Reading<scp>anti‐circumcision</scp>activism in Clothed with the Sun: The Quarterly Journal of<scp>Clothes‐Optional</scp>Living

Beginning in the late 1970s and through the 1980s, anti-circumcision activists sought to change minds, particularly in the United States of America, about the practice of routine neonatal circumcision. By around 1980, routine neonatal circumcision rates exceeded 80% of male neonates in the United States of America (Glick, 2005, 4; Morris, 1999, 3; Wallerstein, 1980, 1). These anti-circumcision activists took their arguments to places that seemed to make sense, for instance, local newspapers by way of letters to the editor (Carpenter, 2009), but they also took the arguments to surprising places, such as men's pornographic magazines (Allan, 2018, 2019b), while the movement today has moved to include comic books (Kennedy & Sardi, 2016), as well as participating in protests. In this article, I am interested in one of these perhaps surprising examples, namely an article published in Clothed in the Sun, an American nudist magazine published by the Naturist Society. It is not that these debates had not appeared previously in nudist publications, but this particular example affords an article by a leading activist, and a series of responses in the following three issues of the magazine. What I seek to show is how nudists responded to the article, and how this becomes a question for nudism more broadly, especially given The Naturist Society's motto, “Body acceptance is the idea, nude recreation is the way.” To these ends, I begin by situating nudism, then move to the article, and then consider the responses to this article. Ultimately, I argue that Clothed in the Sun, despite being a nudist publication with a limited audience, provides a nuanced and important discussion of circumcision that reflects the debates in ongoing society. Finally, I suggest that this kind of approach to anti-circumcision activism is one that is worthwhile as it sought to build alliances with groups that may be sympathetic, especially given ongoing debates about the efficacy of anti-circumcision activism (Freedman, 2016, 2). Circumcision is a cultural norm and thus shifting the norms of a culture would be required to move away from routine neonatal circumcision (Waldeck, 2003a, 2003b). According to the International Naturist Foundation, naturism “is a way of life in harmony with nature characterised by the practice of communal nudity, with the intention of encouraging self-respect, respect for others, and for the environment” (qtd. in Egger & James., 2015, 2). This definition is broad and sweeping and others might prefer a simpler definition, such as, “naturism is the enjoyment of getting as naked as possible, wherever and whenever appropriate, alone or with others, just for its own sake” (3). Carlos Monterrubio, drawing on the work of Barthe-Deloizy and Schoemaker, explains that “naturism's fundamental ideal is that nature and its elements are always medically beneficial to humans, thereby emphasising the non-sexual and family component of public nudity” (586). Regardless of definition, what is essential is that the body ought to be in its naked, and therefore, natural state, and further that this natural state is not an ipso facto erotic or sexual state. The idea of nudism, as an organized philosophical principle, is a relatively new idea, originating at the close of the nineteenth century and taking flight in the twentieth century. In the context of this article, the United States of America, nudism seems to appear in the Interwar period and can be traced to “the early 1930s, [when] many Americans first learned about nudism through tourists and reporters who wrote several popular books about their experiences with Nacktkultur” (Hoffman, 2). Nacktkultur was the German idea for nudism, which began around 1890. For the Americans, then, nudism become “known” in the 1930s, especially with the publication of Francis and Mason Merrill's books, Among the Nudists (1931) and Nudism Comes to America (1932). It is during this time that nudism began to become a part of social consciousness and ideas about nudism started to become understood—while not wishing to overstate the case, this is not to suggest it became mainstream. Historically, then, nudism was not just about being naked, but rather “nudists believed that the experience of going naked was essential to maintaining physical and mental health” (Hoffman, 2). Indeed, in the American contexts, “nudists contended that being naked with the opposite sex satisfied the ‘natural’ curiosity to see and know about the body, promoted a wholesome way of thinking, and ultimately strengthened the relations between man and woman” (Hoffman, 3). Importantly, for nudists, there is a distinction made between nudism as “sexual” and as “natural.” The point here is that for nudists there is nothing inherently sexual about being naked, nor is a naked body necessarily erotic. And upon this surely there can be agreement, after all, being naked at a doctor's office is not sexual, changing clothing in the locker room is not sexual. But what is remarkable is the idea of total nakedness and a nakedness that is without shame. Thus, when nudists publish magazines or books that contain material of naked bodies, the idea is not to arouse or titillate the reader, but rather to reflect the norms of nudist culture. Accordingly, when reading these magazines, I am treating them neither as pornography nor erotica, but rather as cultural documents from the nudist community that reflects their ideas and ideals about nudism. With this brief introduction in mind, I wish to address how I approached the magazine, and then, I turn to the material under consideration, namely the circumcision debates in Clothed with the Sun, a magazine produced by The Naturist Society. In this article, I set out to read an article on circumcision that appeared in Clothed with the Sun and the letters that were published in subsequent issues of the magazine. Specifically, I read the article to understand how the author creates an argument against circumcision by aligning it with ideas of the “natural,” and then consider how readers engaged with the topic. In accounting for the readers, they can be largely divided into two groups “for” and “against” the content of the article. As such, this article engages in archival research, insofar as it seeks to shed light on documents that have largely gone unnoticed in circumcision debates, as well as broader debates around genital autonomy (likewise, little has been written on circumcision politics in nudist spaces and cultures). This article draws inspiration from Jack Halberstam's notion of queer methodology which is a “combination of textual criticism, ethnography, historical survey, archival research, and the production of taxonomies” (10), and this project is especially interested in the combination of textual criticism, which I understand as a close reading of the textual corpus, and archival research, which inherently involves historical