Naked Ramblers and the Freedom to be Yourself campaign
Steve Gough's desire to walk in the nude from Land's End to John O'Groats made him a national hero. Jonathan Brown (suitably attired) joined his Freedom to be Yourself campaign
It bore all the hallmarks of the classic anxiety dream, but it was for real. I am walking along a deserted woodland track, stark naked, when a convoy of vehicles trundles into view ahead, packed with people. There is no time to run. Ridicule and humiliation feel harrowingly imminent.
As the windows are wound down, everyone inside is laughing. The urge to cover up becomes almost uncontrollable but I am determined to tough it out. After shaking a few extended hands, they start to get out and take in turns to stand beside me and have their photographs taken before driving off, the laughter now ringing out louder than ever. Strangely, I don't feel ashamed. What I have is a sensation akin to pride. For someone who feels self-conscious wearing shorts in public, this feels weird.
Such was my first encounter with the clothed public when I joined former Royal Marine Steve Gough and his girlfriend Melanie Roberts and their 60lb rucksacks for a naked ramble in the Cairngorms.
Mr Gough has become something of a celebrity in the last two years since he decided to launch his campaign for the nascent liberty movement Freedom To Be Yourself by making the 847-mile unclothed journey from Land's End to John O'Groats. On that occasion he was arrested 15 times and spent 140 nights in prison. The police referred him to a psychiatrist while his ex-wife and mother lambasted him in the press. He eventually reached the northern tip of the United Kingdom in the perishing month of January, five months behind schedule.
Undeterred by his experiences, the father-of-two embarked on the same route again in June this year. This time however, he was accompanied by his new girlfriend Melanie, a hairdresser from Bournemouth, close to where Mr Gough, 46, spends a lot of the time parked up in the Ford Transit van in which he now lives. The couple met, naturally enough, on the naturist beach at Studland Bay two weeks before the planned departure. A veteran of naked sunbathing since she was 17, Ms Roberts, 34, only decided to join him on his latest odyssey at the very last moment. They were joined by a third naked walker, a retired librarian from Beckenham, Kent, who completed the walk in late August.
It has been a winding road since the sunny start line on the beach in Cornwall, surrounded by Page 3 girls courtesy of The Sun newspaper. After more than three months walking up to 25 miles a day in sun, wind and rain, their bodies are toned and they boast deep brown, all-over tans. And to speed them on their way they have been joined by dozens of supporters, some of them - like me - going naked for the first time. Some have spent their annual holidays walking with the couple. More than 10,000 people have logged on to the Freedom website to chart their progress.
But it has not been all sleeping under stars and wind in the hair. As well as suffering the official disapproval of British Naturism, which represents the UK's 17,000 naturists, for being part of an allegedly "confrontational" stunt, Mr Gough has been arrested on five occasions and spent three weeks in custody. Ms Roberts has been detained three times. Their collars were first felt - metaphorically - in We in Shropshire. A few weeks later they were arrested again just outside Skipton in North Yorkshire after shopping naked at a village store. On that occasion Mr Gough's refusal to cover up earned him a second spell in the jug from Harrogate magistrates.
Moving north of the border they came a cropper with the law again outside Edinburgh. Mr Gough was sentenced to two weeks in jail. He was re-arrested as he was released for refusing to get dressed. The couple's greatest test still lies ahead as they enter the territory of the Northern Constabulary - a force which proved public nudity's most implacable foe last time.
I joined the naked couple following their latest release from jail. They have spent the last three days enduring some atrocious Highland weather - bitterly cold winds and driving rain - as they made their way across the high peaks of the Cairngorms north of Pitlochry. Descending into the calm of the Spey Valley, the sun makes a merciful appearance, although as the wind drops and the temperature rises, so appear the dreaded midges.
Mr Gough admits that cracks are starting to appear in his philosophical armour. "When I first started doing this I thought I had reasons. I thought I knew why. But the more I go on I realise that there isn't a reason." He has grown used to the impact he creates, politely acknowledging each hoot and clap as we make our way along along the banks of Loch Morlich on the Aviemore road.
This time there has been no repeat of the attack at St Ives by a group of lads that left him badly beaten. The negative comments - apart from those of the magistrates that sentenced him - have been virtually non-existent. "The worst we have had so far was a man in a van who said "put your clothes on", he said.
Ms Roberts has not been harassed - apart from the occasional farmer who has driven his Land Rover around the block for a second, or third, look.
