Completely agree with your decision concerning the boys, Anna.  I've see people holding very young children (on their hip, for example) who already have tattoos.  Some on their upper arms, some on their thighs; and I wondered what that child was going to feel about having that decision made for them, when they're in middle school and suddenly very aware of their bodies.
Putting an image online is sort of like a tattoo these days. Once it's there, it's there forever.

Your question is pertinent. At my club yesterday, beautiful weather permitting, we are a lot of people. Swimming, playing volleyball, bow shooting, having lunch and a good time together. We are a good community. We also have a nice website. But we do not show people on it at all because of Swiss regulations. I came across nudist/naturist websites that show people. With stars or other signs on the ladies breasts and the mens parts to obscure them. To me this is dishonest. We believe in something. In something good. And we should be open and honest about it. And show on the websites the way God made us.

So true Peter. When a website adds stars to the body they are basically redressing the people - what is that saying about naturism? To me it suggests that seeing these parts of the body is still seen as either wrong or voyeuristic. It is one thing following the rules of a website that you are visiting - where it isn't primarily a naturist website and there are rules about nudity - but it is a completely different thing on a dedicated naturist website.

When Anna and I started our blog almost three years ago we wanted to be real about naturism, to be dedicated to the cause and to be honest about that fact that in naturism our body parts are all equal. We realised that the only way to do this was to be nonchalent about our nudity. To just take a photo as you would a dressed photo and whatever shows is OK. Some websites and blogs just don't do this. The effort some bloggers go to to not show their "naughty bits" is quite surprising, time consuming and leaves you wondering if they actually are committed to the lifestyle or just after some attention. Personally I think they may be doing more harm than good - they are creating an idea that naturism is about hiding and exhibitionism and that nudity isn't truely relaxed, natural and about body equality.     

The more I consider this topic the more I am convinced that websites that are designating themselves as naturist or nudist and yet do not sure nudity are doing great harm. They do themselves and the lifestyle a miss-service.

We are not talking about individuals who are choosing not to show themselves naked around the internet or even naturists who represent themselves on non-naturist social media - after all they may not wish to loose their profile or even force nudity on to unsuspecting browses or even not wish to have non-naturists behave inappropriately or nasty to them.

We are talking about actual naturist websites of businesses, clubs and even bloggers. Their reluctance to show themselves naked, or to only show naked images that hide their breasts and genitalia is wrong and misleading. It may be based on the fact that they are not really committed to the lifestyle or still consider certain parts of their bodies to be rude and worthy of covering up or not want their nakedness to be part of internet history once they have moved on to other projects. What ever the reason naturist websites that continue to cover up the parts of our bodies that are sexualised and taboo elsewhere are strongly suggesting that these parts of the body continue to be seen as special in naturism just as in the covered up world.

They suggest that if you take part in naturism in the "real world"  then you may do so with the hope of seeing these "naughty bits." They suggest that naturism is about an opportunity to enjoy exhibitionism and voyeurism and that seeing these parts of the body is a reward. They suggest we remain awkward and self conscious about are actual nudity and that we may through embarrassment and from being watched/leered at may wish to cover those naked parts of us up with arms and positions when "caught in the act" of being nude. They suggest that naturism is a kin to be daring like running across a sports field naked in the 1970's or running down a corridor naked for a bet. They suggest that not only are we as obsessed with either hiding or seeing these part of the body as the rest of society but that we also fear them being judged - just as the rest of society.

They also fail to allow those who have concerns about these parts of them - which let's face it is a huge amount of the non-naturist world - to see the wide range of normal and acceptable out there. Therefore missing a huge opportunity to help with body awareness, body confidence  and educating the public about what is OK. If normal people do not show their normal body parts then the average viewer is still only able to see the media fed perfection that encourages our fears and inadequacy in the first place. 

Naturist websites that fail to allow real naturism to be shown in its natural, laid back, honest way are irresponsible and failing in their duty - and yet many of them are doing so for financial reward (hoping to sell a product, a holiday or receive "donations") - this to me is just wrong.

Would they actually be better off not having photos at all? At least then it is providing miss-information.

It's interesting to revisit this topic one year after, especially in re-reading my own post above.  Maybe it's because I have been working (naked) from home since March 2020, and maybe because of that I am not seeing real people much in the flesh as much, I find myself less concerned about other's perception of me.

Here's my story... You may have read about our family adventure in a youth camp a few years ago.  (Something that the kids still rave about even if they're teens.)  The organizer of the camp firmly believed that in order for others to see naturism through the right lens, naturists must profile themselves openly - that we wouldn't hide anything, because we didn't see any reason to.  As a result, their site is one of the very few that showcases everything, openly and nakedly.  At the beginning of the camp, everyone was given a consent form for releasing photos of camp activities.  I chose not to give consent for my own photos at that time, but then subsequently agreed to leave one posted.  That photo was there for a few years and nothing really happened.  I didn't get a call from anyone asking whether that's me, and threatening to call me out.  In fact, my mind set has changed from worrying about being called out, to being ready to say "if you have seen that pic then you should also check out that place. It's really nice."  I've never said it though, because no one asked.  I know I would now be thrilled when the question actually comes.

Would I then start to post lots of pictures of my full frontal?  Probably not, because I don't post online pictures of myself clothed either.  That said, when the context is there, I agree that such pictures would add value, and I would be happy to contribute to that.

Now this is just my own opinion.  Within the family there are opinions that call for caution - that I'm reinforcing myself with naturist values through all sorts of online and offline materials and real world experiences, thereby essentially putting myself in a fantasy; that once people know about our naturism then they will turn against us despite years of friendship.  I don't think they are not wrong, but I know right-and-wrong is itself a belief system, and I should not fear to be right in my belief.

As such, you might have seen me recently update my profile picture for a small change.