Re: DCHS etiquette

Well guys, I really do not think it should be so hard to acknowledge that there are a lot of single guys (not including many of the guys who have responded here) who go to DCHS for the sole or primary purpose of seeing a naked woman or women. Like pornography, we know these guys when we see them there (although these guys themselves are like ostriches with their heads in the sand, apparently believing that their horny, bothersome, voyeuristic energy is unnoticed or invisible). This is particularly obvious when a single guy monopolizes a single woman or couples' time in a pool or the shower area during moments when he could have other pools and areas to himself or with other guys. I experienced such a bothersome creep again at DCHS just last week.

The offensiveness of such guys is a prevalent problem at DCHS, not a "one-time thing."

Of course, the single guys themselves do not see their hawking on women or couples as any kind of "problem"; however, it is certainly obnoxious and a serious problem for most couples and single women.

In fact, in a way it is ultimately a problem even for the single guys themselves, because their insensitivity to the privacy of single women and couples vastly diminishes the numbers of the very thing that such guys come to see.

So far, about a dozen men but no single women or couples have weighed in on this topic (not counting my original post, speaking on behalf of myself and my girlfriends as "couples" who have visited DCHS). If I am correct that the vast majority of single women and couples are deterred from DCHS knowing that they will be bothered by single guys hawking them and not leaving them any privacy in the pools (even if this is due solely to the "fact," proclaimed by the majority of the responses here, that "privacy" in the pools simply does not even exist), then they don't even bother to read this forum, let alone participate in it. And for any that do read it, it is pretty clear, to me anyway, that most of the responses to my post will have confirmed their primary reasons for staying away from DCHS.

As I have said, there are surely some single women who like the attention, or couples who prefer not to have any alone time in the pools at all. But undoubtedly, those are a miniscule minority, among all the couples and single women who otherwise would visit DCHS. The rest stay away from DCHS and will never come back or visit in the first place, or have lousier trips when they do come, unless and until the prevalence of single guys hawking them there is acknowledged by regular users of DCHS, and ameliorated.

But it looks like that will not be, so, as I say, DCHS is effectively RUINED as compared to the lovely, relatively quiet place I once knew and loved many years ago.

That doesn't mean I won't keep going there from time to time, and indeed I had a great trip there this past June. Even with DCHS' problems due to the influx of many more people (problems that are not limited to the horny bothersomeness of voyeuristic single guys), DCHS still has enough remaining virtues for me to warrant occasional visits. And, as Celtfire and others have pointed out, there are times and places along the creek when and where my lady friends and I can be alone. Yes, I have known about these places for decades. It is just that we used to get a good deal of alone time in the main area of the springs as well.

I appreciate all the responses, even though some tidbits have been real stretches or downright silly. For example, it is pretty silly to claim that kissing is "sex" or that it is not "family friendly" to kiss in front of children -- at least if the kissing goes no further than just kissing and does not get too heavy or passionate.

Similarly, when the Naturist Society poses as Rule #1 that people at DCHS respect each others' privacy, some of the responders here are really clutching at straws to mutilate that rule into a distinction between the pools themselves versus the surrounding areas. The core and very focus of the Naturist Society's rules for DCHS are the pools; if the Society meant that no privacy should be respected in the pools (!) but only in the areas outside the pools, the Society itself, in drafting the rule, obviously would have explicated such a stretched and tenuous distinction.

It's all good though. Times change and formerly pristine natural places become crowded. But with the crowds, there are always some people who would like to preserve as much of the essential charm and virtues as possible. For what it was worth, that was my attempt here (an attempt which hit an angry stone wall, it appears, at least among most of the guys who have responded on this topic).

Happy soaking.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 08/29/2010 11:12AM by mellowguy.