A new regime of social repression is imposing itself over the Byron Shire. Supported by local conservatives, the NSW National Parks Wildlife Service (NPWS) is attacking diversity and a particular minority group in Byron Shire – naturists.
The intention to prohibit beach nudism is based on some nefarious and poorly-researched prejudice against naturist culture. At present less than three per cent of the Shire’s coastline is ‘clothing-optional’. That means around 97 per cent of the coast is clothing-only.
Let’s be honest about it. The intention of NPWS to prohibit naturism at Tyagarah and Kings beaches is an assault on an enduring cultural practice – one that has its origins among Australia’s first peoples.
For nearly 70,000 years Aboriginal Australians opted for no clothing, only covering up for bodily protection and certain social interactions.
For Aboriginal Australians the naked human body was entirely integrated with the deeper spirit of nature and the universe.
This only changed when the British colonisers imposed their own violent forms of Christian-based morality, repression and ‘civilisation’.
Beyond bodily protection, clothes evolved as a means of stratifying and distinguishing social groups according to their wealth and power. Clothes were also used to control women, their sexuality and fertility.
Nevertheless, a minority of Europeans adopted naturism as an alternative form of moral, spiritual and natural redemption. From the 19th century, naturist communities became more collectively conscious and organised. They developed a profound philosophy and set of practices that challenged repressive attitudes toward the human body in its natural form.
Naturism challenged the instrumental brutality of the modern state, industrialism and warfare.
From the 1960s and 70s naturist clubs flourished and beach nudism became more common, especially in culturally enlightened places like Byron Bay.
While naturism is now restricted to a tiny proportion of the Shire’s public lands: the personal and community health benefits of naturism have been broadly canvassed in academic and medical research.
Naturists themselves explain the mental health benefits of naturism in terms of – ‘a sense of social equality as naked beings’; an enhanced body image and self-esteem; acceptance and genuine enthusiasm for bodily and cultural diversity; a sense of community and belonging; the sensual pleasure of bathing without the encumbrances of sand-filled and sagging bathers; and a feeling of being ‘closer to nature’ and ‘our natural selves.’
This feeling of being restored to nature through ‘rewilding’ is now a significant strategy for mental health treatments and recovery.
Rewilding is being used as a therapy modality for PTSD, addiction, relationship trauma, grief, depression and anxiety.
The NPWS Acting Executive Director, Deon Van Rensburg, claims that ‘clothing optional’ is not consistent with NPWS values. We need to ask what ‘values’ could he be talking about? Repression? Anti-diversity? Disdain for minorities and nature? Disdain for the human body?
Certainly there are behavioural issues with certain individuals at Tyagarah and Kings beachs. Rather than impose their authority through prohibition and prejudice, it would be far more productive for NPWS to work with the naturist communities to manage these behaviours.
Behaviour issues
Such behaviours have been largely erased from Sunnyside Beach in Victoria, largely through this co-operative, community-based approach.
Working with naturist communities, NPWS could help develop a code of ethics and practices in order to ensure compliance with legal and environmental parameters.
Such a code would also help with management and protection of beach ecologies. It may help protect indigenous fauna from those (usually clothed) beachgoers who bring their dogs into the parks’ beaches.
There have been recent assaults on naturists who have tried to protect the beach ecologies from dog owners, rave parties and fire-lighters in protected areas. Neither NPWS rangers nor police have taken any interest in either the infringements or related assaults on naturists.
Perhaps this is because naturist ‘values’ don’t accord with the more repressive values of the NPWS.
But this is the essence of the problem.
Most naturists are law-abiding, peaceable and respectful people. They seek to protect the natural environment from all manner of violation.
So, again, why are the authorities so keen to attack naturists who care so deeply about these beaches and the natural environment?
Naturism is a constitutional right in Spain, and broadly embraced in countries like Germany, France and the Netherlands. Naturism is seen as a human right, a legitimate form of personal and social expression.
Naturism is an enduring tradition in Byron Shire. It’s a signature of our community’s difference. So rather than impose draconian prohibitions on diversity and minority culture, the authorities should empower communities to enable safer spaces for those who want to enjoy our natural condition with like-minded individuals.
