You are on page 1of 23

GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

De-Queering, Conflict, and Denial:

The Estrangement of the Homosexual and Nudist Movements

~1~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

Homosexuality and the nudist/naturist1 movement, indeed just as many concepts

of ‘self’ do, share common genesis. Both are identities whose formations were

necessitated by the significant social upheavals brought about by the industrial

revolution. Both contain elements whose roots may be seen as a reaction to the

controlling effects of monotheism and the rise of the industrial state. Because both are

reactionary identities, identities which seek to challenge the norms proscribed by the

industrial/religious/corporate state, both are marginalized and in constant threat of

restraint or outright destruction by the state. As identities, both may be seen as the

individual’s effort to embrace the true self in defiance of the cages and strictures which

the industrial/religious/corporate state seek to impose.

As identities, same-sex attraction and the nudist movement were both born out

of a necessity to resist a growing cultural shift which sought to negate the body, the self,

and nature in favor of the machine and profit. It is no coincidence then that as identities

homosexuality and nudism were constructed within decades of each other and that

early innovators and leaders claimed membership within each group. It is not surprising

that within the homosexual movement one would expect to find many adherents to the

nudist movement. For if our sexuality is truly elemental to our beings, then so are our

bodies. Can we separate the two, our sexuality from our bodies?

Paradoxically, as identities seeking survival in the post-modern

corporate/religious/military state, both homosexuality and nudism seem to have

1 Much has been said about the meaning of the labels nudist and naturist. Within the movement many
claim a distinct difference, many do not. Merriam-Webster defines a naturist as a nudist. For the purposes
of this paper and in the interest of continuity, I will refer to the group identity as nudist, even when
speaking of the Naturist organization.
~2~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

succumbed to the belief that willfully re-entering the very cage which spawned their

formations and from which they have tried to escape will deliver success. Herein lies the

source of conflict between these two identity movements which share such distinct

commonalities and genesis. Both have historically rejected the other out of fear of

censure from the institution against which each is reacting. Each has subscribed to the

dominant cultural critique of the other, rejecting the other in hopes of tempering the

dominant culture’s critique of themselves, resulting in a simultaneous resistance to and

