The invasion of the CAMEL TOES.

This is the place for your stories, testimonials, naturist humor (in good taste), family concerns, and other issues, as you help each other understand God's will for you.<P>Only Residents and higher may post here.

Moderators: jochanaan, MatthewNeal, jimmy, natman, Senior Moderator, Moderators

Re: The invasion of the CAMEL TOES.

Postby Ramblinman » Sat Apr 21, 2018 9:08 am

New_Adventurer wrote:Well, it is a step toward gender equality, until women cry foul and start to objecting to our encroachment on their fashion styles.


Codpieces and bustles were an attempt to embellish our natural endowments.
Simple nudity strikes a balance: neither pretending that we don't have genitals, nor attempting to draw attention to them.
Ramblinman
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2524
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:22 am
Location: United States

Re: The invasion of the CAMEL TOES.

Postby Bare_Truth » Sat Apr 21, 2018 9:59 pm

Ramblinman wrote:Codpieces and bustles were an attempt to embellish our natural endowments.


I am not so sure about bustles.......If one considers the style of the dresses which covered up so much of the feminine form, I believe that there was a health and safety risk of the women tripping from their shoe heels getting caught in the trailing edge of the hem of the dress. The use of a bustle would cause the back of the hem to hang several inches back from where it would otherwise be if it simply hung from the buttocks. Depending on the cut of the hem it may also have kept the hem from getting dragged in the dust of the street or any traces of equine deposits in the street. Hence the bustle may have simply been a practical solution to an impractical style of dress. I am not certain that it was an attempt to simply make the woman's butt look larger. Also it may have also served as a way to disguise the contours of the butt cheeks, which would likely have been considdered highly inappropriate as it might have hinted at what a real female form actually looked like. Unlike today any sort of hint of clevage was pretty thoroughly eschewed.

Ramblinman wrote:Simple nudity strikes a balance: neither pretending that we don't have genitals, nor attempting to draw attention to them.

Amen Ramblinman! You got that one right! :like: Keep saying sensible things like that and they will run you out of town for committing truth. Fortunately the ready available of rails, tar, and feathers is much less than formerly. :roll:
I never met anyone that I could not learn something from.
User avatar
Bare_Truth
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2401
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 10:07 pm
Location: Ozark Plateau, Southwest Missouri

Re: The invasion of the CAMEL TOES.

Postby Maverick » Sun Apr 22, 2018 6:00 pm

Bare_Truth wrote:I am not so sure about bustles.......If one considers the style of the dresses which covered up so much of the feminine form, I believe that there was a health and safety risk of the women tripping from their shoe heels getting caught in the trailing edge of the hem of the dress. The use of a bustle would cause the back of the hem to hang several inches back from where it would otherwise be if it simply hung from the buttocks. Depending on the cut of the hem it may also have kept the hem from getting dragged in the dust of the street or any traces of equine deposits in the street. Hence the bustle may have simply been a practical solution to an impractical style of dress. I am not certain that it was an attempt to simply make the woman's butt look larger. Also it may have also served as a way to disguise the contours of the butt cheeks, which would likely have been considdered highly inappropriate as it might have hinted at what a real female form actually looked like. Unlike today any sort of hint of clevage was pretty thoroughly eschewed.


I don't know much about bustles but I tend to agree per one of Doc Holliday's quotes in Tombstone: "Why Kate, you're not wearing a bustle. How lewd." :mrgreen:
In nuditate veritas.
User avatar
Maverick
Native Resident
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2015 11:14 am
Location: DFW, TX

Re: The invasion of the CAMEL TOES.

Postby Petros » Mon Apr 30, 2018 9:39 pm

The joy of fashion is that a bustle may begin as simple practicality but will quickly move to being an enhancement and in time will be the norm so that its absence is daring. The same cycle in most euphemisms which become the new obscenity.
The truth, the stark naked truth, the truth without so much as a loincloth on, should surely be the investigator's sole aim - Basil Chamberlain
User avatar
Petros
Native Resident
 
Posts: 5170
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 2:01 am
Location: Wisconsin

Re: The invasion of the CAMEL TOES.

Postby Ramblinman » Thu May 03, 2018 12:00 pm

Petros wrote:The joy of fashion is that a bustle may begin as simple practicality but will quickly move to being an enhancement and in time will be the norm so that its absence is daring. The same cycle in most euphemisms which become the new obscenity.


And if we ever reach the golden age of nudity, then unnecessary clothing will seem lewd.
Ramblinman
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2524
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:22 am
Location: United States

Re: The invasion of the CAMEL TOES.

Postby New_Adventurer » Thu May 03, 2018 1:04 pm

And if we ever reach the golden age of nudity, then unnecessary clothing will seem lewd.

:like: :like: :biggrin: :lol:
What goes around comes around. Bustles, "foundation" underwear, no skin showing below the chin, cleavage down to there, heavy wool serge, sheer nylon, etc. Who knows what is next.
User avatar
New_Adventurer
Native Resident
 
Posts: 539
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Fremont, California

Previous

Return to General conversation about nudism / naturism

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest