Guest Nudist Blog: A First Timer’s Visit To A Nudist Beach

| November 29, 2015 | 1 Comment

A first Time Nudist At A Nudist Beach

(Guest nudist beach Blog)

A First Timers Visit and Experience at a Nudist Beach:

The first time I went nude in public was when I was 22 at a nudist beach in the Florida Keys. The beach was a clothing optional one , and I had always wanted to run along the beach in the nude so I decided that I would do it.

Well, that was when I started feeling a little bit of fear about the whole experience. I saw that there were other people there, and I just felt a little bit self conscious even though most were naked.

There was a beautiful red sunset that lit up the sky. After sepending some time psyching my self up I finally I just convinced myself that I was going to do it!

I took off my clothes and then just took off! I ran down to the the waters edge as fast as fast as my feet could carry me. From the moment I started my mad dash towards the water I could not help but feel free, like a child, and the feeling of the wind on my body was outstanding.

Nudist Beach Sign

Nudist Beach Warning Sign – Beware Of The Nudists :)

All the fears that I had bout my body & the way I looked just faded away as I was running towards the ocean.

Once the sandy beach came to an end and I reach the water, I jumped into the ocean, and it was so freeing to be totally naked and totally me. Out there in the water, with not a stitch of clothing I felt totally one with god and nature.

naked woman walk on a nudist beach

Just a great naked walk on the nudist beach

Then I decided that I wanted to run along the nudist beach. The feeling of the soft sand on my feet was exhilarating and all the while I was filled with pure happiness, being there completely naked with nothing to hide.

The nudist beach was medium sized, but there were not a lot of people there and that is where I would recommend starting out… Especially for people who are unsure or timid, the best place to start is somewhere where you will be comfortable.

The thing that I noticed about being there was that no one seemed to care that I was naked. We were all just doing our own thing and the fact that no one was wearing any clothing was okay.

I realized that we are all okay as far as other people were concerned. Big, small, fat, tall, dark skin or light, no one really cared about the wrapping I came in.

After the sunset I was heading back to my car when I ran into a couple from England and we sat and talked for a while before I left.

I’m 24 now and I would definitely say that this was a worthwhile experience, and I would definitely do it again. I see things differently since that day. The way I see my naked body & the way I think about others has completely changed.

While I am not a nudist or a naturist, my first experience with social nudism left me far more accepting of the way I look and feel about me!

This guest nudist blog about a first timer at a nudist beach was published by – Young Naturists and Young Nudists America YNA

Tags: , ,

Category: Social Nudity Blogs, Nude Beach, Naked Outdoors Nature

About the Author ()

Jordan Blum is a lifelong nudie and co-founder of Young Naturists America.
  • DavidPabian

    Response to Felicity Jones’ Gender Problem blogs.

    (From a member of SCNA, a personal opinion not implying views reflecting all SCNA membership or association.)

    I read with interest the SCNA February newsletter article by Felicity Jones on “The Nudism Gender Problem,” as well as her earlier related article posted on the Young Naturists & Nudists America website, and came away feeling that both were missed opportunities on a too-familiar theme in nudist discussions, publications and other online forums.

    Her poll and its results are interesting, her own thoughts on the responses generally insightful. But ultimately the article is yet another warning to predator men (or “creeps,” as she puts it twice) to just stay away if they can’t behave. Wait— no, it’s really saying that all men should stay away if they can’t behave, and that’s what got me — this business about behavior, and all the onus for behaving being put on men.

    In an increasingly postfeminist world it’s chilling to encounter advocacy amounting to not only replacing women on pedestals, but making sure those women are formed of the most delicately tempered glass, durable when carefully handled but guaranteed to explode in a fury of shards if not. In this context, “if not” might translate as some guy offering a friendly smile as he timidly tiptoes by. We can all agree on the “empowerment” of women being a good thing, but the word is debased when expressed as vague rules of behavior and threats of venue expulsion to be heeded specifically by men. Are the equality goals of feminism not enough, is purity-policing the goal now? It’s certainly empowerment of a type — it’s called passive aggression.

