Swimming naked: A declaration of independence
It's almost Independence Day weekend in the United States and so I am making my own very specific declaration of independence. In honor of "the personal is political" and in honor of Independence Day (and because I happen to have a very recent photo of me swimming naked near an American Flag) I want to make a simple declaration: I need to be free to swim naked. I dislike the confinement of swimsuits. They cling and bind and besides, other than wet t-shirt contests, why would anyone put on clothes specifically to get them wet? We take off wet clothes! Why put something on to go in the water?
Yet, despite my preference for swimming naked and despite the logic of doing so, at the first opportunity I have had in ages I hesitated. I was on a sailboat at a mooring in the Mystic River and I wondered if the people at the restaurant on the dock, about 500 feet away, would complain that there was a naked girl in the water. I wondered if people on passing boats would complain. I was afraid that I would be told there were rules I was violating. I didn't want a hassle.
Ultimately I did go in the water naked. I stood on the deck, pulled my sundress over my head, and climbed down the swim ladder. I knew that a hassle was unlikely and should it happen it would be worth it. But it got me thinking about why anybody would complain in the first place. And that got me thinking about why there are so few public access places where one can swim naked.
There are many miles of public beaches in New York. Rockaway. Jones Beach. Fire Island. Only small portions of those are designated as "nude beaches, " and those designations are unofficial. To make it worse the only portions of beach to which they apply are the farthest from the easiest access points. In New York it is legal for women to be "topless" anywhere men can be topless, so that includes all beaches, but it is not legal to be naked (hence the "nude beaches" are unofficially designated). Still, law is only part of the issue. Public response is the other. I may be legally allowed to be topless and I may enjoy being topless but am I willing to be topless in a place where most people aren't and many will leer or be offended.
That is where the personal and the political intersect. That is where we decide whether we are willing to endure public scorn to defend our rights under the law or to challenge the law when our rights are not yet protected. I wavered on that sailboat way too long trying to decide about my own willingness to do what I wanted badly to do. I wavered because I felt unsure of my safety and uncertain of my reactions to the unlikely though possible challenge. I hesitated because I wasn't sure that my desire and comfort alone were good enough reasons to break a rule, even an unofficial rule. I was frustrated with myself and even more frustrated by the norms that were holding me back.
And while this discussion of swimsuit norms might seem trivial, it is not. For one thing, people will argue that public beaches cannot be "clothing optional" because of the presence of children, when it is exactly the presence of children that means they should be clothing optional spaces. Children themselves often prefer to be naked (and up to a certain age they are often allowed to be, even in public). What do they learn from seeing older kids and adults preoccupied with covering up? They learn shame or at least a kind of culturally-enforced feeling of impropriety. They learn that bodies are somehow improper and should only be shared privately and only in very circumscribed conditions. They learn that somehow nudity is always sexual and that sexuality needs to be hidden. Why else would women and men at public beaches be expected to cover only those parts of their bodies most associated with sex? Even the smallest bikini covers the nipples. Even the tiniest Speedo covers the penis. Even a g-string provides a small triangle of fabric in the front that covers the mons and the clit.
And somehow, even after years of commitment to social change, activism, and expanding rights and freedoms, back on that sailboat I was clearly being pulled by all the cultural messages I internalized since childhood. It took me way too long to ditch my sundress and slip into the water.
Swimwear is about the norms of class and era. One only has to look at swim suits from different eras to know that these norms are changeable. Swimsuits from the US in the 1920s, the introduction of the bikini, or the recent interest in the burkini - all are evidence that culture shapes what we wear in the water. (Would you believe there was a time when skimpier was patriotic?)
I do not dispute anybody's right to wear a burkini or a bikini. What I dispute is the limitation on my own right to wear neither. Public beaches should be 'clothing optional' with the option being a real option: wear as much or as little as you like. We should neither be ashamed of our bodies nor of our modesty.
And I should be allowed to swim naked, simply enjoying the pleasure of water washing over my skin at a public beach if I want.
Happy Independence Day.
~~~
This post is in honor of Bowsprite and Tugster's "Swim Day". For other Swim Day posts click here.
