-Trigger Warning for this episode as this episode discusses violence against women-. No study shows that naturism reduces men's violence against women. I want to say that clearly from the start. What naturism can offer is something quieter: a place where a body is not an invitation, and where we learn what our bodies mean, and what they don't.
In this episode I look at what the UK femicide data tells us. Most women killed by men are killed by a partner, an ex or a son, at home. That's about control and entitlement, not clothing. I talk about why any naturist argument that leans on covering or uncovering women risks repeating the "what were you wearing?" myth, and about the case of Lindsay Armstrong.
I also look at objectification theory and how girls learn to see their own bodies from the outside. I go back through the history of gymnosophy and naturism, from Germany's life reform movement to its darker chapters, and why naturism has never really had a public language for consent.
Then I get honest about naturism's own problems: unwanted photography, ogling, a male-heavy gender balance, and a recent experience at a naturist camp with my children that showed me how far there is to go. I set out what I think naturist spaces need:
- image consent as a hard rule
- ogling named as a breach, with clear reporting and removal
- more women leading the conversation
- a child consent framework that says "your body is yours" without shame
I close by asking whether gymnosophy could be the fresh start women need. Content note: this episode discusses femicide, rape and suicide.
If something here landed for you, please leave a rating, a review or a question. I'd love this to be a conversation, not a monologue.
Sources mentioned:
Femicide Census / Counting Dead Women – kareningalasmith.com
Fredrickson & Roberts (1997), Objectification Theory
Keon West, Goldsmiths – research on naturism and body image
British Naturism – Women in Naturism campaign and Women in Focus podcast
NSPCC – Talk PANTS
","author_name":"Naomi Gale"}