VoyForums Announcement:
Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor
of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users'
privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your
privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket
to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we
also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.
Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct:
Feedback:
[ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] Date Posted:05:13:20 03/26/26 Thu Author Host/IP: 108.16.250.89 In reply to:
?
's message, "Naked at home" on 16:49:37 03/25/26 Wed
In 2024, Mik wrote to the 206801 forum in present tense. He was kept nude at home, and probably still is. He was made to receive playdates, visit his cousins, and attend sleepovers completely bare. At one time, he was made to perform nude yoga postures for his mother’s women’s yoga club.
The parents of 13-year-old Jeremy (2015, Voy 143459) and his 14-year-old brother were somewhat more lenient. When the parents had guests, the boys were either allowed to wear clothes or sent to their room. When the boys went out of the house, they were allowed to wear swimsuits.
Unlike Mik’s parents, however, Jeremy’s parents expected immodesty from any boy visiting the home. He was allowed to wear a swimsuit or undergarment, however.
What is the case in favor of keeping a boy naked at home? Here are a few gleanings:
----In the words of Mik’s mother, boys "don't need modesty" and "have nothing to hide."
----Mik’s mother asked, “Everyone's seen a willy and butt cheeks before, so what's so special about yours?”
----Mik’s nudity was conducive to body awareness and body confidence.
----Mik’s nudity was a preventive against overeating, alcoholism, and couch potato-hood.
----Mik’s nudity was an effective health safeguard. If Mik’s mother’s brother were kept naked, his case of testicular cancer could have been detected earlier.
----The air on the skin, whether indoors or outdoors, is good for the body. Mik himself admitted that the fresh air felt good when he was outside shooting hoops.
----According to Mik’s own admission, he was accustomed to being nude in the presence of his own family.
----By the admission of Jeremy (2015, Voy 14359), “it’s a lot more comfortable during the summer.”
----According to the parents of Jeremy (2015, Voy 14359), the boys were “better behaved and can’t get up to much.” Their sister must have already behaved well, because the mandate did not apply to her.
----We certainly must not neglect any girl’s educational needs. The summer that Pumba (2018, Voy 223876) was 8 years old, he was kept naked 5 hours a day for the benefit of his 11-year-old sister Louise.
What is the case AGAINST keeping a boy naked at home? Here is Mik’s case:
---Mik could not become accustomed to being nude in the presence of his friends, his cousins, and his house guests.
----Mik’s house guests, although well-meaning, discussed his nudity in a way that made him feel like “a science experiment or something.”
----Mik’s friends’ sisters were not always very courteous. He did not like their grabbing his penis.
In all of the foregoing examples, the families discriminated on the basis of age and gender. The family in which Ken (2020, Voy 223876) grew up, however, discriminated only on the basis of gender. A sign at the front entrance read that “any males present would be naked and in full view of anyone who entered.”
Ken’s mother had a book club. Some of the women brought their daughters. Ken commented, “I guess they wanted them to enjoy the view and I did not mind giving them that view.”
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted:10:55:55 03/26/26 Thu Author Host/IP: 188.172.75.174
I suppose only one argument here is valid, which is also supported by health experts, which is that the skin in every parts of the body needs breathing and is beneficial for optimal health.
Which is why sports in ancient times up to not so long ago was always done naked or with very limited clothing.
It is only when modesty began to be taken into consideration that some clothing was allowed in public, but this only applied to adults since children do not offend anyone by being naked.
Also by nature children do not have a natural sense of modesty, it is only imposed on them from a young age.
The question is why are girls always afforded modesty while many consider it is not so important for boys as you show in your examples here. The answer is that nude girls are seen as sexual objects while nude boys are not seen as sexual objects by girls and women, even though they may admire their beauty as Jermaine Greer and other feminists point out in their writings about the beauty of naked boys up to a certain age.
While the sight of a naked man offends many, if not most women, the sight of a naked boy up to maybe early teens does not offend them.
This may be arguable but is the general opinion, which is why boys were displayed naked in front of girls and women, but not girls in front of boys or men.
