First a declaration of non-interest. Some people here may be aware that I was a founding member of the Naturist Lifestyle Party of NSW. Sadly, the decision was recently made to wind up the party, since it was clearly not going to achieve its primary goal, so I'm writing this with no ulterior motive.

Late last year, I addressed the Administrator of Warringah Council in the council's public forum, asking that nude bathing be permitted on parts of Dee Why and Curl Curl beaches. These are mainstream beaches, so my request attracted some attention in the press. The administrator said he was not opposed to the idea in principle, and suggested that I organise a petition of Warringah residents to assess the level of support for the idea.

In the end, I had to do it all myself, so I spent some hours standing around bus stops in the city, talking to people boarding buses headed towards Warringah. This is a really really dull activity. Anyway, I asked about 200 people, and 80 or so signed the petition, providing their names and addresses (street names, but not house numbers).

That means that 40% of the people I asked were actually willing to put their names to a request for nude bathing on mainstream beaches.

In the end, it got us nowhere, of course. The administrator found reasons why it would be unacceptable, notwithstanding the results of the petition. One of the reasons was a concern for the impact on people who walk along the beaches.

If one based ones expectations on media reports and the state of the law, one would think that a willingness to be nude in public was something confined to the nudist fringe group, yet the facts seem to say otherwise.

So just how many people would actually be bothered by seeing nude bathers in places where nude bathing is allowed? And how many people would participate if it didn't involve hiking to some tiny isolated beach with no facilities?

Personally I dont see the problem with nudity as such. Having said that I think a nice bikini or whatever is much more flattering. There are people who frequent these nude beaches that have quite bizarre looks about them (nude). Sorry I just dont see why anyone would want to have nude people walking around a mainstream beach?? We have stopped people smoking in public areas so that it wont offend non smokers. Being a mother of small children I wouldnt want them to be forced to have naked bodies walking all around them. Sorry I think that if you want to go nude then walk to your remote location and go for it.

Deborah,

I'm somewhat puzzled as to why you think your small children would care if there were naked bodies around them. It's not as if a distaste for nudity has been evolved into us. There are even now tribes in the Amazon Jungle where nudity is the norm. One has to assume that their children are not growing up emotionally scarred as a result.

I've seen some young children on nudist beaches. Their attitude towards the nudity around them can only be described as one of complete indifference.

Sylvia.

Dear Sylvia,

Personally, I wouldn’t feel comfortable walking around naked in public; and I guess most other people think the same, despite the apparent support you have observed. Why? Because if most people believed nudity to be a socially acceptable norm, wouldn’t the government have permitted nudity on beaches long ago? I don’t have a problem with nudity being permitted in especially allocated places, as it is now, but some people may find it offensive on mainstream beaches. Moreover, there are safety reasons, why one should cover at least one’s genital area, which is a particularly fragile part of the body. :)

Rob, think back to what you have read of the introduction of mixed bathing and the various steps since. Each faced similar issues.

At each stage some considered others (un)dress preferences offensive. I fail to see why nudists should be discriminated against in a manner others are not. Somebodies choice to find a certain attire (or lack thereof) should not result in somebody else being forced to dress differently.

I'd be interested to see if any stats have been gathered on the sexual health of people who have grown up exposed nudity compared to their peers who have not. Are kids of nudists more or less likely to be rapists, have unplanned pregnancies etc than those of non nudists?

My gut feel is that they might exhibit healthier attitudes to the human body than some of their peers growing up with the view that their is something indecent or rude about the human body.

R0bert

I'm going to be a fox among the chickens here, but the problem with nudity is that hormonal charged young men may come straight from MTV or whatever and seeing a shapely teenage girl with nothing on...... *think*.

So the problem is not the 'offence' but the open door to perving etc.
I have a simple theory about nakedness, given that reproduction is the 2nd most powerful human motivation.. and that.. shock horror relates rather closely to stimulation by the sight of naked flesh of the opposite gender, it just doesn't sound quite right to be flashing our breasts and bums and privates for all and sundry.

