Comments 31

    1. Those were the days, indeed; and, nothing “gay” about it. Just boys.
      Horsey – the change has occurred on our watch, buddy. I am acutely aware of how much we seem to have stuffed things up for the kids of today; but for the life of me, I don’t recall exactly when and how the change occurred.
      Do you?

      1. “I don’t recall exactly when and how the change occurred.”

        It started “as a trickle” in the mid-to-late-70s, then ramped up big time after Reagan was elected — because he “invited” the religious right into America’s government and then our government proceeded to allow them to start stealing “rights” they never had in the first place.

        By the mid-90s, they started claiming these “religious rights” which is nothing but bullshit propaganda to control our society — and unfortunately, because of the general stupidity of the American public, they have largely succeeded.

        1. Right on. Then under George W things got worse. Trump is carrying on the tradition. The Supreme Court has ruled the first amendment also implies freedom from religion. I want my freedom’s back.

          1. But between Reagan , Bush 43 there was 8 years with Bill Clinton as President and between Bush 45 and Trump you had 8 years with Barack Obama as President and society did not seem to become any more “free”. Reminder President Clinton signed Don’t ask, don’t tell, DOMA as well as the repeal of the Glass–Steagall Act – whisch some feel lead to the Financial crisis beginning in 2007.

        2. See, when you are not aggressive and obnoxious, you can put across a salient point of view.

          Well done you.

  1. These are some cute boys skinny dipping naked, they look good naked, I would love to go skinny-dipping with these two boys, I would love to get me some you know what

  2. To all the old-folk in this comment section, I’m gonna venture and make an argument against your romantic appeal to an idyllic past of supposed freedom and tolerance.

    Sure, many forms of same-sex interactions were definitely different then than they are now. Boys and men could hold hands and be in the nude without prejudice, but that was always within a local sphere (culturally and/or geographically speaking). What was considered “normal” in one place could be considered deviant in another.

    Nowadays, what is considered “morally acceptable” is subject to worldwide scrutiny an open to opinions from all social spheres and strata. And I, for one, think that is a good thing!

    A world-wide debate on what is right or wrong has given us the chance to sanction or approve many social behaviors previously tolerated or vilified locally. And, statistically speaking, homosexuality in general seems to be benefiting from this new dynamic.

    Below is a link to a decade long study presented by Gallup that shows changes in the moral perception of Americans with regards to gay and lesbian relations. Notice how the change is not only in moral acceptance alone, but also in the factors people ascribe as being the cause of homosexual behavior. While this study (2010) mentions that the changes in attitudes are mostly among liberal young men, a more recent (2016) poll shows changes in attitudes taking place across all age-groups. One of the latest polls (2017) even shows changing attitudes between politically conservative and religious groups towards same-sex marriage.

    So maybe it’s time to leave behind any nostalgia for an idyllic Athenian paradise and remember that, while there are still many places where homosexuality is punishable by death, these are rapidly becoming exceptions in a general transition characterized largely by globalization and modernity.

    The Gallup publications:




    1. Thanks, Dan; your comment is very relevant, and identifies a solid factual base for the changing acceptance of homosexuality.

      But the nostalgia of we older guys is still real. Its a nostalgia for a more relaxed, more accepting attitude towards young people’s bodies and what they do with them.

      Of course; acceptance of public homosexuality has changed over our lifetimes, and, I am sure, for the better. At the time the boys in the picture were relaxing on the boat ramp, society (and possibly those boys) would have been horrified by the sight of men kissing in public or demanding to be married in a church.

      But they would not have been pilloried, categorised or labelled for life as “gay”because they secretly compared dick length or discretely mutually masturbated. They could have had a private “crush” without feeling obliged to make a YouTube outing video that labelled them for life.

      Perhaps the yin and yang of this issue is that, in return for the freedom of some young men to be flagrantly “out”; the majority of young men have been denied the freedom to be their own, unlabelled, experimental selves.

      Before I go, a comment on Penboy’s contribution; of course, as an American, you will see things through American eyes; but the social phenomenon we are discussing is pretty much global and has nothing much to do with Reagan or Bush. I suspect they were responding to social change, which was global, rather than directing it from the White House.

      1. “Before I go, a comment on Penboy’s contribution; of course, as an American, you will see things through American eyes; but the social phenomenon we are discussing is pretty much global and has nothing much to do with Reagan or Bush.”

        While I understand your desire (but not ‘need’) to separate yourself from anything (or all things) culturally from America, you’re off base here. Whether you like (or want) it or not, American culture (and its disgusting sub-culture, christianity) has had an enormous influence throughout the world, particularly the “West” and of course, English-speaking areas. Reagan and Bush was a huge effect on all Western cultures as well as others, such as Asia, Europe and South America. And, unfortunately, the Trump administration will also have an influence — particularly “religious-based” — although it will not be as much as Reagan, Bush and those time periods. As a proof of this, our (American) finance bubble that burst during 2007-2009 was felt all around the world (as well as for other more local reasons as well). Finances are as much, if not more so, of a cultural mover as anything else (such as music, movies, dress and sexual mores). Just because you haven’t “experienced” it as yet, you will to some degree through your own politics, religion and other social ways.

    2. True, it’s not good to be nostalgic, but it’s also not good to be selectively blind to bad things that are happening today. This thread started about the nostalgia for the days in which boys were not as buttoned-up as they are now. It’s not a coincidence that boys in many places are buttoned-up as if they’re wearing burkas, and women are on full display almost totally naked on magazine covers (not for men’s sake, but for self-expression and inter-female competition). The places where boys still express themselves more naturally are – surprise – the places where women still have a more realistic attitude about gender differences, especially when it comes to sex.

