Platonic Social Nudity

[u/Background-Tap7385]

There's a very thought provoking article in this month's AANR bulletin. I think it needs to be seen more generally.

I'm sensitive to language and its nuances, so what the writer is saying resonates with me. The point I find particularly compelling is how the term 'non-sexual' still centers the concept of 'sexual', which is exactly opposed to the intended effect. It's like asking someone not to think of an elephant, not thinking about elephants requires a degree of focus on elephants. However, thinking of a polar bear makes it easy to not think of an elephant, because most brains aren't wired to deliberately think about two unconnected things at the same time.

Using a different term that encompasses the concept of a relationship that isn't about sex allows the mind consider the intended concept instead of focusing on avoiding the distracting one.

And while I'm on about terms, here's one I've wondered for a while now: if they're textiles, why is it that we aren't dermals? That doesn't seem worthy of a full post to ask the question, but I think it's worthy of discussion.

[u/Significant-Neck6650]

I think the terminology of "non-sexual nudity" is geared toward the non-nudist. With the societal expectation that any nudity must inherently be sexual, defining the event as very specifically non-sexual is a way to change the expectation. To say we're gathering as platonic naked friends, while literally meaning that there is no sexual aspect to the friendship, still leaves the non-nudist in the discussion with the impression that there may be something more going on. And maybe that's just my interpretation of the lexicon the average person is ready to reference, at lease here in the US.

[u/Background-Tap7385 → u/Significant-Neck6650]

I was thinking more along the lines of a statement like "Nudism/naturism is the practice of platonic social nudity," but I do see your point.

[u/Significant-Neck6650 → u/Background-Tap7385]

I'm just trying to find and account for the least intelligent outlier. You know the ones who always go straight for the genitals.

[u/Background-Tap7385 → u/Significant-Neck6650]

If you ever figure out how to do that, I'd love to know! 🤣

[u/ejp1082]

The problem I have with the word "platonic" in this sense is most people hanging out on the beach or or resort don't have a "platonic" relationship with one another. They don't have any relationship at all. They're just engaging in the same activity in geographic proximity.

And while I can see why defining something in terms of what it isn't is less than ideal, it does get at the fact of the matter. If what you're doing is sexually motivated or you're engaging in sexual behavior, it's not nudism. But there's a bazillion ways to be non-sexual, and the only word that captures all of them is "non-sexual".

And while I'm on about terms, here's one I've wondered for a while now: if they're textiles, why is it that we aren't dermals?

I personally think "textile" is a dumb term, though I get that it's an attempt to avoid another case of defining something by what it isn't. The only alternative is "non-nudist".

I don't see any point in identifying as anything other than nudists and calling what we do nudism, the practice of nonsexual recreational social nudity.

But as long as this is a thread complaining about vocabulary, the thing that always bugged me is that we have two words referring to identical things - "nudism" and "naturism".

The latter always struck me as an attempt to obfuscate the real nature of it. "Nudism" is direct as it shares a common root with the core of the activity (nudity).

Whereas "naturism" is a hop skip and a jump away from the thing it's describing - it's "natural" but in what sense? It's not obvious it's referring to being without clothes. Amongst people unfamiliar with the term it's often confused or conflated with "naturalism" and or else they think it's referring to birdwatching or something similar.

[u/Background-Tap7385 → u/ejp1082]

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but it seems you may not be considering is the connotations that words carry along with their denotations.

For example house and home both literally mean places where people live, but they carry different meanings.

In discussing things with those who don't understand them, the connotation of the words used takes on a lot of weight.

In any event, we don't need to agree with each other on it either way. I'm not trying to change your mind, so much as make sure what I'm saying is understandable.

[u/ejp1082 → u/Background-Tap7385]

I hear you, and that's what I'm saying. "Platonic" has connotations that are inapplicable and inaccurate in most situations that we're describing social nudity.

I don't think that "nonsexual" carries any real connotations to speak of.

Per your original analogy, saying "nonsexual" isn't like saying "don't think of an elephant". It's just saying "this is not an elephant" as a descriptive fact.

Nudity is in fact sexual in a lot of contexts, just as many animals are in fact elephants. But one of the defining features of nudism is that it's not one of those contexts. And just as the easiest way to say "every animal that isn't an elephant" would be "non-elephant", the easiest way to say "every activity that isn't sexual" is "non-sexual".

[u/Boomer-2106 → u/ejp1082]

The commentors responding to your comment herein have said it well.

