Vintage Season : Adam and Eve (part 2)

Genesis 2:25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

We are taught that, originally, the act of being naked was in the Garden of Eden was not ‘sinful’. But on disobeying God -the sin of eating the apple, the fall from Grace- Adam and Eve suddenly became aware they were naked and clothed themselves in fig leaves.

I’m not going to get into a theological discussion on what all of that means. What I am going to argue that it’s only on thinking that sin is involved does nakedness become something ‘shameful’.

Naturism separates the learned sin or shame or embarrassment we learn and are taught from a young age, literally strips  away that learned condition and leaves us back, without shame, with the state of being nude.

I’ve said before that I’m not a church-goer. That’s not to diminish anyone else’s faith system or try to attack it.

I simply think that, in Genesis, the ‘cover up’ arises because suddenly nudity is equated to sex. In genuine naturism nudity does not equate with sex. We quickly learn that there are two basic models of humanity. One has a penis, the other a vagina, both are beautiful and cease to become a focus. We focus on the person, rather than what lies beneath their clothes -the clothed state being one that can often lead to sinful, impure thoughts. How often do we hear phrases like ‘he has a nice firm bum in those jeans’ or ‘she really fills out that sweater’? Yes, we’re focussing on what lies beneath in a sexual way.

Stripped of our clothes we can see what lies beneath. Am I going to focus on the size of that guy’s penis? It may be a whopping 8 inch long thing, but does it make that man? No. He may be interesting as a human being. He may be shallow. I will judge him, very quickly, on that element of his existence and be drawn to a man with a fierce intellect, great conversational skills, life experience or whatever else is going. His penis size is the least interesting thing about him.

And it works in the opposite direction too. A huge pair of boobs or a ripe, round bottom may be the elements the media fixates on in the 21st century, aspects which are reinforced as a female’s defining attributes. My naturist friends include elderly folk whose ‘sexuality’ is none too apparent (within a media regulated framework of what is ‘sexuality’). They’re shrivelled, wrinkled, paunchy….and wonderful company comfortable in their own skins.

In naturism judgement on a person is much, much less defined on physical attributes, much more on personality, much more on the person.

In naturism there is no ‘shame’. There is, instead, a full celebration of God’s greatest creations, man and woman in their natural state of being.

While not a church-goer, I do find that naturism makes me dwell on the diverse and wonderful nature of our planet, actually dwell on the idea of some sort of Divine plan. Lazing on a beach, totally naked, my thoughts are going to focus on nature. The sea, just a few steps away, will have fish swimming around my feet. A warm breeze, a cloud, the grains of sand I’m running through my fingers, the rustle of the trees behind me, my own body, the bodies of those around me equally ‘plugged in’ to nature and -it comes with the naturist territory- caring for that nature around us.

Shame? No. A gratitude to God for providing us with the skin we’re in and the world He created for us to enjoy in our personal Gardens of Eden? I think so.

And yet those who do profess to be Christian or Muslim or whatever will attempt to shame us about our own bodies. For me, being out in the world God created for us, with the richness of its flora and fauna, marvelling at His works, and ‘clothed’ in the manner in which He created us, is a wonderful thing. I feel no shame. I refuse to allow anyone to project their own body shame (particularly those waving a Bible or a Koran) onto me.

tumblr_n8a426m5I21rub8mlo1_500 tumblr_n8cslvl32E1ra3nodo1_1280 tumblr_nav04v4klx1t138two1_1280 tumblr_navg8tlkEO1tsk6y0o1_1280 tumblr_ne4rxnY3rh1tdu6c7o1_500 tumblr_neevh63kQG1tdu6c7o1_1280

Photos: dressed as nature created us, enjoying the pleasures of nature around us.



Vintage Season : Adam and Eve

It’s an old question/joke, but every depiction of Adam & Eve in art shows them having belly buttons, and the question is, if they were the first people, not born of woman……why?

We could extend the theories on ‘the first man’. If he didn’t initially have a woman companion, Eve being an afterthought, why did he need a penis?

Adam and Eve Adam and Eve2 adam_eve adam-and-eve-1531-1 adam-and-eve-under-the-tree-of-knowledge


Interesting, too, that in the photos above, where the penis is depicted, the sculptor and engraver can’t decide whether Adam was circumcised or not either….

Curious, too, that depictions of Adam and Eve freely permitted Eve’s breasts to be bare, an artistic freedom that isn’t allowed, even in depictions of Art, on modern social media. It rather seems that, when it comes to depicting Art, we’re going backwards. Through the history of man and his ability to depict historical scenes through Art, female breasts have been more than acceptable. Only since the dawn of photography & moving image have we become much more coy about breasts (consider the pixellation in TV shows like ‘Naked and Afraid’ or ‘Buying Naked’).