    Ms. Jones doesn’t seem to be guilty of subscribing to the deranged fantasy some feminists hold that men are flawed creations of bad programming that makes them do all sorts of things that are, to use the insipid adjective of victimhood, “inappropriate,” and strongly states her opinion that it’s “unproductive and bad for business” for nudist venues to see single men as probably predatory until they prove they’re not, and that people should be judged by their behavior, not their gender. This is all laudable and I think it would be irrational and unproductive in the extreme to disagree with any of it.

    But as the article continues, postmodern puritanism rears up, very subtly suggesting that there are just two kinds of men — the enlightened that follow the rules set down by women who proclaim their right to feel “safe” wherever they go, and the boors and creeps who don’t. In fact, the latter are more likely just not interested in the edicts of often narcissistically contrived social trends, but still know how to be civil and, yes, gentlemen, in social environments, clothed or not. There are beings on this planet whose bodies and behaviors are fueled to a considerable degree by testosterone; they are called “males,” and exist throughout the animal kingdom. Aside from those prohibiting physical force or obvious intimidation and unarguable harassment, behavioral proscriptions based on current socially constructed fashions that torture a basic fact of nature into some kind of permanent liability for which women must be ever on the alert can be a very destructive thing psychologically for the women who buy the false concept.

    I think it’s a mistake to re-define civility, politeness and consideration to fit the “special” environment of co-ed social nudity by tacking onto these humane attributes censorious rules for heightened sensitivity when naked with others. It makes the default human condition, naked, an even more suspect state to enjoy socially in the minds of those who hate the idea to begin with. Overloading more than a century of common sense rules for social nudist behavior with unwritten but stringent amendments involving personal space, comfortability and feeling safe as requirements for being naked with others, we might as well be saying, “Nudism isn’t about sex, but it sure would be if we ever let up on our paranoia.”

    For me, one goal of nudism is actually to relax and forget we’re in a “special” environment, we’re just with friends who for whatever reason enjoy life without the encumbrance of clothes. Trying to over-refine the conditions allowing that natural state of being might actually work against us, giving some women who might be interested in nudism reasons not to be interested, e.g., “Wow, women really seem to have lots of problems at these nudist joints, men are always hitting on them and stuff. Forget it.” And fun in the sun’s not such fun when experienced through a murky layer of ill-defined, one-sided decrees.

    Once Jones gets past her poll, which involves real people and real numbers — leading me to think the rest of the article would be a more detailed discussion of it, with maybe specifics from some of the respondents — she drops the poll completely and tumbles into the pit of vague subjectivity with: “Some of the online discussion around my article focused on a different issue related to men — harassment and/or behavior by men that makes women (and/or others) feel uncomfortable.”

    It’s nice to see her fairness in following that up with her observation that harassment and sexual assault are less common in nudist facilities than elsewhere, and that “even women” can harass and that “men have experienced it too.” I’ve experienced women (men also, but I’ll focus on women’s harassment as did Jones) complimenting or throwing an arm around me or buying me a drink, and I appreciate it no matter who they are, whether they’re sober or not, 20 or 90 or whatever. I’m glad they’re comfortable doing it and so I’m comfortable too. If more is suggested I might say, “I’m very flattered, but I’d better stick to my plans today,” at which both of us might feel a little uncomfortable, but such feelings come and go at any social gathering. The concept that a purely subjective level of one’s comfortability should impact anyone but oneself is just a tad crazy. That men should consult some invisible rule book at every contemplated action to check if it could conceivably make any one of the nearby women they’ve never met uncomfortable is getting close to a description of insanity.

    No one, short of being confrontational with intention to offend, threaten, make overt suggestions or demands by word or action, is responsible for someone else’s emotional state, which might be based on real or imagined events that have nothing to do with the present situation. And some nearby conversation or glimpse of fleeting non-exhibited erection is also of no concern to anyone beyond those personally involved, however offended a witness might be (thinking one has a right not to be offended is such offensive self-regard it absolutely offends me).

