Naked protest at Auschwitz

My day begins early today with my usual trawl of the news websites. This is often ‘work related’, but occasionally a story involving nudity will catch my eye and work its way into the blog.

One story, widely reported in the UK media, involves a rather bizarre naked protest at Auschwitz, the former Nazi concentration camp in Poland, wherein they killed a sheep (!?!?) at the gates, then stripped naked and chained themselves together before the police were called and the protestors removed.

Unfortunately, the nature of ‘news’ is that it’s often not followed up, so it may be that we never hear the motivation behind this bizarre protest. Some media reports suggest it was in protest against conflict in the Ukraine, and while this is laudable, their choice of venue is not, besmirching the memory of so many people who were forcibly stripped in order to humiliate them when they arrived at Auschwitz, before going to their deaths. And killing a sheep? Naked protest still has a power to create media interest, and publicity, for causes around the world, but there are some places where it’s unacceptable. Auschwitz would be one such location where the memories of those who lost their lives to a horrible, screwed-up ideology needs to be preserved and protected.

1.1m died at Auschwitz, mostly Jews. It’s a harrowing place to visit. I’ve been and was rendered speechless just by the enormity of the hatred that took place there. It will be interesting to know if the 11 arrested, aged between 20-27, will be revealed to have the slightest comprehension of the enormity of history, and man’s inhumanity to man, that occurred there. Quite simply, an awful, ignorant way to protest.


Hot as ginger

Having posted about Twitter, and some of the really backwards attitudes to be found on there, I found myself growing increasingly angry about one tweet…


…that there’s ‘just no excuse for ginger pubes’. Happily not all of Twitter is like that, as there’s at least one Twitter page celebrating all things ginger.

But in today’s society, there are a few who think that verbally abusing red-headed children is OK. There has been serious debate about it in UK newspapers, although the conclusion appeared to be that it’s a prejudice but some prejudices are more acceptable than others. Neither is it a debate confined to the UK, with Australia also writing about it all… MIA‘s video for ‘Born Free’ was removed from youtube because it showed ginger people being rounded up (although I think youtube missed the point here…I took that to be more of a commentary on general racism and hate-crimes than specifically anti-ginger, and showed how prejudices are allowed to grow with no basis in any sort of logic).

I’ve got numerous friends in SL who are red-heads, some of whom are Irish and one of whom isn’t an Irish red-head in real life. ‘I use red hair to mess with the lazy stereotypes’, she says. ‘Some people expect the Irish to be redheads, something born of ignorance about Ireland. They think we all live in whitewashed cottages too. So I play SL as a redhead, while my RL pic is on my profile with a full head of black hair. And people say ‘that can’t be you as you aren’t a redhead’.

They’re all attractive looking redheaded avatars, no different from real life redheaded people…


Beautiful, red-headed people. The idea that ‘there’s no excuse for ginger pubes’ is ignorant and stupid. But, hey, you’re on Twitter, so you have the perfect platform to demonstrate ignorance and stupidity.



Wonder Woman

As long term blog visitors may know, I’m not a cinema fan, so the idea of a ‘Wonder Woman‘ movie was news to me.

Furthermore, the idea that a Wonder Woman, an Amazonian, with clean shaven armpits was something worth remarking on is even more news to me!

I’ve seen re-runs of the 1970s TV version of it, and it appeared to be set in the 1970s, so it was a complete surprise to find that the forthcoming film appears to be set, at least partly, in ancient mythological times, this giving the trailer I’ve seen more of a sense of being a bit Xena: Warrior Princess than I imagined it might be. I won’t go to see it, I don’t think, but my children are getting to an age where ‘superhero’ films capture their imagination, so depending on its classification it might be a summer time trip to the movies.

There is also some debate as to whether originally hairy armpits were photoshopped (note the odd, slightly whiter colour of Gal Gadot‘s armpit, above)

(Incidentally, when researching the post, and Gal Gadot in particular, I read that, most predictably, she was attacked on Twitter for being ‘a Zionist’ (i.e. she did two years compulsory national service in the Israeli Defence Forces). 

What is it about Twitter that it continually presents itself as a forum for angry people being angry about anything, specifically things that, in the main, don’t affect their lives on a daily basis. The phrase ‘get yourselves a hobby in the fresh air’ springs to mind.)

