Adverse Secondary Effects.Essay

Legal Resource Material



ADVERSE SECONDARY EFFECTS

Marvin Frandsen







"Men of your type, who come to our wonderful beach and mix with

women and children in a bathing suit of this kind, with its narrow

shoulder straps and low-cut neck, are nothing but showoffs and

beach posers ... there's only one place for men like you, and that's

the city prison."



-- Coney Island's Judge Golden, 1924

N Magazine 12.2, p. 43.





"Twenty-five years ago women were arrested and convicted for

appearing on the beach attired in sleeveless bathing suits, or

without stockings."



-- Parmelee v. United States, 113 F.2d 729, 732 (1940), quoting

People v. Miller, 155 Misc. 446, 279 N.Y.S. 583,584





"Legs have some sort of psychological effect on men."



-- Mrs. Calkins, Yonkers prison matron, 1936



Comment from the public on the subject of nude knees: "This

nakedness, it's terrible. It's not respectable. It's wicked."



-- Mrs. Edward L. Hunt, Lawrence, Long Island, 1954



Last arrest for wearing shorts in public: 1965, New York City

Defendant: Patricia Ann Morgan

Defense: "I know my shorts weren't too short. It's just that my

legs are too long."



(1985 New York Daily News article by Madeline Rogers, quoted in

Naturally, Fall 1994, p. 34)



"Women in both 19th Century China and 17th Century Spain were

modest about their feet; indeed, in Spain, carriages were fitted

with a mechanism that could be lowered to hide the feet of

women as they disembarked. When the suggestion was made to

Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 1 of 20

shorten women's dresses so they would raise less dust, husbands

said they would rather see their wives dead than share a glimpse

of their feet with other men."



"Victorian morality allowed formal dresses that displayed cleavage

but forbade the display of the bare arm."



"In Japan the nape of the neck was considered an erotic part of a

woman's body bared only for the purpose of arousing a man ... "



-- Surveying Body Acceptance, Nicky Hoffman, Nude & Natural

15.2, p.34





BCO = Brevard County Ordinance 95-21, Banning all Public Nudity





! Nudity opponents are fond of imagining that something about the natural uncovered

human body leads to wild behavior, sex crimes of several sorts, and general social anarchy. In

their minds, a tolerance of nudity leads straight to the demise of Western Civilization and the

family unit as these beloved and venerable institutions crumble beneath crazed naked hordes

who have lost all sexually civilized thought and behavior.



! As claimed by the BCO in its attempt to ape the logic of Renton and Barnes (thus

logically equating a Naturist family on a remote beach with the commercialized sexuality of a

nude bar), nudity in "other [unspecified] communities" leads to "... prostitution, sexual assaults

and

batteries; attracted other criminal activity to the community; encouraged degradation of

women and facilitated other activities which break down societal family structures and values ...

(BCO 3(k))"



! The BCO also goes on to claim that allowing nudity would "encourage the influx into

Brevard County of persons seeking to ... participate in the secondary effects of such nudity,

including disorderly, harmful, illegal and open sexual behavior that is associated

therewith ..." (BCO 3(r))



! This brief will examine the objective, scientific truths about the personal and social

effects of legal, general nudity. Conversely, this brief will also examine the personal and social

effects of the forced wearing of clothing.







The Restoration of Nudity to Western Civilization



! Although nude bathing on public lands has been an economic and social necessity

through all of history and for all peoples, the practice of being publicly nude for extended

periods of time among mixed genders and in family units appears to have disappeared in

European society during the Victorian era. As the 19th century came to its close, "ladies skirts

Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 2 of 20

swept the sidewalk as modesty demanded, waists were small beneath tight corsets that caused

internal damage to the wearer, sex was an unmentionable subject, and a majority (if not all) of

decent married couples never saw each other totally nude." (See The Nudist Society, by William

E. Hartman, Ph.D., Marilyn Fithian and Donald Johnson, Elysium Growth Press, Los Angeles, 1991

version, p. 11. Source is hereafter referred to as NS.)







! It is surprising that in a widespread state of society such as this that a young German

man named Richard Ungewitter dared to dream of and advocate a society in which men and

women would live together totally nude. Ungewitter's attempts to publish ideas met with

incredulity on the part of publishing companies. In 1903, Ungewitter finally managed to scrape

together enough of his own funds to self-publish his book, Die Nacktheit. To everyone's

surprise the book was a sensation.



! In that same year, Paul Zimmerman established the world's first nudist resort, calling it a

Frielichtpark (Free-light Park).



! The 19th century United States however saw the appearance of an anti-nudity crusader

by the name of Anthony Comstock. Comstock's influence on American society was so profound

that he inspired a word in the English language (Comstockery, meaning self-appointed

censorship) that survives to this day.



! Comstock was motivated by an intense piety and belief that he had been called to be

" ... the weeder of God's garden." Comstock was more fervent on the subject of nudity than

anything else. Nude photographs, or anything approaching them were his favorite target.

(Many of Comstock's cases," noted Heywood Broun and Margaret Leech, "concerned books and

plays and pictures which were pornographic only by the wildest stretch of the

imagination." (See Anthony Comstock: Roundsman of the Lord, by Heywood Broun and Margaret

Leech, The Literary Guild of America, New York, p. 267 (1927).)



! Comstock also objected to anything approach real-life nudity, such as circus acrobats

who plied their trade in tights.



! Comstock obtained a commission from the Post Office Department and used his

authority to attack every instance of "indecency" which he could uncover.



! Comstock drew up legislation reflecting his views and succeeded in having his bill

introduced into Congress in 1873. Congress passed Comstock's legislation. Comstock's federal

anti-nudity law was substantially enforced for 80 years and met its end only in the 1950's. The

federal law was finally ended by a Court decision granting the right on First Amendment grounds

for a nudist publication to be sent through the U.S. mail.