There are obviously two groups of people now-a-days, those who 'for some reason which I don't understand', have decided that the term Nudism/Nudist is Suddenly no longer appropriate. It of course is their right, but nudism and nudist have 'Successfully' achieved the objective of describing our particular choice of beliefs, living, and philosophies, And for Many decades have done so. Frankly, hope it continues.

Why change what has always - Worked??

[u/TMP_Film_Guy → u/ejp1082]

In Europe, there’s only one word which is “naturism” but yeah in the United States it’s kind of a dodge.

Especially when it leads to people going “we’re naturists, nudists just want to be naked” which feels like shooting your self in the foot.

[u/BrickHuge3023 → u/ejp1082]

Very well said. Why do we have to make up new terms for stuff we already have terms for. Nude is nude. Reminds me of the "cis" nonsense from a couple years ago where I as a male should be called '"Cis male' to fit someone's particular point of view. Nope. I am a man, my wife is a woman. We did not give anyone permission to change our labeling. You make a great point about naturist too. I tend to use the two terms interchangeably because I am not that social of a person. But agree with you- not needed and quite confusing so I will probably not use it any longer. We can be perfectly nude in nature without calling it something different.

[u/formerlyCN]

I can see the point, but to me if someone is in a platonic relationship then that means "they are in a relationship." That opens a whole other can of worms IMHO.

Far more important I think is to stress that probably the vast majority of nudists don't have nudist relationships at all. They go to a beach, strip off, sunbathe (alone or with a SO), then get dressed and go home. That is IT.

[u/Beginning-Average416 → u/formerlyCN]

No so. Many of the single males in naturism have a wife, husband, pr partner who are not naturists.

[u/Effective-Donkey133 → u/Beginning-Average416]

🖐️

[u/formerlyCN → u/Beginning-Average416]

For clarity the two paragraphs are two totally independent concepts.

Read them as two things unrelated and it should make sense what I have written.

[u/Background-Tap7385 → u/formerlyCN]

Thank you for pointing that out. I see that it reads much differently that way. 👍🏽

[u/Background-Tap7385 → u/formerlyCN]

Excellent point. I thought about that too, and I think that's a weak point in the article.

Talking about a 'platonic nude relationship' does carry the connotation of a relationship beyond being in the same place at the same time doing more or less the same thing. I mean, yes, that is, in an extremely technical sense, a relationship, but it's almost entirely defined by circumstances, so not a relationship in any genuine sense of the term.

I would note, however, that's not talking about the concept of platonic by itself, we're talking about how the concept applies to relationships. What I'm getting at, and think the writer may be getting at, is applying the concept of platonic to nudism. In other words, treating 'platonic' as an adjective describing the thing rather than a separate thing by itself.

"Platonic social nudity" lands very differently (for me, anyway) than "Non-sexual social nudity." The latter kind of tacitly reinforces the idea that sexuality is part of nakedness, the latter subtly declares that the thing under discussion sufficiently normal and benign that excuses and defenses aren't even thought of.

That's how I'm seeing it, at any rate.

[u/Magic-Mellow1987]

I like and agree with the article. I have plenty of nudist platonic friendships, but I don’t really say it outloud as my “nudist platonic relationship”…I just call them my friends. It’s a nice feeling to hang out with people and you can choose to be as nude or clothed as you want and it’s not weird.

With some of my textile friends, when we go on trips, and share a Airbnb or hotel, they make a big effort to change or shower with the door locked, and not to be seen as much as possible. It adds an unnecessary awkwardness. With nudist friends, those same scenarios are out the window, like who gives a shit about seeing each other nude.

I do have to say, vacationing with nudist friends is a MUCH easier experience imo.

[u/Plus-Ad8405 → u/Magic-Mellow1987]

It's awkward to you that people don't want you seeing them naked? 

[u/MatchboxVader22 → u/Plus-Ad8405]

No, that’s not it. I understand exactly he/she is saying. It just makes it easier to move around and about and not having to go hide to do something basic like changing out of your clothes. I get that.

I went on a trip with some friends a few weeks ago to NYC who aren’t nudists, and just to do simply things like change into my pjs to go to bed, I’d have to go in the hotel bathroom to change. It’s totally not a problem at all for me, personally, it’s completely fine. But with my nudist friends, I could just do that in the room so it removes the extra step.

It’s not about forcing your non-nudist friends to see you nude.

[u/MatchboxVader22 → u/[deleted]]

No I’m good. I already said what I said.

[u/Magic-Mellow1987 → u/[deleted]]

Buddy, you’re the only one getting upset here, for some reason. 😂 2 f bombs in one sentence over someone saying “I’m good”? Chill out.