>In 2024, Mik wrote to the 206801 forum in present
>tense. He was kept nude at home, and probably still
>is. He was made to receive playdates, visit his
>cousins, and attend sleepovers completely bare. At one
>time, he was made to perform nude yoga postures for
>his mother’s women’s yoga club.
>
>The parents of 13-year-old Jeremy (2015, Voy 143459)
>and his 14-year-old brother were somewhat more
>lenient. When the parents had guests, the boys were
>either allowed to wear clothes or sent to their room.
>When the boys went out of the house, they were allowed
>to wear swimsuits.
>
>Unlike Mik’s parents, however, Jeremy’s parents
>expected immodesty from any boy visiting the home. He
>was allowed to wear a swimsuit or undergarment,
>however.
>
>What is the case in favor of keeping a boy naked at
>home? Here are a few gleanings:
>
>----In the words of Mik’s mother, boys "don't need
>modesty" and "have nothing to hide."
>
>----Mik’s mother asked, “Everyone's seen a willy
>and butt cheeks before, so what's so special about
>yours?”
>
>----Mik’s nudity was conducive to body awareness and
>body confidence.
>
>----Mik’s nudity was a preventive against
>overeating, alcoholism, and couch potato-hood.
>
>----Mik’s nudity was an effective health safeguard.
>If Mik’s mother’s brother were kept naked, his
>case of testicular cancer could have been detected
>earlier.
>
>----The air on the skin, whether indoors or outdoors,
>is good for the body. Mik himself admitted that the
>fresh air felt good when he was outside shooting hoops.
>
>----According to Mik’s own admission, he was
>accustomed to being nude in the presence of his own
>family.
>
>----By the admission of Jeremy (2015, Voy 14359),
>“it’s a lot more comfortable during the summer.”
>
>----According to the parents of Jeremy (2015, Voy
>14359), the boys were “better behaved and can’t
>get up to much.” Their sister must have already
>behaved well, because the mandate did not apply to her.
>
>----We certainly must not neglect any girl’s
>educational needs. The summer that Pumba (2018, Voy
>223876) was 8 years old, he was kept naked 5 hours a
>day for the benefit of his 11-year-old sister Louise.
>
>What is the case AGAINST keeping a boy naked at home?
>Here is Mik’s case:
>
>---Mik could not become accustomed to being nude in
>the presence of his friends, his cousins, and his
>house guests.
>
>----Mik’s house guests, although well-meaning,
>discussed his nudity in a way that made him feel like
>“a science experiment or something.”
>
>----Mik’s friends’ sisters were not always very
>courteous. He did not like their grabbing his penis.
>
>In all of the foregoing examples, the families
>discriminated on the basis of age and gender. The
>family in which Ken (2020, Voy 223876) grew up,
>however, discriminated only on the basis of gender. A
>sign at the front entrance read that “any males
>present would be naked and in full view of anyone who
>entered.”
>
>Ken’s mother had a book club. Some of the women
>brought their daughters. Ken commented, “I guess
>they wanted them to enjoy the view and I did not mind
>giving them that view.”
Date Posted:02:24:38 03/27/26 Fri Author Host/IP: 108.16.250.89
There has also been a second reason why boy nudity was more acceptable than girl nudity: girls were seen as frail and fragile and boys were seen as strong and confident.
Therefore, went the argument, girls were in greater need of protection.
Now that Stranger Danger emerged, boys need protection too.
Our species was not alone in this double standard. Among the ape species, adults of both genders are more protective toward female infants than toward male infants (Itani 1963; Kummer 1967).
When asked why naked boys appear in movies more often than naked girls, Mevertis (2018, Voy 2238768) suggested that boys were seen as carnivorous animals. We don’t protect wolves from sheep but we protect sheep from wolves. Likewise, goes the analogy, we don’t protect boys from girls but we protect girls from boys.
Linda (2018, dead link) defends the double standard:
"In my view, I think men should be entitled to be naked when swimming or on the beach or other decent occasions that nudity is expected. After all, males are different from females. If a female is naked in public, she exposes herself to male raping; on the other hand, men don’t have this concern. I sometimes wonder why men need the equal modesty as females."