    But there are indications in Jones’s article that it’s okay for a third party to somehow determine the motives behind an action the third party finds offensive and inform someone else of it. This amounts to ruling by implied threat and the word for it is fascism.

    “And we can also make sure everyone knows how to report an incident… —‘if you see something, say something.’” This blanket “let’s all be alert little snitches for the good of the group” is a disturbingly paranoid and repressive aspect of America today, and it’s terrible to see it eagerly embraced by those who probably consider themselves progressives. I think it’s much sicker in the larger social context than the occasional individual who might make a clumsy but totally ineffectual and easily rejected play for someone.

    Jones seems to think it’s up to men to negotiate the invisible inner workings of the minds of women they may not even know, and gets a bit higher on her horse to righteously proclaim that, although it’s difficult, people should report the following examples of “harassment”:

    “… a guy who stands just a bit too close, invading your personal space. Maybe he also puts an arm around you.” Or maybe he doesn’t. Do you still report him? Maybe you do if he looks like John Malkovich on a bad day, and maybe you reconsider if he looks like Ryan Gosling on any day. But one’s personal space should be of concern only to the one claiming the real estate and is very likely somewhat malleable in circumference anyway, depending on any number of personal factors. The non-science of proxemics being hashed around in some narcissistic head for outrage potential while sitting by a beautiful pool under a beautiful sky is actually a pretty sad image.

    Then there’s this one: “Or maybe he looks you up and down or offers an unsolicited ‘compliment’ about your naked body.” Here Jones plays a bit of a game and cues the reader for the proper reaction by using the obviously unnecessary term “naked body” to make her example more salacious sounding, thus more of a threat, and to actually appeal to negative preconceptions of shame and secrecy. And I guess I know what she means by “an unsolicited compliment,” but I can’t resist asking if she considers it okay for women to be soliciting them.

    Jones admits that these subjective reactions to perceived offenses are indeed “internal feelings,” and so senses the problem with her thesis but doesn’t fully see it.

    The problem is endemic to the issue of sexual harassment everywhere, as news stories abound with statistics and percentages culled from women who say the’ve been sexually harassed or assaulted in places such as schools, the military, work, at parties, etc., and the numbers are often shocking and sometimes unbelievable. Serious harassment and assaults unfortunately occur and particularly egregious cases are reported by the media. But surveys conducted to determine a general idea of the problem fall very short of establishing anything tangible. I have not heard or read one news story on polling about harassment where the reporter asks the obvious question, “What actions besides overt taunts or threats, physical attack or rape constitute sexual harassment and/or assault?” That opens a messy can of worms and reporters may intentionally avoid the answer gotten away with in the past – “whatever makes a woman feel harassed or assaulted,” which can mean anything and so means nothing.

    Laws, rules and social theories that have any meaning always and only come from specifics. I’ve heard affirmations made publicly by some feminists in defense of women who’ve made claims against men from subjective perceptions. I don’t think Felicity Jones qualifies as a member of the resentful gender police herself, but she might take those who are a little too seriously. Too many self-proclaimed feminists (as well as non-feminists and even men) take any opportunity to demonstrate their hyper-sensitive outrage at any imagined slight or perceived harassment they witness, and waste everyone’s time with rules that can only be enforced with, “I know it when I see it, and you just broke it, Malkovich.”

    Having said all this, it really boils down to my belief that this whole issue of women needing to feel “safe” at a co-ed nudist venue is a phony one — at best it’s micromanaging solutions for a problem that rarely exists, at worst it’s a muddled theory looking for a place to land. If you ask people if they’ve ever been sexually harassed you’re likely to get a lot of positives. If you break it down to categories or specific crimes, lots of pesky negatives and defensive waffling start showing up.

    Jones ends her article with some questions for women, two of them being: “Have you experienced harassment in a naturist place? Was it handled well?” But where is, “What was the nature of the harassment?” It’s a pretty important question and one would think a relevant one. I’m sure many women who answer Jones’s request will probably voluntarily fill in that blank, but its absence drops into the room a big naked elephant begging the question. I hope Jones is as fair in reporting the responses as she is in showing the results of her poll, and is wary of canned answers; it’s a sure bet that the seriousness of any issue is suspect when people expressing their opinions on it never get beyond the catchphrases and buzzwords of its current public discourse.