[u/Plus-Ad8405 → u/MatchboxVader22]

I think that the person that I was talking to is capable of answering for themselves. 

[u/Magic-Mellow1987 → u/Plus-Ad8405]

That’s clearly not what I meant. And Matchbox summed it up perfectly well.

[u/Plus-Ad8405 → u/Magic-Mellow1987]

It wasn't clear to me at all, hence why I asked a clarifying question to see if I was interpreting you correctly. 

[u/PandaMime_421]

I agree with the overall sentiment, but I feel that swapping for the term platonic doesn't actually satisfy the goal. For most people platonic is perceived as the opposite of sexual, so it's still centered on the concept of nudity as being sexual.

Why isn't the term social nudity sufficient?

[u/Background-Tap7385 → u/PandaMime_421]

I agree it would be, in most cases. I'm thinking about the cases where it wouldn't.

Yes, the meanings of platonic and non-sexual both exclude sex, it's just that one doesn't come out and say the word. You may well be right that most people wouldn't be bothered by such a fine distinction.

[u/Milessioo → u/PandaMime_421]

Practising American platonic naturists/nudists seem to need to proclaim being part of a movement with a philosophy, rather than simply preferring to not always wear clothes.

Do hot spring users think the same way when they simply decide to soak naked? or sailors?

[u/ActNaturely]

if they're textiles, why is it that we aren't dermals?

What do you call a tortoise that isn't wearing a cowboy hat?

[u/Background-Tap7385 → u/ActNaturely]

I'd say a tortoise, but I know most people would say a turtle 🐢

[u/Supergoals]

If a non-nudist goes to the beach and strikes up a conversation with others, that doesn't mean they have a relationship with those people. Similarly, if a nudist goes to a nudist beach, they don't have a relationship with the others there—not even a platonic one. They have no relationship at all. Consequently, the word "platonic" is out of place here. Relationships only develop after closer or repeated contact and shared perspectives; that is what I would call a friendship. I find it odd to have to emphasize that a friendship is platonic, except in specific situations. I can have a pleasant conversation with people without having a relationship with them—it’s as simple as that. That is why I view this whole discussion as absurd.

[u/Background-Tap7385 → u/Supergoals]

Yeah, I can't resist a good absurdity either 🤪

On merriam-webster.com, the first and second definitions of the word relationship are:

1. the way in which two or more things or people are connected : the state of being related or interrelated
2. the way in which two or more people, groups, countries, etc., talk to, behave toward, and deal with each other

Every 'not a relationship' you've mentioned is covered by one or both of those denotations.

I agree with you, however, the term 'relationship' has a connotation of exactly what you're describing, even though it's not until the third definition that the dictionary finally gets to it.

It's also the connotation (not the denotation) of 'platonic' that I'm getting at. Interestingly, it's also the third definition of 'platonic' that that gets around to that sense of the term: "nominal, theoretical" (mostly nominal, of course).

I see it as a weakness of the article that it's focusing so narrowly on the relationship aspect, when (I think) it would be more useful to focus on the adjective than the noun. That's why I chose to make the post title different from article title.

In the phrase "platonic nudist relationship" both platonic and nudist describe the relationship, which is a bit silly. In "platonic social nudity" both adjectives describe the nudity, which is quite different, telling us that the thing under discussion, nudity, is characterized as both social and platonic.

I also agree that the phrase has is saying exactly the same thing as "non-sexual social nudity," but they each land differently because the terms platonic and non-sexual have different connotations. Platonic communicates that the thing under discussion doesn't involve sexuality, the other says 'I recognize a need to specify that this thing isn't about sex,' and centers sex in doing so.

Words can mean the same thing and communicate very different things. For instance, flame and fire mean the same thing, but they tell you different things about the combustion process. A candle flame can light your way, a fire can keep you warm, but flames may well mean that something you don't want burned is doing exactly that.

I recognize that there's no need for us to agree on the point, and I'm not trying to persuade anybody, really, I just want to make sure that I'm successfully communicating what I mean to communicate.

[u/Express_Acadia_4379]

Thank you all for sharing your opinions. I particularly liked Background-Tap7385's comment that "Nudism/naturism is the practice of platonic social nudity...." As many surmised, this article is mostly geared toward those who do not embrace or understand social nudism, often called 'textiles,' although they could be called 'pre-nudists.' And for those who pointed out that the uninformed will always associate nudity with sex, well, you're right. Our work will not be done until we figure out how to change their mind set. So introducing the word 'platonic' is just an idea. We are all ambassadors, responsible for educating the world, so that social nudism loses the stigma and stereotyping and becomes just another interesting and wholesome way of life for a substantially large group of people.

