Is INF Membership value for money for BN?
The International Naturist Federation (INF) has come in for a lot of stick lately and I thought that I might try and tie the different threads together.
It all began last year, when the American Association for Nude Recreation (AANR) resigned its membership, stating that it considered the INF too Euro-centric and lacked vigour as a campaigning organisation. A recent Wall Street Journal article claimed that the US nude recreational industry was worth something in the order of $400 million annually, and this is in a country that is generally considered hostile to social nudity. Can the INF say how much it has contributed to that value by changing perceptions? Clearly, in AANR’s mind, they cannot and decided they can do without the INF. Despite this set back, however a check on the INF website today (23 Aug) shows that six resorts in the US still believe and remain as members, although I would have to question how long for? As for the charge that the INF is too ‘Euro-centric’, the website also revealed that of the 10 members of the central committee named, only one – Barbara Hadley (PR overseas) – resided outside of Europe, so perhaps there is some substance to it.
It is impossible to say if the AANR resignation influenced British Naturism’s Executive Council, but early in 2011, they announced a review of BN’s own membership of the INF. What British vice-president Mick Ayers thought of that decision is anyone’s guess, but as he had cut his ties to BN sometime ago, I doubt if he gave it a second thought. Then in August, Charlie Simonds had a letter published in Naturist Life that followed up, and expanded on an earlier article. He asked a simple question: What does BN and its members get for their money?
Again, the INF website reveals all, stating that it provides a ‘