    Over several decades we’ve been subjected to fads such as, “I’m being objectified,” “I feel violated by the male gaze,” “I have an inner child,” and many other glib banalities that have lost all meaning if they ever had any. The need to feel “safe” is one of the more recent modes of the infantilizing sentimentality of victimhood, and like all those before, it will eventually get quietly put away in the Embarrassing Psychobabble drawer (to make way for new ones, alas).

    Women who claim to be worried that men might look at them — men who are naked themselves in a controlled nudist environment — couldn’t be seriously interested in nudism to begin with. I actually witnessed a young woman arrive at a nudist party where she met the hosts, looked around the room at a very even mix of women and men and said, “Too many men here, I don’t think I’d be comfortable,” and left. What did she think she was going to encounter there? Her agenda was apparently only to establish her delicate super-sensitivity and make everyone regret that someone of her specialness wasn’t going to stay and share the preciously kept secret of her nudity. That’s the generous evaluation. The non-generous one is a bit more earthy.

    Jones says at the end of her article, “… I think the best approach is to simply tell everyone to come forward if anyone makes them uncomfortable in any way.” In any way! Wow. She doesn’t mean directly antagonistic approaches or aggressive physical contact or anything that would amount to targeted confrontation, just amorphous, unreal and unrealistic “uncomfortable in any way.” That’s the worst approach. Maybe before a woman comes forward with her charges she might stop to consider in what way she’s uncomfortable and what exactly it is she feels, and also if the discomfort could really affect anyone but herself to the point of even mentioning it, and whether it’s typical of the setting for most people there to react the same way to what she’s been made uncomfortable by. If she’s new to the venue, it and many people there probably predated her on the planet and have heard, seen and experienced a lot more, so before nailing her new rules of order to the trees she should probably try to figure out how things work there. And finally, how different her response might be if someone else had committed the action of offense–

    “I saw how you looking at me, creep, and I’m reporting you! Oh, hi, Ryan, I didn’t see you come in. No, there’s plenty of room, I’ll just scoot over… a little.”

    It’s very easy to turn disapproval into discomfort. Women or anyone else who are encouraged to believe that in taking off their clothes socially they are given a mandate to make and enforce rules beyond their magic domain of “space” are not ready for social nudism because they’re not even ready for life.

    After fifty years of strong feminist momentum it’s discouraging to think that any woman would want to be a delicate little flower at the mercy of men the way women were defined by the Victorians. I have met many nudist women over the years, in fact since I was a kid, and I cannot remember one who couldn’t deal with any man on equal footing. Going to the owners or managers to report someone was a last option, not the first. Of course I’m not referring to any kind of physical attempt or direct threat of harm, which definitely has to be immediately dealt with by the management or the law if necessary.

    Jones asks, “So, how DO we make women feel safer and more comfortable?” I would suggest by informing them of the long-standing general rules of nudist venues, making sure that both women and men understand them and have equal respect for one another, and that if offended by behavior directly or indirectly, to honestly consider how their personal prejudices or opinions or mental state or unrelated emotional associations might factor in their judgement, how much the issue really has or does not have to do with them personally, and to consider the fact that unfocused sensations of not being safe or of feeling uncomfortable are not grounds for reporting anyone. EVER.

    Actually, in the sixth paragraph of the article Jones offers a good start for making anyone contemplating social nudity feel more comfortable and safe, and something like it should be quoted in any venue’s information packet:

    “Harassment at nudist facilities is not that common — far less than just walking down NYC streets. (Sexual assault or more serious crimes are even less common.) Most men, single or not, behave as they’re expected to and don’t cause problems.”

    I think that says it all and is far less offensive to both men and woman than exploiting the Delicate Butterfly of Threat angle.

    Nudism is about freedom. For everyone.