Photo taken in the very cold water off of Noank, CT, last Saturday evening, by my partner Will Van Dorp. We were swimming off of Matt Housekeeper's boat. Thank you Matt for letting us stay the night. Swimming and then sipping wine and eating simple food while warming up, drifting off to sleep while the boat swung at its mooring and the wind chimes of halyards against masts, waking to the coffee you rowed to shore to fetch: these were the most relaxing moments I'd spent in ages.
Happy Independence Day, Elizabeth
Thank you for your willingness to assert your natural right to swim au naturale, and your willingness to do so and speak about doing so publicly, here in the square.
Our culture does have an abnormal obsession with covering nudity, something that seems very bizarre with even the most cursory of examinations. That obsession cannot possibly be healthy, and needs to be dismantled, especially in regards to enforcing it on children and those free enough to opt out of it.
Kudos to you, Elizabeth.
Despite my rather more... repressed... locale, I intend to make a point of taking my wife skinny dipping this weekend. I don't know how or where, but somewhere, somehow, we will.
Thank you for the inspiration. I haven't been swimming sans ungodly, uncomfortable, unnatural shorts in many, many years. I look forward to the renewal of my freedom.
Baby Biologist, just trying to make the world a better place.
UNnatural...
It was on a beach in Denmark that I saw whole families very naturally remove clothing and very normally go in naked. Children, parents, grandparents, all in, then would come out, dry and dress. So natural. It is really UNnatural to cower and hide in a big towel to add or remove pieces. Bizarre.
Later, in Zürich, I sat in an sauna booth by a lake which was co-ed and naked. I felt strange sitting with nothing at all on among buttnaked men, and even stranger for feeling strange when they were feeling nothing amiss.
Then, I came back to the good ol' USA, and heard an old woman screaming in a YMCA women's lockerroom because there was a 5 yr old boy with his mother changing, yelling about how the mother was damaging the boy. Ahem! Pretty clear to me who is damaged. We are, folks!
-Bowsprite
http://bowsprite.wordpress.com
aunaturel
i once worked as a nude artists' model just to see what it would be like, expecting to be uncomfortable. within 10 seconds i was not only comfortable but also bored, wondering what all the fuss is about.
Swimsuits
Before 1850 or so swimsuits didn't even exist (I forget the exact date they were invented). I theorize that this was due to the unholy marriage of American "Puritan Ethics" which frowned on people of the opposite sex seeing each other naked and the then-booming textile industry's need to sell more stuff. For awhile they were largely an American thing, and a lot of other countries had to be pressured into adopting them in order to avoid offending American tourists. (And later, European tourists, once large parts of Europe started using them..) And even then, that was just for public beaches and pools - in private or secluded places, most people in the US still normally went skinny-dipping until around 1970. This came to an end because it was generally not done in mixed-sex company by "respectable" people and a lot of people suddenly became concerned that seeing others of the same sex naked could make you gay. (And it wasn't too long after that when showering after gym in school started falling out of favor in some areas, as well...) People forget how much different some of the "little things" used to be sometimes.
Since I became an adult, the only times I have worn a swimsuit is when my mother wanted me to go swimming with her, because she's uncomfortable with nudity and doesn't like to swim alone or with only strange people about. Fortunately, I live within a reasonable distance of an officially sanctioned clothing-optional beach, and am aware of occasional clothes-free events at private locations. I never liked swimsuits, or understood what the big deal with nudity was, even as a child. And it really shouldn't be a big deal. Our century and a half experiment in trying to desexualize swimming and sunbathing through swimwear has ironically resulted in clothed beaches and pools becoming far more sexualized than naked ones are and have ever been.
Body awareness and body phobia
Henri Fantin-Latour (1836-1904). Undine (Nyad) 1896
This classical theme touches on many issues, not just that of swimming and bathing, and the social customs that have evolved around this in various jurisdictions. In the past, and still in many cultures, bathing is seen as a natural social tradition. Logic dictates that it be unclothed. Swimming came back into vogue in the nineteenth century as a health activity and people wore streetwear, which gradually evolved, and maybe is still evolving, into swimwear as we know it.
