I wasn't comparing nudity to slavery. It was an example of how something that doesnt offend me can still offend many others. I was just pointing out that to many the confederate flag doesnt have that meaning. A lot who grew up in the 80s see the confederate flag and literally think Dukes of Hazzard. I had 2 lunch boxes growing up, Dukes of Hazzard and A-Team. I never associated that with slavery or racism until much later in life. And it seems you completely missed my point. Lots of people growing up in southern California in the 80s and early 90s would display the flag for reasons other than racism. Just because it doesn't offend me since I associate it with a TV show, doesnt mean it isnt offensive and isnt something that should be displayed. I would never carry my lunch on that lunchbox now because of how it offends other people. They wouldnt even make thsoe lunch boxes today, and my kid would probably be suspended if he took it to school. Nudity isnt slavery, but if it does offend the majority of the population it should be censored.
the difference between me and you, I suppose, is this: I wouldn't display the confederate flag because of what it means to me, not because I don't want people to be mad at me.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
It is legal for women to be topless in public in BC (even though some cops actually forget that and shame topless women anyway once in a while). And this is, of course, as it should be. It is totally ridiculous for men to be able to take off their shirts and for women not. to. I find that idea completely insulting. That said, I wouldn't be caught dead walking around topless in public myself, lol. But the right to do so seems like an obvious given to me. The problem for women is that men leer and comment, etc., when a woman actually does this. So while the law is up to date, men's attitudes sure aren't. I think it's actually kind of sick that breasts are seen so much as sexual organs as they are. Talk about a mass Oedipus complex. But it seems that in societies where women don't cover up, like in tribal cultures, nobody gives it a second thought. So as usual, making breastfeeding and breasts in general a secret and covered out of modesty causes people to see them as overtly sexual. There was a time when a bared ankle was considered sexual, so that makes me assume that whatever is regularly covered becomes sexual to men, lol. And I don't see that ever changing now that breast are seen in a such a sexual way and there is a really unfair expectation when it comes to what breasts are supposed to look like now. Women aren't going to put themselves through generations of ridicule and sexual harassment so that bared breasts become accepted as normal in all their forms.
Good read. Though I do think you are wrong on 1 account, it isn't just men that leer and comment....women do the same to shirtless men that they find attractive.
They do? I've never seen women behaving the same way as some men do in this context. Not even close. I mean, I'm sure some stare and whatnot, but do you really think the way pervo men act towards a topless woman walking around and how some more forward women act with topless men walking around is comparable? I really don't at all. Men can be really aggressive and actually scary sometimes, and start following you ominously, and you start worrying that he's going to grab you (and sometimes they actually do). I don't think men deal with the same thing, do they?? Excluding very unusual exceptions? Also, topless men are normal, topless women cause a stir. I'm not sure you can compare the two. But I do acknowledge that there are plenty of women who will get super catty and bitchy towards other women who are topless.
Yes. They do. Implying that women are far superior to men for restraining themselves from admiring the opposite sex is a little pompous. I've seen women behave very inappropriately in a multitude of settings just as I've seen men do the same.
At the moment and for better or worse, the reality is that breasts are sexual in nature. Pervo men ogling topless women would initially and naturally be the norm if women began to walk around topless in greater numbers- such an event would be peculiar. In time, with more women walking around with their 'breasts' out... men would eventually lose interest in them.
I don't think it's pompous. I think the male sexual urge is stronger (and thus have a harder time suppressing it). I have nothing to support that claim, that's just how I perceive it. You rarely see any examples in nature, that I'm aware of, of the female chasing around the males to mate. it's always the males in pursuit. I think that's generally how it works for humans too, sexually speaking.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
This is a tough one. Saying a man can go shirtless in public but not a woman is definitely not right. However, we are animals. While I agree that a woman should be able to walk around topless without a man grabbing her, etc. I don't think it is reasonable to assume that a man wouldn't walk backwards in front of her to get a good look.
If you want to be topless you can't get upset when people comment and gawk is my point I guess.
Or people could grow up and at least not make comments. Some gawking, or at least double takes in surprise, is expected but I think this would honestly fall under the "yes, you can restrain your reactions" part.
Yeah I personally wouldn't comment....but I would gawk. All day.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
This is a tough one. Saying a man can go shirtless in public but not a woman is definitely not right. However, we are animals. While I agree that a woman should be able to walk around topless without a man grabbing her, etc. I don't think it is reasonable to assume that a man wouldn't walk backwards in front of her to get a good look.
