Photos

Replies

• BI

  

  Bill

  Mar 5, 2025

  I don't know what you're seeing on your logon screen - I do see on the loggingoutscreen a trio of people, two youngish looking gals and a guy between them, but in no way do they look preteen to me. Anyone else seeing what minimalist75 is seeing here? I hope you have fun at Haulover! We expect a full report when you get back from it.

  ReactReply
• TD

  

  Tom DOriginal Poster

  Mar 5, 2025

  [quote]I don't know what you're seeing on your logon screen - I do see on the logging out screen a trio of people, two youngish looking gals and a guy between them, but in no way do they look preteen to me. Anyone else seeing what minimalist75 is seeing here? I hope you have fun at Haulover! We expect a full report when you get back from it.[/quote] Yes I meant log out screen. I have posted my experiences elsewhere on the site.

  ReactReply
• TD

  

  Tom DOriginal Poster

  Mar 5, 2025

  [quote]I don't know what you're seeing on your logon screen - I do see on the logging out screen a trio of people, two youngish looking gals and a guy between them, but in no way do they look preteen to me.Anyone else seeing what minimalist75 is seeing here?I hope you have fun at Haulover! We expect a full report when you get back from it. Yes I meant log out screen. I have posted my experiences elsewhere on the site.[/quote] Forgot say the girls look about 12 to me.

  ReactReply
• TD

  

  Tom DOriginal Poster

  Mar 5, 2025

  [quote]I don't know what you're seeing on your logon screen - I do see on the logging out screen a trio of people, two youngish looking gals and a guy between them, but in no way do they look preteen to me.Anyone else seeing what minimalist75 is seeing here?I hope you have fun at Haulover! We expect a full report when you get back from it.Yes I meant log out screen. I have posted my experiences elsewhere on the site. Forgot say the girls look about 12 to me.[/quote] ... and well under 18 I'm any event.

  ReactReply
• SA

  

  Stone Andy

  Mar 5, 2025

  I gave up believe the site owners had any principles or consistency years ago. But I find that surprising given potential legal consequences whereby any pictures of naked minors can be considered to be child pornography.

  ReactReply
• JO

  

  John

  Mar 5, 2025

  [quote]I don't know what you're seeing on your logon screen - I do see on the logging out screen a trio of people, two youngish looking gals and a guy between them, but in no way do they look preteen to me.Anyone else seeing what minimalist75 is seeing here?I hope you have fun at Haulover! We expect a full report when you get back from it.Yes I meant log out screen. I have posted my experiences elsewhere on the site. Forgot say the girls look about 12 to me.[/quote] Now that I know what picture you are talking about, I can tell you both are over 18 and are regular contributors to the site. I know they look young, but they are just small. John aka cobeachbum

  ReactReply
• DG

  

  David Gaffney

  Mar 6, 2025

  Well even if they are of age should we really be promoting the young nude body look.
  Its as if they are promoting sex and not natural nudists .
  Ok call me a prude

  ReactReply
• DG

  

  David Gaffney

  Mar 6, 2025

  [quote]Well even if they are of age should we really be promoting the young nude body look. Its as if they are promoting sex and not natural nudists .for me its the same as the practice of using 12 year olds in underwear adds. Ok call me a prude[/quote]

  ReactReply
• DG

  

  David Gaffney

  Mar 6, 2025

  Would be interesting to have administrators input into the reasoning on choosing these images
  What image they were trying to represent for the group

  ReactReply
• BI

  

  Bill

  Mar 6, 2025

  The photo in question is a very pleasant and inviting one, with the depiction of nudists who are clearly enjoying their time out in nature with their family and friends. If someone immediately thinks of sex when they see it, I feel that the sexual direction of thought that has taken over the viewer is only in the mind of the beholder, not in the composition. True Nudists takes care to not allow pictures of underage people on their website, but this care in content does not remove underage people from nudism, just the visualization of them.

  Furthermore, there ought not be a problem with showing normal pictures of people who are under eighteen years old. The problem is that if these images were allowed here, this site would quickly be closed down because of strict laws against such pictures, with anything like that considered the equivalent of child pornography. Which these things are NOT, for the record. The normal depiction of children in their natural state should be seen as healthy and progressive, but in the atmosphere of the clothed world, where, "Everyone is a pervert who wants to be bare with all ages of people included." The powers that dictate the laws may help protect the greater society from the small percentage of actual offenders, but they also toss out the baby with the bathwater when it comes to the sound - and documented as positive - practice of regular nudism in families and with friends. Need it be said how wonderful it is to see how children raised without the bonds of clothing end up as healthier overall?

  Though this site appropriately (and understandably) caters to only adults, the premise of social nudism that doesn't include our children (and their children, etc.) is ridiculous if the pursuit of thriving, family-oriented nudism is, in its actual practice, ever going to be fully accepted and encouraged. Which it NEEDS to be, for the record. Where is our aging population of naturists and nudists heading if the younger generation is not included? So the pictures are not allowed, but the premise of family nudism is a sound one and surely strengthened by this website. Don't let the tang of adults-only in here let us forget that we are all better people when we're bare with everyone!

  ReactReply
• JO

  

  John

  Mar 6, 2025

  [quote]I don't know what you're seeing on your logon screen - I do see on the logging out screen a trio of people, two youngish looking gals and a guy between them, but in no way do they look preteen to me.Anyone else seeing what minimalist75 is seeing here?I hope you have fun at Haulover! We expect a full report when you get back from it.Yes I meant log out screen. I have posted my experiences elsewhere on the site.Forgot say the girls look about 12 to me. Now that I know what picture you are talking about, I can tell you both are over 18 and are regular contributors to the site. I know they look young, but they are just small. John aka cobeachbum[/quote] One of the girls is figuringoutsarah and she is 30.

