Hi Peter,
Good to see you back on here mate!
> I find it aberrant that the single/non-accompanied male be that much
> excluded at most places while at once the single/non-accompanied
> female would get the preferential treatment.
It's sickening, hey? I have pontificated on this a bit in my recent
article
in TAN magazine, as to why mainstream ****ist clubs are not attracting
younger lifeblood.
The younger generations are not stupid - they can see right through the
deceptive philosophy of 'naturism is for everybody', and 'naturism is
about
freedom' and then they find there are clubs that discriminate against the
single guy.
I don't understand the mentality of these people. Is it done to protect
and
nurture the emotional and spiritual immaturity of some women who are
frightened of being in the company of predominantly single guys? Do they
have a fear that they will be raped or molested by them, or be looked at
inappropriately? If that is so, then they should just stick to being
textiles or practice naturism in their back yard only covered by a 40 foot
fence with barbed electric wire at the top. I've always believed that
those
who sacrifice their liberty for a little imagined security deserve
neither.
****ist clubs are not doing themselves a favour by shutting single guys
out,
considering that they are the backbone of social ****ism today and
contribute
the most money to clubs. Besides that, I am sure that there are also
single
women in ****ism who want to go to clubs and resorts to meet single guys
they
can hook up with.
Keep up the good work, Peter!
Best wishes,
Dario Western
|