embrasure of the cultural cage which seeks to negate their very existence.

~~~~

It was the acceleration of scientific investigation during the nineteenth century

coupled with the industrial revolution and the rise of the machine which not only had the

effect of negating the body but also dissecting, subjugating, and classifying it. As early

as 1828, Daniel Webster, in a speech given at the Boston Mechanics Institute predicts

the replacement of bodies with machines:

Steam . . .[is] on the rivers, and the boatmen may repose on his oars; it is on the

highways . . . it is in the mill, and in the workshops . . . It rows, it pumps, it excavates, it

carries, it draws, it lifts, it hammers, it spins, it weaves. . . It seems to say to men. . .

“Leave off your manual labor, give over your bodily toil; bestow your skill and reason to

the directing of my power, and I will bear the toil,--with no muscle to grow weary, no

nerve to relax, no breast to feel faintness.” (Takaki 150)

~3~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

Not only would the machine replace the body, but it would do so as the new body, the

new sexuality. Technologies prodigy was anthropomorphized and its power was

celebrated in sexual terms. According to Ronald Takaki, terms such as marriage and

birth were employed to describe steam -- “the pure white jet that fecundates America”

as noted in the celebration of steam by Perry Miller (Takaki 150).

Technology did not succeed in replacing the body and manual labor, but

ultimately degraded labor. As Marx has noted, the “lightening” of labor became “a sort of

torture”. The machine turned artisans and craftsman into factory workers where

repetition deprived work of interest. Factories imposed a new definition of time,

subjugating workers to the factory whistle. Factories became like prisons, taking people

from casual routines to rigid ones. Factories and prisons were, in fact, the first

institutions designed to physically control and direct humans (Takaki 152-3).

As technology worked to chain and deny our bodies, our

sexuality became mechanized, utilitarian; its sole purpose became

production. As Michel Foucault notes, “Sexuality was carefully

confined; it moved into the home. The conjugal family took custody

of it and absorbed it into the serious function of reproduction” (3).

The bedroom became the factory and sex became a serious

business. With the mechanization and confinement of sexuality

came a need to sexualize what had not been before. Sexuality was

seen everywhere, and with sexuality’s serious new business and

confinement, everything became suspect of orchestrating sexuality’s escape.

~4~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

Growing subjugation of the body, sexuality, increasing economic conflicts, and

the medicalization of sexuality from 1870 onwards had a profound effect on the nature of

friendship during the nineteenth century. Sociologist Georg Simmel stated that “’total’

friendship which took hold of the entire body was difficult to realize as a result of the

increasing functional differentiation of society” (Oosterhuis 11). Same-sex friendships,

once regarded as beautiful and and held in the highest esteem, became sexualized and

suspect.

While the industrial revolution was creating a middle class which embraced the

new technologies and sought approval by adopting strict moral codes which reduced

sexuality and the body to a mechanics whose functioning was best kept from sight a

growing group of artists, philosophers, and intellectuals were resisting dehumanizing

effects wrought by the machine age.

Owen Wister expresses this reaction (like steam, even the piano is sexualized)

and suggests the antidote may be found in art when he writes,

Yes, I’m aware your daughter cannot read it;

I don’t forget your piano stands on limbs.

Life’s so indelicate, we have agreed it

Must be concealed by fig leaves and by hymns.

Sculpture’s so bare, and painting so illicit,

And poets unconventional at best;

Give Art a chance and Art will never miss it;

Art has a craving to parade undressed (Wister 253-254).

~5~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

Owen Wister was not the only one reacting to the strictures of Victorian morality

brought about by industrialization and scientific categorization. German philosopher Max

Stirner repeatedly refers to a fundamental state of existence, which he seems to view as

ideal, 'like the bird, who sings because it is a singer'. He provokes his readers with

references to their christian-adopted fear of their own nudity, encouraging them to throw

away such fixed ideas, to see and become 'who they really are' (Max Stirner). In the

United States, Walt Whitman extols the virtue of the flesh in his Specimen Days when

he writes,

Sweet, sane, still Nakedness in Naturel-ah, if poor, sick, prurient humanity in cities

might know you once more! Is not nakedness indecent? No, not inherently. It is your

thought, your sophistication, your fear, your respectability that is indecent. There come

moods when these clothes of ours are not only too irksome to wear, but are themselves

indecent. Perhaps indeed he or she to whom the free exhilarating ecstasy of Nakedness

in Nature has never been eligible (and how many thousands there are!) has not really

known what purity is--nor what faith, or art, or health really is. (Whitman)

As industrialization, the railroads, and expansionism resulted in the closing of

the West, the idea of an open and vast Rousseauian existence where the body and

friendship reined unquestioned are romanticized in Literature. In his novel The Virginian,

Owen Wister tells of a cowboy who takes a visiting Eastern snob under his wing. As

Chris Packard explains, The Virginian is as much about a cowboy giving up the life he

loves to marry a schoolmarm as about the intimate same-sex relationship between the

narrator and the Virginian (Packard 44). In their second year of their friendship, during a

~6~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

camping trip deep in the wilderness the two men, having no luck with fishing, decide to

take a dip in the river. “Forthwith we shook off our boots and dropped our few clothes

and heedless of what fish we might drive away, we went into the cool, slow, deep

breadth of backwater . . .”(Wister, Owen 396) Later they “. . . dried off before the fire,

without haste. To need no clothes is better than purple and fine linen.” (Wister, Owen

397). What seemed to have disappeared for most, nature and the free reign of the

unencumbered body could now only be experienced in popular entertainments which

ultimately reflected and normalized the passing and the taming of the natural by

dressing it in the respectability of the productive, hetero-normative family model; the

schoolmarm.

~~~~

A group of German male students, meeting at a school in Steglitz in 1896,

founded a club which soon became known as the Wondervogel. Their activities

centered around excursions into the country side, hiking and camping. Their trips were

decidedly primitive, members cooked for themselves over campfires and slept outside

under the stars or on straw beds inside barns and often swam or enjoyed nature nude.

Adults were not allowed to participate and initially, the groups were exclusively male.

The Wandervogel were decidedly a rebellion against the regimentation and constraints

that middle class life and industrialization brought to their lives, an attempt to return to

that which seemed to have disappeared and could now only be experienced through

~7~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

literature and art. They celebrated a more romantic notion of nature and a free

expression of emotion and friendship; members openly held hands, embraced, cried

together, fostering a strong element of homoeroticism within the group, as noted by

Hans Blüher in 1912 with the publication of his explosive book The German

Wandervogel Movement as an Erotic Phenomenon. The book postulated that

homosexuality was the driving force behind the movement and created a long-lasting

scandal. Only World War I would deflect the publics attention from Blüher’s ideas.(Mills).

