Talk:Nude swimming

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Skinny dipping)
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Swimming (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Swimming, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Swimming on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Censorship warning Wikipedia is not censored.
Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Wikipedia's content disclaimer regarding objectionable content and options to not see an image.
WikiProject Nudity (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nudity, which collaborates on articles related to nudity and naturism topics. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.


"Places where skinny dipping takes place"? That's kinda...stupid, how about removing that section? WP:NOT a directory – Paul 15:55, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree. If the locations listed do not exist on the List of public outdoor clothes free places (some are, some aren't), they can be added and the link to the list can be put under See also. – Albert109 05:28, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

CFNM fetishism[edit]

I've removed the reference to 'CFNM swimming' as this is more someone's fantasy than anyone's reality here. The article on CFNM states that this term basically applies to a certain genre of Pornography. I see no reason why this should be mentioned in the Skinny Dipping article. Skinny Dipping is a well-known phenomenon that in fact does occur outside of the internet. "CFNM Swimming" is not a phenomenon I have ever heard of. The information on this particular breed of fetishism can be found in the CFNM article. – Colonel Mustard 12:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

From what I've read (from a nudity forum that used to be on voyforums) it's not unheard of for boys to skinny-dip while girls wear bathing suits. In that sense, "CFNM" swimming does technically exist, but I think the acronym is reserved for the fetish. In any case, I've removed the passage because there's no evidence it's well-known enough for us to care about it. I noticed that CFNM redirects to this page, which I think is misleading since a CFNM situation doesn't necessarily mean swimming, so I changed that too. (Btw, the novel "At Swim, Two Boys" features two teens trying to swim to this island about a mile off-shore. In the novel they swim naked, but, oddly enough, on the cover they're in swim suits.) – 21:55, 8 July 2006 (UTC) John S.
I agree, and I've reverted the undelete. If someone wants to write something on variations (with references), that's fine, but there's no point making an unsourced speculative reference to these terms, which are both non-notable and not relevant to this topic. (People may also be interested to see the AfD discussion which these articles are now both under.) – Mdwh 22:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

hey guys, i know this might sound dumb, but do you have to be gay to go skinny dipping with a bunch of guys? i mean im not gay but if some guys started skinny dipping and i swam with them..............isnt that a bit strange —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 00:25, 3 December 2006

Only if you equate nudity with sex. While they go well together, the former does not always suggest the latter. —MJBurrageTALK • 01:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I can assure everyone that CFNM swimming was very real a couple of generations ago. I know because I participated. Our neighbors allowed their boys and any other boy who might be swimming to do so in the nude, and almost all of us did. Neighborhood girls swam with us and wore swimsuits. This was all with parental consent and approval. As a teenager, I did it also, though at the later age it was behind parents' backs. And, CFNM swimming is alive and well to some extent today. On the clothing-optional beaches I have gone to, it is not uncommon at all to see couples (usually middle aged or older) where the man is nude and the woman wears a swimsuit. Uncle Al 21:20, 28 June 2008 (UTC)


Whatever happened to the YMCA photo? Was it deleted off wikipedia? It is still referenced to in the article, but it is nonexistent... Does anyone have a copy? – Spudmonster 22:56, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, it had to be deleted for lack of copyright-justification, so re-posting a copy without a satisfactory tag wouldn't suffice to restore that fine image. – Fastifex 10:18, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I have been able to find a miniscule version of the image on, but if I remember right, the photo posted in this article was about 600 pixels resolution. Does anyone happen to know where I might find a copy of that image in a large format? – Spudmonster 21:21, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

As it is, the article text refers to an image which doesn't exist. That should be changed. But I lack the willpower. – TRiG 13:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

A prime example of USA-centricism[edit]

Various counties and municipalities may enact their own dress codes, and many have. There is no federal law against nudity. Nude beaches, such as Baker Beach in San Francisco, operate within federal park lands in California. However, under a provision called concurrent jurisdiction, federal park rangers may enforce state and local laws, or invite local authorities to do so.