There is clearly a conflict of values - that of wishing to be free, and that of not wishing to offend since individual liberties tend to be constrained where they limit others. We internalise these norms and ultimately society functions the way it does because self censorship or regulation is the most effective.
The broader issue is the body, private and public, and the myth of Adam and Eve which associated nakedness with shame, and hence the need to conceal - both for self-shame and for fear of reaction. Clearly the standards of what is shameful have changed over time and are culturally dependent. Periodically we hear reference to the origins of competitive sports in Greece, and how Gymnos (γυμνός) from which we derive 'Gymn' and 'Gymnastics' means naked. This suggests that attitudes to the body can change quite radically.
Edgar Degas (1834-1917): Spartan youths exercising (First version c. 1860), after Plutarch. (for second version see Kemp 2008)
While it is often stated that what is covered is that which is considered sexual, this can be debated since what is 'sexual' is poorly defined. For instance Elizabeth refers to the female chest, traditionally covered in our society but allowed far more leeway than the pelvis. It is difficult to discern why that is considered sexual, and why we discriminate between females and males. This issue has now been the subject of constitutional challenges in several countries. The problem being that in many people's minds the naked body is associated with sexuality - yet those communities and individuals that practice social nudity do not perceive such an association.
Are there implications beyond comfort, freedom, modesty and convention? Exposing the body to the elements can be hazardous, including excessive sunlight, yet much contemporary leisurewear offers little protection. On the other hand exposure to sunlight is an important source of Vitamin D. Also more options in attire may encourage more outdoor activity which can be considered desirable.
Returning to the contentious issue of the female chest, breast cancer has changed the political climate quite radically. Concern by sufferers and their families, friends and activists has changed attitudes by in-your-face activities, designed to 'raise awareness'. This has often been controversial and provocative, but it is now considered acceptable to discuss the female breast and its attire in public. Whether this has actually improved the outloook for women with breast cancer is however difficult to ascertain. Presentation with breast cancer has certainly changed drastically from far-advanced cases to microscopic lesions through awareness, debate and screening programmes. it would not have been possible, or at least would have been more difficult to promote prevention programmes and self-examination (BSE) in a culturally repressive climate. However the real impact of both screening and BSE remains controversial, treated in isolation.
The other major cultural and health theme invoked is that of self-image and our degree of acceptance versus rejection and yearning for arbitrary 'perfection'. The toll of body rejection is high including both eating disorders and 'unnecessary' cosmetic surgery, as well as mood disorders and poor self esteem.
It is interesting to speculate whether following Elizabeth's example would lead to a healthier happier society. There might be some adverse economic impact on the clothing industry though.
Giovanni Demin (1786-1859). Spartan Women Wrestling 1836
References
Plutarch. Lycurgus 14.2-15.1
T F Scanlon. Eros and Greek Athletics. Oxford 2002 p220
M Kemp. Spartan sport laid bare. Nature 454:1053 August 28 2008
S Pomeroy. Spartan Women Oxford 2002 (p
Whose norms?
Michael wrote:
It is exactly that conflict that I struggle with so deeply. There is a line in Sidewalk, a book I use sometimes in my American Society class, that puts this in perspective somewhat. The speaker is a lawyer for a Business Improvement District in New York City. He says with disdain, "People think just because something is not illegal they can do whatever they want."
The question then arises: when the law does not have anything to say about a specific behavior, whose norms should govern a public space? That question always evokes lots of discussion in my classes. It seems clear and then it isn't.
...because public space really matters!
Elizabeth
Conflict and liberty
While that which is not defined as illegal is assumed to be legal, mores or customs are frequently more powerful social forces that define dominant discourses. Since such moral values are rarely universal, conflict will be inevitable between those who prescribe and those who rebel. Much as we may wish to avoid conflict, social progress has arisen from those who have challenged mores. If we did not we would have a homogenising society that became progressively repressive.
Historically this has been a much harder road for women to travel, one example being women's struggle for comfortable functional clothing in sports. May Sutton may have taken the Women's Title at Wimbledon in 1905, but at a social price. Her short sleeves and a hemline that revealed the occasiohnal flash of ankle were denounced as indecent.