Naturists would be ok with it I guess, but I still don't understand how 15 yr old boys faced with 14 yr old girls totally naked no matter how 'naturist' you might be, would not have a bit of a struggle in the groin.

Sylvia ? do naturists suddenly become holy and pure in all their encounters with the opposite sex ?

I suppose the next step (if it has not already arrived) is for bikini's to have just a thin string between the bum cheeks revealing pretty much all the rump area, perhaps then the front bit will shrink...

of course all simply proving what most of us know, 'titillation' is based on 'being naughty/pushing boundaries' and is incremental in nature. (as stated on the porn thread)
"Many small steps=One long journey"

When I was a young boy, probably about eight, I suddenly went from being uncaring about my own nudity to what my very wise mother called mock-modest. She wasn't a nudist, who was in England in the early 1940s? And she was a regular Anglican church-goer until the end of her long life. But she was remarkably well-endowed with common sense.

She had started discussing various things with me in a logical, almost adult way, when I was two. So, as usual, she took a logical approach. She told me that I would soon be going to high school and would have to change and shower with the other boys. [This was customary in those days and it didn't do us any harm.] When I was 18, I would be called up for national service and have no privacy whatsoever. Along the way, I may have a job, or be a member of a sports club, with communal showers. And, as I went through life, I would almost certainly need medical examinations and/or procedures during which female staff would be involved. So if I grew up ashamed and embarrassed of my own body, then I would give myself plenty of unneccesary hard times. I took this to heart and just as well, because all of these things happened to me.

I've always been a logical person and realised for myself a long time ago that sleeping nude was more comfortable and wearing clothes to swim in was ridiculous. It's not a matter of what a person looks like, if that had any meaning, then some of us wouldn't be allowed to walk down the street without bags over our heads.

The fact that most Australians don't have easy access to a clothes-optional swimming area is a disgrace. A very significant number of people want this facility. It doesn't affect those who don't want to go there. It could work wonders for our tourism industry if promoted sensibly. And, no, it doesn't lead to general debauchery, such a belief comes from ignorance of the situation based on false assumptions.

Dear Rex
I almost hate to admit my naivity here, but 'communal showers' as in.... male and female together ? have I missed something along the way ? Is this a common reality in sports clubs ?

Does anyone else have any examples of male and female shower/change room situations ? as in..... no privacy for changing etc...

On the 'ashamed' about our bodies etc.. I don't see it as being about that at all. Though in this current climate where the message is constantly rammed down our throats that for men 'size does count' a man of ordinary 'size' might feel just a tad less enthusiastic about displaying his ordinaryness in public. I suppose the same might go for females with 'ordinary' breast endowment. (for the record, huge breasts do nothing for me)

The only issue I have with nudity is the male female thing where our nakedness connects to our reproductive urges which are more prone to straying into pure 'lust' when confronted with a naked choice member of the opposite sex.

Am I alone in this ? *worried look* :)

Sorry, Sylvia, but I cannot understand the need for people to appear nude at any time other than getting dressed or undressed at home. And in the shower, of course. But then, I would probably be called ‘uniformed’, ‘ignorant’ etc by some of the galahs on OLO.

However, if some people wish to have a beach where they can be nude, it doesn’t worry me – I won’t be there. We’ve had Maslin’s Beach in SA for many years, and that doesn’t seem to have had any adverse affect on the majority of South Australians or on the general tone of the place. So, why not?

BD, "Am I alone in this ? *worried look* :) " thats called entrapment David. Trying to entice us to have fun with your issues and maybe risk a deletion for flaming. So much material all so risky ;) .

Seriously though you won't be alone on that, others who share your views of modesty will probably agree. You'll be keeping company with some who you spend much of your time criticising, what irony. There are other christains who don't share your concerns about nudity.

I'm not convinced that nakedness on a beach is as erotic as some outfits designed to emphasise those bits they cover. I've seen outfits on people in church services more focussed on creating erotic appeal than a nudist on a beach can get near. Almost impossible to legislate against (and I would not want to), even if you inforce a particular dress code those who want to flaunt it will find a way to do so. I bet some Amish find a way to look sexier than other Amish wearing similar garb. Its a combination of intent by the wearer and viewer, nothing the rest of us can or should involve ourselves in.