Why the sudden mention of [US] federal law? Huh? – TRiG 13:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Skinny dipping animated movie[edit]

An article about skinny dipping, that had a fun "wish I was there" animated movie of someone skinny dipping, and somebody removed it. That makes absolutely no sense at all. 12:30, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I think that the animated gif is refreshing and adds "life" to the article. Including this kind of image (animated gif) to Wikipedia articles is new and welcomed from me. Regular encyclopedias can't give you these kinds of images. I think that doing this is "cutting edge". As far as the statement about people with slower connections, when did we start censoring for connection speed? Did you take into consideration those of us that have faster connections and enjoy this image? 05:35, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

hahahhahahhahah nice picture to do................i like this picture too much.................i lover this too

Not to be "overly concerned" with user-made images, but Image:2 Friends Sknydpg.jpg is two guys standing naked in ankle-deep water, not really "swimming" in any sense of the word. As for the animated gif...well it is amusing, but I'm torn. Sherurcij (Speaker for the Dead) 13:26, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Child Pornography??[edit]

Arent those pictures of naked boys considered child pornography? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk)

  • I doubt it. They're not doing anything sexual. 23:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Why does this article need four images of naked boys? There are two paintings which include older boys and two photos of younger boys. That seems excessive regardless of content. Regarding the content, though, aren't there potential legal problems for including photos of those undressed underaged individuals without their parents' consent? Wryspy (talk) 20:09, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
I am guessing that skinny dipping has historically been more of a male activity than a female activity. I am no historian so I do not know for sure, and I mean no offense to any women in the world, but I doubt that historically women had any right to skinny dip when around men in a lot of cases. This historical habit would surely have some bearing on skinny dipping habits in the modern age. My only problem is that the last image on the page doesn't mention where or when in the world it was taken. The image can surely not educate anyone on anything if it does not mention when and where in the world it came from. It may as well be a cartoon of animated humanoid bananas skinny dipping, for all the world value the caption provides. JayKeaton 17:30, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Are the naked children really necessary though, couldn't other pictures be used. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:51, 18 May 2010 (UTC)


The image of the two boys standing in ankle deep water is not swimming nor skinny dipping. I am removing the image and ask it not be restored. It has nothing to do with the articles subject. Nevilledad 00:35, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree, they may be naked, they may be wet, but they are not skinny dipping. I am removing them as well.D8a 02:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I enlarged all images to make them more plain Nevilledad 06:40, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

The Movie Section[edit]

I removed the list of movies and paintings with skinny dipping as I feel that whole section only cluttered up the article and was usless and irrelevant to the article. Nevilledad 05:15, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it should be removed, as it is an attempt to show it's affect on modern culture. However, if it could be organized, it would be more useful.D8a 17:14, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I feel it needs to be made less list like if you don't want to take it out? Or at least shorten it. It seems too long really, in my humble opinion. (talk) 11:20, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I came to this article following a link from the featured article The Swimming Hole and I would say that the list of movie references is way too long. I mean, ther article on beer does not have a movie list citing every movie where there is some vague reference to [beer]], does it? I'd suggest to remove every movie that does not have a skinny dipping scene/reference that is actually 'relevant' to the plot or famous for some other reason. --Lagerbaer (talk) 11:13, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

How about removing every movie reference where skinny dipping isn't specifically referenced by an outside source specifically as notable. For example, the movie "Ecstasy" was famous for its nude scenes that began with skinny dipping. Most of the other titles can not make the same claim. Rklawton (talk) 01:30, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Any other thoughts on this, or can I get to work on it? Rklawton (talk) 00:56, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, so I've started removing movies. There are a lot, so I figured I start with movies that don't have articles and movies that don't mention nude swimming or skinny dipping in the article. I'll do this in several steps since it takes a lot of time to check each movie article. Once I/we finish with this, we should review the remaining movies and determine on a case-by-case basis if the nude swimming was notable. In a few cases, the nudity caused controversy. In other cases (like Jaws), the nude scene is featured on the book's cover and in movie posters. In a few more, the nudity has very little to do with the movie and only has a brief mention in the movie's article. Rklawton (talk) 21:56, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Maybe a category along the lines of "Nude Swimming" can be applied to movies featuring this activity. The list is simply too long and too trivial for an article devoted to the topic. Rklawton (talk) 02:21, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Dukes of Hazzard Episode[edit]

I included that line because I felt it deserved to be mentioned, but I haven't seen that in so long my memory fail me. Could somebody put information about the episode name and number?