There is a divide between setting out to deliberately offend and shock and taking risks of disapproval by following one's heart and instinct. Disapproval may often say more about the speaker than the object of disapproval. A tolerant society alows those with particular values to exercise them, but not impose them upon all members of society. .
Off topic, but...
Do you need to be a registered user to use paragraph breaks? It always removes mine when I post them. I even tried adding the html tags directly last time (one of the posts above) and it didn't work either.
Line breaks
Hi Random Visitor. I do wish we had a name for you!
Thanks for alerting me to the line break problem. The input filter for people not logged had a problem in its settings. I believe I've fixed it now. In fact, it appeared to be affecting a few other input filters also, so those should now be fixed too.
Also, if you want to use html tags directly you can do that, but you need to disable the rich text editor by clicking "disable rich-text" below the post window. That will give you a plain old text box into which you can type things with tags.
...because public space really matters!
Elizabeth
I don't think showing off
I don't think showing off your sexual organs in public places is ever going to become popular. It provokes a sexual response in the viewer with no possibility of outlet, thus causing anger. I have very little experience of public nudism, but would it be fair to say that there are very few young people with handsome bodies doing it? It's mainly old folk with withered bodies. Plus, the voyeurs. The nudist is defenceless and naked, while _they_ are fully-clothed. Not good. So, aesthetically, emotionally and strategically, I say, cover up yer bits!
-TigerTom
Problematic assumptions about nudity
TigerTom, there are several problematic assumptions behind your comment.
First, it seems problematic to assume that seeing a person's breasts or penis or vulva is likely to provoke a sexual response in the viewer. This may happen sometimes and not others, but it hardly seems inevitable. Only in the cases where the viewer found the person they were seeing attractive would it seem likely.
Second, to imagine that there is "no possibility of outlet" also seems problematic. There may be no immediate outlet, but how many of us need immediate satisfaction of all our urges all the time?
Third, to worry that there are very few young people with handsome bodies doing it would seem in conflict with your first concern about sexual arousal. More importantly, "young" and "handsome" are very subjective terms. And would a wider range of people be interested if there were fewer prohibitions against it? On what do you base the guess that "it's mainly old folk with withered bodies"? (Many "old folk" I know have lovely bodies, by the way!)
Now, about the voyeurs. Voyeurs usually watch. That's why they're called voyeurs. If a person is being naked in public I can't imagine that they are objecting to being seen. So what are they defenseless against?
If there is a threat of violence I doubt that it comes from voyeurs. It is more likely to come from those who feel compelled to force their will on others. Does that compulsion, or the inability to control it, come from seeing people naked? I don't think so.
...because public space really matters!
Elizabeth
I disagree
Pessimist.
This comment reminds me of the debacle in Richmond KY, and smacks of blaming the victim, TigerTom.
No, it would not. What difference does that make?
As I mentioned, that's not the case. And further, that's not only subjective (who gets to decide whose body is too "withered"?), but inherently rather arrogant, don't you think? Do I get to pass judgement on your body? (Don't worry, I happen to think the human form is beautiful in its all of its natural states.)
Also: so?
Why not? Define "good". Seems like people who choose to go without clothes would logically not mind being seen naked. It sort of follows, y'know?
And we should all just do what TigerTom says because ...
I really hate to break it to you, TigerTom, but not everyone exists to please your delicate sensibilities. Just a thought.
Baby Biologist, just trying to make the world a better place.
Body freedom and feminisms
It is of interest that such issues of body freedom are barely within the scope of North American feminisms, or at least low on their sense of priorities.
This is in contrast to a number of European countries. In self-styled gender-neutral Sweden Bara Bröst, a militant feminist group have been campaigning for some years to have gender neutral regulations around swimwear, and recently won another victory in the city of Malmö . An equivalent group in Denmark is the Topless Front. Thir victory was accompanied by a comment from the Socialist People's Party "This decision is important in order to stop the idea that women's bodies are only sex objects."