The First Psychological Study of General Nudity





Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 3 of 20

! Almost three decades after its founding, Zimmerman's Free-light Park was professionally

visited by a Dr. Howard Crosby Warren, a Professor of Psychology and Chair of the department

of Psychology at Princeton University for many years. Prof. Warren was apparently one of the

most eminent psychologists of his day, and served as President of the American Psychological

Association in 1913, twenty years before his study of nudism. Prof. Warren published his

insightful study as "Social Nudism and the Body Taboo" in the Psychological Review, March

1933. (Reprinted in NS as Appendix A.)



! Prof. Warren's interest centered on the nature of the body taboo. As he wrote,

"Foremost of interest to psychologists is the basis of the body taboo. Is it a fundamental

human trait, as many have maintained - inherited, or at least an inevitable consequence of

man's social life?"



! We will skip directly to Prof. Warren's conclusions:



! "The most striking phenomenon in the life at a nudist park is that this taboo disappears

almost at once, and without any detrimental effect to one's world view or morals. One quickly

realizes that the human body is not indecent."



! "No one who has been through an experience of social nudity in favorable and proper

circumstances will hesitate to answer this [question of innateness of the nudity taboo] in the

negative. In some cases the taboo and its customary responses slough off at once. On

questioning the men stopping at Klingburg [location of Free-light Park], I found that for some

the maladjustment lasted only a few minutes, for other it persisted during the first day - after

that social nudity seemed perfectly natural and the power of the taboo was entirely broken. I

had no opportunity to find out the duration of the taboo in women. It certainly vanished in

every case after a short time ... my observations and the reports of others, make it certain that

for the normal human individual who is not entirely dominated by the taboo the habitual

responses disappear in a remarkably short time."



! Prof. Warren also addressed the issue of increased eroticism with general mixed gender

nudity and found that:



! "Soon the effect is merely the appearance of the 'organism as a whole'; one notices the

general contour of the body; whether male or female, rather than any specific sex-distinguishing

features ... I observed the tendency of men to seek women and chat with them in an

unconstrained way. The slight sex barrier usually noticeable in social gatherings was absent; but

there was no petting or flirtation, nor trace of ribaldry, no presumptuous behavior based on the

exposure of the body."



! "My observations, and the wider experience of others, lead to the conclusion that social

nudism does not in any way foster eroticism - that it tends if anything to promote a saner sex

outlook and more natural relations between men and women, even during the years of early

sexual maturity."





Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 4 of 20

! "The writer's observations and the testimony of others indicate that social nudity is not

productive of eroticism. There is less sexual excitement, less tendency to flirt, less temptation

to ribaldry, in a nudist gathering than in a group or pair of fully clothed young people."



! Prof. Warren finally concluded that:



! "Two conclusions of considerable psychological importance were satisfactorily

established: (1) Since the traditional body taboo can be readily, almost immediately, broken

without detrimental results, it is not a fundamental human trait. (2) Social nudity is not in itself

indecent; only a widespread and persistent social convention has made it so."









Continuing on the Question of

General Nudity and Eroticism



! Prof. Warren's conclusions concerning the non-innate nature of the nudity taboo and the

lack of eroticism inspired by general nudity are also borne out by other researchers.



! As noted by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in Parmelee

v. United States, 113 F.2d 729 (1940) (hereafter, Parmelee) it is the presence rather than the

absence of clothing which causes eroticism to be attached to the human body as such. Quoting

Folkways by Sumner (1906) at 426, Parmelee notes that: "It appears that if any part of the

body is put under a concealment taboo for any reason whatever, a consequence is that the

opinion grows up that it never ought to be exposed. Then interest may attach to it more than

to exposed parts, and erotic suggestion may be connected with it ... so soon as objects were

attached to the body for any purpose whatever, the conventional view that bodies so

distinguished were alone right and beautiful was started, and all the rest of the convention of

ornament and dress followed." (Parmelee p. 733)



! One interesting example is that "... when the present queen of England brought in, at her

marriage, the fashion of brushing up the hair so as to uncover the ears, which had long been

covered, it seemed indecent." (Parmelee p. 733)



! Parmelee notes several cases which illustrate the inverse relationship between clothing

and conservative sexual behavior, among which are (Parmelee p. 733):



! (1) "The natives of New Britain are naked, but modest and chaste. 'Nudity rather

checks than stimulates.' The same is observed in English New Guinea."



! (2) "On the Uganda railroad, near Lake Victoria, coal-black people are to be seen, of

whom both sexes are entirely naked, except ornaments. They are 'the most moral people in

Uganda.' The Nile negroes and Masai are naked. In the midst of them live the Baganda who

wear much clothing ... Their character and their dress are accounted for by their long subjection



Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 5 of 20

to tyranny. They are 'profoundly immoral,' have indecent dances, and are dying out on account

of the 'exhaustion of men and women by premature debauchery.'"



! Parmelee quoting Sumner likewise notes that "It is impossible to eliminate the sense of

stimulus, or to establish a system of societal usage in which indecency shall be impossible. The

dresses of Moslem women, nuns, and Quakeresses were invented in order to get ride of any

possible question of decency. The attempt fails entirely." (Parmelee pp. 732-733)



! Ironically, the experience of history, psychology and even art is that the best way to

remove indecency is not with compulsory clothing but with common nudity.



! Parmelee at 732-733 quotes Schroeder, Obscene Literature and Constitutional Law

(1911) p. 306, quoting Havelock Ellis, Psychology of Sex, to note that: "Nakedness is always

chaster in its effects than partial clothing ... As a well-known artist, Du Maurier, has remarked

(in Trilby), it is 'a fact well known to all painters and sculptors who have used the nude model ...

that nothing is so chaste as nudity ... Burton, in the Anatomy of Melancholy (Part III, Sec. ii,

subsec. iii), deals at length with the 'allurements of love,' and concludes that the 'greatest

provocations of lust are from our apparel.' "



! Similar very telling historical cases are cited by Lawrence Langner in his groundbreaking

review work on the history of fashion ("The Importance of Wearing Clothes," Lawrence Langner,

Elysium Growth Press, Los Angeles (1991)).