"The modern civilisation [sic] has withdrawn itself from nature in an inadmissible

way; who equates nudity with greediness, is a hypocritical Philistine: and when the body

is freed from the slavery of the cloths, the humans will automaticaly [sic] come to a

better mood, which is ethically to be seen as "clean" in the traditional way"(Pudor), so

wrote Dr. Heinrich Pudor who authored the book, Nacktcultur, in Germany in 1894.

Nacktcultur introduced the idea of a society where everyone, male and female, would

live together without clothing. Heinrich Pudor advocated nude exercise and suggested

that nudity was aristocratic and slavery to clothes plebeian (Goodson 179). Today Dr.

Pudor is considered one of the fathers of the modern nudist movement by many

organizations including the Federation of Canadian Naturists(Federation of Canadian

Nudists), and Internaturally, Inc (Internaturally). In 1905 Paul Zimmerman opened

Freilichtpark (Free Light Park) near Klingberg, Germany, the first nudist park in the

world. Zimmerman kept strict rules in his park; meat, tobacco, and alcohol were strictly

forbidden and guests were expected to rise with the sun for two hours of calisthenics.

Freed from the confines of restricting clothing and corsets and the over indulgences of

~8~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

middle class life, the first visitors to Freilichtpark left glowing with health and energy.

Word soon spread and Freilichtpark and the German nudist movement blossomed.

In 1896, Adolf Brand began publishing his journal Der Eigene (The Self-Owner).

Max Stirner, the German philosopher who fifty years earlier had suggested people throw

away their christian-adopted fear of their own nudity to “see who they really are”, was a

profound influence on Brand and his anarchist leanings in the early issues of Der

Eigene. In fact, Brand borrowed the title for his journal from Stirner’s main work, Der

Einzige und sein Eigentum (The Unique One and His Property). Der Eigene was

perhaps the first literary and artistic journal of homosexuality in the world. Its readers

would be men who “thirst for a revival of

Greek times and Hellenic standards of

beauty after centuries of Christian barbarism”

(Oosterhuis 3). Brand believed that scientific

research into sexuality removed the beauty

from eroticism and held the idea counter to

that of Magnus Hirshfeld that homosexuality

was not a disease or a third sex but was a

normal state of being. Brand and his

followers were members of the nudist

movement in Germany and advocated nudity

as a way of appreciating the beauty of the

body and achieving its ideal perfection.

~9~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

Heinrich Pudor, considered the father of modern nudism, was a contributer to Der

Eigene. Writing an article for Der Eigene entitled “Nudity in Art and Life” in 1906, he

suggested that the Greeks inhabited and knew their entire bodies because they weren’t

restricted by clothing as opposed to modern man who could not know his body as we

“feel the dress - not the body” (Oosterhuis 109). In 1925, Adolf Brand, in an article

appearing in Der Eigene titled “What We Want” writes, “. . . in the interest of racial

improvement, sexual health, and advancement in general, calls for the promotion of a

noble nudism . . . as well as the encouragement of every sport establishment that does

not degrade people to machines . . .” (Oosterhuis 160).

Here we can see two movements springing forth simultaneously as a reaction to

nineteenth century industrialization and middle class morality, the nudists and the first

