A number of arguments in favour of naturism.

Clothing is not always relevant
The bathing suit is irrelevant to any activity in and under water. It neither keeps us dry or warm, nor is it an aid to swimming. At best, it is a social dress, like the dinner jacket."

It is not reasonable to cover the apples in the marketplace just because someone might may be tempted by gluttony, nor is it necessary to ban money because someone might be overcome by greed. Nor is it reasonable to ban nudity, simply because an individual might be tempted to lust. Furthermore, appreciation for the beauty of a member of the other sex, nude or otherwise, cannot be equated automatically with lust. Only if desire is added does appreciation become lust, and therefore sin. Even then, it is the one who lusts, not the object of lust, who has sinned. Pope John Paul II writes: "There are circumstances in which nakedness is not immodest. If someone takes advantage of such an occasion to treat the person as an object of enjoyment (even if his action is purely internal) it is only he who is guilty of shamelessness . . . not the other."

Many psychologists say that clothing is an extension of ourselves. The clothes we wear are an expression of who we are. The Naturist's comfort with casual nudity, therefore, represents an attitude which is comfortable with the self as it is in its most basic state, without modification or deceit.

Clothes-compulsiveness creates insecurity about one's body. Studies show that nudism, on the other hand, promotes a positive body self-concept. These effects are especially significant for women. Studies by Daniel DeGoede in 1984 confirmed research done 16 years earlier, which established that "of all the groups measured (nudist males, non-nudist males, nudist females, and non-nudist females), the nudist females scored highest on body concept, and the non-nudist females scored lowest."

Body Acceptance
The practice of nudism is, for nudists, an immensely freeing experience. In freeing oneself to be nude in the presence of others, including members of the other sex, the nudist also gives up all the social baggage that goes along with the nudity taboo. The sense of "freedom" that comes from the nudist experience is consistently rated by nudists as one of the main reasons they stay in it.

Clothing hides the natural diversity of human body shapes and sizes. When people are never exposed to nudity, they grow up with misunderstandings and unrealistic expectations about the body based on biased or misinformed sources--for instance, from advertising or mass media. As a result, breast augmentation has long been the leading form of cosmetic surgery in the U.S. In the 1980s, American women had more than 100,000 operations per year to alter their breasts. Helen Gurley Brown, past editor of Cosmopolitan, says, "I don't think 80 percent of the women in this country have any idea what other women's bosoms look like. They have this idealised idea of how other people's bosoms are. . . . My God, isn't it ridiculous to be an emancipated woman and not really know what a woman's body looks like except your own?" Paul Fussell notes, by contrast, that "a little time spent on Naturist beaches will persuade most women that their breasts and hips are not, as they may think when alone, appalled by their mirrors, 'abnormal,' but quite natural, 'abnormal' ones belonging entirely to the nonexistent creatures depicted in ideal painting and sculpture. The same with men: if you think nature has been unfair to you in the sexual anatomy sweepstakes, spend some time among the Naturists. You will learn that every man looks roughly the same--quite small, that is, and that heroic fixtures are not just extremely rare, they are deformities."

Clothing hides and therefore creates mystery and ignorance about natural body processes, such as pregnancy, adolescence, and ageing. Children (and even adults) who grow up in a nudist environment have far less anxiety about these natural processes than those who are never exposed to them.

Children are not born with any shame about nudity. They learn to be ashamed of their own nudity.

Shame, with respect to nudity, is relative to individual situations and customs, not absolute. The relative nature of shame is acknowledged by Pope John Paul II. "There is a certain relativism in the definition of what is shameless," he writes. "This relativism may be due to differences in the makeup of particular persons . . . or to different 'world views.' It may equally be due to differences in external conditions--in climate for instance . . . and also in prevailing customs, social habits, etc. . . . In this matter there is no exact similarity in the behaviour of particular people, even if they live in the same age and the same society. . . . Dress is always a social question."

Nudity is not, by itself, erotic, and nudity in mixed groups is not inherently sexual. These are myths propagated by a clothes-obsessed society. Sexuality is a matter of intent rather than state of dress. In our culture, a person who exposes their sexual parts for any reason is considered to be an exhibitionist. It is assumed that they stripped to attract attention and cause a sexual reaction in others. This is seen as a perversion. Hypocritically, if someone dresses specifically to arouse sexual interest, they are considered to have pride in their appearance. Even if they get great sexual gratification out of the attention others give, there is no suggestion of perversion or sexual fixation.

Clothing focuses attention on sexuality, not away from it; and in fact often enhances immature forms of sexuality, rather than promoting healthy body acceptance.

