Nearly a year ago, I wrote an article about an episode of the Naked, Nudists, and Naturists podcast. It was never published, through no one’s fault but my own.
I offered it to Planet Nude, who readily agreed to publish it, but they asked for some minor, entirely appropriate changes, which I immediately agreed to make. However, life, as is its wont, got in the way. I started working on the requested changes, and didn’t finish; soon it seemed too late to publish the article. I let it go.
I stress that the fault for not publishing the article was mine and mine alone. (In fact another venue offer
However, the issue was raised recently on BlueSky by the wonderful artist Reinder Dijkhuis and astute commenters Mister Bionic and Gerardo Cisneros. Why? Because the podcast has recently been featured—endorsed, perhaps—by Planet Nude.
Nudist writer Dustin Cox recently made the case that this is a case of redemption of NNN hosts Frank Stone and Lisa Monroe. He claims that the podcast has made “conscious, consistent strides toward growth.” However, the podcast has never responded to the criticism, or apologized or otherwise addressed the remarks.
Redemption starts by openly acknowledging the wrong done. To my knowledge, that has never happened; I would prefer that it did.
But in the meantime, the article I wrote is below.
Earlier this year, an episode of the Naked, Nudists, and Naturists podcast - the official podcast of AANR - included a reading of an email from an unnamed correspondent talking about body positivity. This is a subject that has always been a little concerning for me, as many of the positions that people take on this subject seem directly opposed to naturist values. I was interested to hear the discussion.
The email, as read by the hosts, started by claiming “enthusiastic support” for body positivity. But the rest of the email, and the ensuing discussion by the hosts, went in a far different direction.
The Naked, Nudists, and Naturists podcast (NNN from here on), with hosts Frank Stone and Lisa Munroe, has been releasing hour-long weekly episodes since the middle of 2023. They have interviewed a wide range of guests, all with a naturist connection of some kind. The hosts repeatedly extol the virtues of nudism in every show, often with their catchphrase “enjoying being naked for all the right reasons”. In 2024, AANR adopted NNN as the official podcast of the organization.
But in Episode 92 of their podcast, I discovered that their feelings about body positivity—that naturism, as a philosophy, requires radical acceptance—were completely opposite to mine.
Around the 21:20 mark of the podcast, in response to the correspondence about body positivity, the hosts revealed a view of bodily acceptance that is problematic, and far too prevalent, in nudist spaces. If naturists see body positivity and acceptance as fundamental to a shared naturist ethic, then we must ask some important questions of the podcast and its approach to nudism.
The listener’s email was prompted by its unnamed author “thinking about body positivity”. In response to a social media post about body positivity, he commented:
Body positivity is a good thing if not taken to the extreme. Our perfection-obsessed culture driven by images of photoshopped supermodels has driven a generation to hate their bodies, leading to unnecessary unhealthy dieting and body modification, and conditions such as anorexia, bulimia, depression, and suicide. Learning to love the skin you’re in can help develop a better sense of wellbeing. There are some people who take it to an unhealthy extreme, and I don’t see that as true body positivity. Self love requires self care.
The hosts appeared to be in complete agreement with the email. Immediately Frank referenced “that personality, I can’t even call her a star or a singer, whatever she is, Lizzo”—a surprising way to describe a musical superstar. Frank goes on, with Lisa’s agreement:
You know, very overweight by anybody’s judgement. And people are saying, “You go, girl. You’re so positive and love the—” what—no. You shouldn’t be doing that. Because that is unhealthy. That’s no longer, as he mentioned, under the banner of “body positivity.”
The hosts continue to discuss how body positivity should not be taken to an extreme. Body positivity “is just accepting who you are, whipping the clothes off, get out there and enjoy life”, but it is “not being unhealthy”.
They think of two other imagined examples beyond Lizzo who should not be positive about their bodies. One, Frank describes, is someone “five hundred pounds overweight”. Frank later imagines the mindset of someone who should not be body positive: “I am grotesquely overweight, I smoke ten packs of cigarettes a day, I have a couple of cases of beer every day, man, am I feeling good about myself.” Lisa also adds that having self-esteem is important, but it doesn’t mean that someone should “gorge on six pecan pies tonight”.
The segment ends with the final lines of the email, which read:
And that is while it is important not to judge ourselves or others based on external things, such as appearance, it is also important to nurture and care for ourselves by promoting better health.