They both remain committed to the cause of public nudity, or more accurately the right to go naked. "People talk about a healthy self-image and that it is important to be comfortable with your own body. We are challenging people to think about how they really feel about their own bodies. People talk about freedom but I can be locked up for just walking from A to B naked," said Mr Gough shaking his head in exasperation.
There remains a minority that feel naked rambling should be punishable by law, which means the police must continue to act. But for Ms Roberts the equation is simple. "The overall effect is that it makes people happy. Everyone likes a naked body." I ponder her comments as Steve informs me that we are preparing to rendezvous with a BBC documentary crew making a programme about the walk.
As I see them waiting in the car in a lay-by at the side of the loch I conclude I have reached the limit of my desire to be publicly naked. For all my new found self-confidence the idea of my nakedness being captured for perpetuity on camera sends me diving for my clothes.
They climb into clothes for lunch - as they only remain naked for walking - and become just another young couple out for a walk in the woods.
So who has the problem? The people who feel so uncomfortable at the sight of two fine specimens of the humanity striding through the British countryside in the all together? Or is it them for flouting convention and challenging society's ancient taboos? How can the naked body really be shameful?
I cover up again and feel a sneaking admiration for their strange, epic journey. Will I be doing it again? My family is begging me not to and no matter how intellectually I reason that there is nothing wrong with being naked per se, for me it just feels too damn weird doing it in public.
Naturists' struggle to shed their bad image
Ever since the Earl of Mercia's wife ordered the people of Coventry to close their shutters while she rode naked through the streets to secure them a tax cut, public nudity has had a particular pull on the British psyche.
As Lady Godiva made her legendary progress in about AD1000 to force Leofric III, to abolish his tolls, a tailor supposedly disobeyed her proclamation and spied on her, only to be struck blind. His curiosity gave the English language the expression "Peeping Tom".
This trade-off between the principled shedding of clothes and the risk of exciting a prurient "phwoar" or "eeurgh" from the unenlightened has provided the nation with comedy, outrage and entertainment for the 1,000 years since. From the Carry On movies to Health and Efficiency magazine, and Lady Godiva to Erica Rowe, the 24-year-old bookshop assistant who became Britain's first female streaker at Twickenham in 1982, there are few acts more guaranteed to earn publicity in Britain than the simple fact of getting naked where others are not.
It is a response thatirks Britain's 25,000 signed-up naturists, along with the estimated 500,000 who regularly go nude.
British Naturism, a 16,000-strong nudists' organisation, has spent four decades trying to dispel the notion that nakedness is, of itself, anything to do with sexual attraction and is instead everything to do with a oneness with mother nature.
A spokesman said: "It is a way of life in harmony with nature with the intention of encouraging self-respect, respect for others and for the environment."
Some within the movement frown upon the militancy of Steve Gough, who first made headlines with his naked rambling in 2003, believing that it once more gives a laughable quality to a past-time trying hard to shed its image as an object of ridicule conducted largely by corpulent middle-aged couples on Leylandii-screened campsites.
Unsurprisingly, serious nudists also eschew streakers, the breed immortalised in popular history by Ms Rowe's topless sprint across the turf during the England-Australia rugby match. In the aftermath of Ms Rowe's 15 minutes of fame, one nudist organisation commented: "Exhibitionism is not nudism. Nudism is about people who enjoy being naked but are not motivated by seeing others naked or being seen naked. That is very different from baring your 40-inch chest in front of 50,000 people."
The history of British nudism is, ironically, a little hazy. The father of modern naturism is Richard Ungewitter, a German who published a book, Die Nacktheit or Nakedness, in 1903 explaining the pointlessness of clothing. He also espoused a Spartan regime of vegetarianism, compulsory gym exercise and being teetotal.
It was not until the 1920s that the movement made its way to the UK.
A nudist club opened in Wickford, Essex, in 1922 but it remained an activity only to be conducted on private land for almost 60 years. The first of Britain's small crop of designated nudist beaches opened in 1978 and there are now more the 150 naturist clubs across the country.
But rarely is the subject of nudism greeted with sober discussion or, as in Germany or the Netherlands, a disinterested shrug. When naturists at Studlands Bay in Dorset complained about the shrinking size of their nudist beach, they were greeted with stories about "naked fury".
