. For while I might gently caress or apply pressure to my genitals - simply because it feels good - I don't necessarily have the intention of initiating a full-blown masturbatory session.

This flies in the face of the sexist stereotype of the man who demands sex at the slightest provocation of penile stimulation; but that has never been my reality. Perhaps I am atypical, but insofar as there are people like me, who behave the way I do, I don't see what harm that kind of behavior could possibly do, even in the context of an "asexual" nudist environment. Whether the chemicals coursing through your body - the electrical charges, if you will - are the result of athletics, relaxation, massage, the alcohol in your system, your wife scratching your back, or any other "decent" source you can think of, or if they are erotic in nature, I don't see how there is any difference, aside from an unnatural and unhealthy taboo surrounding anything related to sex.

The same logic can be applied to finding nude bodies sexually appealing. As long as you're not some neanderthal that can't help grabbing your crotch every time you see a naked breast, there's no reason why nudists should disavow the very human realization that our bodies are fundamentally sexual in nature. Nudism is not about sterilizing life. It's about having a healthier approach to our bodies. Which means not denying basic truths (and in the process lending evidence to the rest of the world's suspicion that we're nutjobs who simultaneously can't keep our clothes on and yet adamantly refuse to acknowledge that there could be anything sexual about it), but just taking responsibility for our actions and maintaining civility in the face of a more natural, down-to-earth mode of living.

Garden Rounds

An insider's perspective, perhaps, on a view you've seen before. -_^

Peaceful, isn't it?

At the Garden

I don't know if this constitutes proper naked gardening - as opposed to just posing naked around the garden - but it's the closest I've gotten all season!

Yard Mischief

Spanking (above), and stroking (below). :-3

An erection in plain sight? Omfg, it's the end of the world! People will literally die from seeing it - or, worse yet, suffer for the rest of their miserable lives from the traumatic memory of such a horrible thing!

Kitchen Squares

Helpless

I was chatting with an art aficionado over at deviantART, and he introduced me to a new fetish - something that seems to be referred to as "lift and carry". It's something I'd seen before, browsing through other people's favorites, but this was the first time I'd had a chance to actually talk to someone who has the fetish.

As an amateur sexologist, I find the mechanisms and diversity of human sexual desire to be fascinating. I'll be the first one to admit that some of those fringe desires seem downright weird to me, but I know this is all subjective, and as a sex-positive activist, one of my goals as an erotic artist is to make people feel more comfortable with their potentially weird desires.

As such, I like to be nonjudgmental, and occasionally enjoy exploring new avenues of erotic expression if it doesn't take me too far outside of my comfort zone. And as far as fetishes go, lift and carry is pretty benign. I don't have any real strong attraction to these particular sorts of poses, but I could certainly see the appeal in them, the same way I am sympathetic to the BDSM scene (in all its diversity), while not necessarily considering myself a true practitioner.

In this case, I think the appeal of the fetish has something to do with helplessness - being carried limp in another person's arms (I had to shoot these "draped" over a chair because my photography is a solitary craft). There's a power dynamic - dominant/submissive, strong/weak, alive/dead. But it could be viewed in sympathetic terms - one person taking care of another. Power imbalances are not intrinsically negative, or abusive. They place a lot of responsibility on the one with more power, but it makes the relationship all the sweeter when that person cares enough about the other not to abuse that dynamic, but to use it instead to protect and guide them. (Of course, power abuse is its own kind of fetish, but I don't believe that should be the default assumption in these cases).

Then again, there could just be some aesthetic appeal to these poses. I, for one, already appreciate the way the body looks when it's all stretched out - back arched, arms above the head. It emphasizes the bone structure - which not everybody likes, but I find appealing (when not taken to unnatural extremes).

Anyway, I have to admit to a curiosity about what it is - in our psychology or whatever - that makes us drawn to certain types of things. People with fetishes can often (although not necessarily always) recall experiences early in their lives related to the subject of their fetish - e.g., watching some old horror movie where the monster lifts the damsel in distress.

But what makes me wonder is whether it's the experience that molds the fetish (imprinting on a person's mind in their formative years), or if it's the dormant fetish that's actually responsible for a person finding themselves drawn to these moments in the first place. Kind of a nature vs. nurture question, I guess.

But if you can have two kids watch the same cartoon where the villain ties some girl to the train tracks, and one of them grows up to have a bondage fetish, and the other one doesn't, that seems to suggest to me that there's something already there in the psychology that's merely being triggered, and not entirely manufactured by the stimulus. As I said, human sexuality is a fascinating thing.