What do the hosts and their correspondent mean, then, by “body positivity”? Some definitions are thrown around, but they are immediately undermined by their counterexamples. You should love your body, but not if you are too fat. You should have self-esteem, but not if you are too fat.
The concern is ostensibly health; however, being overweight is their primary problem. Smoking and drinking are mentioned, but only in combination with weight. No other unhealthy practices are mentioned, such as drug use or lack of exercise. Weight is a problem, and we must not be body positive if we are overweight (like Lizzo), five hundred pounds overweight, or grotesquely overweight.
Some of this harkens back to the original concept of nudism as a means of being more healthy. Early nudist clubs promoted exercise, vegetarianism, and abstinence from tobacco and alcohol. Indeed, in the early decades of nudism it was often characterized as a “health craze”. That fell off in the middle of the twentieth century and is no longer a major part of the nudist idea.
What is not clear, despite the hosts’ discussion, is where the limit for body positivity sits. All of the examples were extreme, other than Lizzo: “body positivity” is a problem because it is “unhealthy”.
Who is to judge others’ health? What does “health” even mean? Frank and Lisa never said.
Let’s state, right up front, that this isn’t about Lizzo.
Whether a person is a fan of Lizzo or not, reducing a classically-trained musician and superstar to her body size seems unfair to say the least. Frank gave no reason for the dismissive description of her—“that personality, I can’t even call her a star or a singer, whatever she is.” What prejudices might have brought her so immediately to mind?
But the hosts made it clear that fat people should not feel positive about themselves. Unhealthy people are vaguely and generally exempted from body positivity as well. But fat people definitely need not apply.
Although the hosts did not state it, there’s a clear feeling underlying the discussion. If we can see your ill health—that is, if they decide you’re too fat—then you should not be positive about your body.
Judging people by how they look: is that really something these naturists are saying—on AANR’s official podcast, no less?
And the word “judging” points to another problem. Who has a right to judge other bodies? Who is qualified to say who is fit and who is not? And what do we do when those judges determine someone is too fat - can we tolerate them in a nudist society?
None of this fits in with a naturist philosophy. And to express these opinions in an official AANR podcast is troubling indeed.
I don’t pretend to speak for all naturists. But as a naturist, have have a very clear opinion on this subject.
What Frank and Lisa said was not just nonsense. It was damaging to naturism as a philosophy and as a community. Naturists deserve an apology for this outrageous exchange, and AANR must consider carefully whether this podcast should continue to represent them.
As naturists, we are committed to seeing beyond the physical body that a person inhabits. We are proud of saying that everyone qualifies to be a naturist. Making people feel judged—even if they are only questioning whether they should feel judged—is the opposite of what we promote as naturists.
Radical acceptance—the idea that everyone who shares our naturist values should be accepted, no matter who they are—is the only logical place for us to land.
We naturists shed our clothes as an outward symbol of our philosophy: that our physical selves are less important than who we are inside. If we are truly to accept each other as we are, then we should be willing to accept what we all look like under our clothes.
As I recently posted, the new naturist anthology Beneath Healing Skies released last month. The anthology includes dozens of stories by naturist authors. All of the stories relate in some way to the theme of the healing aspects of naturism - an idea that many naturists deeply connect with.
I have placed stories with two previous anthologies put together by the same group, Murder in the Nudist Colony and Romance in the Nudist Colony. Those anthologies had a clearer focus; the common theme was more straightforward. This new one was a novel challenge.
The problem, for me, is that the theme suggested a straightforward plot: present a problem; introduce nudity; problem solved. For many nudists, this is a satisfying structure. For most non-nudists, it’s trite, bordering on nonsensical. I was determined not to take that easy route.
As it happens, I have a number of story ideas lined up that I’m working on, so I tried to make them fit the anthology. It just didn’t work. Some stories related to the theme so tangentially that I couldn’t in good conscience use them. Others would end up too close to the trite structure I wanted to avoid; no matter how much I buried it in other devices, the problem–nudity–solution dynamic would, at least to me, shine through.
For a few weeks, I noodled around on this. And only a couple of weeks before the deadline, I hit on the idea I needed. Funny how deadlines have a way of sharpening one’s brain, isn’t it!