Visual media[edit]

This list is ridiculously long. A few historical and notable examples from movies and television should suffice. Rklawton (talk) 03:56, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Would it help to split the list off into its own article? Call it, say, List of skinny dipping in TV and movies or something of the sort, and then link to it in the main article. --Nomad Of Norad (talk) 07:05, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I suppose - but would such a list be useful? Rklawton (talk) 17:27, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Would it be OK to just delete the visual media section entirely as unsourced list-cruft? Rklawton (talk) 12:28, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

It would probably cut the list down if one insisted in the fact that there is nude swimming to be noted in a reliable source rather than just watching the film. So I'd just stick a {{cn}} onto each of them and delete them somewhere between a week and a month if nobody comes up with anything. Dmcq (talk) 13:28, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Title of Article[edit]

I think that the article should be renamed "Nude swimming", which is what it is about. "Skinny dipping" is a colloquial expression more common in the US then outside of it. Ewawer (talk) 19:31, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

That's OK by me. Rklawton (talk) 23:51, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Removal of Content[edit]

I came to this article and added a photo by Henry Scott Tuke to the gallery in the art section, because I knew about his work. Then I looked at the edits and noticed that it was there a day earlier. Based on the history of the ip address, I gather that this article was edited by somebody generally interested in removing content from articles about nudity.

I was unimpressed by the gallery reduction, which I reversed. However, some of the editor's other attempts at clean-up could have been merited so I left them alone. For one example, I don't think we necessarily need blurbs about particular artist bios in the art section, if one of the images is already linked to an article about the artist. Corwin78 (talk) 01:21, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Images Censorship[edit]

It seems to me that the images here are purposely chosen in order not to show any nudity. Wikipedia is not suppose to be censored. (talk) 20:23, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

What body parts would you like to see? I'm sure we've got articles on them with appropriate labeled images. Rklawton (talk) 20:52, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
I am not saying this because I just want to see naked people if that's what your applying. I know their images on Wikipedia and Wikimedia that show more. Shouldn't they be here? I'm not saying there should be a lot here, I just think a couple will fit with the topic better. (talk) 20:59, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

[[File:Eakins, Thomas (1844-1916) - 1883 - Eakin's art studens bathing 2.gif|Eakins, Thomas (1844-1916) - 1883 - Eakin's art studens bathing 2]] [[File:Migjorn (625361194).jpg|Migjorn (625361194)]] [[File:Sk dip.jpg|Sk dip]] [[File:Tidal Pool Nude 2.jpg|Tidal Pool Nude 2]] [[File:Phoque humain dans eau.png|Phoque humain dans eau]] [[File:Fotothek df roe-neg 0006337 044 Badende.jpg|Fotothek df roe-neg 0006337 044 Badende]]

A couple of these images should be added to the article. (talk) 21:16, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I think including classic examples would be a good idea. Rklawton (talk) 02:23, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Trivia and reliable sources[edit]

A lot of trivia seems to be creeping into the article. I think the best way of countering that is to require a citation from a reliable source instead of editors sticking in a line every time they see a person swimming naked in a river. I'll stick {{cn}} after the various bits of trivia and remove them after a while if they haven't been cited. Dmcq (talk) 13:41, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

  • Support - good plan. Or just delete it outright. Rklawton (talk) 14:42, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
If there were citations for the ones that are actually of note then it would be much easier to do that. At the moment it would be a little arbitrary. SO I'd like some on even the ones which are probably okay. Dmcq (talk) 16:08, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Well... if you check the articles for the notable instances, you'll see they're sourced. Ex: Ecstasy has a lot about it due to the controversy. Rklawton (talk) 16:57, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Then it should be easy enough to copy over a relevant citation. Dmcq (talk) 18:26, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
That's not how we do it on Wikipedia. If it's sourced in the article, then it's sufficient. If it's not sourced in the article, then the reference gets removed. In that way we don't have to update the same source across multiple articles, and people can click on the article link and get the details if they want them. Check out any of our date articles (like February 18) and you'll see that most or all of the entries lack sources in the date article but have them in the subject article. Rklawton (talk) 01:51, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
That is not right. See WP:CITE right at the beginning "This requires inline citations for any material challenged or likely to be challenged, and for all quotations." Notice the 'inline'. A request to see that things are reliably sourced rather than just what an editor thought they saw while slumped in front of a television is a reasonable challenge. Dmcq (talk) 04:52, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
You're reading it wrong. These aren't quotations were talking about here. Furthermore, a user need only click on the linked article to find the appropriate citation. If a citation isn't available, then it's perfectly reasonable to remove the material as unsourced. You also failed to address my point regarding date articles. The same also applies to city articles that list notable residents, national landmarks, and so on. I'm left now with a choice between believing hundreds of thousands of articles are wrong for not providing redundant sources, or believing you're mistaken. It's much more reasonable to assume you're mistaken rather than tens of thousands of other editors. Please apply some common sense here. I suggest you try to see the logic in this, or failing that, trust an editor with significantly more experience than you have editing this encyclopedia. Rklawton (talk) 05:11, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
No you are reading it wrong. It does not only apply to quotations. It says about quotations that they should always have inline citations. For other material it is required if it is challenged or likely to be challenged. That the date articles don't have citations simply means nobody has put in a reasonable challenge. WP:V is the policy and it is pretty clear about this. If you like you can ask on the talk page at Wikipedia talk:Verifiability. Dmcq (talk) 05:32, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
I hit this one up years ago and got the same answer I'm giving you: it's all verifiable because all the user has to do is click on the link and get the detail and the source. Therefore it fully satisfies WP:V - and it's a lot less work to maintain. And as I noted above, if a claim is made that isn't supported in the main article, then it counts as not sourced and can be treated accordingly. Why not request mediation on this for another opinion. But do keep in mind, our articles simply don't follow the convention you propose. Rklawton (talk) 16:22, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

This goes to the "likely to be challenged" clause. It's not likely to be challenged if all the user has to do is click the relevant link to find the source. Rklawton (talk) 16:29, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

I have challenged it. In fact I looked at Ecstasy (film) first before challenging it and just saw 'Curiously, Extase is celebrated as the first motion picture containing a nude scene, which it was not, rather than the first to show sexual intercourse, which it was'. The internet movie sites did not describe it as renown for a nude swim, in fact they just say she was bathing. But even with that the citation needs to be here because verifiability needs to be in the article itself and not depend on another Wikipedia article. I will raise this at Wikipedia talk:Verifiability. Dmcq (talk) 23:08, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
I have asked for a third opinion at Wikipedia talk:Verifiability#Verifiability from another article. Dmcq (talk) 23:29, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for getting the ball rolling. I've seen the movie, and it's definitely a swim. The controversy is about the nudity which begins with a swim and ends with a cross country run - and the actress' husband's efforts to stop film distribution. The sources I checked out reference the swim or skinny dipping, and only a few mention the run. Though European term is "bathing" - but it doesn't have the same meaning as in American English. For example, Americans wear "bathing" suits to swim in public pools, but Americans don't bathe in public pools, they swim. Anyway, thanks again for setting up the discussion in WP:V. Rklawton (talk) 00:51, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

In the United Kingdom, skinny dipping is sometimes known as "naked swimming".[edit]

I live in the UK, always have, and I have never heard anyone call it something that isn't skinny dipping, with the exception of telling someone what skinny dipping means. I don't know if that's local to the south of England, but I think that the sentence is inaccurate and should be removed ... (talk) 21:02, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Nude swimming[edit]

I have been watching this article for years, and seen editors come and go. I have made a few corrective edits over the last month removing some of the more blatant howlers. But the truth has to be faced that this article has a dual focus- and ís a basket of half truths. The first part in an edited clone of the swimming suit article- which in itself may be a copyvio of a Jane Austen Society article-I bagni di mare di Jane Austin. The article is anglo-centric and while discussing a UK legal situation shows no understanding of the UK legal system, precedent, statue law, bye-laws- criminal v civil. Feathery phases like: In some European countries.. I have spoken with Beyond_My_Ken who is busy elsewhere, and attempted to collect notable on-line references, and can recommend:

The basic story is that for the common folk- splashing in rivers and swimming was always done naked by boys and men- girls and women did not have leisure time so it so rarely happened that there was no story. With the quacks setting up spas at Bath and Buxton etc where cures were guarenteed by being dipped by bathing attendant- there was no swimming involved and it was not a social activity. Sea bathing, naked for the men and boys became popular- and the upper class participants went for health reasons- a cold dip and drinking the water was restorative, (changing took place in bathing machines)- some men extended this to swimming in the sea. Seeing them frolicking in the sea attracted sightseers to the sea spa resort.