Filtering

I'd been sitting on this theme for a long time, but I wanted to shoot it last (yes, this is the last planned shot in the Why Nudism? series - I managed to complete it within a year!) because it stands out in the sense that, while every other shot highlights a reason to practice nudism, this one emphasizes the importance of a nudist to be able to overcome the hangups that prevent textiles from practicing nudism.

I knew I wanted it to be a play on the black censor bar cliché; the only question was where to shoot it. I picked this spot because it provides a nice, clean background (plus, I think nudity has slightly more oomph when it's outdoors), but it turned out to be a great complement to the theme of the shot, because the lines behind me kind of look like the backdrop to a police lineup, even down to me holding a black board in front of me! A little nod, perhaps, to all the legal issues that are involved when it comes to nudity.

Anyway, I was thinking about the subject of censorship in preparation for this shoot, and I came across an article arguing that censorship is good for photography. Basically, because it maintains the "shock value" of controversial images. I don't necessarily agree that the need for censorship is good for photography (i.e., that art wouldn't flourish in a more liberated culture) - although I cannot deny that there is some satisfaction in violating taboos - but I'm inclined to agree that artists should not be so quick to decry the censoring of photography (e.g., adding black bars to a nude photograph), at least insofar as it enables controversial (albeit modified) images to reach wider audiences, who then still have the option of accessing the original work. Certainly, though frustrating it may sometimes be, I feel like I have only grown as an artist by catering to the slightly less liberated audience of deviantART (provided I still have other outlets for my more risqué works).

But that, really, is a pretty narrow context for censorship, and what I would argue constitutes something closer to a form of filtering, than the active suppression of speech that the term "censorship" is usually linked to. Censorship, in its truest form, is somebody (whether it's the government or not) dictating what you're allowed to see/read/consume. It may involve actual destruction of information - as in the iconic example of book-burning - or, more commonly, a destructive modification to the source material (e.g., applying the black marker). Even the simple act of a gatekeeper preventing certain materials from reaching an audience can be considered censorship. The common theme in all of these cases is that somebody else is making a decision for you about what kind of information you're allowed to be exposed to, whether or not you have knowingly and willingly granted them this authority.

Filtering, by contrast - while sometimes having the superficial appearance of censorship - distinguishes itself from that practice by preserving the individual's choice. It recognizes that some subjects are contentious and potentially offensive, and that a significant portion of the population may prefer not to be exposed to them without warning. It makes no moral or ethical judgments about the effects certain kinds of information may have on people. It merely lets the individual decide for themself what they're comfortable with. For this to be possible, there must always be some kind of click-through enabling the viewer to consciously choose, if they so desire, to view the original, uncensored work.

I feel a bit like I'm taking the devil's advocate position here, as I am not a fan of trigger warnings and "safe spaces" - and I still think the marginalization of sexual speech does the subject a severe disfavor - but as I've said in the past, I'm willing to make reasonable compromises, and though I consider myself to be somewhat radical in terms of some of my beliefs, I still believe that the moderate position is usually the sanest and most advisable one. So as an alternative to "hard-line" censorship, I'm willing to live with a filtering system (as I did, mostly happily, during my flickr years) as an acceptable compromise, if not the ideal situation (which would be a more tolerant and open-minded culture).

Now, when I say that there must be a click-through to the uncensored work, I will allow that this may involve cooperation between separate sites/companies. A website needn't permit the hosting of information it deems objectionable, as long as there exists an alternative host, and the filtering site does not actively obstruct access to it. A site that prohibits linking to the original, on the other hand (as deviantART not only prohibits the hosting of "pornographic" content, but also the posting of links to sites that include pornographic content), is engaging in active censorship. The crucial difference is the preservation of choice. You may place the controversial materials behind a curtain, but not a locked door. Because you still have the freedom to pull back the curtain if you wish.

Unfortunately, what makes sexuality (and also nudity, insofar as our culture links it with sexuality) different from other forms of speech - such as crude language and violence - is the fact that there are laws with potentially severe penalties for anyone responsible for allowing minors to access such content. Choice has been removed from the equation, and the government has unilaterally (and in opposition to science and reality) deemed such speech a public menace. You may be criticized by your peers for letting your preteen watch an R-rated movie, but nobody's going to jail or losing custody of their children over it. For those of us, however, who recognize that the human body is not synonymous with sexual activity, and, to go even further, that knowledge of the carnal act is not toxic in the same way that other forms of potentially offensive speech (e.g., hate speech) may be, this is a distinctly frustrating state of affairs.