survey. Furthermore, a queer methodology, as Halberstam figures it, concerns itself with “subjects who have been deliberately or accidentally been excluded from traditional studies of human behaviour” (13). Thus, this article seeks to “include” voices that have hitherto been absent from discussions of circumcision. In thinking about textual criticism, I focus on the ways in which these documents (articles and letters) were written, which is to say, the rhetoric and discourse that is found in both the article and the letters. In reading the article, I pay close attention to how the author constructs her argument. I am also interested in how the author brings together the different politics and practices of nudism/naturism and circumcision. As such, this article addresses what might be understood as the main or principal themes of the argument articulated in the article, and subsequently, the main themes that come out of the letters published in response to the article. In accounting for the archival and historical, I agree with Daniel Marsh and Zeb Tortorici, who remind us, “archives are places where material gets turned into something else: evidence or loss, history or an inspiration to do this history differently” (1), and thus, my approach here is to look at both circumcision and nudism/naturism differently with a focus on the intersection of these topics, which at first glance may have little in common. In thinking about the archive and the historical, then, I read the letters in the order in which they were published. This decision is motivated by a desire to read them in the order in which they were published, rather than organizing them according to their thematic concerns. Letter writers were not only responding to the article in question but also responding to one another directly or indirectly as the letters were published. This project is narrowly confined to a specific set of issues and data analysis of letters stopped once letters stopped being published, as such an argument is not being made about the publication history of the magazine, nor about the politics of the organization. Permission provided by the Naturist Society. [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com] The magazine provided and continues to provide readers with articles about nudist culture, places to visit, recent news articles on nudism, and an opportunity to network. But the magazine also provided what might be called “think pieces,” which is to say more philosophical articles. One of these appeared in the winter 1986, when Rosemary Romberg Wiener published “Circumcision: My Own Story,” which sought to lay out her argument against circumcision while also selling her then recently published book, Circumcision: The Painful Dilemma. Before readers could find the article, they would have seen the cover page of the magazine which includes a family photograph, husband and wife, and their child. All are naked on a beach (though the genitals can only be seen on the adults). They are smiling as they look lovingly at their child. This is a family portrait. People are in the background as the waves roll in. The man is clearly and visibly circumcised, with what might be described as a tight or high circumcision, wherein there is little left of the mucosal collar (see Callegari et al., 2022). The circumcision scar is high on the penis.2 It is a bit disorienting, perhaps even shocking, to see this photograph on the cover alongside the small headline at the bottom of the cover page, “Circumcision – Child Abuse.” If circumcision is child abuse, as cover seems to imply, what can be said of the penis on the cover? The small title at the bottom of the page is thus juxtaposed with the image on the cover. Permission provided by the Naturist Society. In some ways, for a reader unaccustomed to nudist publications, this image might be startling, but for a reader aware of nudist philosophies, this would make perfect sense. This is a photograph like any other. There is hardly anything sexual about the photograph and is mostly anatomical in nature. But the subject matter is clear. This article will tackle the question of circumcision, which is visibly marked by difference. In the article, Romberg recounts her “epiphany,” as it were, regarding penile circumcision. She outlines that when a child is born, “we expect each individual to keep all of his or her body” and that “most people would be aghast at the idea that any individual should be unwittingly deprived of any part of his or her body” (35). In essence, Romberg is laying the groundwork for her argument, and she is creating the framework for an analogy. She then explains, “in the United States, people make one glaring exception to these ‘rules’ in that the foreskin of the penis of most newborn baby boys is routinely amputated” (35). From here, she will describe the circumcision procedure in some detail and noting that “in most cases this is done to the infant without anaesthesia, although when the same operation is performed on an older child or adult it is considered painful enough to warrant an anaesthesia” (36). For then, the as it is one in which for are not by circumcision, and that the procedure itself to be this Romberg is the idea that it is a as it is to or With this in mind, Romberg to her own noting that an American I had always were to look a way with the at the It to that anything had been or to make it appear that (36). In ways, this as it were, given the ways in which circumcision has become a kind of American sexual (Allan, and more particularly that “in the American then, find a discourse wherein the penis has become and the penis is an and (Allan, This is what Romberg is here, the penis to her mind, that she could not even it had been in any to become that American The penis is a part of American cultural a the around the of his penis But this time I not about to The and that was upon this little being was to come and and From this my to do for a that I recently published, Circumcision: The Painful Dilemma. Wiener then to a of the history of circumcision, which is relatively well The procedure is in to but in the nineteenth something Circumcision becomes “the practice as an American out of the of the People that a had his foreskin would to while his This something of a as most people the that is and that do she to the operation as for their infant little or nothing as to or how the procedure The for circumcision, to have been by the and circumcision Romberg addresses the of circumcision, all of which are for instance, of circumcision, such as She also that people not to that the newborn infant any when his foreskin is from the and This is another idea she will seek to with to which have how to circumcision. This argument is with an image of a and at the the penis circumcised, the penis the and to show the from an to a natural to the This of is it the reader of the of the natural to her she that is a against infant circumcision, which is following the recent natural and And thus, Romberg once the foreskin to the natural