/ ahumphries92pike's Library/ Notes/ Favored dermal contact with the environment, hostile though it was, to the loss of sensation indicated by wearing
Favored dermal contact with the environment, hostile though it was, to the loss of sensation indicated by wearing
from web site
clothes." 124
96. Clothes-compulsiveness is incompatible with the natural patterns of nature, as expressed by every other
Individuals are the sole species to clothe themselves.
97. Some psychologists theorize that people developed garments, in part, to set themselves apart from
animals.
Fred Ilfeld and Roger Lauer write: "Mankind's major aim is superiority . . . and one way that he strives for it is
through clothes. Not only do garments safeguard and decorate, but they also give status to the wearer, not merely with
Esteem to peers but, more to the point, in relation to man's place in nature. Clothing make a human being appear less
125 Lawrence Langner adds: "Modern man is a
puritan and not a pagan, and by his clothes has been able to beat his feeling of shame in relation to his sex
He's done this by transforming his fundamental inferiority into a feeling of
superiority, by relating himself to God in whose sexless picture he maintains to be made. But bring all his clothes away, and
it is clear to see he is half-god, half-animal. He is playing two opposing parts which contradict one another, and
the end result is confusion." 126
98. The physical barrier of clothes augments psychological barriers dividing us from the natural world.
In our clothing-obsessed society, we have distanced ourselves so much from nature the sight of our
own natural state is often startling. Allen Ginsberg writes: "Truth may consistently surprise a little, because we're
creatures of habit, notably in our hypermechanized, hyperindustrialized, hypermilitarized society. Any
presentation of nature tends to appear shocking." 127
99. Lifestyles that are incompatible with the natural patterns of nature (including clothing-obsessiveness)
may be psychological damaging.
"Nakedness is the natural state of humankind; garments demands a barrier between us
and God, nature, the universe, which serves to dehumanize us all."
everyday lives. After all, whole industries are now dedicated to empowering people 'to get away from it all.' What exactly is it,
everything? Many will acknowledge they're looking for something unavailable at home (apart from sunshine), something
They've been stripped of their cultural heritage; and this is
why they have to buy back what ought to be the birthright of all human beings: secure anchorage in parties and
rituals that attend the critical moments of our human lives." 129
100. A Naturist lifestyle is more environmentally accountable. As an example, the option of going bare
during hot, humid weather considerably reduces the need for air conditioning. Most air conditioners use massive
Numbers of energy, and many use coolants which are damaging to the stratospheric ozone layer.
101. Clothes is produced by environmentally reckless procedures from environmentally reckless
sources.
For instance, synthetics are developed from oil; and cotton is grown with intensive pesticide-laden
agricultural techniques. read represents half of the planet 's textile eating, and is one of the most pesticidesprayed
Harvests in the world. Clothing production may additionally comprise chlorine bleaching, chemical dyeing, sealing
with metallic compounds, finishing with resins and formaldehyde, and electroplating to rustproof zippers, creating
toxic residues in waste water.130
Accepted clothing conditions are arbitrary and inconsistent.
102. Clothes standards are inconsistent.
For instance, a bikini covering is accepted and even lauded on the seashore, but is confined elsewhere--in a
department store, for instance. Even on the beach, an expensive bikini is considered satisfactory, whereas knickers-
-though it covers the same amount--is not.
103. Clothes conditions are arbitrarily and irrationally based on sex.131
Until the 1920s, for instance, female ankles and shins were considered erotic in Western cultures, though
men wore knickers. The Japanese considered the back of a lady 's neck erotic, and contemporary Middle Eastern
cultures hide the girl's face. During the 1991 Gulf War, female U.S. army personnel were forbidden from
wearing t-shirts that bared their arms, as it would violate the Saudi Arabian allies.
forced to wear full army apparel in stifling heat.132
104. Today in The United States, women's breasts are seen as erotic and unexposable, even though they are
anatomically identical to all those of men except for lactation capacity, and no more or less a sexual organ.
96. Clothes-compulsiveness is incompatible with the natural patterns of nature, as expressed by every other
Individuals are the sole species to clothe themselves.
97. Some psychologists theorize that people developed garments, in part, to set themselves apart from
animals.
Fred Ilfeld and Roger Lauer write: "Mankind's major aim is superiority . . . and one way that he strives for it is
through clothes. Not only do garments safeguard and decorate, but they also give status to the wearer, not merely with
Esteem to peers but, more to the point, in relation to man's place in nature. Clothing make a human being appear less
125 Lawrence Langner adds: "Modern man is a
puritan and not a pagan, and by his clothes has been able to beat his feeling of shame in relation to his sex
He's done this by transforming his fundamental inferiority into a feeling of
superiority, by relating himself to God in whose sexless picture he maintains to be made. But bring all his clothes away, and
it is clear to see he is half-god, half-animal. He is playing two opposing parts which contradict one another, and
the end result is confusion." 126
98. The physical barrier of clothes augments psychological barriers dividing us from the natural world.
In our clothing-obsessed society, we have distanced ourselves so much from nature the sight of our
own natural state is often startling. Allen Ginsberg writes: "Truth may consistently surprise a little, because we're
creatures of habit, notably in our hypermechanized, hyperindustrialized, hypermilitarized society. Any
presentation of nature tends to appear shocking." 127
99. Lifestyles that are incompatible with the natural patterns of nature (including clothing-obsessiveness)
may be psychological damaging.
"Nakedness is the natural state of humankind; garments demands a barrier between us
and God, nature, the universe, which serves to dehumanize us all."
everyday lives. After all, whole industries are now dedicated to empowering people 'to get away from it all.' What exactly is it,
everything? Many will acknowledge they're looking for something unavailable at home (apart from sunshine), something
They've been stripped of their cultural heritage; and this is
why they have to buy back what ought to be the birthright of all human beings: secure anchorage in parties and
rituals that attend the critical moments of our human lives." 129
100. A Naturist lifestyle is more environmentally accountable. As an example, the option of going bare
during hot, humid weather considerably reduces the need for air conditioning. Most air conditioners use massive
Numbers of energy, and many use coolants which are damaging to the stratospheric ozone layer.
101. Clothes is produced by environmentally reckless procedures from environmentally reckless
sources.
For instance, synthetics are developed from oil; and cotton is grown with intensive pesticide-laden
agricultural techniques. read represents half of the planet 's textile eating, and is one of the most pesticidesprayed
Harvests in the world. Clothing production may additionally comprise chlorine bleaching, chemical dyeing, sealing
with metallic compounds, finishing with resins and formaldehyde, and electroplating to rustproof zippers, creating
toxic residues in waste water.130
Accepted clothing conditions are arbitrary and inconsistent.
102. Clothes standards are inconsistent.
For instance, a bikini covering is accepted and even lauded on the seashore, but is confined elsewhere--in a
department store, for instance. Even on the beach, an expensive bikini is considered satisfactory, whereas knickers-
-though it covers the same amount--is not.
103. Clothes conditions are arbitrarily and irrationally based on sex.131
Until the 1920s, for instance, female ankles and shins were considered erotic in Western cultures, though
men wore knickers. The Japanese considered the back of a lady 's neck erotic, and contemporary Middle Eastern
cultures hide the girl's face. During the 1991 Gulf War, female U.S. army personnel were forbidden from
wearing t-shirts that bared their arms, as it would violate the Saudi Arabian allies.
forced to wear full army apparel in stifling heat.132
104. Today in The United States, women's breasts are seen as erotic and unexposable, even though they are
anatomically identical to all those of men except for lactation capacity, and no more or less a sexual organ.