homosexual movement. Each share common goals and common founders, but as we

shall see, each grows to develop along paths which tend, for reasons founded in

pragmatism, to not only ignore but shun and vilify the other.

~~~~

The nudist movement was brought to the United States in 1929 by German

immigrant Kurt Barthel who advertised in a German language newspaper for people

interested in starting a nudist facility in New York. He received a few responses and on

Labor Day, 1929, the first outing of what was to become the American League for

Physical Culture took place. From this first outing grew the desire for and the ultimate

~10~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

founding of the first permanent nudist park in the United States in 1932, Sky Farm in

Millington New Jersey (Hartman 21-33).

Shortly after Sky Farm’s founding one of the most controversial figures in

American nudism appeared, the Reverend Ilsley Boone. Boone was a charismatic figure

who almost immediately gained control of the nudist movement in the U.S. He soon

founded his own nudist park in Otis, Massachusetts named Burgoyne Trail and began

working on producing The Nudist. a magazine founded a year earlier by Gil Parks. Soon

after seizing control of The Nudist, and consequently its mailing list and access to the

names and addresses of all interested parties, Boone managed to have himself

appointed executive secretary of the newly formed International Nudist Conference,

which was also officially listed as the publisher of The Nudist, although in reality Boone

was the publisher (Hartman 21-33).

~11~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

~12~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

The Nudist idea portrayed in the frontispiece of The Nudist magazine, that of the supremacy of nature as

teacher and savior of humankind. Also apparent is the move towards a more family oriented or christian

ideal, that of mother and child.

From its beginnings in the United States the nudist movement was positioning

itself as a family oriented movement which sought to uphold strict gender balances

within its ranks, meanwhile insisting that nudity had nothing to do with sex. While it was

still focused on health and physical culture, it had moved away from the aesthetic

notions of the body and the return to Hellenic standards proposed by the movement in

Germany at its inception. In an article titled “Nakedness Versus Nudism” which

appeared in the July issue of The Nudist, Bruce Calvert notes , “When real nudists go

out for sunbathing, they want their wives and daughters, and their cousins and aunts,

and their sweethearts with them” (Calvert). Note that this real nudist, presumably male,

wants opposite gendered nudists with him in droves, wives, daughters, aunts. Decidedly

not sons or uncles. Calvert continues, “Men when alone are barbarians. Look at armies,

look at penitentiares! Women when alone--I don’t know just how that would be. . . the

language and behavior of that bunch of males on [a] womanless strip would hardly be

an ornament in polite society” (Calvert). Here is presented the normative idea that

masculinity may only be tempered and restrained by femininity and what women could

possibly do together is unimaginable to men because women are unimportant, they

could not possibly exist without man. We see here also the desire to return full circle to

~13~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

the morals and strictures of “polite society” from which the nudist movement and the

Wandervogel in their earliest forms sought escape. To put the stance of the nudist

movement even more bluntly, the membership rates for The American Gymnosophical

Association, as stated on the full page back cover ad appearing in the July 1933 issue of

The Nudist lists Men - $5.00, Women - $3.00, Married Couples $6.00.

In spite of this normative positioning The Nudist magazine came under attack for

purveying obscene material and in the 1940’s the Comstock law was used by the Postal

Service to suppress The Nudist and other nudist publications in the United States. After

many years of legal battles fought by Ilsley Boone, the United States Supreme Court

ruled in 1958 that nudist publications were not obscene, opening the door for the

appearance of many nudist publications throughout the 1960’s.

While the nudist publications and the movement itself focused on families and

females, seeking to position itself as virulently anti-sex under the pretense of ‘family’,

during this time of growth after the Supreme Court decision, a new form of publication

emerged. Because the definition of what was pornographic was uncertain and confusing

until 1973 (when the United States Supreme Court outlined its community standards

ruling in Miller v California) magazines aimed at homosexuals in the 1960’s were

couched as either physique magazines or nudist publications. Most of these

publications carried photographs of naked men in nature alongside articles extolling the

virtues of nudism, usually having no direct correlation to the photography with which

they appeared. Running through the commentary of many of these publications was the

~14~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

idea of the acceptance of single males in the nudist movement and a return to the ideals

of the nineteenth century romantic roots of the nudist movement.

Mr Sun, which began publication in 1966, seems dedicated to the fight against

gender discrimination in the mainstream American nudist movement. Mr Sun reiterates

in every issue its intent in its editorials. “For too long now, the male of the species,

especially in nudist circles, has taken a back seat to the female. . . Discrimination

against single male nudists has slowed down the progress of organized social nudism in

this country” (Mr Sun) and again in a later issue, “We do hold that the discrimination

practice against male singles should be looked at with a new eye by those individual

park members who feel this is

upsetting to the balance at camp

The male nudist . . . is an asset, not

a liability. . .” (Mr Sun). An article

appearing in the January 1967 issue

of Mr. Sun tells of the new

movement away from the confines

of traditional parks and how this

idea of ‘casual’ nudism is good for

the traditional nudist parks.

Now this may seem a bit

contradictory that we believe

that casual nudism is good for

~15~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

the nudist park, but it is. First, it should certainly open the eyes of park managements

everywhere to one of the oldest bugaboos in American nudist movement, the ‘problem’

of single men. It is inevitable that with the widespread acceptance of casual nudist . . .

where there is no restriction about who can and can’t belong, the parks will banish the

ridiculous barrier against single males (Mr. Sun).

Issues of Mr Sun also included articles explaining the philosophical stance of

such eighteenth and nineteenth century writers and philosophers as Jean-Jacques

Rousseau, Henry David Thoreau, and Walt Whitman, seemingly striving to return the

nudist movement in America to its German roots of romanticism coupled with a

resistance to industrialization and middle class morality.

As reflected in those issues of Mr Sun arguing the case for the single male

nudist, the turbulent 1960’s and the civil rights movement spawned many movements for

equity and liberation including the feminist movement, the gay and lesbian movement,

and the free beach movement. It was a time of re-examination of old values and rules

and challenging the status-quo. One of the ways that groups did this was getting back to

nature, by getting in touch with their bodies and themselves. Gender roles were coming

under scrutiny as was clothing and its purpose. Nude-ins flourished. San Gregorio, the

United States first nude beach, began operations in 1967 (Baxandall 4). The free beach

movement was under way.

~16~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

The newly emergent gay community was showing signs of affinity with the

nudists. In 1968 the Advocate carried an article reporting that charges brought against

24 people at a private nudist camp under an ordinance banning nudity in Los Angeles

County were thrown out of court. A later follow-up article reporting that a three judge

panel upheld the lower court’s ruling (Advocate). The first Gay and Lesbian Pride

Celebrations often included displays of spontaneous nudity. The poster for San

Francisco’s 1973 gay freedom day celebration even featured nudity. Among the

mainstream nudist organizations and parks the status-quo held sway, strict gender

balances were enforced and any hint of the sexual nature of nudity was vehemently

denied in attempts to appease critics.

The Naturist Society was formed

in 1980 out of the resources of the free

beach movement as an educational

organization to promote clothes free

resources, living sites, and recreation

(Baxandall 2-4). The Naturist Society was

the first mainstream nudist organization in

the United States to include in its bylaws

a non-discrimination policy based on

race, class, gender, or sexual orientation,

although many resorts affiliated with the

Naturists maintain their own guidelines based on gender balance and family definitions.

~17~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

Many nudist resorts have significantly higher membership fees for singles than couples

although gender balance issues is gaining more open dialogue within the movement

and many resorts are admitting same sex couples as families, but resistance to gender

equality still exists within the movement.2 These parks will honor benefits to Naturist

Society members but are only required to abide by the Naturist’s non-discrimination

policy if they are hosting a Naturist Society gathering. In this way the Naturists may

maintain that they are non-discriminatory without being required to exert undue pressure

on their affiliated clubs to actually not discriminate.

From within the Naturist Society sprang many special interest groups, or SIG’s,

of nudists, including a gay male SIG.

Since its inception many affiliated clubs

of gay male nudists have sprung up

across the globe. Today GNI, or Gay

Naturists International is a separate

entity from the Naturists and boasts a

roaster of 155 affiliated clubs. With this

large gay presence with in the nudist

movement, it is not surprising that

visibility at Pride celebrations would

2 I contacted Lake Como nudist resort in Florida which advertises couples rates of $490.00 per year as
opposed to singles rate of $300.00. When I inquired wether the couples rate would cover same-sex
couples the woman who answered my call said she would have to find out. After hearing much laughter in
the background and hearing her saying “I’m not even going to go there” as she returned to the phone, she
told me that yes, the couples rate would apply to same sex couples as long as they had the same
address.
~18~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

become an issue. In 2002, members of the Toronto GNI affiliated club decided to march

in the Pride parade nude. There motivations, beside having fun, included,

“communicating that the process of gay liberation is incomplete if we are still ashamed

of our bodies; the human body is a wondrous thing, in all its variations, and should not

be a subject of shame; protesting the prevalence of body shame in North American