Why Nudism? (Part 25)

There are a lot of practical reasons to go naked in specific situations (which I hope this project has underlined), but pragmatism isn't always the only or the most important factor in a person's decision on what to wear. You could be hot, you could be uncomfortable, you could be inconvenienced, but all of these could be worthwhile costs if you place some kind of metaphysical importance on covering your nakedness. So it's important to acknowledge that not only may nudists have good reason to go naked, but that they also lack significant reason not to.

I think this is what spooks a lot of people about nudists - that they lack the common "decency" to cover up. But a nudist would argue that this is an arbitrary taboo, and that there is really nothing indecent, threatening, or "sinful" about uncovering one's nakedness in front of others. In fact, it can be very healthy - not just physically, but also psychologically. And whatever justifications you can come up with for keeping yourself covered, there are justifications for not hiding who you are under your clothes that are no less legitimate. In the end, it really comes down to a matter of personal preference.

Skywalker

I've been wanting to take a shot like this since my original 365 Daily Nudes project, believe it or not.

Outdoor Shower

Social nudism has me totally spoiled on taking showers outdoors. I'm not sure I can describe the appeal any better than that of just being naked outdoors, or skinny dipping - it's more than just some exhibitionist thrill (although, as a voyeur, I will say that a person with an attractive body rubbing themselves down in the shower - especially surrounded by nature - is one of the great aesthetic pleasures in this life, and I wish there were more opportunities to witness it); it's a primal sensation, of being naked among the elements, with the addition of water providing another tactile dimension. I'd love to stand naked under a waterfall someday.

P.S. The best way to dry off is not with a towel, but open air and sunshine. -_^

Peeking Over The Fence

"Did I hear something?"

"Who's that?"

"Sorry, I just wanted to see if you had a rake I could borrow."

And here's a light test for each of the clones in this shot. Usually these test shots are not very interesting because they're just that: test shots - I haven't put much effort into posing. But they do sometimes have a candid, behind-the-scenes appeal to them, and every once in awhile, by pure serendipity, they come out looking quite striking themselves.

Backyard Camping

Popping a Tent

I had to set up my tent in the backyard because, sadly, I'm not allowed to set up my camera in nudist venues. (Even putting aside the nudism issue, privacy concerns are really killing candid photography these days - god forbid you should take a picture of someone without getting their permission first...). This is pretty much what it looks like, though:

I'm pretty diligent with my sunscreen. I'm actually a little bit self-conscious about it, because I don't see a lot of other people being this diligent with it, and of course in the nudist culture a dark, all-over tan is something of a status symbol. But I like my pale skin, for aesthetic reasons even beyond the health benefits of avoiding too much sun exposure (although a moderate amount of sun is certainly healthy). And this is how I keep my pearlescent sheen:

I had to edit the video down for time constraints, but I think it's probably even better this way - lean 'n' mean. If you're taking notes, you should know that I also apply sunscreen to my face and scalp, but that isn't shown here.

Discount Bikini

So I found this mesh-style bikini sold in a bargain bin for $2.50 a piece at Walmart. A whole bikini for just 5 bucks? I had to get one! 'Course, then I realized you can probably find better quality swim separates on the 1 dollar clearance rack at your favorite overstock/discount store. Except, the problem there is that you can never find two pieces that match, leaving you to have to get creative and hope for the best...

Looking at a bikini like this, it never ceases to amaze me that girls can actually get away with wearing this little to go swimming. I'm so jealous. If we lived in a speedo culture, things would be a lot more even, but you must be bored of me saying that by now.

I picked up a pair of the bottoms in a small, but in hindsight, I think I should have picked up a medium (every time I've been back to the store since, they've been sold out of that size and color, and have yet to restock). They're awfully snug. Especially with the meat I'm packing. I mean, they're sexy - yeah. But they're not comfy, and they're definitely not "street legal". Ah, the curse of being male...

Photography note: It's terrible when I go so far as to set up my camera, and then decide to just use my phone instead, because it takes better pictures (although I ultimately decided that a video was the best way to showcase this swimsuit). And it's not just a matter of laziness - having to manually work out the proper exposure. Granted, my camera is pretty old technology, by the standards of rapid growth in this industry, but I'd have to take multiple exposures and merge them in Photoshop, when my phone handles high dynamic range on the fly (with quite satisfactory results). Which means less time fiddling with machines, and more time being creative. And lately, my time for photoshoots has been in criminally short supply.