Maybe we should set aside some secluded isolated beaches for those with poor control of their lusts or who have convinced themselves that the human body is offensive and make the rest clothing optional.

R0bert

Sylvia,

Not me!

And now, if I might go off topic, and advise that another topic to which you were posting, "Innovative Uses for Salt", has just disappeared without trace. It would appear you may be about to be deprived of credit rightfully yours for your proposal of the world-beating Salt Powered Desalinator. I have submitted the following post as a new discussion topic under the same heading of Innovative Uses for Salt. I don't know how to reach Gonzo.

"GrahamY,

After 13 posts the topic "Innovative Uses for Salt", the sole topic under the heading "Technical Support" has seemingly dropped off the face of the planet, or disappeared into the ether, or both. It is only, I think, 10 days or so since the thread was started by Gonzo, and it was his first post. Other topics seem to stay up three times as long with only half the number of posts. The second post was my first post on this forum, too. The thread had become very active, yea, productive even. Its removal seems to discriminate against the category. Does this forum have something against newbies, or Technical Support; or has someone used a bad word in a post and now we are all to be punished? Is the Forum experiencing technical difficulties, or was Sylvia's last post the Last Post for uncensored interaction?

For those not in the know, Sylvia Else had just posted a design for a revolutionary salt powered desalinator, of possible world significance, but at the least potentially of great significance here in Australia. She indicated she may have placed it in the public domain, perhaps under something like a Creative Commons license. She had indicated that she had no expectation of becoming "feelthy reech" from her proposal. Her design was innovative, and it used salt. She was right on topic, but something, or someone, appears to have hijacked Gonzo's thread. Credit where credit is due, please.

The three of us seem to have lost the thread of our discussion; we were certainly all on topic. Could you post it back? Please?"

Boaz:

"I suppose the next step (if it has not already arrived) is for bikini's to have just a thin string between the bum cheeks revealing pretty much all the rump area, perhaps then the front bit will shrink..."

Um... you should go to the beach more often. They're called g-strings (or 'thongs' in the US, believe it or not). They've been commonplace and legal on our beaches for some years now, and IMHO are decidedly more sexy than a completely naked body :)

You are aware, of course, that your logic concerning the supposedly intrinsic 'sexual' nature of the exposure of human bodies is very close to that of Islamic fundamentalists, who promote the wearing of the hijab, burkha etc precisely so that men's lust is not inflamed by the sight of hair, skin etc.

Fortunately, most of us are more confident in our abilities to contain our sexual impulses than such fundamentalist prudes are.

Rather than addressing my responses to individuals, I'll just add some musings on what's been posted so far.

Nudism remains, um.., very much under cover. Even people who are pushing for clothing optional beaches are frequently reluctant to have their full names published. Some nudists are concerned that they'll suffer adverse consequences, such as losing their jobs, if their involvement becomes widely known.

One consequence of this is that there seems to be a significant disparity between what people think about public nudity, and what people think *other* people think. A perception that acceptance of public nudity is not the norm results in people concealing their own acceptance of it, and thus perpetuates the idea that society as a whole is not accepting. The laws just reflect this. I suspect that some people who refused to sign my petition refused for exactly this reason.

On the issue of balancing rights, it is true that people should not have exposure to nudity imposed on them. But it's less clear that this should encompass a right to go anywhere and everywhere without coming across nudity. Such a right would imply that those who want to be nude cannot be nude anywhere. A more equitable approach would be to allocate resources proportionately, with appropriate warnings given to people that they may encounter nudity in certain areas. There are three small metropolitan beaches where nudity is allowed. On a hot day, and despite their inaccessibility, these beaches become more crowded than other metropolitan beaches. This must surely indicate that the allocation of clothing optional beaches is not proportionate to the demand.