Make the beaches better and safer by working with naturism and naturists – not against them.
The Alstonville-based office of NPWS has long been the haunt of some ultra-conservative reactionaries who will, at any opportunity, crack down on lifestyle aspects that they find unpalatable, despite no damage to the environment they ‘look after’.
I’m sure their parks, forests, and beaches will survive the sighting (oh shock horror!) of the occasional willy, fanny, jug, or derrière – unlike the Service’s nanny mentality.
Despite the NPWS’s conservative anti-body mentality, it is (or used to be) okay for that service to train its staff in 4WDriving by tearing up sandhills in their vehicles – sandhills that the public’s cars are banned from for reasons of conservation, ffs! (I know – I spent six months’ employment with them doing just that!)
It’s been there for generations, so keeping it is the Conservative view. Abolishing it would be Progressive. You can’t pretend to be the cultural revolutionary in the room if you are fighting to maintain the status quo.
NPWS are treading a very thin line here, assuming they have the power to erode natural human rights, more or less criminalising normal human activities. This is how oppression begins. All victimless crimes make criminals of those who prosecute them, as it’s unlawful to charge someone for a product they never received.
The law involves itself when someone takes something from another (the victim), that doesn’t necessarily involve physical property. Like the freedom to enjoy uninterrupted peace, free from physical harm or harassment.
When the law becomes the crime, resistance becomes duty. The naturists should simply start enjoying the main populated beaches, and practise the sacred art of “Do as thy will.” Can’t carry ID without pockets.
In days of old, it was considered a sign of goodwill or charity to “clothe the naked” as they couldn’t afford clothes. In modern times it seems to have changed to harass, intimidate, beat, charge, or arrest anyone who just doesn’t feel like wearing them at the time.
Once we go down this path, it’s only a matter of time before people will be monitored in their showers to ensure their bits are covered while they bathe. Parents will be forced to wash their babies through protective screens to shield their bits or become prosecuted for sexual deviance.
Enough is enough. Stop eroding our rights. It was bad enough to force us to go to Tyagarah where enforced parking fees apply.
Once the bits are out and on display, it soon loses the allure of seeing the forbidden. Reminds me of the old Leunig cartoon where everyone was naked and wore elbow coverings. The thrill for the pervert became catching a glimpse of elbow.
This is a democracy, and if NPWS refuse to listen to the will of the people… the laws for treachery have never been repealed. At the very least, they must be stripped of their powers and handed over to someone who is able to apply them with decency and respect. Once a right is taken away, it’s very rarely given back. Is it any wonder they took our guns. Outlawed our medicine. Now want to strip us of the right to… well… strip.
Would be good to see National parks issuing more fines for people taking dogs into national parks and on beaches in Byron where dogs are not allowed , disturbing the local birdlife and attacking wallabies .
Having lived here 10 years , I have never seen national parks officers take any action on the above .
Looks like they are just picking at the low hanging fruit 😉 ( no pun intended )
Maybe we should have a nude beach day for all the staff at Northern NSW National Parks . Once they see how good it feels to have a nude swim they might just be converted ! at least some of them .
I have been a local living at Tyagarah for 20 years and loved the clothing optional beach. There is no negative feeling towards the naturists. The clothing optional should be closed down because there has been a total change of character of the beach and nearby bushland and lakes by being infiltrated by sex pests and poor sexual behaviour that makes the beach creepy at best and dangerous at worst. There was a committment made to clean up this element but it has failed miserably. Close down the nudist aspect of the beach.
A change of character ????
Oh you mean because there isn’t that creepy inappropriate behaviour anymore.
How is a Clothing Optional Beach of 800 metres creepy or dangerous with 0 yes zero police reports, CAD, stats over the last 3 years.
Creepy is having absolute hypocrites living in the area pertaining to be reporting sexual inappropriate behaviour to police . Strange that they were once again caught out on their lies recently at a Stakeholders Meeting.
So over a bunch of sex cult crazies.
Thank you for your excellent posts. I live in Tasmania now and have lived in Northern NSW for a lengthy period enjoying the beauty of the surroundings and freer culture of many people living there. I am at heart (and in practice) a naturist, or was when sharing life with my husband in NSW.