Moral pressures forced some town councils to establish zones for the women and men to bathe separately as mixing while in the water (promiscuous bathing) was seen as bad for morals. A half hearted attempt to suggest to men that torso-suits would be fashionable. These areas were not policed- under pressure from the church ever stricter byelaws were passed but not enforced. Mixed bathing was a popular activities for families- who took their custom to the next resort along the coast. Few records of magistrates enforcing the byelaws. This was around 1860-75. Commercial pressure defeated the moral pressures and Sea Bathing ceased to be done for health- but for pleasure. As the segregated beaches in town disappeared- bathing costumes for men became part of the commercial package. Nude bathing continued to be practised outside resorts on isolated pieces of coast- a very few of these known beaches and coves got local authority recognition as Nude beaches.

All this was very much an English problem and one of attitude. In France I can assume the discrete nude bathing for both sexes is acceptable anywhere along the coast or on river banks, outside the town or village centre. In Germany provision is made in major city centre parks. zB English Garden (Munich). We have the same silliness in gym changing rooms and even in dressing up in a sauna in England.

Now we come to the title of the article- the colloquial term skinny dipping emerged in North America in 1947 and in England in 1962 and implies a slightly risqué illicit activity. The term used in the UK for such an encounter was a 'Midnight Swim'- it was probably around before it was used refer to any form of naturist swimming. In has never really been a term for all types of Nude bathing or Nude Swimming- thus it make it impossible to give focus to this article. The debates we have had about which films to include illustrate this. So I agree with User:Ewawer in #Title of Article above that the article needs to be changed to Nude swimming as against Naked swimming which can be a redirect. With that one change, we have scope to define the article in the lead- and the article has focus.

I would suggest: Nude swimming is the practice of swimming naked, originally in natural bodies of water, but more recently also in swimming pools. In the recent past boys and men swam this way, but swimming costumes became popular from the 1860s onwards and quickly became the norm in mixed company. For health reasons for most twentieth century, many swimming pools insisted on male nude swimming as chlorination and water circulation was not reliable. Most nude swimming today takes place on nude beaches, or at naturist facilities, and segregated public swimming areas or in private swimming pools. The colloquial term skinny dipping was first heard in North America in 1947 and was used in Europe from 1962. Some countries of Europe are relaxed and nude swimming is permitted in public areas, but some countries there and elsewhere enforce strict public decency laws.

-- Clem Rutter (talk) 20:51, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

I thought I had changed the title of the article to Nude swimming some time ago. I had moved on since then, and in the meantime somebody else must have reverted my changes. I was drawn back here by you invoking my User name. I agree with the thrust of your points above and with the name change. Perhaps you can also incorporate some of your other comments into the body of the article. Just one point though: you say "swimming costumes became popular from the 1860s" is not exactly right. They became mandatory. Enthusiast (talk) 21:59, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
Firstly, great to talk. I am flagging ideas here as the first stage- and will not write anything without a reliable reference as this is the sort of article that would attract an edit war. The text has to be very tight. I am open to any helpful suggestions. Popular/mandatory- Popular is the wrong word- but I can't find a reference to support mandatory- which is the act of parliament? All I can find is town-council bye-laws which were limited in scope and not enforced- which are towns? State side Federal law or state law- it is an interesting problem. -- Clem Rutter (talk) 22:24, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Useful reference[edit]

Memory Lane: communal football baths from days gone by – in pictures -- Clem Rutter (talk) 10:18, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Eakins painting[edit]

The very famous painting by Philadelphia artist Thomas Eakins was called "Swimming" ... not "The Swimming Hole" or anything else. It was called "The Swimming Hole" when exhibited in the very early 20th Century to give it a more innocent and wholesome persona. In other words, to lessen the sexual and/or homoerotic aspect of the painting (see William McFeeley's biography of Easkins "Portrait"). Eakins himself entitled it simply "Swimming." This is the title preferred by scholars nowadays. (talk) 00:36, 23 July 2014 (UTC)buddmar

That's an interesting point, but it seems like it should probably be discussed at Talk:The Swimming Hole. Since the article about the painting is named The Swimming Hole it seems to me that it's adding confusion to change the link here. Having said that, as an article name, Swimming (painting) is a lot clumsier than The Swimming Hole, so a case can be made that the article's name doesn't necessarily need to match-up with the painting's proper name. Grayfell (talk) 01:03, 23 July 2014 (UTC)