If you want to be topless you can't get upset when people comment and gawk is my point I guess.
Or people could grow up and at least not make comments. Some gawking, or at least double takes in surprise, is expected but I think this would honestly fall under the "yes, you can restrain your reactions" part.
Yeah I personally wouldn't comment....but I would gawk. All day.
full disclosure: so would I. I stole some looks in Mexico a few weeks ago. Because it was foreign to me. My tongue wasn't hanging on the ground. I wasn't moving my lounger closer to her. No creepiness. Just curiousity.
After a day of that, of just one woman being topless, it already started to desensitize me.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
This is a tough one. Saying a man can go shirtless in public but not a woman is definitely not right. However, we are animals. While I agree that a woman should be able to walk around topless without a man grabbing her, etc. I don't think it is reasonable to assume that a man wouldn't walk backwards in front of her to get a good look.
If you want to be topless you can't get upset when people comment and gawk is my point I guess.
Or people could grow up and at least not make comments. Some gawking, or at least double takes in surprise, is expected but I think this would honestly fall under the "yes, you can restrain your reactions" part.
Yeah I personally wouldn't comment....but I would gawk. All day.
Gawk discretely, then
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
I wasn't comparing nudity to slavery. It was an example of how something that doesnt offend me can still offend many others. I was just pointing out that to many the confederate flag doesnt have that meaning. A lot who grew up in the 80s see the confederate flag and literally think Dukes of Hazzard. I had 2 lunch boxes growing up, Dukes of Hazzard and A-Team. I never associated that with slavery or racism until much later in life. And it seems you completely missed my point. Lots of people growing up in southern California in the 80s and early 90s would display the flag for reasons other than racism. Just because it doesn't offend me since I associate it with a TV show, doesnt mean it isnt offensive and isnt something that should be displayed. I would never carry my lunch on that lunchbox now because of how it offends other people. They wouldnt even make thsoe lunch boxes today, and my kid would probably be suspended if he took it to school. Nudity isnt slavery, but if it does offend the majority of the population it should be censored.
the difference between me and you, I suppose, is this: I wouldn't display the confederate flag because of what it means to me, not because I don't want people to be mad at me.
Seems you're right. Except its not about them being mad at me. If I didn't want people mad at me I'd never log onto AMT and post a comment. But no matter how big of Hazzards fan I am, I wouldnt paint my car like the General Lee today because of what it does mean to others, even if to me its just about a cheesy 80s TV show. Its not about keeping them from being mad at me, I view it like a sense of respect for others. I would be completely fine if they banned racist slogans and clothing in public. I dont think yelling "I hate n---ers" in public should be a protected speech. And if you survive long enough doing that, you should face a fine or other consequence. But then it comes down to what is offensive? Theres where I think the common vote rules over my personal opinion. I dont see the confederate flag as offense because I associate it with D of H, but I understand that most view it differently and would be compeltely fine if it wasnt allowed in public anymore. I understand the logistics of such laws are impossible, but I dont disagree with the idea of it, and restricting hate speech.
This is a tough one. Saying a man can go shirtless in public but not a woman is definitely not right. However, we are animals. While I agree that a woman should be able to walk around topless without a man grabbing her, etc. I don't think it is reasonable to assume that a man wouldn't walk backwards in front of her to get a good look.
If you want to be topless you can't get upset when people comment and gawk is my point I guess.
Or people could grow up and at least not make comments. Some gawking, or at least double takes in surprise, is expected but I think this would honestly fall under the "yes, you can restrain your reactions" part.
Yeah I personally wouldn't comment....but I would gawk. All day.
full disclosure: so would I. I stole some looks in Mexico a few weeks ago. Because it was foreign to me. My tongue wasn't hanging on the ground. I wasn't moving my lounger closer to her. No creepiness. Just curiousity.
After a day of that, of just one woman being topless, it already started to desensitize me.
chicken / egg
Are bare breasts taboo because men can't control themselves? Or, men can't control themselves because bare breasts are taboo?
Either way, we're punishing/controlling/censoring women for the actions of men.