Tan-Through Swimwear

Despite being a nudist, I'm not really into the tanning culture. In fact, I prefer my skin to be pale. But there's no way to avoid being out in the sunshine during the summer. And while I try to be diligent about applying sunscreen, I can only do so within reason, and it's inevitable that I'll end up getting some sun. Especially given that I like to use the heat as an excuse to wear very little. Naturally, the parts of my body that get more frequent exposure are going to get the most sun, and even in spite of my enjoyment of nude recreation (when possible), I always seem to end up with a noticeably pale ass by the end of the season.

I was thinking about ways to avoid that, when I remembered something I'd read about tan-through swimwear. Made from a translucent, mesh-like material, it allows for sunlight to pass through while maintaining an opaque appearance against your skin, so you can get all the tanning benefits even when you can't risk full exposure. I figured it would be something I could wear in the sunshine when I can't be nude, to work on evening out my tan!

Plus, I'll admit, it's kind of fun knowing you're basically wearing nothing but a see-through mesh against your skin, while no one is the wiser. The Kiniki brand carries tan-through swimsuits in a variety of styles (running the gamut from shorts to thongs for men, and one-pieces to string bikinis for women - although, curiously, I found no thongs for women), including various wraps, sarongs, and coverups. I'd be tempted to buy a whole wardrobe's worth of beachwear, except that some of it can be fairly expensive (especially the larger pieces).

So I started out with a simple pair of swim briefs to try, in a classic tiger-stripe pattern (if the patterns look a bit busy, it's because this helps them to appear opaque against your skin). They're very comfortable, and boast a quicker drying time than regular swimsuits (no doubt because there is less fabric to dry). And they really are quite convincing! Which is even more impressive after getting a look at them unworn, and seeing how translucent the mesh is. If you stare at it closely, you might pick up a hint of detail, but really, who's going to be scrutinizing you that closely? And even if they do, I daresay the view would still be sufficiently ambiguous (especially compared to some regular swimsuits I've seen while wet).

As some critics like to note, one potential drawback to wearing this kind of swimwear is that you'll obviously want to apply sunscreen even to the parts that are covered up. This may not be a problem at home or in the changing room before you put the suit on, but after you've been lying out in the sun for a couple of hours, you might find it pretty awkward to reapply that sunscreen in public. To be fair, it's worth noting that if you're wearing this kind of suit, it's probably because you want the sun exposure (i.e., you're trying to tan), which pretty much makes this a moot point.

I'm going to have to have a word with that tag, though. It's in a very awkward spot, and keeps sticking out. Even if you make the effort to tuck it away, every time you run your finger along the back of the suit to straighten it out (which is a fairly common habit), it just pops right out again. If that's not intentional self-advertising, then it's a serious design flaw. I wonder if the tag is tan-through, too. Because that would be an awkward tan line to have to explain... x.x

As for whether this suit will solve my tan line problem, I have my doubts - but that's not the suit's fault. I'd really have to wear it regularly, whenever I'm out in the sun without a full coat of sunscreen, and that's not always going to be practical. That's partly the reason I considered also getting a coverup of some kind (until I took a closer look at the prices). I could perhaps wear these briefs to go swimming (if not for the anti-speedo discrimination I frequently face) - although that's one of those cases where I'm more likely to be wearing sunscreen. I can wear it in the garden at home, but it might not fly for casual exercise and recreation at public parks, not to mention coming in and out of stores and restaurants and the like.

Because, ultimately, I could wear it five days a week, but if I've still got shorts on (among other things) the other two days, my butt may turn out to be tanner than usual, but it's still going to be a shade or two lighter than the rest of my body (which is the same problem I have down the middle of my back, where my hair usually rests). What I could do is deliberately lay out in the sun to tan (although I don't want to be any darker than necessary), especially if I put sunscreen on the parts of my body that get more regular exposure, leaving my butt unprotected. But honestly, that sounds like a lot of work, and I don't care about my tan that much. I still think this suit is a fun thing to own, though. I'm glad I bought it!

Rain Games

You'll get wet either way. -_^

Fitting Moon

You'll forgive me for being a little cheeky. :-p

I don't really like these fitting rooms all that much. And it's not even because they're right in the middle of the store with huge gaps under the door (which would bother me less if I weren't concerned about people wondering what I was doing in there). The mirror is pushed off to the side, which is awkward, and then you have that bench that obscures your feet. But I guess it's not the worst fitting room I've ever encountered.

Return of the Pink Shorts

I've had these pink shorts for a long time. Though I don't wear them as much as I used to. This was from a year ago, which may have been the last time. I love them, though. Cute, and comfy. I've even got flip flops to match!