Posted on Jan 22, 2012
What is “naked”? According to some Canadians it seems, you’re not naked with only shoes on.
Yes, technically you are still naked. I prefer without shoes, but you are still naked even if you are only wearing shoes.
Was this answer helpful?
Nudism is liberating.
My Webster’s New World Dictionary defines naked as “completely unclothed…”. In my opinion shoes are an article of clothing. I believe, however, that many nudists consider themselves to be nude ‘tho they may be wearing such items as hat, shoes, socks, wrist watch, rings and sunglasses. A nudist in the swimming pool may need none of these but the nudist on a hiking trail might want to add boots, hat and backpack.
You are naked and have protected feet. I am always worried that I am going to cut my feet off, so I am often shod. I will tell you how you know you are naked, you can get arrested with only shoes on.
The resort to which I belong has miles of desert trails. I wear hiking boots and I’m nude.
I have competed in a few Nude Runs, and shoes were certainly part of the necessary equipment to tackle the rough bush trails up along the Murray River. It is my considered opinion that a shoed runner can still be a nude runner.
Dumbest debate ever.
Why is this “dumb”? It might seem minor to you, but there are people who actually have wondered about that (though I’m not one of them).
It is a dumb question because it plays into the foolishness of those that laugh at nudists. I have even been asked why I wear a coat in the winter if I am a nudist. You wear whatever clothes you need for protection. That sure means shoes if you are anywhere but in water. It means a hat if you are out in the sun (especially of you are hair challenged), and you wear glasses if you need to see where you are going or need sun protection.
Maybe not the dumbest, Kenny, but close! Some folks just have too much time on their hands and spend it spitting hairs. Jeez, only a foot fetishist could care one way or the other or even notice whether a naked person has shoes on!
Someone had better tell Playboy to get those high-heels off those ‘clothed’ models…
Naked folks look stupid with shoes and socks? WHO’S LOOKING? Mind your own business. As any real nudist knows, looking and judging is as far from naturist principles as you can get.
I always prefer to be barefoot–even when I am otherwise clothed. Their are many benefits to going barefoot, but there will always be settings where either shoes or clothing are a requirement for safety, comfort, decorum, cultural and legal concerns. And, yes–even though shoes may qualify as an article of clothing, legally speaking–you are usually considered to be naked if your chest, genitals, and buttocks are not covered. Being publicly barefoot may be discouraged by some establishments, it is usually legally allowed though.
When I was a kid I used to think that if “naked” was the abscence on anything on you, the fact of wearing a necklace or socks make you clothed, later I knew that people consider nakedness just the exposure of certain parts of the body, and that that depends on the region and culture you are on…
I don’t see how shoes mean ur clothed when ur not wearing a stitch. I am aware of the law in Canada about that, and it kind of surprises me, but I’m none the wiser, its good on us anyway.
Nudity is the state of wearing no clothing, so technically you are not naked. Though in modern society you would (incorrectly) be called naked.
Just remember… we are nudists not NUTS! Being naked is really an attitude with the intent of No/MINIMAL clothing required to be comfortable in the environment. Not ‘fully clothed’ but shoes, hat, pants or even a shirt (wrap, robe) when environment (cold/hot,rain/shine, etc.) requires it to be comfortable in that environment. And as with ALL things in nudism/naturism its a PERSONAL thing.. Where I am warm enough, you might be FREEZIN’. Our goal is to NOT judge others, but encourage them to accept themselves AS THEY ARE, to be comfortable in their skin, and enjoy themselves as God and their environment/life has created them.
Well, here’s my thing…if the ultimate goal of nudism is more along the lines of “body acceptance” and “clothing optional” on a broader scale, then why would it matter how much clothing someone is wearing in the first place? Isn’t “clothing optional” including “which articles of clothing a person would WANT to wear”? I mean, hell…I’ve seen nudism resort videos where people were out wearing JUST a sweater to stay some kind of warm. So, why the big debate about shoes and “nah, you ain’t naked unless you ain’t wearin’ SHIT!” The ultimate goal is “who cares”…so act like it is!
total nudity is with nothing on including shoes, but I am naked or nude under anything I wear and I think a smile is enough. nude or naked or completely bare is just too damn comfortable
i wear shoe’s at the nudist camp!