! Langner noted that, "... among habitually naked primitive peoples, eroticism due to

viewing the opposite sex in the nude is less aroused as compared with the sexual stimulus due

to the nakedness of people who habitually wear clothes. For example, the men of Pongo,

French West Africa, refused to allow their women to wear any kind of clothes because, if they

did, the women would become more beautiful and be desired by the men of other villages ...

Arthur Grimble, Research Commissioner of Gilbert and Ellice Islands in the South Pacific Ocean,

expressed his views in regard to this matter as follows: 'Clothes may have originated in the

Garden of Eden but they have spoiled a Pacific paradise. Clothes covering bodies which once

went naked, have contributed to the natives' moral decadence by stimulating a nasty curiosity

which never before existed.'" (p.41)



! Langner also stated that "Gauguin, in his book, Noa Noa, stated in effect that the

continued nakedness of the Polynesians had kept their minds free from preoccupation with the

mystery of

sex and has given their manners 'a natural innocence, a perfect purity.' It is often assumed that

if we lived in a nudist world, our nakedness would produce such excessive sexual stimulation

that we would all rush to cover our bodies in order to survive. Hence the widely held but

mistaken belief that the effect of wearing clothes is to inhibit sexual stimulation. It is now well

recognized that the contrary is true." (p. 83)



! The relative lack rather than presence of eroticism in the case of widespread public

nudity is borne out by research indicating that nudist sexual norms are actually more



Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 6 of 20

conservative than those of the clothed population. (see "A Comparison of Social Nudists and

Non-Nudists on Experience with Various Sexual Outlets," Dr. Marilyn Story, Journal of Sex

Research 23 (2), 1987.)



! Dr. Story noted that "The issue of the effects of nudity on sexual behavior is rampant

with opinion and emotion ..." and sought to replace that opinion with scientific study.



! Dr. Story noted that statistically "Social nudists were less likely than nudists to have (a)

had premarital intercourse with a person other than an intended marriage partner ... ; (b) had

sexual experience with a person of their own sex before or during adolescence ... ; (c) had

extramarital sexual experience ... ; (d) had group sex experience ... ; taken unfair advantage of a

person for selfish reasons ... ; or (f) had sexual contact with a family member other than a

spouse." (Numerical results omitted.)



! Dr. Story concluded that "The lower rate of nudist participation in less socially

acceptable sexual behaviors lends support to the view that nudists hold a stricter code of

sexual conduct than non-nudists."



! Interestingly, Dr. Story found that "... members of religious groups with strict sexual

conduct rules were as sexually active as nonreligious persons ... ". Statistically it seems that

public nudity is more successful at producing healthy sexual norms in a population than is

religious belief per se.



! Ironically then, public nudity leads to precisely the sorts of social and sexual effects

which the opponents of public nudity hold to be supportive to and necessary for the family unit

and civilization, and which are taught weekly in churches throughout the nation, while the well-

intentioned efforts of the clothing-compulsive lead to precisely the opposite effects.







The Effect of Public Nudity on Children



! One of the most potent fears of the opponents to Naturism/Nudism is the effect of

exposing children to nude bodies, and especially adult nude bodies. As hatred and fear are

almost the same emotion, the opponents of nudity easily turn fear for the welfare of children

into hatred of people who would supposedly harm children.



! Thus the fears of presumed negative effects when children are allowed to see adult

bodies (and even other children!) are always a forefront political and moral theme when nudity

opponents seek to pass restrictive laws against nudity. They and their politicians often make

the a priori assumption that such exposure is an adverse secondary effect per se.



! This brief will attempt to summarize simple observational science on the matter and

replace presumption and fear with fact.







Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 7 of 20

! Although the effects of nudity on children have not been a central focus of psychology,

two good major academic works have been published on the subject. One is the sweeping and

comprehensive 1970 study of all aspects of nudism titled Nudist Society, by Prof. William

Hartman, Marilyn Fithian and Donald Johnson (Elysium Growth Press, Los Angeles, 1970 and

updated in 1991.) Another 5-year study was devoted specifically to the subject of children and

nudity (see Growing Up Without Shame, by Dennis Craig Smith and Dr. William

Sparks, Elysium Growth Press, Los Angeles, California (1986).) (Hereafter Nudist Society shall

be referred to as NS, and Growing Up Without Shame as GUWS.) Both of these major works are

responsible scientific efforts headed by trained scientists. In the case of Prof. Hartman, a

devout Christian employed at a Christian university, personal preconceptions were changed and

professional sacrifices were made as ideals of scientific truth were placed above personal

interests.



Dissonance in the Psychology Community



! It should be noted as we begin that a few prominent psychologists have stoked parental

and societal fears by claiming that various sexual maladjustments may ensue if children see

their parents or other adults in the nude. Such claims are always based on Freudian theory and

the unconscious-probing clinical treatment of disturbed individuals. (In an editorial footnote, it

is ironic that the politics of nudity have made strange bedfellows as the Christian right

often relies on theories invented by an avowed atheist and promulgated by his supposedly

liberal and sex-obsessed ideological descendants, while these same people and theories are

scathingly rebuked by these nudity opponents in other circumstances.)



