Sunday, November 22, 2020

Photos suitable for the portrayal of naturism

I have said before that the world is inundated with pornographic pics so much so that most people associate nudity with porn. But the more we naturists post decent photos, the more we normalise nude pics in the minds of the public. One grouse I have against many naturist sites is they tend to show photos of people taken from behind. There is an effort put in to hide the genitals. I have argued before that such pics will only tell the world that we too view the genitals as indecent and inappropriate which is why naturist websites only show pics taken from behind.

That of course is harmful to the naturist cause. We can't tell the world that the genitals are not indecent and yet we take pains to hide the genitals on naturist websites. We cannot be hypocritical to the outside world. They'll be the first to spot our hypocrisy. So I always make it a point not to hide the genitals in my photos or the face. I pose for photos when nude the same way I pose for pics when I am clothed. I don't cross my legs when a photo is taken of me clothed and so I don't cross my legs when I am photographed naked. Nudity must be perfectly natural and decent. 

To a large extent, I have achieved this in all my blogs and public photos whether here or on Twitter.  I never hide my face or my genitals. But sometimes, there is a problem. 

Years ago, on a naturist website, I had someone objecting to a photo of mine on the ground that there was an erection. I was quite offended because I am totally opposed to photos of erection in a naturist website. I always take great care to ensure that the photos I post do not contain even the mildest hint of such a thing. Over the years I realised that different people have different ideas of what constitutes an erection. In my experience, the people who object to some of my photos are usually very elderly men. I cannot help but wonder if these people might have somewhat forgotten what an erection really is. I used to think everyone knew that you couldn't have an erection with the penis pointing downwards; it's an impossibility. But the people who object to some photos maintain that a penis that is pointing downwards can still be in the erect state. I'm sure a urologist can certify that I am right here and they are absolutely wrong but in a naturist website if someone insists that something is an erection, it's always better not to post it even if you are sure he's wrong.

But such objections have a huge impact on how I post my photos. Since then, I am careful to pick only photos that even people with erectile dysfunction will approve of. Photos taken in a cold environment helps. But it's not always that I can be in a state approved by everyone.

I talk about this now because I was just about to post on Twitter a photo in which I was carrying a quintessentially Austrian drink but I felt that pic could give room to some objection from some elderly men. I usually take a lot of photos and it's easy to pick a photo in which the penis is at its smallest but I had only one pic in which the drink can be clearly seen. So, I have to rule that pic out as 'inappropriate' even though it would be ridiculous to even suggest that there was any erection. 

There should be a clear definition for this. The majority of people in our naturist community are very old men. Some of them have very unrealistic ideas of what constitutes an erection. A woman can post any pic she wants because her pics are always acceptable. But it's very difficult for a man. Everyone knows that the penis changes shape and size all the time even when there is no hint of an erection. It cannot be that a naturist should only choose a photo in which it is at the smallest size. That's ridiculous and it doesn't happen like that all the time. We who believe in the decency of nudity should not raise objections unnecessarily just because some of us have long forgotten what an erection really is. 

NOTE: I received a message from someone who is a urologist. He writes that what I have said is true. It is very unlikely for a healthy man to have an erection when his penis is pointing downwards. So, if you are one of those who are very quick to spot an erection where none exists, please bear this fact in mind. I have so many perfectly decent photos with beautiful scenery that I can't post for fear that one of these captious people might object when even the Ayatollah himself will probably declare to be perfectly wholesome. 


4 comments:

  1. I am reminded of a reference on a UK radio show to the "Mull of Kintyre" test: it is a landmass on the west coast of Scotland which appears to "dangle" off from the mainland. In English law, apparently, as long as a penis is no more erect than that, it is not deemed to be an erection.
    There was also mention of semi-erect states, which one of the contributors rather wittily described as being "al dente". ;o)

    ReplyDelete
  2. It may help your cause to reference the urologist you mentioned. At least with his name, your statement couldn't be objected. I would post what you feel is proper. I have never listened to outsiders.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi,
      Thanks for your comment. The message I got is largely anonymous. It's an email from someone who said he was writing in response to this blog post. He calls himself Dave and he says he's a urologist. I'm sure he is what he claims to be (why would anyone tell a lie?) but I don't think this will lend much credence to my assertion.

      Delete