The idea I came up with involves a man who runs a naturist park. He has worked hard to make the park as visitor-friendly as possible, even though no one ever seems satisfied with what he’s done. And as the story begins, he has gone too far - nature, in a way, has burst through the carefully manicured edges of the park, and She is not happy.
This idea has been bouncing around in my head for a while, because I have seen it in action in two naturist clubs I’m familiar with. There is a constant tension for these clubs between creating a beautifully managed space that will attract and retain visitors, and keeping the rustic, natural beauty of the environment as an important part of the experience.
Isn’t this the crux of the problem with modern naturism? The entire naturist philosophy is based on a set of values that are often at odds with the realities of a commercial operation. A historic example: in the 1970s, nudist beauty pageants were the only way some clubs were able to get any press at all (because newspapers would not run ads for nudist resorts). And yet beauty pageants run exactly counter to the concept of the natural beauty inherent equally in every person.
In more modern times, clubs might use photos of slim, young nude bodies to promote themselves, even though the reality is that these images do not represent the naturist experience. And clubs hold highly sexualized events and dances to attract traffic, even though sexualizing nudity is the opposite of what we hope to achieve as a movement.
In my story, the main character is similarly violating naturist values, not by sexualizing nudity, but by removing nature itself from the equation. My feeling is that, one way or another, nature will heal herself. And if we do not constantly keep ourselves aligned with our naturist values, we will not be healed; we will be the wound itself that nature heals.
I submitted the story with, I admit, some trepidation. While the story addressed the theme clearly in my own mind, I could not be sure that readers would see it the same way. I worried that I was being too obscure, or missing the point.
To my relief, the anthology compilers (Will Forest, Ted Bun, and Paul Z Walker) were okay with my approach, and the story was enthusiastically accepted. There were a couple of rounds of editing, but Will and Paul are highly competent editors, so I accepted their suggestions gratefully and gladly. And soon enough the story was complete.
I am proud of this story, as I have been proud of all the naturist fiction I have published. I hope you’ll pick up a copy of Beneath Healing Skies - and if you have, let me know what you think of my story, as well as the rest of the anthology, in the comments below!
Last month, a new naturist anthology was released. And I’m happy to say that my short story, “The Natural Look”, is among the stories in the anthology.
Why buy this anthology? Here are some good reasons.
So… get on it! You can buy the book on Amazon, or at one of the many other bookstores around.
If you do buy it, let me know what you think of it in the comments! I’ll have more about the process of writing my own contribution to the anthology soon.
I'm back, folks.
It's been a while, I know. With some personal challenges and health challenges, I've been away for a good long while. But I'm back.
I will not be posting regularly here, at least to start, as I have become only too aware of my limits. However, I am still very much a naturist, as well as a proponent and advocate for naturism.
And yes, I've been writing - not as much, but that's changing. I recently submitted a short story for the upcoming anthology, Beneath Healing Skies, which is coming out soon. I want to discuss my motivations for that story but I'll wait until the anthology is released before I post about it in more detail.
I know my departure was sudden and prolonged, and I appreciate those who reached out with concern when I was not able to answer. I continue to enjoy being part of the wonderful naturist community and I look forward to being a more active and engaged member starting now.
I just wanted to leave a quick note to say Happy New Year and to let you know that I am taking a small break.
Recently an article made the rounds about a house for sale:
It's about a nice little house for sale. It's very cheap - probably about half the asking price if it were in the nearest city (Hamilton, Ontario - my home town). And! If you can believe this! It's in a nudist resort!
I've seen the article reposted numerous times lately on Facebook, reddit, twitter, and the like, and I noted it because it's located near me and I've visited the Ponderosa Family Nudist Resort many times.
The writer of the piece, Lauren O'Neil, clearly spent a lot of time poring over the Ponderosa's website. She found a fair amount of information about the resort and its amenities and policies. But there is a certain amount of vagueness in the article too: "the listing does not specify", "leading one to assume", and the like.
The areas of question are all quite straightforward. So why not contact the club and ask them? That's what a journalist would do. Is this not supposed to be real journalism?
The article's publisher, BlogTO, is a reasonably reputable website in the Toronto area. Their coverage of local events is widely followed, though their style has given rise to a number of parodies over the years. But they do purport to be a legitimate news website. O'Neil is a senior editor and staff writer. She is an experienced journalist.
So why didn't O'Neil call or email the Ponderosa?