! As noted in GUWS, "Working with the same conviction as Anthony Comstock, our law-

enforcement agencies [or politicians] jump to conclusions as to what is deserving of

prosecution and what isn't. Often the decision is made on the basis of what might offend a

child. Yet there are no good studies [on nudity] regarding what would harm a child - or offend a

child, for that matter." (p. 126)



! GUWS points out that "... modern advocates of this policy [of shielding children from

nudity] appear to base their statements on personal experiences or on a few cases of troubled

individuals for whom nudity was accompanied by many other problems." (p. 27)



! After five years of study specifically of the effects of nudity on children, GUWS vented

some frustration at the uninformed shoot-from-the-Freudian-hip theories of some 'experts' by

stating that:



! "The experts warn about the terrible guilts and frustrations which will develop in a child

exposed to nudity. We didn't find them in the people we interviewed. We found normal

childhood problems of adjustment, but we also found a group of adults seemingly satisfied with

themselves, and very willing to raise their children as they were raised, with nakedness as part

of their everyday lives ... Some even mention that they were able to develop into adults without

fear or shame because of the nudity that surrounded them. None speak of overstimulation." (p.

180, 181)



Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 8 of 20

! GUWS also concluded that: "It seems clear to us now, after five years of study, that this

unfounded bias and conjecture has been very misleading. But, more than that, it has caused

real harm to more than one generation of American children. It has been, in a way, something

akin to doctors telling women in third-world countries that breast feeding could be harmful and

that artificial formula was better for their babies. In light of the effects of that misinformation,

it is clear that some warnings by 'experts' can be irresponsible and dangerous." (p. 181)



! For a more detailed examination of the issue, one is invited to read the entire book. This

brief concerns observational science applied to the general population, and leaves the untested

personal theories of a few dissonant psychologists as a sideline issue.







The Reality of Children's Reaction to Public Nudity



! The Supreme Court of Michigan ruled in 1958 that it is absurd to impute harm to

children by sighting naked adults: "... to surmise without a shred of evidence that they were

corrupted by seeing their mother and father without any clothes on (along with some other

mostly middle-aged people some distance away) is to gratuitously invest childhood with evil and

erotic tendencies before mere nakedness and to reject the observations and researches of

virtually every anthropologist and sociologist who has contributed to the literature of human

mores. See Sumner, Folkways, under index entry "Nakedness." Also, see 33 Michigan L Rev

936 for similar references." (People v. Hildabridle, 353 Mich. 562,590; 92 N.W.2d 6 (1958))



! Moving on to the academic study done more recently, NS notes that the famous

anthropologist Margaret Mead observed the effects of nudity on children in South Sea Island and

American cultures and in summary concluded that:



! "(1) Clothing is an alienating factor in establishing our body image and separates us

from our bodies. The dichotomy of the self apart from the body develops in childhood. (2)

Nudity in clothed Western culture involving children and adults may provide a traumatic

distortion for the child because of lack of comparative elements. In an unclothed society all

ranges of humanity of varying sizes, shapes and descriptions are to be found and compared ...

This involves breasts and penises in our society in particular ... (3) In many societies sex roles

develop in early childhood through physical [skin] contact between parents and children ...

paraphernalia as bottles, cribs and clothes create barriers between the bodies of parents and

children and mute a significant communication process and learning experience ... (5) Because

of absence of nudity in our culture, the child loses an important link in learning since he cannot

observe the growth process of nude bodies at various maturational states that his body will go

through. (6) Nudity or partial nudity by no means indicates a lack of modesty among primitive

peoples." (NS 153-154, see also Margaret Mead, Male and Female, pp. 83, 288-90.)



! Thus according to Margaret Mead's trained comparison of a nude vs. a clothed society,

the clothed society comes off rather the worse for its banning children from exposure to nudity.





Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 9 of 20

A lack of exposure rather than presence of exposure is harmful to a child's emotional and social

maturation.



! Hartman et al. in NS also noted emotional health advantages of nudist children which

paralleled Mead's observations of Polynesian children. As concluded in NS pp. 139-140, "In the

area of observable sexual differences, nudist children may have an advantage over a great many

other children in our culture who have never been exposed to the same or opposite sex in the

nude. We view this as a positive aspect of nudism, for both the children and the adults. It not

only gives children the opportunity to see that they are like other boys and girls, but it gives

parents the opportunity to notice that Johnny and Jane are developing at about the same

maturational rate as the other youngsters their age."



! NS also concludes that (p. 141) "... nudism provides a natural form of sex education. If

children are freely able to observe sexual differences, they develop a better understanding of

the physical differentiation between genders when parents talk about sex education with their

children."



! Interestingly, then, public nudity is a parental aid for home and home-value based sex

education.



! A 30-year old married minister interviewed in NS makes the equivalent statement that

"Nudism offers an environment as nothing else does, which is free from morbid physical

curiosity, one in which children can grow and mature with a healthy attitude toward body

differences and functions." (NS p. 144).







! As one mother noted, "My daughter is two years old and is the only child on our block

who is not 'ashamed' or curious about another's body. Hers is a wholesome attitude toward her

own body and others." (NS p. 141).



! Numerically this anecdote is validated by the University of Northern Iowa study wherein

it was found that "In terms of how positive they felt about their bodies, their attitude toward

their genitals and what the research termed 'total body self-concept,' nudist children and adults

scored higher than nonnudists in all categories ... nudism was found to be more important a

variable than sex." (see GUWS p. 25-26)



! The 1991 update to NS also concluded that "Despite small differences, the responses of

the two groups [two other independent study groups] are remarkably similar. It appears from

our study (and confirmed by Smith and Sparks) that nudist affiliation - even from childhood - in

no way damages normal sexual development and enjoyment." (p. 379)



! NS does disagree with the beliefs of some nudists and nonnudists as to an overall

lessening of sexual interest caused by public nudity. NS finds that "... we, however, are more

inclined to view it as a shift in area of importance, from sex per se to that of a total

relationship."



Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 10 of 20

! An interesting example of this shift is provided in a note in NS p. 190 where it is

reported that "Several of the men reported an increased dislike for smutty jokes or dirty stories

that they had routinely listened to before they began to practice nudism."