culture; and protesting the prevalence of body fascism in North American gay culture”

(Wattie). They were arrested, but the charges were dropped because the courts ruled

that they were not completely nude as they were wearing shoes. Subsequent rulings in

Toronto have stated that nudity relates to community standards and if the LGBT

community has no problems with nudity, neither will the police (Wolf).

In San Francisco, the Pride parade’s guidelines list under prohibited activities,

“Complete Nudity. City ordinances, dull as they are, prohibit public exposure of genitals.

SFLGBTPCC cannot tell you exactly where the line is drawn, and you draw the line too

close at the risk of the San Francisco’s police officers warning or arresting you. We can

provide you with suggestions, but those do not constitute legal advice, and Pride is not

liable for any risk you take by crossing the legal limit” (SF Pride). The consensus in San

Francisco still seems to be up in the air as to whether or not public nudity is illegal.

Precedence has been set with the Bay to Breakers foot race where nudity has been the

norm since 1998, In September of 2002 the San Francisco District Attorney’s office

announced that being naked in San Francisco is not illegal, after the courts were

instructed to drop charges against George Davis for practicing yoga naked at

Fisherman’s Wharf (Matier). Historically, nudity had been common place at the Castro

~19~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

Street Fair without

hassle from the

police. Recently,

however, fair

organizers have

requested the police

stop any nudity at the

event in order to

make the event

‘safe’ for everyone.

Marching naked in the San Francisco Pride Parade. Advertising

Nakedpride, a pay per view website.

In the United States, while the mainstream nudist movement officially pays lip

service to non-discriminatory policies, they still practice exclusion based on gender and

sexual orientation and deny any and all links to sexuality in an effort to placate critics in

the dominant culture which would seek to destroy it, by forgetting their original genesis

~20~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

and adopting the norms from which they initially rebelled. The mainstream LGBT

movement is practicing these same exclusionary tactics with nudists within its

community for the same reasons. This is especially hurtful within the Queer community

where displays of eroticism and fetishism are the norm at such events as Pride and

street fairs and flesh is visible as long as it is marketable, but the site of a natural naked

body suddenly renders the situation ‘unsafe’.

It is essential for reactionary and marginalized groups to understand and

embrace their “queerness”, their differences from the normative culture, and to

recognize that in these differences they share a commonality with which they may gain

significant strength. Oppression works against everyone and only when the oppressed

resist the oppressor rather than appeasing the oppressor may they find true freedom.

~21~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

Works Cited

Advocate Vol. 2, No. 8 July 1968 2+.

- - - Vol. 3, No. 1, Jan.1969 1+.

Baxandall, Lee. World Guide to Nude Beaches and Recreation, New York: Harmony Books, 1983.

Calvert, Bruce. “Nakedness Versus Nudism.” The Nudist July 1933: 8-10.

Editorial. Mr. Sun Vol. 1, No.2, and Vol. 1, No 3. 1966, 1967.

Federation Of Canadian Naturists. A Brief History Of Nudism/Naturism. 2006. 15 May 2006

<http://www.fcn.ca/history.html>

Foucault, Michel. The History of Sexuality Volume I: An Introduction, New York: Vintage Books, 1990.

Goodsen, Aileen. Therapy Nudity & Joy, Los Angeles: Elysium Growth Press, 1991.

Hartman, William, Marilyn Fithian, and Donald Johnson. Nudist Society, Los Angeles: Elysium Growth

Press, 1991.

Internaturally, Inc. Nudist History Timeline. 2006, 15 May 2006

<http://www.internaturally.com/timeline.html>

Matier, Phillip, and Andrew Ross. “Au Naturel is Natural for Naked Yoga Guy,” San Francisco Chronicle 22

Sep. 2004. 15 May 2006

<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/09/22/BAGQO8SQIK1.DTL>

“Max Stirner.” Wikipedia Free Encyclopedia, 15 May 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Stirner>

Mills, Richard. “The German Youth Movement (Wandervogel).” Gay Roots: Twenty Years of Gay

Sunshine. Ed. Winston Leyland. San Francisco: Gay Sunshine Press, 1991. 149-176.

Oosterhuis, Harry. Kennedy, Hubert, Eds. Homosexuality and Male Bonding in Pre-Nazi Germany, New

York: Tha Haworth Press, Inc., 1991.

Packard, Chris, Queer Cowboys:and Other Erotic Male Friendships in Nineteenth-Century American

Literature,New York: Pelgrave Macmillan, 2005

Pudor, Heinrich. Michael’s Seiten. 2006. 15, May 2006 <http://www.michis-seiten.de/side380.html>

~22~
GLST 15 Elwood Miller 7/15/10

SF Pride, Registration Guidlines. 2006 San Francisco LGBT Pride Parade and Celebration, 15 May 2006

< http://www.sfpride.org>

Takaki, Ronald. Iron Cages: Race and Culture in 19th-Century America, New York: Oxford University

Press, 2000.

Wattie, Chris. “Annals of Law, You’re Not Naked if You Have Shoes On,” The National Post. 19 Sep.

2002. TNT!Men. 15 May 2006 <http://tntmen.abuzar.net/tnt/beach/news/post020919.html>

Wister, Fanny Kemble, Ed. Owen Wister Out West: His Journals and Letters, Chicago: University of

Chicago Press, 1958.

Wister, Owen. The Virginian. New York: Penguin Classics, 1988.

Whitman, Walt, Prose Works. New York: Bartleby.com, 2000. 15 May 2006

<http://www.bartleby.com/229/1133.html>

Wolf, Oscar. “TNT MEN & Toronto’s Pride Week.” 2005. TNT MEN 15 May 2006

<http://www.tntmen.org/members06/Pride2005.html>

~23~