A few weeks ago, I read an article talking about the psychology of nakedness.

In this article, the writer goes over an unusual psychological experiment about nudity.

What does all this have to do with nakedness? The psychologists demonstrated it’s quite easy to shift our perceptions of other people from having a mind full of agency to having a mind interested in experience: all they have to do is take off their clothes. Take the first experiment by Gray, et al., which showed 159 undergraduates a variety of photos. Some of these photos were of an attractive female named Erin, appearing in either a headshot or a bikini.

Other students looked at a handsome man named Aaron, glancing at either his face or sculpted bare chest.

After looking at these pictures and reading a brief description of Erin/Aaron, subjects were asked to evaluate the mental capacities of the person. They answered six questions, which took the form, “Compared to the average person, how much is Erin capable of X.” The X was filled in by various agency-related capacities, such as “self-control,” “acting morally,” and “planning” and a slew of experience-related capacities, such as “experiencing pleasure,” “experiencing hunger,” and “experiencing desire.” Participants answered these six questions on a 5-point scale from 1 (Much Less Capable) to 5 (Much More Capable).”

It turns out that a glimpse of flesh strongly influences our perception of Erin/Aaron. When the pictures only showed a face, they had lots of agency. But when we saw their torso, we suddenly imagined them as obsessed with experience. Instead of being good at self-control, they were suddenly extremely sensitive to hunger and desire. Same person, same facial expression, same brief description – but a hint of body changed everything.

Interesting, right?

My Comment

In my opinion, this experiment failed to consider the nudists’ perspective. How many of these 159 undergraduates were, in fact, nudists? How could the psychologists reach an objective psychological opinion or an analysis when all their objects were utterly biased? My point is, there are tons of psychological researches, studies, essays, books, and institutions; there are thousands and thousands of psychiatrists worldwide, yet the studies about nudism stay minimal. So, how could they make clear and objective opinions on the matter? How does this lack of experience grant them objective findings? Unless they want to keep judging us based on their biased thoughts and traditions.

However, the article offers another compelling perspective:

But the psychological reality turns out to be a bit more complicated. While seeing a body reduces perceptions of agency, it actually enhances perceptions of experience.

Now we are talking, huh?!

My Opinion

Nudism, to me, is an experience. Every day, every time I get naked, it gives me a new adventure. Boredom isn’t part of the equation when others or I am naked, even if they are the exact people I always see naked. Every time is a new, fresh experience for me. Nudism is the connection of our skins to the whole world around us. I still remember my first nude experience in our garden when I was little. Despite all the challenges and dangers around me, family, religion, and society, when I snuck out at night, I was able to feel the connection between me and the grass, the two palm trees, and the few flowers in our garden. I shared this experience in more detail in The Trigger of Nudism.

Perhaps not every nudist sees things the same way I do, but I can guarantee that, when we are nude together, there will be a better and more positive vibe between us, each other, and the nature surrounding us. Even when we meet indoors, we still feel the same positivity.

The problem in this experiment is the biased idea about nudity and sex. Grouping nudity and sexual actions is the norm in most research; the chances of finding any experiments done where the two concepts aren’t intertwined are slim. Due to religions and social attitudes, we developed unique feelings towards nudity. Instead of looking at the clothing as a tool for protection from cold or heat, we now use it as a blind—a blind that covers the shame we have of our bodies. Clothing has falsely become a measure of wealth and dignity.

Many religions created rules of shame and immodesty against nudity. These rules slowly became part of the cultural structure of human society, which developed an extensive and deep feeling of guilt towards nudism—guilt because nudity had always been attached to sex. Throughout my experience with my online nudist community in Just Nudism, I heard from many people that they feel guilty about being nudists. I would like to quote Dr. John Veltheim:

Concurrent with this trend is a parallel trend to automatically associate nudity to sexual activity. Many religions choose to perceive sexual activity as a sin, and by association, choose to see nudity as a sin also. Some religions use this argument as a way of manipulating people into feeling guilty about nudity. Guilty people then think they need the church to forgive them. Also, guilty people can be controlled easily by authorities of any description. Vibrant, healthy, guilt free people of high self esteem are traditionally very hard to `manage’ or control for churches or governments. Through the combination of the above influences, many societies created laws to make it illegal to go as nature intended.

When is it wrong to be naked? A naked new born baby is not considered wrong or bad. At what age does this child become bad? Is it 18 months or when they are three. A naked two year old on the beach is generally considered normal and inoffensive. So when is a child not a child? Is it four years old or is it ten years old? People with issues around nudity will often say it is when they reach school age, and that would be five years old. That concept infers that when a naked child on the beach is 4 years 364 days 23 hours and 59 minutes old it is a healthy child with a good attitude to life. One minute later, when the child turns five it is suddenly a naughty, sinful child because he/she is still naked! That concept is obviously a farce.