! While public nudity may not lessen sex drive per se, then, it does tend to reorient

sexuality into the direction generally desired by the opponents of public nudity and for that

matter by responsible society at large. As the obsessive focus on the body is lessened and

sexuality is better coupled with an overall relationship, many of society's problems with sexual

exploitation could be mitigated at the roots via government and societal promotion of

appropriate, safe and nonsexually-oriented public nudity. This type of public nudity is

precisely what exists at clothing-optional beaches and clubs. The State's interest in decreasing

public health and welfare, especially that of children, by banning the exact type of public nudity

most needed by society is difficult to fathom.



! As the "proof is in the pudding" we should examine the behavior and especially the

sexual and other crime rates, of children who have been raised in the allegedly healthful

environment of public nudity.



! NS notes that as one interviewee put it, " ... preschool age children don't do nearly as

much fussing and crying. Practically never do they squabble." NS also notes that "Outsiders we

have taken with us to camp also have invariably been interested in this phenomenon." (NS p.

143)



! NS also records that: "A prominent Midwest doctor, writer and counselor dealing

extensively with young people attended camp with us, and, as usual, we asked his reaction to

the youth. His impression was that the children were very cooperative with each other, with no

conflict situations developing in the course of the observations. He seemed to think this quite

interesting because there seemed to be no concept of "mine" as found generally in the larger

culture, where children seem to be very egocentric in their behavior. There seemed

to be a much greater willingness to share. He was impressed with what he observed and never

fails to mention it in correspondence with us." (NS p. 155)



! NS also records the opinion of a well-known female family counselor that "She, too, was

impressed with the children at play. She observed that there was no appearance of any sense

of shame or embarrassment in the boy-girl relationships, and she felt it was a positive,

wholesome environment." (NS p. 155)



! A well-known psychiatrist from the East observed that:



! "The reduction of hostility was strikingly evident in the kindly way in which children were

treated. They were dealt with by parents and others as worthwhile individuals. There was none

of the sharp direction, shoving, pulling, or threatening behavior that adults can be seen

exhibiting to children in stores and other public places. Children were energetic and outgoing,





Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 11 of 20

playing together or with adults without bickering and without any show of sexual curiosity or

sexual naughtiness." (NS p. 281)



! Conversely, psychologists have noted the emotional and psychological harm caused by

teaching body shame to impressionable young minds: "An alarming amount of sexual

dysfunction, child abuse, and intimacy difficulty in our society is rooted in early childhood body-

guilt, learned through verbal and non-verbal parental reactions toward genitalia and the

excretory functions of the body. Case histories were related to me that dramatically

demonstrated the disastrous effects of this early training as it carried into adulthood." Aileen

Goodson, Ph.D., author of Therapy, Nudity and Joy, quoted in Nude & Natural Magazine 15.1 p.

66 (1995)







Childhood Exposure to Public Nudity and the Crime Rate



! As for crime, NS noted that "Some attitudes became obvious as our research developed.

Most nudists felt free to leave their valuables unattended without concern, convinced that no

one (not even a young child) would take something that did not belong to him."



! NS notes that nudist Henry Huntington (see Defense of Nudism, New York, Robert

McBride Co., 1958, p. 41) contended that not a single case of juvenile delinquency has been

reported. The National Observer (a non-nudist news publication) covering a Midwest Sunbathing

Association convention stated that "Not one of the more than 23,000 youngsters in the nation

who have been raised as nudists is known to have ever picked up a police record ..." (see

National Observer, 14 August 1967, "Can Nudism Put Brakes on Juvenile Delinquency?")



! NS notes that "The contention by the nudists we interviewed was that, even if a few

cases had been hushed up, this still presented a fantastic figure and that left a high number of

young people who had never encountered the law in any negative capacity." NS however does

question given figures as police reports and records do not provide information on a juvenile's

past experience with public nudity.







! The NS 1991 update provides no further information on nudist and naturist crime rates,

nor did GUWS examine the question. One provocative statement is made however in a religious

publication wherein it is stated that "It still remains true today that no person, raised from

childhood in a stable nudist family, has ever been convicted of any kind of sexual assault. The

same can not be said for any other method of raising children." (see Along the Way, #19, p. 3)



! Paul Bowman also asserts in his study of nudity in South American Indian tribes that "It

is very interesting to note that in cultures where childhood nudity is not taboo, the sexual

paraphilias (such as pedophilia, exclusive or acquired homosexuality, fetishism,

exhibitionism, etc.) are almost non-existent compared to Western cultures today. Often we

tend to think of people who happen to have a more primitive culture as being sub-human. It is

important to realize that the people we are discussing are every bit as human as we are. They



Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 12 of 20

are a friendly and handsome people who can feel the full range of human emotions. Certainly,

living in total nudity, except for decorations, does not in any way diminish their

humanness." (Paul M. Bowman, "Nudity in South American Indian Tribes," NLI No. 8, pp. 31-32)



! These modern results prophetically echoed the prediction made in NS in 1970 that "Until

our society takes a more realistic view of providing opportunities for individuals to be educated

about the basic biological differences between the sexes, the current unwholesome climate can

be expected to generate curiosity that will, in turn, produce sex offenders in the future." (p.

349)



! Overall this brief notes that while more research should be done to nail down the precise

relationship or lack thereof between children raised with public nudity and their crime rates,

what evidence does exist indicates that public nudity evokes healthy social behavior in

children and correspondingly suppresses antisocial behavior, leading to a plausible if poorly

documented lower crime rate. As the government's legitimate state interest is in suppressing

rather than in inciting crime, and in the welfare of children, a ban on public nudity directly works

against the long-term interests of the state.







Effects of Public Nudity on Adults



1. Marital Adjustment



! The only comprehensive look at the effect of public nudity on marital adjustment is that

done in NS in 1970.



! The bottom line is that NS found that "Most of our respondents reported that nudism

had been a positive influence in their lives and marriages ... Viewing marital adjustment through

the eyes of practicing nudists generally reflected nudism to be a unifying and positive influence.