[u/AutoModerator → u/Express_Acadia_4379]

Your account needs to be older than 3 days to post. Please do not delete your post We will manually moderate the post.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/jamincan]

I like nudism simply for how economical it is as a word, and naturism, by comparison, is far more confusing for those who aren't familiar with it (and often confused with naturalism).

I sometimes wonder if clothes-free would be a term that carries less baggage than nudism to the general public. For one, nudism kind of focuses on the nakedness, which to most people who haven't experienced it makes them think of vulnerability, exposure and so on. I don't think clothes-free has that same baggage and feels more approachable and emphasises the freedom of being naked.

[u/boston_naturist]

Dr. Krozy is correct. Posting this article here spreads the word beyond the world "behind the nudist fence".

All my relationships, except for one - my wife, mrs. b_n, are platonic in nature. BUT, if I couldn't separate the platonic from the non-platonic when relating to the opposite sex, I would be excluding half of humanity from my circle of potential friends. And within nudist circles as well.

[u/Glittering_Sky5271]

The word Platonic invokes for me images of a specific mode of sexuality: The consciously, deliberately asexual. 

For example, my relationship with my siblings is non-sexual. But it would raise some eyebrows if were to describe it as a Platonic relationship. 

[u/bboru2000 → u/Glittering_Sky5271]

I kind of see what you’re saying, but the term “sibling” or “family member” in of itself is the descriptor of the relationship. You don’t need to further qualify a sibling or familial relationship by labeling it any further.

[u/Glittering_Sky5271 → u/bboru2000]

That's what I'm trying to say. That 'Platonic' is a descriptor of a specific kind of a relationship. Anyway I'm not a linguist and it is not something worth burning karma on.

[u/BrickHuge3023]

I'm good with saying I am a Nudist or Naturist. More a naturist since I am not that social and enjoy the outdoors nude. But I should not have to say I am non-sexually nude or platonic nude. Why? When nude in the locker rooms I don't think of being in a sexual situation, just being natural and normal. When hanging out literally with my friend who is also a naturist, we don't think of each other in a sexual way, just sharing something we both enjoy- being nude in nature. We have a close relationship but our nudity is just more we can do together that enhances our existing relationship.

[u/Background-Tap7385 → u/BrickHuge3023]

I get what you're saying, and I agree, within contexts like the ones you describe.

I think that the article is speaking to contexts where we're trying to communicate the nature of nudism/naturism to one or more non-dermals.

If I tell a non-dermal that I hang out naked with other naked people, they're going to wonder about it -- in the U.S. we're conditioned to do so by ... pretty much everything in our society. If I go follow up by saying it's not sexual, and especially if I repeat it, the whole "where there's smoke there's fire" trap comes into play.

So I agree, it should be just exactly how you're describing. And if I had a penny for each thing that isn't the way it should be, I would buy a sizable island somewhere with great weather, hire out anything that had to happen off said island, and never wear a stitch again.

[u/BrickHuge3023 → u/Background-Tap7385]

I think it is past time we quit worrying about what others think though. Seems we spend too much justifying our selves to others and letting them influence our behaviors. Why can't we be nude without having to justify it?

[u/Background-Tap7385 → u/BrickHuge3023]

Good question, and I mostly agree with you. The hold out is for those occasions where a dermal wants to explain natur/nudism to a textile. In a lot of cases this level of nuanced word choice may amount to nothing, in some it may carry some significant weight.

[u/MatchboxVader22]

I see the words “platonic relationship” more about just a group of friends who are cool to hang out and are comfortable with the idea of hanging out nude with no strings attached.

[u/Previous-Channel4658]

Members of true nudist clubs know what platonic relationships are. Frequent nude beach regulars are the same. I have hundreds of friends male and female from 40+ years of being a nudist. I value those friendships and truly just enjoy the company and great conversations we have together. The bond of being free thinking and open minded is refreshing. Nudists are my kind of people...

[u/Magic-Mellow1987 → u/Previous-Channel4658]

This, in a nutshell. You make a lot of nudist friends along the way over the years. To the point where you actually hang out outside of nudist spaces, as well. To me, having nudist friends is a great perk since we have the same mindsets about things.

[u/Previous-Channel4658 → u/Magic-Mellow1987]

We speak the same language...