While I identify myself as a feminist, it’s this sort of worthless debate that often leads feminism to ridicule. Where there’s unequal pay for doing many of the same jobs, I imagine that underarm hair, or lack thereof, should be fairly low on a list of feminist priorities.

I sometimes wear underarm hair in Second Life (and sometimes I don’t shave in real life, either!) and you can buy some on the Marketplace (L$59)

I would wear it almost permanently in SL were it not for the fact that, due to the mechanics of SL, it sometimes ‘disappears’ to be replaced by a different avatar attachment. While I’ve never encountered any negativism from wearing it -on the contrary, male avatars seem fascinated by it and comment positively on it, ditto pubic hair- some of my SL friends have reported comments on how pubic or underarm hair is a ‘turn off’ for males, even within SL!

Actually, I just checked on Twitter to see what was being said on there and I wasn’t surprised to find some negativity out there for (female) body hair.

Appalling! It’s her body, and her choice to do with it as she pleases, not anyone else’s to tell her how she should ‘dress’ down there.

Worse…an actress, Lola Kirke, makes a political statement regarding policy over planned parenthood, and it goes unremarked, but her unshaven armpits result in death threats…

Lola Kirke at the Golden Globes

And yeah…Twitter had stuff to say about Gal Gadot’s armpit hair too.





Look at the weekend’s weather! 🙂

Saturday to be 14 and sunny! 🙂

Greenhouse time! Time to get the seeds that I haven’t planted so far into pots, and inside a sunny greenhouse it’ll be warm enough for naked gardening.

Here’s hoping I can get into the greenhouse similarly (un)clad as the gardening ladies above!



Photos (2)

Leading on from the previous Photos post, specifically related to copyright of photos, I’ve assessed the photos we utilise and come to the following conclusions.

  1. We will attempt to credit all photos where we can actually find the source, and we will approach copyright holders to seek permission to use their work and credit accordingly. We will also be taking the opportunity to ‘link back’ to the originals where possible and try to ensure the original blog/source benefits from some traffic as a result.
  2. After several years of blogging, there are a huge number of photos used on the blog. I don’t propose to cull everything from the past, but instead respond (worst case scenario is usually 3-4 days response time) to remove any copyrighted material. Essentially all photographic material will be copyright (until 70 years after the death of the photographer, so even ‘vintage’ photos may still be under copyright) but not everyone will make a claim. Until I receive notification of copyright claims, backed up with some evidence, all photos will remain under ‘fair use’ laws. All documented clams of copyright ownership will, however, see the removal of the offending photographs, or a credit attached to the appropriate post should the copyright holder be satisfied with this.
  3. Not all photos are watermarked, some are cropped with the watermark removed. In such instances it’s difficult to know, if lifting photos from Google images, just who the original copyright holder is. Once again, production of the original, with watermarks or copyright notices, will see the said items removed forthwith

It is never my intention to knowingly infringe copyright, and the blog is filled with articles where I’ve made this clear, that I won’t use copyrighted material. I do try to maintain this policy in recognition of the rights of others, and this will continue as policy.



Blogging is meant to be fun. But recently I’ve received several notifications of photographs infringing copyright. Some copyright owners have been exceptionally nice about it, and offered to to permit us to use the photos for a credit. Which I’d be happy to do, in all instances, if the photos were watermarked accordingly! My problem is that many photos are cropped, then re-used elsewhere, and I’ve no way of knowing if a photo is under copyright. I’ve tried to adopt a policy where I don’t use copyrighted material but, obviously some stuff does slip the net.

Another (alleged) copyright owner threatened legal action. 😦 They offered nothing to back up their claim of ownership, I have to say. Unfortunately I’m not in a position where I can afford to pay out copyright owners or fight people in court (and lose, if they’re the legal owner of the photos in question). I blog for fun, I blog in my spare time, I hope I deliver a sense of the wholesome, exhilarating nature of naturism in 2017. But when there’s the question of legal issues, and veiled threats, the blogging ceases to be fun. It’s just a blog, and I can live with, or without, it.

I simply can’t go checking the origins of every photo (a policy that would simply fail somewhere) as the blog would grind to a halt, even if we could make arrangements to credit photos or seek permission. I’ve looked at the options available to me, and it’s clear that even our current policy of crediting, where known, or pointing people in the direction of the original copyrighted work, isn’t feasible.

I shall be rethinking the blog over the next few days, up to and including possibly deleting it all rather than risk legal action.