It is legal for women to be topless in public in BC (even though some cops actually forget that and shame topless women anyway once in a while). And this is, of course, as it should be. It is totally ridiculous for men to be able to take off their shirts and for women not. to. I find that idea completely insulting. That said, I wouldn't be caught dead walking around topless in public myself, lol. But the right to do so seems like an obvious given to me. The problem for women is that men leer and comment, etc., when a woman actually does this. So while the law is up to date, men's attitudes sure aren't. I think it's actually kind of sick that breasts are seen so much as sexual organs as they are. Talk about a mass Oedipus complex. But it seems that in societies where women don't cover up, like in tribal cultures, nobody gives it a second thought. So as usual, making breastfeeding and breasts in general a secret and covered out of modesty causes people to see them as overtly sexual. There was a time when a bared ankle was considered sexual, so that makes me assume that whatever is regularly covered becomes sexual to men, lol. And I don't see that ever changing now that breast are seen in a such a sexual way and there is a really unfair expectation when it comes to what breasts are supposed to look like now. Women aren't going to put themselves through generations of ridicule and sexual harassment so that bared breasts become accepted as normal in all their forms.
Good read. Though I do think you are wrong on 1 account, it isn't just men that leer and comment....women do the same to shirtless men that they find attractive.
They do? I've never seen women behaving the same way as some men do in this context. Not even close. I mean, I'm sure some stare and whatnot, but do you really think the way pervo men act towards a topless woman walking around and how some more forward women act with topless men walking around is comparable? I really don't at all. Men can be really aggressive and actually scary sometimes, and start following you ominously, and you start worrying that he's going to grab you (and sometimes they actually do). I don't think men deal with the same thing, do they?? Excluding very unusual exceptions? Also, topless men are normal, topless women cause a stir. I'm not sure you can compare the two. But I do acknowledge that there are plenty of women who will get super catty and bitchy towards other women who are topless.
Yes. They do. Implying that women are far superior to men for restraining themselves from admiring the opposite sex is a little pompous. I've seen women behave very inappropriately in a multitude of settings just as I've seen men do the same.
At the moment and for better or worse, the reality is that breasts are sexual in nature. Pervo men ogling topless women would initially and naturally be the norm if women began to walk around topless in greater numbers- such an event would be peculiar. In time, with more women walking around with their 'breasts' out... men would eventually lose interest in them.
You're the only one talking about who is "far superior". Anyway, I think you are in total denial about the difference between how men are about topless women compared to women about topless men. To say the two are equal in this context is completely ridiculous. But yes, that is a cultural difference as far as bared breasts go. Our culture has made it so that women's breasts are seen by most men as sexual organs, #1. The breastfeeding factor seems secondary, and only a factor when women actually have a baby attached to their nipple. As I mentioned, that is not the case in cultures where women are topless all the time. But it's too late for that in our Judeo-Christian culture, because of all the weirdo prudery and sexualization of women and all their parts that are supposed to be covered.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
This is a tough one. Saying a man can go shirtless in public but not a woman is definitely not right. However, we are animals. While I agree that a woman should be able to walk around topless without a man grabbing her, etc. I don't think it is reasonable to assume that a man wouldn't walk backwards in front of her to get a good look.
If you want to be topless you can't get upset when people comment and gawk is my point I guess.
Or people could grow up and at least not make comments. Some gawking, or at least double takes in surprise, is expected but I think this would honestly fall under the "yes, you can restrain your reactions" part.
Yeah I personally wouldn't comment....but I would gawk. All day.
full disclosure: so would I. I stole some looks in Mexico a few weeks ago. Because it was foreign to me. My tongue wasn't hanging on the ground. I wasn't moving my lounger closer to her. No creepiness. Just curiousity.
After a day of that, of just one woman being topless, it already started to desensitize me.
chicken / egg
Are bare breasts taboo because men can't control themselves? Or, men can't control themselves because bare breasts are taboo?
Either way, we're punishing/controlling/censoring women for the actions of men.
I believe it to be the latter. otherwise, all the pictures of tribes in affrica where women are topless you'd see men in the background pointing and trying to suppress their tenting loincloths.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
I wasn't comparing nudity to slavery. It was an example of how something that doesnt offend me can still offend many others. I was just pointing out that to many the confederate flag doesnt have that meaning. A lot who grew up in the 80s see the confederate flag and literally think Dukes of Hazzard. I had 2 lunch boxes growing up, Dukes of Hazzard and A-Team. I never associated that with slavery or racism until much later in life. And it seems you completely missed my point. Lots of people growing up in southern California in the 80s and early 90s would display the flag for reasons other than racism. Just because it doesn't offend me since I associate it with a TV show, doesnt mean it isnt offensive and isnt something that should be displayed. I would never carry my lunch on that lunchbox now because of how it offends other people. They wouldnt even make thsoe lunch boxes today, and my kid would probably be suspended if he took it to school. Nudity isnt slavery, but if it does offend the majority of the population it should be censored.
the difference between me and you, I suppose, is this: I wouldn't display the confederate flag because of what it means to me, not because I don't want people to be mad at me.