Wives particularly reported the benefits nudist practices had on their husbands and children and

thus on their marital and family situations. Our data support the idea expressed in the nudist

literature to the effect that spouses who practice nudism are generally happy in their

marriages." (p. 132, 134)







! As one anecdotal account noted, "Prior to becoming nudists, my wife, my daughter (by

a previous marriage), and I had problems and were counseled by a psychologist who suggested

a closer family relationship. In nudism we have found this relationship and have been able to get

along in harmony ever since." (NS p. 191)



! Another man noted that "I used to spend all my spare time in a bar. Since I joined

nudism, I have felt better. I have gotten closer to my family. We have fun as a family, such as

swimming, table tennis, volleyball. We have met a lot of other wonderful families that we visit

frequently. We do not drink or go to the bars very much, and on the whole, we are enjoying life

much more." (NS p. 132)



Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 13 of 20

! The NS study also noted a another subtle effect which could increase marital harmony,

which is an increased feeling of equality among the genders. As a participating eastern

psychiatrist observed, "There seemed to be more male-female equality in this context. Both

sexes participated in all of the camp activities and there was less segregation into male and

female groups than there is in usual social gatherings. This could relate to reduced need to

accentuate or defend sex differences." (p. 281)



! As for divorced nudists, NS found that "... nudism had nothing to do with divorce, that

both spouses were nudists before and after the divorce, and that, in their opinion, nudism as

such was not a factor to be considered."



! Also of note is the observation by Jan Smith that "... social nudity can serve as an

antidote to the titillation of pornography. Once you've seen hundreds of naked bodies on the

nude beach, bodies lose some of their taboo power. Nude beaches are far less sexually charged

than clothed beaches simply because swimsuits are much sexier than wearing nothing at

all." (see Nude and Natural 11.2, p. 108)



! What academic evidence exists suggests that public nudity in the form of nude

recreation creates no discord in marriages and may serve a healthy and unifying role in many

marriages. The elevation of women to a position of equality is helpful in this. Contrary to the

misguided and unfactual statements of the BCO, a government which wishes to foster social

cohesion and the status of women should promote rather than ban public nude recreation.







2. The Effect of Public Nudity on Self-Esteem



! The psychological and emotional advantages gained by children who grow up with public

nudity are deepened and mirrored in the case of adults. The truth is that our species was

designed and meant to experience social nudity. In a society that bans nudity, the unhealthy

result is that the deprived adults have no realistic general idea of what the bodies of the two

genders of their own species are really like. This lack of information fosters an unhealthy

obsession with fantasies of unattainable and unreal physical perfection and the supposed

imperfection and deformation of one's own body. The insecurities bred by the lack of such

important emotional feedback can cause a great deal of unneeded insecurity and pain even in

persons who have considerable accomplishments in their life. This is especially and particularly

true of women.



! As noted by writer Jan Smith, "Our inability to accept ourselves - not just physically, but

in every way - in part stems from our larger-than-life images, the Hollywoodization of our idea of

what is normal. Virtually every image that our popular culture presents to us is an idealization

of reality ... Feeling inadequate, we look for some outside fix to satisfy our inner needs. No

wonder we have become a society of addicts." (see Nude and Natural 11.2, p. 106-107)









Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 14 of 20

! Evidence of the power of banning nudity to make Americans emotionally ill is seen in

Zimmerman's report of the the result that:



! "Studies show that 85% of American women currently suffer from some form of body

image disorder. Over 5 million men and women are afflicted by what is now called body

dysmorphic disorder (BDD), "imagined ugliness disorder." Think of it: body intolerance has

become an American way of life. In many circles criticizing body parts and one's own

appearance can feel almost obligatory. Millions of people in this country are not at peace with

themselves, and more join them every day in focusing on the body as the primary source of

human discontent." (see Nude and Natural 14.3, p. 73)



! A poignant example of this emotionally depressive effect of a nudity ban is provided by

one of the most prominent women of American history. As reported by Zimmerman, "Eleanor

Roosevelt - with all of her accomplishments - when asked whether she had any regrets about

her life, said: 'Just one. I wish I'd been prettier.'" (see Nude and Natural 14.3, p. 73)



! In contrast the nation of Denmark (which as discussed elsewhere does not have any laws

against public nudity and where public nudity is a routine fact on nearly all the nation's beaches)

has a psychologically much healthier population.



! As stated by June Reinisch, Ph.D., Director of the Kinsey Institute for Sexual Research,

"Americans appear to have a more negative self-image than people in other cultures. We have

an ongoing project in Denmark and the U.S. that includes a body image questionnaire. The

Danes are either positive or neutral about ninety percent of their body. But when you ask

American women and girls about their bodies, they're unhappy with ninety percent of their

features, and happy or neutral about the remaining ten percent." (see Clothed with the Sun 8.3,

p. 10)



! Public nudity provides a psychologically needed and necessary antidote to unreal

suppositions. Public nude recreation provides the necessary feedback for many people to

understand the reality for others and thus the reality for themselves.



! As one women put it, "Women don't get to see nearly as many naked women as they

would like to. You never have a chance to look at another naked women. I don't think 80

percent of the women in this country have any idea what other women's bosoms look like.