Fashion industry
Complete nudity is antithetic to the elaborate semi-pornography of the fashion industry. Partial clothing is more sexually stimulating (in often unhealthy ways) than full nudity.

The identification of breasts as sexual objects in our culture has led to the discouragement of breast-feeding, the encouragement of unnecessary cosmetic surgery for breast augmentation, and avoidance of necessary breast examinations by women. Sydney Ross Singer and Soma Grismaijer write: "When a woman learns to treat her breasts as objects that enhance appearance, they belong not to the woman, but to her viewers. Thus, a woman becomes alienated from her own body."

Pornography
Naturism is the antithesis of pornography. Nudity is often confused with pornography in our society because the pornography industry has so successfully exploited it. In other words, nudity is often damned as exploitative precisely because its repression causes many to exploit it. Non-acceptance and repression of nudity fuels pornography by teaching that any form and degree of nudity is inherently sexual and pornographic. In the words of activist Melissa Farley, "pornography is the antithesis of freedom for women. . . . to treat the human body as anything less than normal and beautiful is to promote Puritanism and pornography. If the human body is accepted by society as normal, the pornographers won't be able to market it."

Pornography, in turn, limits women's ability to participate in healthy nude recreation, and to be casually nude in other ways. Naturism breaks the power of pornography over women. Naturism defies relationships based on a balance of power, and is thus consistent with contemporary feminism, which seeks to break down power hierarchies.

Naturism is innocent, casual, non-exploitative, and non-commercial (and yet is often suppressed); as opposed to pornography, which is commercialised and sensationalised (and generally tolerated).

Social attitudes
Naturism is socially constructive. It is, by philosophy, tolerant of others and their differences. It expects only the same in return. Naturism rejects obstreperous, provocative nudity--but because it is anti-social effrontery and disorderly conduct, not because it is nudity.

Naturists tend to be especially accepting of other people, just as they are. This is an attitude that is undoubtedly related to the fact that Naturists are generally more accepting of their own bodies, just as they are, than the general public.

Naturism rejects blind conformity to cultural mores and assumptions about the body, which see clothing as a constant necessity, in favour of a more reasoned, rational approach which recognises the need for clothing to be dependent on context.

Naturism is healthy for the family. Research shows that children who grow up in a nudist setting tend to be more self-confident, more self-accepting, and more sexually well-adjusted. They feel better about their bodies, and more comfortable with their sexuality. Most commentators say that it's the context in which family nudity takes place, not the nudity itself, that determines whether it's problematic. Children respond far more to parents' attitudes toward nudity than to the nudity itself, and nudity is only a problem when it is treated as one. Children of "primitive" tribes, surrounded by nudity of all forms, suffer no ill effects. Neither do children who grow up in other societies which are more open about nudity than our own. Presumptions that exposure to nudity will lead to problems for children grow out of the preconceptions of our culture.

Religion
Much of the origin of repressive attitudes toward nudity may be traced to the political setting of the early church and church-state, though not the teachings of Christ Himself. The earliest writings of the Christian church show no evidence of the negative attitude toward sexuality and nudity which so characterise later years. This negative attitude grew slowly among some segments of the faith, but was by no means universal. The aversion of early Christian church leaders to casual nudity was due in part to an association of nudity with paganism and homosexuality in the surrounding cultures. The Church's aversion to nudity derived, in part, from its roots in the cultures of the ancient Near East, where nakedness had signified poverty, shame, slavery, humiliation, and defeat. Naked, bound prisoners were paraded in the king's victory celebration, and slain enemies were stripped of clothing and armour.

Pope John Paul II agrees that nudity, in and of itself, is not sinful. "The human body in itself always has its own inalienable human dignity," he says. It is only obscene when it is reduced to "an object of 'enjoyment,' meant for the gratification of concupiscence itself."

Pope John Paul II writes: "Sexual modesty cannot then in any simple way be identified with the use of clothing, nor shamelessness with the absence of clothing and total or partial nakedness. . . . Immodesty is present only when nakedness plays a negative role with regard to the value of the person, when its aim is to arouse concupiscence, as a result of which the person is put in the position of an object for enjoyment. . . . There are certain objective situations in which even total nudity of the body is not immodest."

Personal experience
One of the most important arguments in support of nudism is personal experience. Personal testimonies in favour of nudism are too numerous to mention. Based on my own experience, I find nudists to be more friendly, open-minded, considerate, respectful, and sharing than non-nudists in general. Their children are more active, and healthier, both physically and mentally. None of these testimonies, of course, compares to personal experience. A single visit to a nudist park or a nude beach will not cause permanent harm to anyone. On the other hand, it may change your life. Experience the freedom for yourself!