It's the usual, I think: the deep fear in our society of anything associated with nudity. Even the idea of phoning or emailing the club was too much, although it made the article much weaker.
I'm glad that the article got so much attention, because it tells people that nudism is a thing, and for many that there is a club in their area. But it's another disappointing example of the kind of journalism that we nudists have to put up with.
At least there were no stupid jokes or puns about nudity - it could have been worse.
It's warming up here in Ontario, and while COVID has kept us more or less shut in at home, I'm still alive and safe and half-vaccinated. I hope everyone who's reading this is doing well!
It's been a long time since I've posted on here, and that's because there is actually a lot going on - unfortunately leaving me very little time for writing. But I'm working on what I feel is a very important series of blog posts; I am also working on some changes to this website, and a new book on nudism. More on those things soon.
In the meantime, I'm also changing the look of my existing book, How to Take Your Clothes Off. The fantastic art that Cleo from ToplessTopics did for me is now featured on the cover, and I am hoping to get more great work from her to help fill out the site's look and feel. Keep an eye out for that! And check out the cover design, which is coming soon to fine bookstores everywhere:
If you don't have a copy, here's your chance! Search for it at any e-bookstore you like, or check it out at Amazon here.
As I’ve been quite active on Twitter in the last couple of years, specifically within the naturist community there, a few patterns have emerged for me.
Twitter has become one of the best social media spaces where nudists can gather. The administrators or algorithms (or both) have overreacted to nudists on Twitter in some cases, but by and large we are allowed to be - and to be ourselves. The community is large and thriving. (Taylor Lorenz published an article on the subject in the Atlantic Online in 2017, and surprisingly, not much has changed since.)
The nudist Twitter community is also vibrant, and vocal. There are a number of nudists who have plenty to say about social justice, inclusion, and diversity in the nudist community. Some are locked accounts (which is a shame, but understandable) but you would do well to start with someone like @AlmostWildBlog to see the kinds of fruitful discussions that are emerging on the platform these days.
One of the primary interests of nudists on Twitter, though, is promoting nudism itself. Campaigns like #NormalizeNudity and #NakedInNature are designed to capture non-nudists’ attention (and bare skin always seems to grab people’s attention) and then hit them with positive messages about non-sexual social nudity.
Others try to promote nudism by putting themselves out there, unashamedly nude. The thinking is that showing real people enjoying themselves nude - not models, just regular people with regular bodies - will send the message that nudity truly is for everyone.
But there is another kind of “promotion” for nudity, one that the nudist community has to reject fully and completely.
A number of accounts post a steady stream of photos of nude people, often with similar hashtags about promoting nudity and nudism. The photos are all pretty much the same: slim young people, almost always women, almost always white. No two photos show the same person: they come from a variety of sources, including porn sites, voyeur photo collections, and - infuriatingly - legitimate nudist Twitter accounts.
There are a couple more significant characteristics for these accounts as well.
That last point is really the problem. They’re not promoting nudism, they’re promoting a business. And they’re exploiting nudists to do it.
And nudists not only let them get away with it - they help them out.
The reason I know so many of these exploitative spam accounts exist is because other nudists - real, legitimate nudists, as far as I can tell - help them out. They follow these accounts, like their posts, and sometimes even retweet them.
Maybe these legitimate users think they’re helping to promote nudism when they help promote these accounts. Or maybe they notice that their retweets of nude women get them more likes and follows than they usually get.
In the long run, though, every like, retweet, and follow is damaging to the nudist movement.
These accounts play into the same narratives we know are barriers to our society’s acceptance of nudism: nudism is about seeing attractive nude people. Nudism is about sexualizing bodies (especially younger, slimmer, female ones). Nudism is about looking at naked people, not being naked oneself. Nudism is reserved for people who are young, slim, and conventionally good-looking.
And by following, liking, and retweeting their posts, nudists are complicit in spreading these damaging myths.
Every interaction with these accounts is a step backwards for naturism.
So please, nudists, be careful about your activities on Twitter. Avoid these transparently problematic accounts. Don’t give them any more attention than they deserve. And most of all, stop helping to exploit and commodify your fellow naturists.
What do you think of these accounts - are they helping or hindering nudism? Are there any problematic accounts you’ve seen other nudists promoting? What can we do about it? Tell me in the comments!