As for whether people really need to be nude in public, one can equally well ask whether they really need to be dressed. Neither question can sensibly be answered without making initial assumptions that pretty much contain the answer. People can be dressed unless they need to be nude, or they can be nude unless they need to be dressed. Neither starting point seems to have any special status compared with the other.

The salt usage thread is still available at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=134

Sylvia.

For a few years now my partner and I have regularly visited a “clothing optional” beach, not so much for the nudity but because we can take our friendly, sociable dogs without some anti-canine Nazi insisting they need to be on a leash at all times. Nude people are maybe a bit more chilled about such things. Yes, we do bring plastic bags. No, they don’t bite, but they do occasionally…um… sniff. Sorry.

It’s nice to be able to swim in the nuddy, and even to sunbake – but clothing is definitely non-optional once the cold southerly winds spring up, or if you’ve forgotten to be scrupulously thorough with the SPF 15+. And that’s the point: clothing, like nudity, has been optional there – it’s your choice.

Most visitors to this beach are friendly, decent and tolerant, but as with any beach (including plenty of clothed beaches) you can get a perve element. Unfortunately a small number of this latter group have been getting a bit….um… “indiscreetly prominent” lately, and I gather the local council is moving to remove the “optional” bit of “clothing optional”.

A pity, but we’ll still visit, just so long as our mutts can still romp in the surf with us.

Wow, didn't realise that some people were so paranoid; BOAZ_David, but then I remembered your superstitious bent.

As I spent most of my 20s in Europe, especially around the Mediterranean, I can state, quite categorically, that visiting nude beaches is not much of a turn on for young studs “straight from MTV or whatever”.

Most Europeans accept private and public nudity as barely worth raising an eyebrow for, and I believe the evidence is that sex related crime there is well below the level of the God-fearing prudes in the USA.

There are countless resorts where clothing is only required if you actually go off site to the local town. For the uninitiated the first ten minutes are a bit of an eye opener, especially since many of the ‘perverts’ are middle aged or older and quite relaxed. Once the shock value wears off you wonder what all the fuss is about.

After all we wandered the planet for hundreds of thousands of years without a stitch and all the other animals still do.

Perhaps the real question is: why does anyone have to wear clothes except to stay warm or protect themselves from the searing sun?

Could this be the root cause of many of society's current problems?

When you repress an irrepressible urge you pervert it - it is the forbidden nature of nudity that makes it titillating not the nudity itself.

I remember a really old grand uncle telling us about the days when women even covered their hands with gloves (so the only female skin you saw was on the face) that he got a sexual rush from seeing women's ankles and he would sit opposite a puddle where women had to lift their skirts a few inches off the ground and perve.

Also if I can be a little cynical - you can sell someone a bikini for a ridiculous price - you cant charge them anything for their birthday suit. There is no profit in it - a huge industry could collapse.

It could also be an impediment to our becoming the 51st State of the most puritanical Western Nation in the world.

I rather like the Spartan view that nudity encouraged fitness since any lack of fitness was obviously going to be more, well, obvious.

Perhaps it just goes to show that our political leaders and our puritans all have very small penises and they will do anything to stop them from being found out.

Sylvia, it is just a culture thing.

Whether or not it is healthy, unhealthy, liberated, prurient, normal or abnormal, it is simply not going to be a widely accepted practice in Australia. Not just today, I would suggest, but for a very long time.

I worked in Germany for a while, and as you would know they have a totally relaxed view of public nudity

http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,415516,00.html

(it's safe to click, by the way!)

But as the article points out, it has been like that for a century. Nobody had to lobby, persuade, argue or protest about it.

It was first formalised at the turn of the last century...

"a certain Paul Zimmerman opened the first known nudist camp near Hamburg in 1903. The idea was to resist the straitjacket of 19th-century social expectations by flinging away your armor of restrictive clothes. Along with vegetarianism, tee-totalling, "clothing reform," and calisthenics, nudism belonged to a new, avant-garde cult of the body"

It was an option. And being a pretty logical race, the Germans simply accepted it as another lifestyle choice.

The chances of that happening here are, quite simply, Buckleys. We simply aren't that tolerant of "otherness", in whatever form it may appear.