Exponents of the birthday suit, however, can retort with words of one of the nation's foremost seekers of spiritual enlightenment. John Donne wrote in 1598: "Full nakedness! All joys are to thee."
Cahal Milmo
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited



Comments
The following quote from the above article highlights how Steve Gough is implicated as the founder of The Freedom To Be Yourself.
"Mr Gough has become something of a celebrity in the last two years since he decided to launch his campaign for the nascent liberty movement Freedom To Be Yourself by making the 847-mile unclothed journey from Land's End to John O'Groats."
On the Independent site regarding this article, the heandline describes TFTBY as "his" (Steve's) campaign: "Jonathan Brown (suitably attired) joined his Freedom to be Yourself campaign."
Surely any article regarding public nakedness rights should cite Vincent's unanimous not guilty verdict. Vincent Bethell made legal history in 2001 when he was acquitted by the jury regarding numerous occasions of public nakedness. Vincent was entirely naked and present in court throughout the trial. Vincent was in the dock naked and he was in the witness box naked.
Vincent believes Steve Gough is an attention seeker using public nakedness for personal notoriety. Vincent has subsequently changed the campaign name from The Freedom To Be Yourself to STOP RACIST HUMAN SKIN PHOBIA. Despite the name change Vincent Bethell continues to be the founder of The Freedom To Be Yourself, and the victories achieved under the name of The Freedom To Be Yourself will always be Vincent's victories.
For more information visit http://stop-racist-human-skin-phobia.or
While I can appreciate some of the things these nudies suggest, such as being comfortable with your own body, I think it's fine for these people to do what they do in the comfort of their own homes or in specific areas for this kind of culture, but the rest of us were clothes firstly for function and secondly because it is an every day part of decency. Unless public opinion rapidly shifts to the point where everyone wears a pair of hiking shoes and a smile, perhaps a hat as well, then nudists should be Heard and not Seen.
Where does the moral boundary lie? Next thing you know, people will be reproducing in public!
If you look at the sub-header directly beneath the headline, it states The Freedom To Be Yourself is "his" (Steve Gough's) campaign BUT I assure you I (Vincent Bethell) am the sole founder of The Freedom To Be Yourself. The thing that really annoys me about Steve Gough is that combined with him hijacking the campaign name I invented he has corrupted the message of The Freedom To Be Yourself. This campaign was never about focusing on individual people. This FREEDOM was (and is) about everybody: everybody's skin unclothed. So when Steve and journalists ignore the precedents and when Steve focuses attention primarily on himself via "his" campaign, it is really frustrating indeed! It is not his campaign. I firmly believe Steve Gough is an attention seeker corrupting the name and ethos of THE FREEDOM TO BE YOURSELF for his own personal aggrandisement. Steve has actually used his publicity to advertise clothes in a fashion shoot! If you want to know the truth visit http://stop-racist-human-skin-phobia.or
I, Vincent Bethell, have never described myself as a Naturist or Nudist. This issue of SKIN FREEDOM is comparable to the emancipation of Black people from slavery. Prior to Black people being emancipated racists were fearful society would crumble if Blacks were equal to Whites. Abolishing Black slavery was once an ancient taboo thus abolitionists were scorned. Thankfully sense triumphed over prejudice thus most people now realise Black people are NOT sub-human. Prejudice regarding public nakedness is common in this day and age. Some people falsely link public nakedness to sexual intercourse in public. During the height of Black enslavement it was difficult for most people to see how Black people were NOT sub-human. Currently it is difficult for most people to see how nakedness is not inherently sexual. Attitudes can change and prejudices can be overcome. Once upon a time the Victorians allegedly covered piano legs for fear of causing arousal (due to piano legs resembling women's legs), thankfully piano legs are no longer sexualised and women are allowed to wear miniskirts. Some people state Victorians covering piano legs is untrue (a fiction invented by satirists), but whatever the truth we can say for certain the Victorians were neurotic about their bodies. Victorian swimming costumes were designed to cover a large amount of flesh whereas women today wear almost nothing on beaches. Imagine a woman wearing a miniskirt during the height of the Victorian era? When women began wearing miniskirts in the 60s there was an outcry and some people thought people would be having sex in the streets next. Thankfully prejudice can be surmounted. One day the prejudice towards unclothed skin will be transcended. The world is better place now that Obama is President, and the world would be a better place if people were not forced to wear clothes. http://stop-racist-human-skin-phobia.or
Vincent Bethell
Vincent Bethell is NOT a rambler.