Boys have cooperated in this double standard. Willy (2019, Voy 223876) was allowed to appear nude at home, but “would not of wanted my sisters to be nude.” He believed that “it was only fair for girls to be afforded more modesty.” In his opinion, “being nude was a boy only thing as we boys are stronger that it would be far too embarrassing for the girls to be nude.”
Stan (2019, Voy 223876) appeared nude both at home and at swim meets. From the age of about 14, he had protective feelings about his sisters:
"I wouldn't want strangers look at my sisters like that. It was the big brother in me to keep my sisters safe and not wanting anyone to look at my sisters like that. So I am in agreement that I have no problem keeping my sisters clothed and not naked, especially in front of strangers. I never felt jealousy of why not girls be nude at the swimming events like us boys."
According to Rob (2019, Voy 223876), “Girls’ modesty was protected from the prying eyes of males, while it did not matter for boys to be seen naked by females. Males were always the predators so female modesty had to be protected from a young age, while girls seeing nude boys was harmless.”
Could you, by any chance, be the same Rob?
Itani, J. 1959. Paternal care in the wild Japanese monkey, Macaca fuscata fuscata. Primates 2: 61-93.
Kummer, H. 1967. Tripartite relations in Hamadryas baboons. In Altmann, S., ed. Social communications among primates. Chicago: University of Chicago Press: 63-71.
Date Posted:10:23:47 03/27/26 Fri Author Host/IP: 188.172.75.174
>There has also been a second reason why boy nudity was
>more acceptable than girl nudity: girls were seen as
>frail and fragile and boys were seen as strong and
>confident.
>Therefore, went the argument, girls were in greater
>need of protection.
>
>Now that Stranger Danger emerged, boys need protection
>too.
>
>Our species was not alone in this double standard.
>Among the ape species, adults of both genders are more
>protective toward female infants than toward male
>infants (Itani 1963; Kummer 1967).
>
>When asked why naked boys appear in movies more often
>than naked girls, Mevertis (2018, Voy 2238768)
>suggested that boys were seen as carnivorous animals.
>We don’t protect wolves from sheep but we protect
>sheep from wolves. Likewise, goes the analogy, we
>don’t protect boys from girls but we protect girls
>from boys.
>
>Linda (2018, dead link) defends the double standard:
>
>"In my view, I think men should be entitled to be
>naked when swimming or on the beach or other decent
>occasions that nudity is expected. After all, males
>are different from females. If a female is naked in
>public, she exposes herself to male raping; on the
>other hand, men don’t have this concern. I sometimes
>wonder why men need the equal modesty as females."
>
>Boys have cooperated in this double standard. Willy
>(2019, Voy 223876) was allowed to appear nude at home,
>but “would not of wanted my sisters to be nude.”
>He believed that “it was only fair for girls to be
>afforded more modesty.” In his opinion, “being
>nude was a boy only thing as we boys are stronger that
>it would be far too embarrassing for the girls to be
>nude.”
>
>Stan (2019, Voy 223876) appeared nude both at home and
>at swim meets. From the age of about 14, he had
>protective feelings about his sisters:
>
>"I wouldn't want strangers look at my sisters like
>that. It was the big brother in me to keep my sisters
>safe and not wanting anyone to look at my sisters like
>that. So I am in agreement that I have no problem
>keeping my sisters clothed and not naked, especially
>in front of strangers. I never felt jealousy of why
>not girls be nude at the swimming events like us
>boys."
>
>According to Rob (2019, Voy 223876), “Girls’
>modesty was protected from the prying eyes of males,
>while it did not matter for boys to be seen naked by
>females. Males were always the predators so female
>modesty had to be protected from a young age, while
>girls seeing nude boys was harmless.”
>
>Could you, by any chance, be the same Rob?
I am not sure but it could have been me because it expresses the same opinions and observations that I have have.
I also agree with Willy and others you have mentioned here that boys were over-protective of their sisters and didn't want other males to see them naked, while with boys it did not matter who saw them naked.
Feedback: 