rather than the she becomes for a she that this child were a would keep his which out not to be an as the child is a But this her to am that has not any that and to baby some American people will the same to baby boys as be people that circumcision of their infant is an of their with today even many people question this of their it a or like the American it as a There are who have to their to Rosemary Romberg “Circumcision: My Own were and The first set of responses appeared in the following another set of responses in the following and another response in the after the article. In the article published letters of one has idea how many were by the but these letters a of The of from who found the article to who the and one that even foreskin as a were more in their for instance, have always is to of a little like that when made of Indeed, was with a and it was not with that circumcision became required while another reader the magazine for the article as they a of Circumcision: The Painful after reading the article. at the articles as a the arguments are more when to that are in of the To describe circumcision as and as the and of in is first of all when in this a of in the of and evidence that circumcision sexual and evidence that as in by and for of it has a and on the relations of and by this and for it a that only would There is evidence that it is the in child there were and boys would be of child as with the evidence the Clothed with the Sun to of in an they that the article in question be in and they then the argument, drawing attention to the as well as and even noting that has to of it as a The are also by the nature of circumcision and that to the by male who the is In the following found some “the If or it, then should being and in this Circumcision and the foreskin do part of an as to the particularly in This response becomes more when the how is a to about how a penis Romberg should be that her were of a to this then, have here a of a In the there is a that circumcision between a and and for a and to have a experience absent of the In the the point is should a have an on the by the of can even that the sex on the in the on of is It is perfect in with its from a and its to a point where the can with the one of the left that its should be a after being and the had out I had and could understand the for all of My penis I like I was its of it being of I would come to only when I not when it If or to the of the several and a of into had to see a of them on the in a I my for the to have It was made in when people the and the can be done about it But in in on I could find for and of not my has seen many on his and small are circumcised, some are are some are are some are This is part of My that as an adult to be it is his decision to I had the that circumcision be out to that by in of foreskin also responding directly to an should like to for the and penis and explains that was the has learned of of who would like to their natural state. I as under in to United for which in essence, a for to their explains that a of foreskin which involves The is and but that the is the of the the with the penis being described as “natural.” This of the natural the to is and the that people are without this is are without as they are with foreskin and Circumcision and body well as have been of As body acceptance is a of should be the most and of baby boys as they are when they come into the In of the natural time that the as Indeed, I would argue that may to pay attention to something like circumcision in nudism it becomes a (though not that As it should be that nudists have and In a article from a had her was as by who to this about she had the which to “the of nudist has Indeed, there are specific for which to and who prefer to be from the But the is from In The to & and Egger provide a series of some of which to have a genital this be a to which they not on a public nude but many question is with and noting that a or is not a to say, these and circumcision become and might even see this as a way in which are and in a movement that is on body these are not Indeed, there is an “in the United that not only but also circumcision for male This and would see nothing with the of and the Thus, when of body in the nudist and perhaps the focus ought to be on what I have called rather than on the body Thus, while the movement may of all and the movement may well make people more in their own there may be on these more research, particularly research, is to or this the here is and The with circumcision is that it is against cultural norms in the United States to this the of are et al., et al., 2016, and the of male neonates are at a of about et al., If circumcision is abuse, circumcision is genital what that in the nudist where are not the exception but the this against ideas of the natural and what is And how do nudists to ideas of body acceptance while the genital of in which many had at There in some ways, an The letters considered here show that there is a of and it as there is at at the writers to to the My is that Rosemary Romberg article a after all, many of the reading the magazine would have been and they are being that they have a penis or that they were of child might see this as a kind of just it, it not But I am not that is what is The writers are and are thinking through the there seems to be a kind of at the body is If the body has been how one make of the What is is that nudists have in debates about circumcision and that nudists are in of that be circumcision or it is perhaps to nudism and it be that in this set of there is a of the politics of the foreskin and circumcision. And this is a particularly for these discussions as these would be with the naked body and all of its while also for body The question that for nudists and is what to do with the would to the of out but what is a to do with a the one that would the penis and or would the These debates will just as the debates in the public One particularly of this was the of and the that circumcision such a of of studies that there is between the and America [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com] was a that is This is the where and in body acceptance and believed in and the the natural male with In essence, this was there is once more a together of nudism, and the In this done by one of the leading anti-circumcision Importantly, another here might be around body as America as with Clothed with the Sun, have sought to the foreskin and to be of the foreskin is that one not to the and make a penis for who had on the in the politics of circumcision would do well to the of analysis to places that might be the and consider spaces like nudism and naturism as places where these of debates and to Indeed, as the from this has not and as this article has to this is to an historical wherein circumcision and the foreskin have been and with a particular focus on body and nudism. is in and at is the author of from of the and and and is of the and of

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.