      Foucault himself, almost ubiquitously misused in support of feminist ideology, was hopeful that the Iranian Revolution was going to result in a modern society which had a “separate but equal” gender system – largely because that would have allowed pederastic type relations to continue. Only, that type of modernity didn’t happen. Instead, we get American modernity: drivel such as Chimamanda’s book. The type of modernity we get also means that the prevalence of male same-sex experiences is 1/3 what it was 100 years ago. We must be careful what we wish for.

      Right now, women are in control and are acting as proverbials bulls in a china shop, and we are the most vulnerable group in existence. It’s not as bad where you’re posting from, but that might change.

      1. “the prevalence of male same-sex experiences is 1/3 what it was 100 years ago.”

        You’re just like Trump — you not only pass on pure bullshit, but then you keep doubling-down on these lies as if what you say is absolute law.

        Give it up — that “theory” is nothing but pure bullshit just to make yourself feel better.

        1. Calm down. If you think he’s somehow wrong, please tell us how, and what your reasons for thinking so is.

          1. I cited the studies to him, months ago, but he doesn’t believe in science apparently. It’s amazing for a self-professed atheist to not believe in science…

          2. Less cute:
            “If you think he’s somehow wrong, please tell us how, and what your reasons for thinking so is.”

            I’ll do what Wordworth does: I already have, just look at my past posts to his comments weeks, months, and even a year back.

            And, “Calm down.”? Fuck you. These social idiots NEED to be called out for their bullshit.

            And he wraps it with more bullshit by claiming “science” — exactly like the religious-right does in America — he just hollers “feminism/feminists!!”

        2. Penboy, I mis-spoke, we are down to about 1/4 of the prevalence of male same-sex experiences compared to 100 years ago, not 1/3.

          To refresh your memory, the highest prevalence is documented in the timeframe of the Kinsey study, when lots of boys used to have sex with other boys or with men (in the 1920s-1940s, but most of the experiences they had were in the 1920s) – 37% of the male population having had sexual experience to orgasm. The U of C study (Laumann), GSS (General Social Survey), and other samples, all show a massive decline by the 1970s and 1980s, to the 4-5% range (<1/7th of the rate in early 20th century), and now the GSS is up to around 8-9%. At 9% we are at 1/4 the prevalence of 100 years ago.

          I cited these studies before, but you said you didn't believe them. You compare me to Trumpists, but you're clearly as ideological as they are – you might as well be calling these studies "fake news".

      2. “you might as well be calling these studies ‘fake news'”

        And that’s exactly what that is — PURE BULLSHIT.

        And not only that, they (those studies) are in reality, LIARS just for the purpose of advancing a religious-related agenda — exactly like Fox News.

        1. Whaaa? The Kinsey study, “fake news”? The Laumann study, “fake news”? The GSS, “fake news”? “Liars”? “Advancing a religious-related agenda”? You’re completely off your rocker!

  3. I recall things being pretty easy going in the 60’s and into the 70’s – meaning boys playing naked and such – and then there seemed to be a conservative push back in the 80’s that started subtle and ramped up as it went along.

    In the 90’s things went “underground” in a way – internet and texting seem to be the playgrounds now and not easy to find in real life for those just passing by.

    1. Sorry to through a small spanner, but some of the change has come about because of our own universal “coming out.” Every boy is so constantly aware of gayness now, that it is always at the forefront of their minds, they can’t just “mess around” and pretend it has nothing to do with being “gay.” We certainly knew about it back then and we joked and teased each other, but it was still something strange and alien that didn’t really apply to us no matter what we did.

          1. Actually it was Herbert List I was thinking of. Took me forever to retrieve it though I usually have it right at my fingertips.

          2. Ah, sorry.
            But checking Google Images I see exactly what you mean – a very similar ‘feel’.

      1. Yes indeed, the prevalence of male same-sex experiences is 1/3 what it was 100 years ago. People who were involved in bygone eras do say that the end of this kind of behavior coincided with the emergence of gay identity. I suspect it is also inseparable from the emergence of mixed gender society – universities, workplaces, etc., and the social norms which changed. The society newly valorized that young males could have sex with young females, whereas before, saying “you have a girlfriend” used to be an insult and the society valorized male-male friendships among the young.

  4. Lovely evocative image of a bygone age.
    We have definitely moved to a puritanical victorian era of modesty and sexual behaviour and the ruling much of human nature as not appropriate…

  5. I’m knocking on the door of 50, and I never went skinny dipping in my youth, or for that matter wondered around naked in the great outdoors.

    so I’m not at all sure where all this talk of a more relaxed times comes from, or how times have changed.

    Maybe I moved in different circles compared to some of your comments. Or you’re just looking back through rose coloured spectacles.

    Or I’m just too English!

  6. Hi guys – these boys are German, the blonde kid is reading the German newspaper Stern as you can see from the wonky star logo on the paper. The Europeans have a far more relaxed attitude to nudity than the US and other countries ‘cos you can bathe naked in the public parks in the centre of Hamburg and other major cities in Germany – so catch up and join the 21st century you puritans!

  7. I’m wondering if that ‘music system’ is from his car: either a pull-out radio or 8-track player or combo of both?

  8. First: They are German. The right one is reading the “Bild” newspaper with an adv and the logo for the “Stern Magazin”.
    I magnified and enhancend that pic and now I think both boys brought their portable radios. (=> The german word reverse translated: “suitcase(!) radio” :) ). At the darker, laying radio you can see the not fully retracted antenna. The upper, brighter radio has an hole (while carrying the radio its protected by the belt) for an external antenna.
    Enough techs – I loved that casualness of that days. Nobody was talking about “nudism” or rules or gayness or whatever.
    It was just … fun and natural.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *