How the Textile Industry Convinced Everyone That Nudity is Poor

While most folks don’t think about the historical political impact of the clothing they wear, textiles and the textile industry has in fact had a huge impact on societies around the globe, and still do now. It must be recalled that prior to the European Renaissance and Industrial Revolution, most Earth’s human population was (and still is) centered about the equator in tropical and semi-tropical areas.
European and other temperate zone, sub arctic, and arctic inhabitants traditionally necessitated handmade clothing (usually of animal skins and pelts, wool, insect byproducts for example silk, hand processed leaves and tree barks, and hand/loom woven plant fibers like linen, hemp, and cotton) for protection from the elements.
Desert dwelling peoples also traditionally demanded garments for protection from overexposure to the harmful ultraviolet rays of the sun. In many of these societies handcraft textiles and loom woven fabrics became a valued art, benefiting comfortable weavers and merchant classes. Individuals also wore garments to indicate their socioeconomic standing, and spiritual offices.
Nonetheless, for most individuals all over the world, outside of little elite aristocracies, rich merchant classes, the religious organization, and societies heavily influenced by handcraft textile and merchant guilds, garments was primarily worn for practical functional purposes, and not required when impractical, such as for swimming, or for working in hot humid conditions. wasn’t ascribed any moral measurement as emblematic of modesty or purity. The naked human body was linked with poverty at worst, honesty and purity at best, and was, at the time, not directly related to human sexuality by the majority of Earth’s peoples.
slaves – colonization, nudity, garments and the textile industry
Then, in 1750 the textile mill was devised in England.
As clothing was the leading gain generating end use of the textile mill owners merchandises, it became critical due to their local inhabitants to be indoctrinated with the “need” for cloth body concealment in the least times to keep consistent gains.
This indoctrination also solidified the positions of the aristocracy by direct transfer of wealth from the masses via textile clothing purchases, by designating specific clothes fashions as exceptionally pricey and only to be worn by aristocrats, and by designating many different clothing fashions for each sex, age, class, and trade, area, task, and sect, so reinforcing divisions within the general public, making them more readily subdivided and commanded.
Once the masses accepted the practice of constant fabric body concealment (frequently indoctrinated though the church, the best proponent of new thoughts available to the aristocracy at that time) the abundance of the textile makers was ensured for generations.
Textile makers and religious organizations in Asia had long followed the same path to constant gains and authoritarian hierarchical control within their own areas and religions too.
As the technology of the industrial revolution progressed it became possible for the textile manufacturers to provide more clothing than was demanded by local inhabitants, and the producers were thus compelled to seek elsewhere to advertise their products.
Thus colonial expansion was substantially hastened. The European aristocracy sought new markets for the products (mostly textiles, in addition to alcoholic beverages, and weapons), affordable labor, and new environmental resource lands to produce its necessary raw materials (chiefly cotton and wool).
Governments sought growth of their international influence, tax base, and increase in their national wealth. Governments also sought to enforce cloth body concealment as a question of “law” and social “order” as the practice became normal within their own populations and profitable elsewhere within their colonies. Enough indoctrinated populations themselves presumed the notion they were made more pious, moral, modest, adequate, and pure through the practice of cloth body concealment.
Police officer “Smokey” Buchanan measures swimsuit of Betty Fringle on Palm Beach, to see that its length fulfills swimsuit regulations – 1925
Now there are other means than authoritarian hierarchical associations for textile makers to indoctrinate their pervading bogus message of the requirement of cloth body concealment all the time. with sleek energetic brilliant pictures and engaging stories. Newspapers expound the stories mass media consensus determines to be most rewarding. The web engages and interacts with the minds of its users. Promotion more and more invades every facet of our everyday life.
Meanwhile women are attacked by various forms of violence, kids are harassed to the point of suicide, people starve themselves to death from hate for and discontent with their bodies, and folks are habitually ostracized, bullied, assaulted, raped, and murdered for what they choose to wear.
Actually, garments liberty (the ability of any man to wear or not wear whatever they need without negative repercussions or consequences) can be a reasonable index of freedom generally within confirmed society.
From what I have seen in my travels abroad, liberty and self-determination have a tendency to abound in the societies where garments freedom exists. In the societies where garments independence is refused, authoritarian hierarchy predominates and other private liberties can also be at risk.
Young Naturists & Naturists America
Tags: clothes, culture
Category: Nudist Site
About the Writer (Author Profile)
About The Nudist African American Compose: