While maybe leaning to a bit to the esoteric extreme, it is refreshing to see this recent commentary from the New York Times giving a somewhat muted endorsement for naturism. What is most pleasing, actually, is the author made it through the entire piece avoiding all the typical puns and stereotypish gags about social nudity, while acknowledging that there are people who avidly embrace the naturist cause, while there are others who simply have an occasional urge to visit that beach where no swimsuit is required. An important distinction at a time when a new concept of “non-defined naturism” seems to be emerging as the textbook definition of naturism.
I thought I was a good piece. Surprisingly normal!
View original post: approximately 800 more words
I will share this on my site.
LikeLiked by 1 person
NY Times, no less. Gradually, we are seeing more positive press, and even the critical pieces are far more genteel than they would have been in the not so distant past.
LikeLiked by 1 person