Weighing in on the San Onofre Beach Issue

N Magazine published Part 1 of a comprehensive feature article on the battle for continuing clothing-optional access to San Onofre State Beach in the Spring 2010 issue. Coincidentally I happened to sign on to the forums at the AANR website last evening and learned that quite a few nudists are extremely upset that AANR did not in their opinions do enough in helping The Naturist Society in the battle to preserve the rights of nudists to continue using San Onofre as a clothing-optional beach. I for one am not in the camp of those ready to take AANR to task over the issue, in spite of the fact I think I can understand and sympathize with the frustrations that other nudists feel about this particular issue. Yes, it may be true that AANR did not do much in the way of saving San Onofre and certainly they did not partner with NAC in the legal battle. But I think for several reasons, anyone who had the expectation that they would doesn't really understand the history of AANR.

AANR is the Conservative Nudist Organization

The fact is, AANR has pretty much always been and in my estimation will continue to be a very conservative nudist organization. It is not an activist organization in any way, shape or form. The strategy of the organization is primarily to work within the framework of public relations to cast nudism in the most favorable and non-confrontational light possible. The leadership believes that this approach is the best approach to gaining the favor of non-nudists and eventually gaining wider acceptance of nudist culture within the broader culture. Confrontation is simply not the style of the organization and I am sure is seen by the leadership as counter-productive to their strategy.

Rank and file nudists have frequently disagreed with the AANR approach which some have even gone so far as to label appeasement. Many nudists believe that AANR cares about nothing but the member clubs and sits idly by without lifting a finger when nudist rights are threatened on any other front. Actually that is to a great degree the truth and it really should not come as a surprise to anyone. In fact, disagreement with the way AANR does business is the very reason that The Naturist Society came into existence.

TNS is the Activist Organization

TNS through its political adjunct, the Naturist Action Committee has always been the nudist activist organization. Proactive and confrontational when necessary, NAC is the organization that sees its mission as advancing and protecting the rights of nudists to access and use public lands for responsible nude recreation. Personally I think NAC did an otstanding job trying to save San Onofre despite the fact that in the end the efforts failed. If you read the article in N Magazine I think you will readily understand that the refusal of AANR to join the legal action was a non-issue.

The loss of clothing-optional access to San Onofre State Beach, at least superificially, is simply attributable to two things. Currently the California Department of Parks and Recreation is headed by a director, Ruth Coleman, who is nothing more than a figurehead. She permits DPR to be run by her underlings and she has no real input into the policies of DPR beyond rubber-stamping the decisions made by those beneath her.

The N Magazine article clearly revealed that Ms. Coleman's minions intercept written communications intended for her, withhold information and largely insulate her from any policy making decisions. Others within the department decided that the long-standing Cahill policy would be ignored and that clothing-optional access to San Onofre would no longer be permitted. As long as Californians, especially California nudists suffer an ineffective political appointee to "run" DPR who is obviously either unable or unwilling to lead the department, the future prospect of any clothing-optional beach access in the entire state is in serious doubt.

The Real Reason Behind the San Onofre Debacle

Instead of laying the blame at the feet of national nudist organizations, nudists in this country need to wake up to the fact that the responsibility for advancing and protecting the rights of nudists to access public lands lies not with the national organizations but with individual nudists. I find it alarming and more than a little disturbing that nudists seem content to sit back and expect the national organizations to fight the battles and then simply hand over the victories while the average nudist does little or nothing. I have a few questions for the nudists who are so critical of AANR is the San Onofre issue, especially those who live in California.

• How many letters have you written to governor giving your opinion about the lack of leadership in DPR?


• How many letters have you sent or phone calls have you placed to your local government representatives to convey the truth about nudism/naturism and how important you feel it is that our culture be permitted equal access to public lands?


• How many personal visits have you made to the offices of your elected government officials where you have stated politely but firmly that you will not support or vote for representatives who show themselves to be unfriendly towards naturist issues?


• How much have you contributed to organizations like NAC and the Body Freedom Collaborative?


• Are you a dues paying member of AANR or TNS?

The truth is, nudists are an invisible subculture in this country to large extent. So much so that it is actually a miracle that we have any access to public lands and what little we have is due to the generous past contributions of those like the founders of the Free Beach Movement. We can continue to sit on our collective duffs and indulge in the fantasy that the national nudist organizations are going to do all the work and then we can watch our freedoms being eroded and taken away until the legacies of people like Lee Baxandall are nothing more than footnotes in nudist history.

The withdrawal of clothing-optional access to San Onofre need not stand. If it is a battle important enough to nudists to win, then they can take back the beach. The image above is that taken April 6, 1997, of the demonstration by Australians to secure clothing-optional access to Belongil Beach, Australia. The same tactics that work in Australia will work here. Instead of relying on backroom, handshake deals too easily broken, like the Cahill policy to secure our freedoms, nudists need to organize, demonstrate and become a noticeable thorn in the side of backward thinking politicians and political bureaucrats until we get what we deserve. A failure to do that in essence means we really deserve nothing more than what we got with the San Onfre decision.

In conclusion, look at the past histories of minority cultures in our nation. None of them were ever given anything. Those that were successful decided what they wanted, chose their priorities and their battles and they got involved. No longer content to be pushed aside by the government or society, they suffered indignities, lost jobs, made sacrifices and faced the threats of fines and arrest. In the end however, they got what they wanted, that which was rightfully theirs. Until nudists and naturists are willing to accept personal responsibility for their own destinies, San Onfre will be the rule and not the exception. If that is not a priority for us then we might as well get used to being cloistered behind the protective walls of AANR resorts until those too are taken away. San Onfre will either be a wake up call, or it may very well be the death knell of naturists rights.