In WA, during the 1970s and 80s, nude bathing became very popular. North Swanbourne freebeach, just a short drive from Perth CBD, was one of the most popular and crowded beaches in WA. Amongst the many anonymous people, you could see [if you could recognise them without their clothes on] politicians, well known business people, media presenters, entertainers, senior police officers, sporting personalities, ministers of religion and so on. An independant survey showed that about 10% of the people there would be tourists.

But this beach had inadequate parking, no services and was the only busy beach with frequent heavy surf in the Perth Metropolitan area to be without the protection of lifesavers. Apparently, if you swam nude and got into difficulties, you didn't deserve to be rescued.

As the demand for more nude bathing areas grew, instead of doing their duty and providing more nudist facilities, the authorities responded with more and more NO NUDE BATHING signs and police and ranger resources were wasted on open or covert surveillance of relatively isolated beaches to prevent the increasing popularity of skinny dipping. This popular trend was deliberately discouraged by official bullying and threats of prosecution. I was head of Neighbourhood Watch for a busy beachside suburb at the time. At every meeting, people complained that you couldn't get a police officer when you needed one. But they could always get to the beach at short notice if someone complained about nude bathers.

cont

Every impartial survey taken in WA since the 1980s has shown public support for nude bathing, usually by about 2 to 1. The outer metropolitan City of Wanneroo, with a huge coastline, was being pressed to provide a freebeach. The council, confident that the proposal would be rejected, held a referendum to coincide with the local election. When they got a "Yes" vote, the council said they weren't bound by it. So much for honesty!

I have lived for some time in another outer metropolitan area, which does have a legal freebeach. Some time ago, a local paper printed a letter [writer's name not published] saying that this beach was dangerous for women and children. I phoned the police station and the council and asked their opinion. They both said that the freebeach was quiet and trouble-free. I got permission to quote both the police sergeant and the head ranger by name in a letter to this paper. The paper refused to print my letter. They were happy to print an anonymous lie, but would not print the truth.

When this beach was legalised, with majority public support [the professional survey, submission and petition figures were never publicly released, but I have them], It was publicly stated that it would help to attract tourists and provide local employment in service industries. But the council and local tourist office has done absolutely nothing about it. The freebeach isn't marked on any local maps or tourist leaflets and no info is available at our tourist office.

cont

Attitudes to nudity is a cultural thing. Every culture exposes different parts of the body and some are offended at different parts of the body. Victorian Christians and the Taliban found female ankles so arousing that for a female to show an ankle was considered offensive. Ancient Greek and early Roman women were forced to wear head scarves as so not to arouse the gods. Nudity and personal security are not an issue; women could wear a sack of cow dung and a paper bag and still be ogled or raped for exposing their eyes. In Islamic countries women are no more secure from rape than women in the west.

I think there is a place for nudity at specially zoned beaches but not most urban beaches. The reason is nudity is not in cultural context on urban beaches. In cities we formally dress to work and socialise, this is carried through to the beach where we formally dress to swim and relax, ie Shorts, Bikinis. If bathing costumes get so minimal that it barely covers anything then so be it, context evolves.

The worry that nudity attracts perverts is redundant simply because there will always be those who have immature attitudes to nudity. The same people are predators in society now regardless of what cladding the population wear. Perverts wether they are of sexual or puritan types need to be addressed as a separate issue

WA has either legal or recognised nude swimming areas at the tourist destinations of Esperance, Albany, Denmark, Dunsborough, Bunbury, Rockingham, Rottnest Island, Perth, Jurien Bay, Dongara, Geraldton, Shark Bay, Carnarvon, Coral Bay, Exmouth, Dampier, Point Samson, Port Hedland and Broome. Probably many more, known only to locals. But they are not publicised and it's not easy to get any relevant information. The first rule of marketing would have to be, If you tell no-one you've got it, then no-one will buy it. But try telling this to the so-called experts wasting taxpayers' money on failed marketing campaigns and see where it gets you.