They have

this idealized idea of how other people's bosoms are, but we are now beginning to see that

there are hundreds of thousands of different shapes, colors, and structures. You know, nipples

are all different ... My God, isn't it ridiculous to be an emancipated woman and not really know

what a woman's body looks like except your own?" (see Nude and Natural 11.1, p. 13)



! NS reported similar emotional and psychological advantages for women who experienced

public nudity. An good example was reported personally by one of the researchers:







Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 15 of 20

! "I was finally able to convince a friend who was certain that she was abnormal in body

build (she felt she had no breasts) that she should go to a nudist camp with us. At least

partially due to her breast size, this woman seemed to have feelings of general insecurity. When

we got there, disrobed, and walked into the group, she turned to me and said, 'My God, I have

more breasts than most of them.' She did. But how does one know this in a clothed society

where falsies, padded bras, and puffy blouses cover the body beyond recognition? The visit

was very therapeutic for her. Now she feels more like a real women, and nobody can ever tell

her she has small breasts. She knows better." (p. 339-340)



! As stated by psychologist Paul Bindrim, "I found out that self-image was very much

based on body-image and, if you can accept your body, then you can begin to accept yourself

much more", quoted in Nude and Natural Magazine 15.1, p. 66 (1995)



! Another note on the elevation of women in public nude recreation is provided by a GUWS

statistical study which noted that concerning nude beaches, "Many married women said their

husbands wanted to come and they just went along. Of this group, only 15% said they would

stop going if it was left up to them. An amazing 85% said they would come on their own now

and were glad their husbands had brought them there." (p. 175) It seems rather unlikely that a

neutral-to-reluctant group of women would at the 85% level return on their own even if their

husbands stopped coming, if public nude recreation did not provide substantive psychological

benefits.



! As concluded on a more statistical basis in NS, "We found that one of the most valid

ways of accepting one's basic biological self is to practice nudism in a social situation (p.

160) ... our culture has done a magnificent job in creating much ado about nothing. This is to

say that denying the individual his basic biological identity in social situations is possibly one of

the major contributing factors to our mental health problems of the day (p. 315) ... Not only

are there therapeutic implications in nudism but there also is a dimension to biological honesty

and self-revelation provided by nudism that has never been considered by any researchers of

my acquaintance (p. 320)."



! Thus, quite bluntly, according to objective scientific findings, and contrary to the

unfounded misstatements of the BCO, a governmental ban on public nude recreation does not

promote "public health, safety and welfare" but actually constitutes a well-meaning but direct

attack on the public's psychological health, safety and welfare by the government itself. If the

government wishes to meddle in such affairs at all then the rightful place of government as per

legitimate state interests is to promote public nude recreation, not to suppress it.







3. Effect of Public Nudity on General Psychological Adjustment



! The earliest personality inventory of nudists appears to have been published in NS in

1970 by John P. Brantner, Ph.D., a Professor of Psychology at the University of Minnesota

Medical school, co-author of The Physician's Guide to the MMPI and a veteran of 20 years' use





Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 16 of 20

of the MMPI (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory), a test which today is still the

standard in personality testing.



Prof. Brantner found that:



! "The married men are on the average a self-assured group of active and perhaps

somewhat impulsive people ... They are free from anxiety and worry, although they take a mildly

pessimistic view ... They are generally free from hostility and do not appear to be

frustrated or resentful ... they do not show any aggressive or truculent masculinity of attitude

and are likely to be considered somewhat gentle by the average American standards."



! "The married women are quite different ... They are utterly normal. There is nothing in

this mean MMPI profile to distinguish it from the average American wife. Some writers have

described groups of women like this as full, uninteresting, and placid. The lucky ones

are married to one of them. These are the women whose central interest lies in their families

and their homes. They are serene, calm, self-assured and womanly without undue dependency.

They are stable, contented women, and they derive their greatest satisfaction from their

husbands and their children. They very likely form the foundation of American character." (see

NS p. 101)



! As for single male and female nudists, Brantner found that the unmarried men were " ...

rather like the married men with a few differences. They were less self-assured and confident

and perhaps a little more resentful of things in general and more self-indulgent." Single female

nudists were "... more active, cheerful, optimistic, more aggressively outgoing and social."



! Brantner found the differences between married and single nudists to be minor, noting

that "Most of the minor differences between these essentially normal married people and these

essentially normal unmarried people can be accounted for by the likelihood that the unmarried

are younger and also because of the cultural definition of the role of the single person in our

society." (see NS pp. 99-100)



! In summary, Brantner found that:



! "On the average, the MMPI suggests that a man who practices social nudism is within

normal limits in his personality. Within these limits he is somewhat of a nonconformist in many

ways, active and physically restless, a little discouraged by the world as he perceives

it, but quite free from anxiety and personal concern."



! "Women who practice social nudism are, in MMPI terms, a remarkably normal group. An

average profile with no high points and no low points is rarely seen. Although some might

consider this to indicate that nudist women are, therefore, relatively dull but normal, women

who fit within this range of MMPI ratings are very effective. They are stable, dependable,

contented, and invest most of their interest in their husbands and children. They are not

usually active outside the home. The family provides them with satisfactory identity and feeling

of worth. They, like the nudist males, are confident and self-assured."



Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 17 of 20

! "In short, the MMPI shows this to be a group much like any other in our population,

containing its rebels and malcontents, its disturbed individuals and its unhappy ones, but over-

all consisting mostly of normal men and women seeking their own way to fulfillment." (see NS

pp. 103-104)



! Hartman, Fithian and Johnson commented that "The In-Depth Personality Inventory

confirmed our judgment that nudists are relatively normal, well-adjusted individuals. This is

particularly true of females ... Female participants in social nudism seem to be unusually well

adjusted. It would be difficult to find a group of adult females in our culture who would provide

more normal profiles on an In-Depth personality test than those we have obtained." (see NS p.