Seems you're right. Except its not about them being mad at me. If I didn't want people mad at me I'd never log onto AMT and post a comment. But no matter how big of Hazzards fan I am, I wouldnt paint my car like the General Lee today because of what it does mean to others, even if to me its just about a cheesy 80s TV show. Its not about keeping them from being mad at me, I view it like a sense of respect for others. I would be completely fine if they banned racist slogans and clothing in public. I dont think yelling "I hate n---ers" in public should be a protected speech. And if you survive long enough doing that, you should face a fine or other consequence. But then it comes down to what is offensive? Theres where I think the common vote rules over my personal opinion. I dont see the confederate flag as offense because I associate it with D of H, but I understand that most view it differently and would be compeltely fine if it wasnt allowed in public anymore. I understand the logistics of such laws are impossible, but I dont disagree with the idea of it, and restricting hate speech.
yeah, growing up I obviously had zero idea what the meaning behind the flag was. when I found out, that, in my mind, trumped my previous association.
so confederate flag comparison aside, how is baring breasts disrespectful to others? and in that context, where is the line drawn? I mean, really, if we're talking about offense of the breast and not the nipple itself, why are giant billboards for clothes allowed with little to no outrage when it shows nearly everything but the little nub on the breast?
if it's only the nipple that's the problem, why are men allowed to bare it? if the WHOLE BREAST is the sexual part, isn't it hypocritical to be ok with string bikinis or side-breast modellling shots or front shots with nothing but fingers covering the nipples but not be ok with the nipple being shown?
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
I mean, being in college, females are headed towards not wearing a top at all anyways based on what I see on a daily basis (granted I go to school by a beach). Really all that is left to uncover are the nipples. Especially in scenarios where it is common to wear little (the beach/pool), the only thing they wear up top is thin straps holding up a tiny bit of fabric that leaves majority of their breasts exposed anyways. I am sure that soon enough they will say fuck it and not wear anything.
Pittsburgh 2013 Cincinnati 2014 Greenville 2016 (Raleigh 2016) Columbia 2016
question for the women here. Wouldn't allowing this be another reason for women to be body shamed? wouldn't you be concerned, especially if certain age groups were allowed to do this, it would be another thing for younger women to fret about? or would it be women old enough that something like that wouldn't be a concern?
Regardless of age (and other factors), women are only shamed if they allow themselves to be.
To me, the shamers are the shameful ones.
If the nip is freed, has nothing to do with age. Even in my "perky" youth, roaming around topless in public wasn't something to which I aspired or wanted. Others want that? Let 'em loose! Not like it would infringe on me in any way.
question for the women here. Wouldn't allowing this be another reason for women to be body shamed? wouldn't you be concerned, especially if certain age groups were allowed to do this, it would be another thing for younger women to fret about? or would it be women old enough that something like that wouldn't be a concern?
great question. But I would tend to think that any woman willing to walk around bare-chested wouldn't be worrying too much about what people thought.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
Regardless of age (and other factors), women are only shamed if they allow themselves to be.
To me, the shamers are the shameful ones.
If the nip is freed, has nothing to do with age. Even in my "perky" youth, roaming around topless in public wasn't something to which I aspired or wanted. Others want that? Let 'em loose! Not like it would infringe on me in any way.
true, but if you allowed women to do this wouldn't it be a concern that younger women would see it and become more self conscious about their bodies? as a guy i honestly don't know the answer but at least in my mind i can see where it might add to the issues already there.
Regardless of age (and other factors), women are only shamed if they allow themselves to be.
To me, the shamers are the shameful ones.
If the nip is freed, has nothing to do with age. Even in my "perky" youth, roaming around topless in public wasn't something to which I aspired or wanted. Others want that? Let 'em loose! Not like it would infringe on me in any way.
true, but if you allowed women to do this wouldn't it be a concern that younger women would see it and become more self conscious about their bodies? as a guy i honestly don't know the answer but at least in my mind i can see where it might add to the issues already there.
