Present study, only 17-18-year results data were assessed.

Predictor Variables
To ascertain extent of exposure to nudity and primal landscapes, parents were asked two
questions in a face-to-face interview at kid’s age 3: “Does mother (father) go naked in
front of kid?” and “Does mother (father) bathe or shower with the kid?” The questions

family nudity, (it) felt OK about nudity within the family but not with others, or (iii)
Vulnerability to primal arenas was measured by two items. At child’s age 3, parents were
asked whether their child had ever seen them “have sex.” They were offered a 4-point
Likert response format anchored by 1 (never) and 4 (regularly). At youngster’s age 6, parents
were again asked if their kid had noticed them having intercourse, and again offered a
4-point scale anchored by 1 (no) and 4 (frequently). Because of shifts in the identity of
Moms’ male partners for some of the families over the first 6 years, and the greater
frequency of fathers working outside of the house and being unavailable for interview,
missing data for dads approach unacceptable levels. So, only mothers’ data were
used for these investigations. Nonetheless, whenever data for dads existed, correlation coefficient with

mothers’ data was generally high (e.g., n = 69, r = .80).
Scores for individual variants were standardized [Mathematical Expression Omitted]
Control Variants
Management variables included participant child’s sex, family SES, and family climate
(Distressed/nontroubled status, pronaturalism, sexual liberalism/conservatism). Families
participating in the FLS endeavor differed as to domestic organizations, stability, worth and
beliefs, and amounts of devotion to those values and beliefs. On the basis of intensive
Case by case examination of family life style, a typology of family types was developed

same sort identified qualitatively (Weisner and Wilson Mitchell, 1990).
Kinds was termed “changeable/troubled” in http://rudenudist.com/tube/i-actually-started-down-the-path-to-being-a-nudist/ , and just
“troubled” in the current study for use as a management variable. Thirty-one families (16.4%)
were assigned to this category qualitatively. This type was characterized by shaky
family composition (defined as regular changes of moms’ male partners and/or
Regular residential changes); low devotion to whatever were the stated family values;
and commonly disturbed parent relationships or alcohol/substance abuse and other pathologies.
At the time of registration, parents were assessed as to common family values. A number of
Pieces were initially created regarding child-rearing, the environment, and human
relationships. The concept addressed by these items was termed “pronaturalism” by FLS
Varimax rotation was used to derive three variables
with high loadings and good commonalities (Weisner, http://nudismphotos.net/posts/a-day-visitor-to-a-nudist-club-near-to-where-i-was-working/ ). These factors described
belief in using natural materials, medicines, and food; a de-emphasis on materialism
and possessions; a “warm and emotionally expressive” style stressing truthfulness,
Familiarity, emotionality, and physical heat and familiarity; belief in “natural”
child-rearing practices for example breastfeeding and close parent-infant contact; a loose,
Laid back family style highlighting low contradiction, little punishment and aggression,
conforming parenting style to the nature of the child, and belief in the
wholesomeness of sensed fashions of pre-industrial peoples who are supposed to be more
“naturally human.” (For an interesting discussion of the fallacy of the “naturally human”
assumption, find Buss, 1994, p. 17.) The construct “pronaturalism” was quantified at
Kid’s age 3, 6, and 17-18 years and then averaged.
“Sexual liberalism/conservatism” was measured through aggregate evaluation by FLS staff
interviewer of mom’s answers to a series of items associated with attitudes toward sexuality.
This measure was administered at child’s age 3. “Conservative” approaches contained low
tolerance for youth masturbation and sex play, restrictive attitudes toward nudity in
the house (independent of real presence of nudity in the home), highly negative
attitudes about kids seeing parental intercourse (separate of kids really
viewing sexual intercourse), an unwillingness to acquaint children with the “facts of life,” and
“traditional” beliefs about the view of gender equality. “Liberal” dispositions comprised

Toleration for masturbation, sex play, and family nudity; more permissive attitudes about
children seeing intercourse; a willingness to impart sex education; and “progressive”
attitudes about gender equality.
Standard Variants