| |
FOR: Michael Peacock
|
Division at the Men’s Pond: is it an unnatural situation?
Calls for more nude sunbathing space on the Heath have divided opinion. Are naturists discriminated against? Or are their’s the demands of a clubbish minority interest?
IT is time that naturists in this country got more vocal. If you visit a park in Germany or in many cities in Europe, you will find a large naturist area where you will find men, women, and families sunbathing naked.
This should be a right for people who wish to get an all-over tan in the company of others.
But at the male nude sunbathing enclosure at Hampstead Heath Men’s Pond in north London, on hot sunny days the small enclosure is packed to bursting, preventing many from using the facility.
The poor ladies can only go topless.
This is the only gesture towards naturism in London – yet in the enclosure we are cooped up, shielded from the outside world, as a result of an attitude towards naturism that is dictated by traditionalists.
Next door, the area allocated to clothed changing – which is
42 per cent larger – is typically less than one third occupied.
Making inquiries about the partition that separates the two areas within the enclosure I learned that in the early 1990s a prominent barrister complained to the ‘authorities’ that neither his young son nor himself should be exposed to the spectacle of seeing any naked men.
At that time the enclosure was totally allocated to nude sunbathing.
Despite a survey that found that most people objected to this partition, up it went – and all it did was create a division.
Nudity is still on view – you cannot miss it as you walk to the changing rooms. But the space is limited to 30 guys at a pinch. This must change to reflect demand. So I appeal to anyone that supports naturism (you don’t have to be a user of the facility, or resident in the UK ), to sign my online petition.
AGAINST: Robert Sutherland Smith |
I HAVE read Mr Peacock’s views on the needs of naturists. On the face of it his cause, as I understand it, seems reasonable. To summarise: more “naturism” on Hampstead Heath or, more precisely, at the Highgate Pond.
The enclosure given to men for lying naked together beneath the sun now lacks capacity, so why not take all or part of the separate enclosure traditionally occupied by changing swimmers, shuttlecock players and non-naturist sunbathers in swimming togs and give it over to Mr Peacock’s sun-loving naturists?
As a cold water, winter pond swimmer, I may not be in the best position to criticise the eccentricities of others, but I do find lying naked on a towel on a hard concrete floor inside an all-male metal framed compound an odd definition of “naturism”. Where is the “nature?”
The steel and concrete construction was designed for changing swimmers, not naturists.
His campaigning also distorts facts.
The changing enclosure for swimmers is not 42 per cent larger than that used by the “naturists”. They are about the same size.
Nor is true that on hottest days the swimmers’ changing area is “typically less than one third occupied”. On the contrary, on the hottest days it is always uncomfortably full.
The competition for space on hot days, between changing swimmers and shuttlecock players is sometimes acrimonious.
Nor is it true that the barrier is the result of the protest of a single anonymous barrister on the basis of his prudery about naked men.
The truth is that it was requested by a large body of users who did not appreciate the sight of sexual acts in public; part of a colourful tradition which evidently not everyone enjoys.
I note that Mr Peacock urges people who have never been to or seen the Highgate Pond to sign his petition. He will no doubt get thousands of signatures, but such protesters are without credibility.
I have been told by a friend (who happens to be gay) that the reason the “naturist” compound is full on hot days, is because it is advertised as a place to visit in the worldwide gay press. No doubt a splendid example of globalisation!
But what about the rest of us; the mainstream Londoners who wish to swim? Or those retired old buffers who like to play a game of shuttlecock? Or the sunbathers who like to keep their trunks on when they sunbathe?
Mr Peacock speaks selfishly for a clubbish, minority interest, not an open, majority one. He and his plainly spurious petition should be given polite consideration but nothing more.
|
 |
|
| |