When all I’m wearing is shoes then I’m unclothed. When I’m Naked I’m not wearing shoes as in swimming or showering.
I think the best way to look at this is: naked when possible, dressed when practical. I often roam around nude from the ankles up. The only reason for the shoes is protection of my feet.
So, in answer to your question, it all depends on how YOU see it.
This question is a lot like asking if you’re truly clothed if you’re not wearing a hat. To most people, you can be hatless and fully clothed. To some (usually particularly religious) people, if you’re not wearing a hat, you might as well be naked. In the end, whether you’re “fully clothed” is an opinion about which wearing a hat makes absolutely no difference. It’s just a label. Wear a hat if you want or need to; don’t wear it if you don’t. It really, truly does not matter. It makes no difference to anyone but yourself. Exactly the same reasoning applies to this question of whether you’re “truly naked” if you’re wearing shoes.
Kinda naked. The problem is the apposition of “naked” (an absolute state) and “clothed” (a relative state). Lots of room for politics in-between. The real question is “how clothed” — not “how naked.” Perhaps we could better just add “nude” as one outfit in our wardrobe, and then count up all the added accessories from earings to overcoats to get some sort of “clothed index.” The debate could then be on the contextual multiplier. “Just shoes” would thus score low on the “clothed index” but might have a negative multiplier for the beach and a high mutiplier for the opera. I’m of course just trying to make something simple seem complex, like our legislators do but with less transparent methodology.
I see three aspects of the question:
1) The aesthetic dimension. Nudity except for shoes simply looks stupid, even a pair of sandals. But real shoes and with socks are of course much worse, I would say even grotesque.
2) Next thing is the dogmatic dimension so to speak: No matter how good reasons you have for wearing shoes it should be completely obvious that the very moment you put your shoes on you have stopped practising nudism. Exactly as when you wear swim pants because you want to respect the local rules. Fine, but evidently you are not practising nudism that day. And if you almost always believe you must wear shoes you cannot qualify to be called a nudist. Now everybody do as you like. But since you have made the question of wearing cloth or not into an ism I would have expected that you would be strict on observing certain rules or principles and that you for that reason only would wear shoes if there really could be a good reason – for instance an extremely unpleasant terrain.
The contrary seems to be the case. If I make a picture googling on nudist I’ll see only a minority of nude nudists! Also under circumstances which seem to be absolutely barefoot friendly.
3) Which brings me to most important aspect. If only you would give being barefoot a chanche you would soon discover that don’t need shoes that often. What about taking just a small walk from your home to the supermarket without shoes as a beginning? Next day you walk a bit longer. In few weeks you can easily walk 10 kilometers barefoot. And you will realise that it’s simply so wonderful that you’ll find the idea of putting shoes on completely absurd and unbearable. When best a barefoot walk simply involves an intense feeling of pleasure and happiness. Difficult to explain, you simply have to try.
Let me underline that I talk about spring and summer. I’m not a fanatic who would walk barefoot in the snow.
Yes, use shoes when necessary but shoes are not necessary all the time as most people think, apparently also nudists? As nudists you should be the first to consider the idea of leaving your home without shoes.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Posted by Felicity on Mar 30, 2013
Posted by Diebyclones on Feb 17, 2013
Posted by nesv1 on Jan 29, 2013
Posted by nude22 on Jan 18, 2013
Posted by Anonymous on Feb 19, 2012
Posted by Melissa DejaNude on May 5, 2012
Posted by Anonymous on Feb 1, 2012
Posted by Felicity on Jan 22, 2012
Posted by Anonymous on Feb 5, 2012
Posted by TimCH on Jan 19, 2012
Posted by Felicity on Mar 3, 2012
Posted by saiyankev on Nov 30, 2012