Nearly a year ago, the Wall Street Journal ran an article about how nudist colonies are on the decline as their typically baby boomer generation clients are aging. They need young blood to fill those old shoes (if they wear shoes, not sure about that to be honest). The article talks about how they're targeting the college-age set. While I applaud their efforts, I can't help but think they're still aiming too old. In my opinion, they should be targeting the preschool-age set.
If my kids are any indicator, those nudist colonies would be full-up in no time. Here in the Pacific Northwest, the calendar says March, the temperatures say January, but my kids' attire says mid-July. They start their day in warm, footie pajamas, but they increasingly strip it down over the course of the day. First, I wrangle them into long-sleeve shirts and pants. Then, they sneak a minute in their closet and are transformed into shorts and t-shirts, soon to be replaced by shorts and tank tops. Then, just shorts. Then, just their undies and diapies. More often than not, this is the state of undress my husband finds them in when he gets home from work. "It's cold outside! Go put some clothes on!" he says. I just shake my head, as I've given up that particular battle.
On the one hand, I get it. Their little bodies are super-cute. If I had such adorable little legs and could legitimately call my belly cute, rather than frightening, I'd probably want to flaunt it, too. But, on the other hand, it baffles me. Their little bodies are well, little. With no blubber blanket on their bones to keep them warm, aren't they freezing? Oh well, it won't be the first bit of toddler-logic to escape me.
But, since having read that article, I can't help but think it would be kind of refreshing to vacation at a nudist colony where I could just let my kids roam free in their state of wild. A week without battles over getting them dressed? Hoorah! Hmm, except then I'd be expected to go au natural as well... Maybe they're right to target 20-something's instead.