Vincent Bethell IS the founder of The Freedom To Be Yourself
The Freedom To Be Yourself is NOT about rambling, it IS about SKIN FREEDOM for everyBODY - the entire human race.
http://stop-racist-human-skin-phobia.or
Poor old Steve is still an innocent imprisoned victim of a world gone mad..
Mango the Fruitarian,
http://mangodurian.blogspot.com
I simply wanted to correct journalistic inaccuracies. I put a lot of effort into creating The Freedom To Be Yourself thus I want to truth to be known. Steve Gough is not the founder of the campaign which I created. Steve Gough often presents himself as a bumbling (rambling) idiot and I don't my campaign that I created to be associated with him. I don't want my hard effort wasted. This is purely a matter of the truth. I am simply correcting journalistic inaccuracies. If you leave these inaccuracies to fester another journalist will come along and read the article and then proclaim it to be truth; and then before you know it everybody thinks Steve founded The Freedom To Be Yourself but in actual fact Vincent Bethell is the founder.
Why is the truth important? Such a question seems obvious to me. The truth is important because I have a clear message to communicate and untruths will distort my message. Without truth life is meaningless nonsense. Truth is the hallmark of sense. Without sense there would be no progress. This is simply a matter of clarity of communication.
Steve and his cohorts use the campaign slogan TFTBY against my wishes. Steve and his cohorts see public nakedness in a fundamentally different light to how I see public nakedness, therefore it is important that people do not mistake Steve's views for my views. The Freedom To Be Yourself is connected to Vincent Bethell (see wikipedia entry for example or any of the online news reports regarding me) therefore I don't want people mistakenly thinking I support Steve regarding his different views on public nakedness. If a news report mistakenly cites Steve as the founder of TFTBY and if it fails to mention that I don't share Steve's views, I obviously want to correct that inaccuracy. I have a message I want to communicate clearly therefore clarity is important to me.
Previously I have asked the people associated with the management of Steve's website if they would desist from using the slogan TFTBY but they refused to do so. Last time I looked at Steve's naked walk site there was an option make a donation to TFTBY. I worry that some people may think they are donating to a campaign I support, or people may even think that are donating to me. I have never sought donations regarding my nakedness campaigning and I don't intend to. This isn't about wanting a share of their donations, which Steve's managers collect regarding TFTBY on their site. I simply feel that Steve and his cohorts are corrupt, dishonest, insincere, phoney pretenders. I feel truth is very important.
The corrupt MP expenses scandal shows us how people can be corrupt. I fear similar corruption motivates Steve and his cohorts?? So when they refused to stop using the slogan TFTBY I decided to publicise the truth. So far I have created a webpage regarding a fashion shoot that Richard Collins and Steve Gough took part in: http://stop-racist-human-skin-phobia.or
I feel Steve and his cohorts are capitalising on my effort via using the campaign name I created. Or maybe it is coincidence that they use The Freedom To Be Yourself name regarding their public nakedness activities? I feel they don't have the brains, integrity, or creativity to invent their own campaign slogan. When I invented the slogan in late 1998 (it didn't come into public usage until 1999) there were no other groups or companies using the slogan. When Marks and Spencers used the slogan (FTBY) in their ad campaign regarding a naked woman running up a hill to a cliff top (I think I was in prison at the time), I was not jealous but I was angry. I didn't feel any major need to set the record straight regarding M&S because Vincent Bethell and M&S are not likely to be confused. It could also possibly be a coincidence that M&S used my slogan for their naked women advert.
Poor innocent Steve? Regarding anyone who is in prison I do have sympathy. Prison is horrific for all inmates whether they are guilty or innocent. Prison is a barbaric way of dealing with crime, and it is necessary in our barbaric mad world. However, on the whole I don't have sympathy for Steve. Regarding poor innocent Steve I suggest maybe he is not too poor (how much money has been donated to TFTBY via Steve's website?) and although he may be innocent in law he certainly DOESNT have an innocent conscience. If Steve is a "victim" he is a "victim" of his own creation. Court cases are much easier to win in England so why is he obsessed with getting naked in Scotland where the application of the law is much harsher? Perhaps Steve sees some profitable mileage in being a long term prisoner. Perhaps one day he will write a book about poor old innocent Steve? Maybe he could then do more fashion shoots when he gets out of prison?
