This might sound weird but I think it’s true.
A man can be big and strong and impressive, but in the nude that doesn’t matter. The only thing that seems to matter (for those who don’t understand naturism) are the bits of a person that can be seen that are usually hidden.
Indeed, these bits are genitals and female breasts. Naturists know that people come in all shapes and sizes. Being naked, there’s hardly a way around that unless you’re visually handicapped, and even then a person is probably aware of that. (If you have other experiences, please share, I’m genuinely curious.)
These are the ‘problem parts’ for the non-understanding ones. For the people who lived in the repressed environment of clothialism, so to speak.
For me this is another indication that the whole clothing-obsessed world is wrong. The clothialists get further and further away from nature and all things natural, including their own bodies. I have heard stories about people who are so ‘body conscious’ that they don’t even dare to be nude in their own home, when they’re alone and no one can see them.
Isn’t that sad?
People who shower in their underwear. How awful to even consider that.
And for exactly those same repressed people, the size of a penis, a behind or some breasts matters. As if that defines a person. Certifiably bonkers, I tell you. That is now how naturists define people. Because, in naturism, size doesn’t matter. I know big people and tiny people, and they’re beautiful people. I know “beautiful” people who are downright ugly on the inside.
Size doesn’t matter.
People are people.
Do you agree?
As a kind of follow-up on my post on 