350)



! Hartman et al also explicitly concluded in their academic study that the arrow of

causality runs from public nudity to mental health:



! "There are important mental-hygienic implications in social nudism ... In a culture where

sizable proportions of the population require the services of professional persons in the

alleviation of their mental, emotional, and social problems, the reported relaxation

possible in nudist settings is significant. This shift in emphasis of benefits accruing from nudist

practice over the past three decades suggests that the physical benefits primarily significant in

the early days of nudism in America now have been replaced by the mental

benefits." (see NS p. 350)



! "An outstanding finding of our research, completely unsuspected at the beginning and

closely related to mental hygiene, is that nudism may be regarded as a therapeutic

community ... Our four years of research of the nudist phenomenon has confirmed the position

taken in 1934 by Dr. Howard Warren that the body taboo is not universal, that its usefulness as

a concept is questionable, and that the changing of this supposedly biological taboo may not be

only desirable but beneficial for the health and welfare of many individuals in our society." (see

NS p. 351)



! Thus on the whole, public nudity actually actively supports the pillars of mental health

and sociality upon which healthy civilization rests. While not a panacea, public nudity via nude

recreation has been found in fact to be an effective therapeutic setting in which anxieties,

neuroses, low self-esteem and aggression are laid to rest and healthy, confident, family-oriented

individuals result. The worst that can be said is that public nudity produces individuals which

some might see as healthily dull in a utopian sort of way.



! The therapeutic effect of public nude recreation is particularly important due to the

decades-long trend of decreasing mental and emotional health in America's youth. This

decreasing health has been documented by Drs. Michele D. Wilson and Alain Joffe of Johns

Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore in the June issue of The Journal of the

American Medical Association.





Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 18 of 20

! As reported by the Associated Press (see "Adolescent health skidding, doctors say,"

Florida Today, 7 June 1995) in an age of sophisticated medical capabilities as a long-term trend

American adolescent health is actually decreasing. The reasons for this decline are (1) violence,

(2) sexual assault (3) increasing drug abuse, including alcohol, and (4) promiscuity and

pregnancy. On the latter, the report notes that "U.S. teen pregnancy rates continue to be

among the highest of developed nations ..." It is noteworthy that the U.S., which is as a society

is generally more hostile to nude recreation than Europe is experiencing correspondingly greater

social problems related to mental health, emotional balance and social bonding.



! It is most noteworthy then that responsible social scientists have found that public nude

recreation produces a mental health and sociality which is precisely inimical to the roots of

these social maladies. As is well known, violence, sexual assault, drug abuse, and irresponsible

sexuality are all directly linked to low self esteem, weak family bonds and feelings of alienation.

Meanwhile public nude recreation has been proven to weigh in on the side of high self-esteem,

respect for and an identification with others as equals, and a refocusing of sexuality to a

relationship rather than a quick physical fix.



Nude recreation thus therapeutically strikes at the heart of these roots of social malady. In

an age and nation that is marked by its ineffective grappling with the social problems of

unsocialized and violent children and juveniles and weak and dysfunctional family and marriage

bonds, the State's interest is clearly in promoting and fostering a scientifically proven method

for mitigating precisely the social problems that are most vexing to its long term health. The

State has no interest in warring against its healthiest citizens and its fundamental interests by

banning practices which increase mental, emotional and social health precisely when it is most

desperate to find social arrangements which will produce a generally more healthy, functional

and family-building citizenry.







4. Miscellaneous Public Health Issues



! One little-appreciated benefit of public nude recreation is that swimsuits are a mild and

sometimes a serious threat to public health. Beyond the usual concerns of hypothermia or the

catalysis of yeast infections in females, public health concerns are particularly relevant in

subtropical climes such as Florida where jellyfish and their larva are abundant.



! As noted in the public press (e.g. see "Sea lice make presence felt across state,"

Orlando Sentinel pp. B1, B5, 18 June 1995) invisible animals known as sea lice (actually recently

discovered to be jellyfish babies) are a public health threat to ocean swimmers and splashers.



! That is, unless they are nude.



! As noted in the article, "... the rashes tend to occur on areas of skin covered by

swimsuits ... Applying pressure to sea lice prompts them to fire stinging cells that inject

toxins ... The force of water draining from bathing suits, which can trap sea lice, is a main

source of bather's stings, which turn into itchy welts and red blotches that last for several days.



Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 19 of 20

Showering in sea lice-infested bathing suits can set off the stinging cells ... Children seem to

contract worse cases than adults, said Boca Raton Community Hospital emergency room nurse

Mary Russell."



! Sea lice seem to be spreading from their normal geographical range and getting worse.



! As noted in the article, " ... swarms of the tiny, stinging jellyfish larvae known as sea lice

are causing loads of misery for ocean bathers this summer. And the lice are invading more

Florida coastal waters than in previous years, University of Miami researches say. Scattered

outbreaks have been reported as far south as the Florida Keys and as far north as Jacksonville.

This exceeds the normal sea lice hot spots in south Palm Beach and north Broward counties,

said Terri Meinking, a dermatology researcher and professor at UM's medical school. In

Hollywood, where sea lice are rarely a problem, more than 700 bathers were treated for stings

June 11-12 ... Offshore winds, shifting ocean currents and burgeoning food supplies for thimble

jellyfish could be boosting sea lice numbers in coastal waters, medical researchers say."



! Forcing the entire population to subject itself to venomous toxins at the beach through

legislatively forced exposure is perverse, against the State's interest, and concretely and

diametrically opposed to the goals of fostering public health, safety and welfare. At the very

least, the population should be allowed havens (nude beaches) where they need not be exposed

to toxic stings. This is particularly true of persons who are allergic to venomous stings or who

are medically predisposed to developing such allergic reactions with exposure, such as the

Author's daughter. For such persons the forced wearing of bathing suits can develop into an

unexpected tragedy.







Conclusion



! In conclusion, the bottom line on the supposed adverse secondary effects of public

nudity were announced more than 2,000 years ago by Plato:



! "It is not so long ago that it seemed shameless and

ridiculous to the Greeks to see men naked ... but, I suppose, when

it became clear to those who used these practices that to

uncover all such things is better than to hide them, then what is

ridiculous to the eyes disappears in light of what's best."



Larissa Bonfonte, "The Naked Greek," Archaeology

Quoted in Naturally, Winter/Sprint 1992, p. 31









Adverse Secondary Effects // 2003.06.07 // Page 20 of 20