I simply want the truth to be known. This is for the sake of my own views being clearly disseminated without distortion. I assure you jealously isn't my motivation although people with small minds may think so.
I think Steve is corrupt and his corruption directly impacts upon my ability to clearly communicate very important issues regarding the human race. When journalists exacerbate the distorted truth I seek to correct matters.
http://stop-racist-human-skin-phobia.or
http://stop-racist-human-skin-phobia.or
Vincent Bethell
STOP RACIST HUMAN SKIN PHOBIA
I?m fed up banging my head against some bad bugger?s wall
GOODBYE!
I'm sure you could bring yourself out of your depression by focusing your mind elsewhere, and moving forward...
Peace to you, and I hope life shines on you.
Mango the Fruitarian
http://mangodurian.blogspot.com
If you actually read my previous message you will see why this matter of clarity is important, but to recap I will once more draw your attention to the key points:
1. On Steve's website people can make donations to TFTBY. Steve has previously taken part in a fashion shoot advertising clothes therefore I fear Steve is corruptly using nakedness (and my slogan) to earn money. The managers of Steve's site have refused to stop using the name TFTBY. I also want to point out that they refuse to put a disclaimer on their site saying I am not connected with their site.
2. Truth is important to me. Truth is essential for clearly communicating my message. If a pole dancer was getting naked in public (sexually) and campaigning for The Freedom To Be Yourself I would obviously want to make sure people knew that my views were very different from her views. I simply don't want my views to be distorted or misconstrued. Steve is distorting my views via his use of my slogan. The above journalist is adding to the distortion via implying Steve is the founder of TFTBY. I am trying to clear up the confusion.
So if that pole dancers views are different to yours, then by all means, state the difference, but there's no need to become upset because they are using the same slogan. That is my point, that you seem to be angry/upset at something which is apparently beyond your control..
Personally, again, so what if steve has earned himself a bit of cash through advertising clothes, and I don't see how you can make a meaningful comparison to a theoretical peta member endorsing hamburgers or fur coats.. the 2 are very different. A Peta member behaving such, would clearly be compromising the morals (s)he preaches, whereas steves morals do not tell him that wearing clothes is inherently wrong, but rather just state that he has the right to not wear them, if he chooses not to wish to.
Vincent, I think I've said what i've felt to, and any more and we will clearly both be "rambling"..
Peace,
Mango.
The fashion industry perpetuates the inhuman concealment of our racial human identity. It will never be morally justified for a true skin freedom activist to endorse the fashion industry. Steve is utterly insincere and corrupt in my opinion. Regarding pole dancers I note how Steve allowed himself to photographed with topless page3 sexy models. I never allowed such a thing to happen thus I VERY firmly turned down an offer to be photographed with sexy topless models. The problem with Steve is that he is simply a rambling buffoon. I think he sees the whole thing as a bit of a joke or perhaps he considers it to be a wacky escapade that will earn him some easy money. I truly don't know how Steve sees nakedness but I can say with certainty he is NOT serious about skin freedom for everyBODY.
I do find it upsetting whenever I see the truth distorted and it does make me angry, but rather than passively and mindlessly accepting the fate of a situation I sometimes find it therapeutic to express myself, righting the wrongs.
I have no problem with people using my words; except when they use my intellectual property to earn money. People such as Steve are intellectually poor thus they need to steal the intellectual property of others. They cannot devise original ideas of their own. Copyright can therefore serve a valid purpose and it is necessary in a corrupt world.
1. On Steve's website people can make donations to TFTBY. Steve has previously taken part in a fashion shoot advertising clothes therefore I fear Steve is corruptly using nakedness (and my slogan) to earn money. The managers of Steve's site have refused to stop using the name TFTBY. I also want to point out that they refuse to put a disclaimer on their site saying I am not connected with their site.
2. Truth is important to me. Truth is essential for clearly communicating my message. If a pole dancer was getting naked in public (sexually) and campaigning for The Freedom To Be Yourself I would obviously want to make sure people knew that my views were very different from her views. I simply don't want my views to be distorted or misconstrued. Steve is distorting my views via his use of my slogan. The above journalist is adding to the distortion via implying Steve is the founder of TFTBY. I am trying to clear up the confusion.
Vincent Bethell is the true founder of The Freedom To Be Yourself
TFTBY is now known as Stop Racist Human Skin Phobia
http://stop-racist-human-skin-phobia.or