A similar group in France, Les Tumultueuses, have stated that "C'est une action pour dénoncer la différence de traitement entre hommes et femmes, le corps des femmes étant systématiquement considéré comme plus sexuel que celui des hommes, et soumis à des normes de beauté" (this is an action to condemn the difference in treatment between men and women, women's bodies are routinely considered more sexual than men, and subject to standards of beauty). One of their manifestos is titled "Mon corps si je veux, quand je veux, tel qu'il est" (My Body If I Want When I Want, As It Is). They contrast this with the objectification of women's bodies.
Finland, in the sauna tradition, prohibits all swimwear in the public swimming pool in Helsinki, although the genders are separated into two separate pools. In Canada numerous court cases have established women's right to not be discriminated against in relation to swimwear.
For further information on Bara Bröst's aims and philosophy, see European Viewpoint.
Legal regulation v. social regulation
Part of what distresses me in my own reaction to this discussion is that I live in a state, NY, where it is legal for women to be topless anywhere men can be, so technically the legal regulations are gender-neutral and do not prohibit that degree of nudity. Yet I have not yet found the courage to use that freedom because of my sense of the social sanctions against doing so. A few recent examples.
My partner and I were biking the other day and there were many men biking sans shirts. I thought about how good it would probably feel to have the air rushing over my skin and yet could not bring myself to take off my tank top.
Also with my partner, taking our normal morning walk through our local park, I thought about taking off my shirt when he did. I couldn't do it.
This is clearly not about legal sanctions but about social sanctions. And social sanctions work as well through fear as through actual application.
...because public space really matters!
Elizabeth
Nudist point of view
I'm a nudist, or to use the term I prefer, a naturist. Very glad to see this topic discussed here. I think I've heard most of the arguments, pro and con, for social nudity and nudity in (tolerant) public settings many times over. Could take a whole book to deal properly with them all, so I won't even try to do that right now.
What I would like to say now is that it is practically impossible to completely disentangle the concepts of nudity and sexuality, and this causes no end of confusion for both nudists and non-nudists alike.
Nudists religiously assert that nudity and sexuality are totally, or almost totally, distinct. I agree that the concepts are distinct, but definitely disagree that the concepts are unrelated. Nudists quite generally make an effort to exclude sexuality from social interactions that are intended to be "pure" nudism. But some nudists are quite extreme about this, and take the position, both with other nudists and the general public that there is no relationship at all.
I think, to be perfectly honest, that this really is an extreme and unrealistic position, simply because in our society "nudity" entails, almost by definition, an exposure of sexual parts of the body. There's a lot of debate among nudists as to whether it's even proper to think about sexuality while engaging in "nudist" activities. Personally, I think that as long as one's private thoughts are kept to oneself and don't affect outward behavior in a way that's unwelcome to others present, it generally should not be an issue.
The general public, on the other hand, is very, very concerned with private thoughts when nudity is involved. The general opinion (which is wrong) seems to be that such thoughts will necessarily be sexual, and that therefore nudity itself is necessarily a problem.
The premise of this opinion happens to be wrong, but even if it weren't, this clearly illustrates the problems our society has in dealing with sexuality itself. Unless I'm quite mistaken, such problems are one of the main concerns of this site, so I hope to find more discussion of such issues here.
As a naturist, I really wish our society could get over a lot of its sexual hang-ups. Not because naturism itself is inherently sexual, but because naturism itself (or simply innocent skinny-dipping) makes too many people uncomfortable as long as so much confusion exists about sexuality.
Nudity and sexuality
CGD, thank you for such a thoughtful post. I'm fascinated by the difficulty of managing the connection between nudity and sexuality in this society. It seems to be easier in other places. But here, not so much.
One passage in particular from your post made me realize just now complicated it has become in the US:
If, in order to feel safe, or legitimate as practicing nudists, it becomes necessary to exclude sexual expression from all "pure nudist" gatherings, that seems as problematic in its way as insisting that in any non-purely sexual space we be dressed.
It is a very sad thing about our society that our culture is so confused when it comes to sexuality and bodies.
...because public space really matters!
Elizabeth
Post new comment