Adam and Eve are relatively easy to depict on SL. On the Marketplace, a search for a ‘fig leaf’ will turn up a L$0 one, as shown in the pic below, and picking up free apples (if you go to the right sims, you’ll find free drinks & food -including hand held apples- freely available.

adam and eve 3_001b


In our SL depiction, above, Eve tempts Adam with that apple.



World Vegan Day, and some slightly woolly thinking.

Yesterday, November 1st, was World Vegan Day, and dozens of Peta supporters staged….less a ‘protest’, more a ‘happening‘, in London’s Trafalgar Square, Peta being ‘People for the Ethical treatment of animals. I’m all for the ethical treatment of animals, and I’ve long been a vegetarian, but I’m certainly not vegan on the basis that I don’t see any essential non-ethical treatment of animals in the production of eggs or dairy products. Milk cows will largely be treated correctly, free-range hens treated correctly, although I’m certain vegans will produce evidence to the contrary. Thus, my diet will constitute dairy products and eggs.

Oddly, as a vegan diet won’t provide any adequate vitamin B12, vegans often have to ingest a synthesised version of the vitamin, a simple case of science having had to provide a solution to what nature can’t provide, and it undermines the argument (for me) that veganism is, thus, a natural diet. (Incidentally, on the same basis, I will avoid soya products where possible as a vegetarian: where’s the logic in creating artificial, processed products just so they can taste like bacon? Isn’t a bacon tasting product not made of bacon counter-intuitive? Shouldn’t vegetarianism be a whole different range of tastes, not just synthetic bacon tastes?)

Let’s keep this post on track, though.




A previous PETA protest highlights that 50 baths = 1 steak, referencing the huge amounts of water required to produce meat.

The event makes its way onto SLN because of the naked element of the protest, of course. As usual, the existence of bare skin has the capacity to turn something of a non-event (and I’m not singling out PETA’s protest yesterday -that’s a general observation of many protest events) into front page news. The naked body still holds that power.

But I’m slightly disturbed at an entry on Peta’s website which references Victoria Eisermann, voted ‘Europe’s Sexiest Vegetarian’ some years back. If we’re talking ‘ethics’, shouldn’t we be talking about the non-objectification of women as part of that ‘ethical treatment’ too?  Doesn’t the existence of a ‘Sexiest Vegetarian’ poll point at some kind of ill-conceived animal equality? Most odd.

Ms Eisermann has said ‘you can’t be a meat eating environmentalist’. Wrong. Environmentalism is a broad church. It encompasses many forms, and being shoe-horned into a very narrow definition of environmentalism seems less about ethics, more about nature-fascism being espoused by someone probably munching synthetically produced vitamin supplements to stay healthy. (I wonder if she wears wool products. Wouldn’t sheep-shearing be a process that is traumatising to the sheep? Is it ethical to shear them for their wool?)

I ride a bike rather than drive a car, where possible, to aid the environment. We grow some of our own fruit and vegetables in a small plot in our garden for several reasons, such as the pleasure of tending them and watching them grow, the fact that we end up with naturally produced weirdly-shaped veg that the supermarkets discard (which is an enormous food waste on their part), the fact that we don’t use pesticides on them and that they resultantly taste better on the plate, and are fresh and seasonal. I won’t buy supermarket strawberries, which have been airlifted halfway across Europe, for a Christmas lunch. That logistical exercise is another stupid waste of the earth’s resources.

Equally, I won’t be finger-wagged at by someone saying that meat eaters, who may pursue the same policies as myself, aren’t environmentalists. All we can do is our own little bit.

Because SL doesn’t need us avatars to actually eat, there’s not many sims around where ‘vegetarianism’, or ‘veganism’ need to exist, but if you do a search you’ll find several in-world groups you can join that includes like-minded individuals, and I note there is a ‘Peta’ group presence within the game. I’d be confident that you would find well-educated avatars within those groups who will be more than happy to share information, links and so on about RL activism if you’re an SL player who likes (as many of us do) to link bits of their SL to our RL beliefs.


esme peta pose_001b


Despite my criticisms above, I’m still broadly in agreement with many of PETA’s aims, and one of their slogans, ‘I’d rather go naked than wear fur‘ makes perfect sense to me. In the 21st century, killing animals for their pelts, for fashion purposes, makes no sense whatsoever.