|
If revealing sexy swimwear (itsy bitsy bikinis, thongs and speedos) are consider outerwear and allowed to be worn almost anywear without prejudice, why is underwear that reveals the same or less and probably not nearly as sexy not acceptable and considered as outerwear? Why do nudists have a problem with underware and not swimwear? (not talking about in the pool and soap suds) Your thoughts please?
|
|
Swimwear and underwear are two different things. The attention getting design is usually secondary to the fact that it's a swimsuit. Swimwear is usually intended for swimming and designed to cover you up while not weighing you down with heavy water absorbing clothing that will impede your mobility in water. With a lot of underwear and more specifically lingerie, functionality takes a backseat to attention grabbing design. Sexy lingerie is intended to bring attention to the body and to express sexuality. Swimsuits are generally acceptable to be publicly worn at places where people go swimming, and lingerie isn't usually acceptable to be worn in public. And from what I've heard some lingerie isn't comfortable. I personally don't have a problem with what anyone chooses to wear or not wear given the appropriateness of the location. But I've never seen anyone at a nudist resort wear a swimsuit, and I've never seen anyone at a clothing optional beach wear a corset and boyshorts either, probably because that would draw unwanted attention in their respective places.
|
|
Q:
Panties ?
|

Bikini ?
| A:
Depends …
|
|
If I understand what the original question that SB asked, it's not a question of functionality or anything like that, it is more of why does A cover up as much as B, but both are not acceptable to go out in public with.
We've all seen this, a girl walking around on a hot day with flip-flops, short shorts, and a bikini top is considered okay by society, but if on the same hot day a woman fully dressed would take her shirt off so that all she was wearing from the waist up was a bra, but that would not be considered socially acceptable.
I think it has to do with society. Swimwear is considered to be public wear since you can wear it at the pool, beach, etc. Underwear is more of a private thing, the only time it is usually seen is in the bedroom. It doesn't matter that it is probably covering more then the bikini, it is still a private thing.
Not all swim wear is considered okay everywhere. In the town that I grew up in, the law stated that swimwear effectively could not show any butt cheek (they used a long technical term that I can't remember) and the top on a woman's suits had to cover everything from the top of the aureole down to the bottom of the breast. I also grew up in a really conservative town too. Other cities and towns have different laws about how little you can get away with, which comes back to how much society says is okay.
As to the question of why nudists have more problems with underwear than with swimwear, I think it has to do with our mindset. We as nudists don't see much of a reason to wear clothes except for when it is cold or when we go somewhere that it is required to cover up. And even then, we will usually wear the minimum so that we don't get arrested. Therefore, we would usually never wear underwear. On the other hand, we see swimsuits as okay because if we want to hang out with our non-nudist friends, say at the lake, it would be the minimum amount of clothing that would be required. We also see a gray line between comfort and practicality. If we are nude at home and we need to run into town to pick up some dinner, we can throw on some shorts, a shirt, and a pair of sandals and we can go anywhere, no underwear needed (and you have to admit that it's more comfortable that way). Practicality states that we need some underwear during certain times. For example, my wife works at bank where she is having to deal with customers all day on a one-on-one basis. She is required to look professional. She needs to wear a bra so that her breasts aren't flopping around everywhere and depending on what kind of pants she is wearing that day she has to wear underwear (showing your crack is not very professional), so this is an example of practical.
This is just my observations.
|
|
Very insiteville fbh I think you hit it square on the head.
|
|
The law just states what must be covered. There is no distinction between underwear and swimwear. Company policies are more often based on what is acceptable. But acceptability differs by community standards and is usually not enforceable. Acceptability is usually determined by religion, culture and upbringing and rarely based on logic.
|
|
Barefreedom,
I'd say you hit it outta the park with your assessment. Personally, I don't even own a pair of underpants any longer and can actually not see the need for anyone, man or woman, to wear them.
I do, more as a matter of habit I guess, still wear t-shirts under my uniform at work. For one, it hides the jade Bhuddha pendant my wife gave me as a Christmas gift a few years ago so I don't need to remove it or ensure it is behind my back beneath my shirt, since I would no doubt be told to remove it if exposed above the top of my buttoned up shirt.
In terms of underwear vs swimwear, I guess society sets the standard, sorta like the line about pornography - it's not easy to define but I know it when I see it, or words to that effect.
Jim
|
|
A fashion trend which comes and goes is for women to wear mens' boxer shorts in public with the fly sewn up. In our small town on hot days I have seen women in their own yard wearing bra (undergarment) and shorts.
|
|
Here is a thought...a woman can simply discard a regular bra for a sports type bra and discard her underwear for a bikini bottom..slip on a dress and now she is completely appropriate no matter where she is...out in public she has a dress..she decides to shuck the dress she has on sports bra and bikini...Americans simply have too many busy bodies that want to run any and everyone else's lives while screwing up their own and this underwear verse bikini bottoms is a perfect example...along with women going topless on beaches...perfectly okay to breast feed in public but OMG!!!! shes topless on the beach how terrible...
|
|
TexasnNewd, women are still fighting in cities and states for the right to breast feed in public. Usually breastfeeding is done under a small blanket or pancho and the breast is hardly revealed. But it is still terrible in the minds of many people that a child might see what breasts are for.
When it comes to full nudity women seem to get off easier than men. News shows have sometimes featured a story of women out nude such as shopping or filling their car with gas. I believe it has rarely resulted in more than a warning. But when men have been out in a park nude it has been reported as a lewd act and an arrest has been reported. As House said, you have the esthetically pleasing gender and the dangly gender. People seem to go easier on the esthetically pleasing. A few years ago lace bras were fashionable in L.A. as outerwear it didn't last more than a season but there didn't seem to be an uproar except from parents and teachers.
|
|
Both the states of New York and Texas have passed laws that permit women to be topless anywhere it is legal for a man to be topless. Other states have active organizations promoting legal toplessness for women.