Australia has tourism offices in both Britain and Germany. Many millions of Germans like holidays which include nude bathing and they are made welcome in Spain, France, Croatia and other nudist-friendly destinations. But Australia tells them nothing. The French govt tourism dept has promotions in London informing people of their nudist resort facilities. But Australia tells the Brits nothing.

The bleak British and European winter is our summertime. We're in the box seat to attract a huge number of sun-loving tourists to Australia and we do absolutely nothing about it. This isn't the fault of ordinary Australians, who are largely either onside or unconcerned about it. It's the fault of the so-called tourism and marketing experts, ignorant politicians and religious extremist lobbyists which Australia unfortunately seems to be stuck with.

Onya C.J. *ouch*.....

sooo.. you are a sexually resilient person huh ? Good 4 u.

I agree in one way... context has a lot to do with it. We don't get excited simply because a female can see our privates.. Doctor as an example.

As I thought I said.... the biggest issue might be from 'out'side pervs rather than inside participants...but.. having lived in indigenous societies where there is much more skin than here, I also know from the young guys that they are definitely alive down below when a hot chick is around.

Taliban ? sheesh.

There is nothing 'offensive' or 'evil' about our bodies (West) but our desires can be, and the thing which stimulates them is usually the old eye gateway.

"If your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out" said Jesus to underline the importance of not looking wrongly at the opposite sex.

For those who wish to bathe nude....go4it... no biggy to me, but don't whine when young teenagers come along to spy you out :)

Sorry Boaz? Jesus nailed up on the crucifix not being able to pluck out his own eye for staring down at women’s cleavage? Nudity is not about Jesus; nudity is about born freedom versus skin cancer. In this case perverts wether puritan or sexual are the control seekers, we must not allow them to tell us what to do. To do so would be the same as allowing terrorists to change our way of life. ‘WE’ ourselves are intrinsically imbued with the right to be clad or not. Our social organisation, our social contract with each other is negotiation to how much skin we expose. The pervs have no rights on this matter wether Aroused Allen or Reverend Puritan. Aroused Allen should be dealt with by law and Reverend Puritan should keep his nose in his own business.

Religious Right

The religious right sometimes seem to have trouble with their knowledge of the very religious basis for their objections. In the second reading of the NSW Local Government Amendment (Nude Bathing) Bill 1996, Rev. Fred Nile said "The next heading in Leviticus is "The Penalty for Committing Sexual Sins". That chapter regards nakedness or indecent exposure as a sexual sin."

He cites Leviticus 20:17 as an example, quoting "And if a man shall take his sister, his father's daughter, or his mother's daughter, and see her nakedness, and she see his nakedness; it is a wicked thing; and they shall be cut off in the sight of their people: he hath uncovered his sister's nakedness; he shall bear his iniquity."

The puzzle here is why the bible should be going to such trouble to identify specific familial relationships when proscribing nudity. In reality, the text above is obviously a mistranslation and Leviticus 20:17 is really about incest. Something that Rev. Nile should have known, particularly as otherwise incest is not proscribed.

Voyeurs and Sexual Offenders

Unfortunately it is true that voyeurs and people indulging in sexual activity can be found at some clothing optional beaches. I think this is largely because these beaches tend to be isolated and are essentially law-enforcement free zones. It would be rare to see a ranger or police officer there. Nudists can be reluctant to call in the authorities for fear of having the clothing optional status revoked. There is also the problem that the nudists tend to be older than the offenders, and people committing offences are not above making threats. I have also heard claims of vandalism to cars when nudists complain. So people get away with their unlawful activities, and the problem grows.

In an article entitled "Flashing a problem at hand [1]", journalist Emma Tom suggested that voyeurs could be dealt with merely by photographing them, but I have not been able to get any support for the idea from the nudists I've talked to.

[1] "Flashing a problem at hand" The Weekend Australian, 12 Jan 2002, Page 18.

I was a regular at North Swanbourne for many years. There were enough public spirited regulars to deal with the occasional unacceptable behaviour. Sometimes there were senior police officers present [in "plain clothes" if you could call it that! Not on duty], but we sorted things out for ourselves.