  ReactReply
• JO

  

  John

  Mar 8, 2025

  What WildWilly said. If nudity is constantly seen as equivalent to sex, then pictures of people under eighteen will always be seen as pornography, despite the fact that hundreds, if not thousands, of children are being raised in nudist environments and are seen naked every day.

  IIRC, there was a problem in the San Francisco Bay area some twenty or thirty years ago, where photographs of nude children in normal nudist contexts were circulated by a porn site. They were taken without permission from the children's parents, usually clandestinely. When the authorities took notice, it resulted in a number of changes in nudist communities: vetting of newcomers to screen out anybody with a history sexual crimes, bans on photography at naturist resorts, and so on. As a result, children have pretty much disappeared in the media except for the very, very young, which tends to reinforce the popular image of adult nudes being only interested in sex. If the public can't see ordinary families, with adults and children, in nudist settings, what else are they to think?

  I put out a leaflet for my local non-landed club, which had a picture of two adults and a pre-teen child, in silhouette. (If there's a way to insert the picture from my computer instead of the internet, I don't know the method.) We handed them out at a local earth day fair, and the only complaint we got was from somebody who said that he wasn't comfortable with the concept of nude children. But he conceded that it was the parents' right to raise the kid in any way they saw fit.

  ReactReply
• JO

  

  John

  Mar 11, 2025

  Note: I did put the image I spoke of into my the "media" section of my page, which you can see if you like. I should add that it's copyrighted to me, although anybody else can use it in their own promotional material without charge, as long as it's credited to me.

  ReactReply
• JO

  

  John

  Mar 12, 2025

  And now the image has been taken down, possibly because of the "Under 18" rule, even though the child was seen in silhouette. I think that reinforces my point about the Great Taboo on pictures of children.
  Question: does that taboo extend to links? If not, I can put the picture on my web site and link it.

  ReactReply
• NK

  

  nkhiker

  Mar 13, 2025

  If this was a site that was truly about nudism for real nudist, then 18 would be irrelevant. But we all know what this site has become. There are many sites out there about nudism that show nudist of all ages.

  ReactReply
• VI

  

  Vincent

  Mar 13, 2025

  To nkhiker:I completely agree. If this site were truly about naturism, age wouldnt be an issue because genuine nudist communities focus on body acceptance, not sexualisation. Unfortunately, its clear that the priorities here have shifted, and the integrity of the platform has been compromised.

  Many of us joined expecting a real naturist community, only to see discussions overrun by off-topic content, bots, and questionable profiles. Its disappointing to see moderation fail to maintain a space that represents authentic naturism.

  Thankfully, there are still real naturist platforms working to provide a genuine space for nudists and naturists. NRE (NaturismRE) www.naturismre.com is actively creating a truly authentic platform that prioritises real naturist values, ethical moderation, and meaningful discussions. The NRE forum has no bots, no fakesonly genuine conversations with real naturists. Hopefully, more of the naturist community will shift toward spaces that actually represent what nudism is about.

  ReactReply
• JO

  

  John

  Mar 14, 2025

  [quote]If this was a site that was truly about nudism for real nudist, then 18 would be irrelevant. But we all know what this site has become. There are many sites out there about nudism that show nudist of all ages.[/quote] That actually is beside the point. It's for legal reasons. Being accused of hosting a kiddie porn site (regardless of how ridiculous the charge is) would be very expensive to defend against, and could result in jail time and hefty fines. They also ran into an issue with the credit card company that processes memberships (which caused the great purge of "banned" words). The land of the free is no longer the land of the free. We are the land of lawyers and lawsuits now. John aka cobeachbum

  ReactReply
• NK

  

  nkhiker

  Mar 14, 2025

  But its not beside the point. Many naturist sites show nudity of all ages. The difference may be that they do not generally allow people visiting the site to post their own pictures. They are informational and tightly controlled by the site owners. Nonetheless, a true naturist site should not be age restricted in showing people in a naturist setting. In the US is there a risk of doing so--perhaps. You are at risk of litigation if there is a crack in your sidewalk. Changing the topic slightly, it does seem that some of the scammers are now using photos of people under 18, or at least they look it. That is disturbing. That, or its part of a sting operation.

  ReactReply
• TD

  

  Tom DOriginal Poster

  Mar 14, 2025

  [quote]If this was a site that was truly about nudism for real nudist, then 18 would be irrelevant. But we all know what this site has become. There are many sites out there about nudism that show nudist of all ages. That actually is beside the point. It's for legal reasons. Being accused of hosting a kiddie porn site (regardless of how ridiculous the charge is) would be very expensive to defend against, and could result in jail time and hefty fines. They also ran into an issue with the credit card company that processes memberships (which caused the great purge of "banned" words). The land of the free is no longer the land of the free. We are the land of lawyers and lawsuits now. John aka cobeachbum[/quote] Yes, the US is very strict about underage nudity. Two incidents come to mind. Daniel Radcliffe has a leading role in a London production of Equus when he was 17. Since his role included full frontal nudity the production couldn't come to the US until he was 18. Brooke Sheilds was under 18 when filming The Blue Lagoon so they had to use a body double for her in some scenes. Chris Atkins was older so they didn't for him.

  ReactReply
• SU

  

  Susan

  Jul 29, 2025

  Thats a valid concern and one Ive quietly wondered about myself. The platform rightly enforces strict rules to prevent under-18 content yet the login visuals could unintentionally send mixed signals. Perhaps the photo is meant to depict a family-friendly naturist setting, but I agree it does raise questions, especially considering how seriously the community takes age-related boundaries.

  Maybe its time the admin team re-evaluates those visuals to better align with the site's policies and protect the integrity of the space we all value.

  ReactReply