John
|
|
Wow!! Real progress and equality in New York and Texas. Great!!
jim
|
|
Thanks BillyJo. Enjoyed the read and it was a well done article. But Central Park, NY has a ways to go to catch up to the English Garden, Munich. It was so nice to have a place where you could just layout and feel the air on you.
|
|
It's all based upon society's perception the female breast is a sexual organ, it seems to me. Yes, men do tend to get excited at the sight of nude female breasts because we've been told it's taboo for them to be exposed, whereas no one, theoretically, finds a man's bare chest sexually stimulating.
What a double standard.
Jim
|
|
I agree with you Jim, but feel that if a lot of ads on TV or mags would stop 'enhancing' the female breast, the site of one would be less stimulating. Biggest offeder, IMHO, is Victoria's Secret ads. They exagerate a person's attention to a part of the female body that offends some if we men see a bare breast.
|
|
Ohio as a state does not restrict women's rights to be topfree. It is allowed at any state facility. However, Ohio allows each municipality to make its own laws. So far I have not heard of a city making any law more restrictive than the state. Topfree sunning and swimming is allowed at any state park.
|
|
Good article. The more the ladies protest having to wear shirts/tops when men don't, the better things will be.
John
|
|
Anyone remember a old Paul Harvey story about a 90yr old man making a complaint about a young girl being topless at a local beach resort.
The girl was ONLY 2yr old.
|
|
I think I do remember the story about the man offended by the 2-year old girl. I wonder how he felt about boys and men going topless? Some people just seek things to complain about.
Jim
|
|
Along that line.... while in Germany I was told y several Mothers about their visits to the USA. They had a great time with their families but couldn't understand the attitude of American's at the beach. They had been approached by men and women telling them that it was inappropriate for their child (range from 2 to 5) to be running naked on the beach. They were told this is a family beach and they don't want their children seeing that. The incidents were at different times, unrelated andin east coast and wwest coast.
Needless to say they thought Americans are a bit obsessed with sex.
|
|
This is a topic I've asked textiles because reactions don't make any sense to me. If you have a woman in a bikini at the pool no one thinks twice. You have the same woman in the same bikini at a mall and mass hysteria ensues. Why? At the same pool in the locker room people are naked in an open community shower, but if you step out of the door 5 feet away it is the crime of the century. Textiles are very contextual and driven by expectation. So, where do they expect to be nude in context? Locker rooms, showers, hot springs: mostly bath related. So, bring back community bath houses and social nudity will be accepted by all.
|
|
As I sat on the foredeck of the boat today, at our dock, I was wearing a small bikini top and shorts. Of all the passerbys no one even gave it a second look or thought (well a few guys gave a second look). Now if I had been topless, I wonder what the reaction would have been. We won't ever know, but I am suspecting it would have been different. Just that one little article of cover-up can make a diffenernce on how we accept the norms of society. It just does not make sense to me.
|
|
I agree it doesn't make any sense SunBunny. I wonder what the reaction would've been had you been fully nude - it really shouldn't matter but, unfortunately, we're not there yet.
Jim
|
|
What also does not make any sense ... is the bikinis worn by young women at some of the more "party" atmosphere areas ... like Lake Havasu, AZ.
We've strolled through the marina, cruised on our PWC's and you see these absolutely nothing bathing suits that barely cover anything except the vaginal opening, the anus and the nipples but leaves nothing else to the imagination. What's the point of wearing something so revealing and paying 80-100 dollars or more for?
Several shops in the marina at Lake Havasu sell pasties. There are almost as many young females wearing pasties instead of tops and ... it's okay there? Haven't seen any of these ladies hauled off to a police car or told to put on a top.
Some of these bathing suits they wear, both top and bottom are opaque dry but really see thru when wet. Are they still legally covered?
We have this circle of aquaintances, baseball moms, that are in their mid to late 30's. My wife and I joke that ... if they knew we were nudists, they may not allow us to even watch their kids play ball but ... more times than not, these women sit on the bleachers and wear the low rise jeans with their g-strings or thongs showing.
We went to a minor league ball park to watch a game with this same group. The boys got to run out on the field and were introduced by the announcer for winning a local tournament. Before going into the park, we assembled outside the park and these moms walked up and we all greeted each other. Three of these moms had on low cut t shirts with their lace bras showing and we asked our daughter, who is the same age and friends with them ... "what's with the lace part of the bra showing?" She said ... "oh, some of the girls wear it like that for an even more feminine look."
I guess you miss some of these new fashion trends from our textile counterparts when ... you're a nudist!
:)
|
|
FireProf, I understand your point but let 'em wear as little or as much as they want. Maybe the les is more thing will be a positive to help move them move to nudist freeedom.
|
|
Oh ... there's no doubt. It's just typical young hypocritical behavior ... especially from some of the younger females that dress down to this level! LOL
|
|
Because to young women, it's a "fashion thing." As exemplified by Miley Cyrus "bringing back" the minimalist braless torn white T; or Rihanna going with the lace undergarment look.
 
Honestly I don't even think they consider the irony or paradox of wearing such fashions and then not going topfree at the beach or speaking in support of body acceptance. They're just going with the "new cool thing" that's going to get them noticed. And then millions of young women all over the world imitate them, with no rational basis for it other than: "it's the hip new thing!"
Whether it ultimately opens minds...time will tell.
|