The legal free beach in Rockingham is less than 5 minutes drive from my house. It's close to a fully built up residential area and is separated from the adjacent textile beach simply by a sign informing of its legal status. There's no visual barrier whatsoever. The fact that it is "quiet and trouble free" as described by a local police sergeant and the council former chief ranger is no doubt due to its very public situation.

Putting clothes-optional beaches in isolated places is just asking for trouble. People going there are put at risk, not because they may be nude, but simply because they are in an un-policed area. It's also discriminatory to put any public facility in an area which cannot easily be accessed by people who are old, infirm or struggling with young children and trying to carry the many items which are needed for families to enjoy any outdoor activity.

A while ago, I was on our beach and saw a man a little way up acting inappropriately. I walked over to him and told him that, next time I was on the beach, I would have a camera with me and would photograph him if he was acting like that. And I would give copies to the council, the police and the media. I never saw him again. I know what you mean, Sylvia, probably few on our beach would have done that. They fear retribution from the council if they report any inappropriate behaviour. As far as I am concerned, that attitude achieves nothing.

Many years ago, a senior WA police officer told the media [during an attempted smear campaign] that North Swanbourne had no more perverts than any other [textile] beach. Something which people with an axe to grind unfortunately find hard to believe.

Rex, the discrimination can be worse than just a lack of policing.
Qld with no legal CO beaches has an unofficial one on the Sunshine Coast. A remote unofficial site - no lifeguards (except for special events). There is a phone on the far end of the beach (away from the area used by nudists) but I gather it is generally broken due to vandals.

People have a choice regarding swimming at the beach so the risk is their own. Having said that the governments unwillingness to support any safely accessable CO beaches limits the options of nudists and has contributed to peoples deaths.

R0bert

Every one is right on this issue, from their own perspective of course.
What they have been doing in Europe is forming clubs with facilities.
Raising money amongst members and buying a bushblock would be an option.
Preferably a large farm with a huge dam with waterholding (water..were?)
capability and land which has to be desalinated for profit and powergenerating.(no pun intended Sylvia)

There are plenty of private member nudist clubs in Australia too, some of them with extensive grounds. And also plenty of holiday places, ranging from very basic to very comfortable. But many people don't want to be forced to go to private clubs or resorts and why should they?

It is noticeable that there have been no serious attacks on nudism on this thread. Surely that is because most Australians are either actively or passively on-side, or neutral. And this is what has been found in many impartial surveys.

My small WA city has many, many kilometres of beach. We have boat launching facilities, places for wind surfing, fishing, snorkeling, spearfishing, jet skiing, you name it. A great, lifesaver patrolled surf beach. And many kilometers of dog walking beaches. But just 800 metres of clothes optional beach. This beach has never caused any problems, but a small minority of people, apparently mainly extreme Christians, openly wish it wasn't there.

Most of the complaints regarding beach activities in my city relate to uncontrolled dogs. Fighting each other, fouling the beaches and walking paths, attacking other dogs and sometimes attacking people. Most of the violent criminal activity seems to be associated with some of the hotels and night clubs. And we also have serious problems with road hoons and graffiti. But no problems with our legal freebeach, which is easily accessible, close to built up areas and easily seen from adjacent beaches. Surely this should tell us something.

G'day
I would agree with many of you, saing in the polite way, that our Australian society in it'sew on nudity and interpretation of "morale" etc. fueled by certain organisations, is a very much backward and rusty.

In some instances is like a living in kind of fundametalistic system.
Arn't people travelling all over the waorld?
Did any one notice such pointles debates about nudity, in most appropriate placess such as abeaches,taking place in Croatia? Is there any big deal with nudidty in the central park in Salzgitter or Frankfurt, Holland, beaches of France even in so ortodox, one would think, Spain? No!.

Old and young, grandmas and kids enjoying swim and sun bath without any shame or shocks. It would be rather "vo pa" if some one would try to make any comments on that.

Some arguments are based on supposingly missbehaviour of some individuals, but if our australian beaches wouldn't be tacked "somwhere in the corner" placess, these thing wouldn't be happening.

Tad