I don't know if I'm following. why would younger women, who typically are portrayed as the more "sought-after" generation sexually (see: all media), become more self-conscious if it was allowed?
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
Regardless of age (and other factors), women are only shamed if they allow themselves to be.
To me, the shamers are the shameful ones.
If the nip is freed, has nothing to do with age. Even in my "perky" youth, roaming around topless in public wasn't something to which I aspired or wanted. Others want that? Let 'em loose! Not like it would infringe on me in any way.
true, but if you allowed women to do this wouldn't it be a concern that younger women would see it and become more self conscious about their bodies? as a guy i honestly don't know the answer but at least in my mind i can see where it might add to the issues already there.
I don't know if I'm following. why would younger women, who typically are portrayed as the more "sought-after" generation sexually (see: all media), become more self-conscious if it was allowed?
because it would or could just further the unreal expectations many girls already feel based on media portrayals and such. again as a guy just kind of speaking out loud. i could be totally wrong.
Regardless of age (and other factors), women are only shamed if they allow themselves to be.
To me, the shamers are the shameful ones.
If the nip is freed, has nothing to do with age. Even in my "perky" youth, roaming around topless in public wasn't something to which I aspired or wanted. Others want that? Let 'em loose! Not like it would infringe on me in any way.
true, but if you allowed women to do this wouldn't it be a concern that younger women would see it and become more self conscious about their bodies? as a guy i honestly don't know the answer but at least in my mind i can see where it might add to the issues already there.
I don't know if I'm following. why would younger women, who typically are portrayed as the more "sought-after" generation sexually (see: all media), become more self-conscious if it was allowed?
because it would or could just further the unreal expectations many girls already feel based on media portrayals and such. again as a guy just kind of speaking out loud. i could be totally wrong.
I think it would have the opposite effect. if young girls were to see what REAL BODIES looked like, instead of the 1% in magazines and the pushed-up/blown-up nonsense you see from the bra industry, the expectations would decrease dramatically.
but, like you, as a male, my thoughts only hold so much weight on the matter.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
I, for one, value the perspectives of the men here on this issue
And, I would hope, that young girls *edit (and boys) DO see what real (ie, not manipulated, photoshopped, etc.) bodies look like in their daily life...in their real life. That they learn while it's nice to feel pretty - and really, what is that, anyway? - learn to be comfortable in their own skin, accept certain physical "flaws" (again, what is that, anyway?) ...easier said than done, I know. That shit can take a while!
Guess my point is that character and smarts and compassion and all that other good stuff are so much more important, in the end. Gender aside, that's what makes someone attractive to me. Not solely their breasts, or well-rounded butt (can I say butt?!), or six-pack abs or huge guns, and on.
It's the MEAT of the person.
That said, while we wouldn't ogle, pretty sure my husband and I would "notice" a topless woman driving or at the farmer's market or what have you, regardless of the state of her breasts.
I, for one, value the perspectives of the men here on this issue
And, I would hope, that young girls *edit (and boys) DO see what real (ie, not manipulated, photoshopped, etc.) bodies look like in their daily life...in their real life. That they learn while it's nice to feel pretty - and really, what is that, anyway? - learn to be comfortable in their own skin, accept certain physical "flaws" (again, what is that, anyway?) ...easier said than done, I know. That shit can take a while!
Guess my point is that character and smarts and compassion and all that other good stuff are so much more important, in the end. Gender aside, that's what makes someone attractive to me. Not solely their breasts, or well-rounded butt (can I say butt?!), or six-pack abs or huge guns, and on.
It's the MEAT of the person.
That said, while we wouldn't ogle, pretty sure my husband and I would "notice" a topless woman driving or at the farmer's market or what have you, regardless of the state of her breasts.
yes to the butt, no to the huge gun. reminds me too much of my derringer
The worst of times..they don't phase me, even if I look and act really crazy.
and honestly, if my agenda was to simply see more breasts, this wouldn't be the way to go about it. 90% of the breasts out there, when not supported, and/or after a certain age, don't exactly fit the criteria that most men fantasize about anyway.
Wow . . . "90% of the breasts out there . . . don't exactly fit the criteria." That right there says it all about the objectification of women's bodies.
and honestly, if my agenda was to simply see more breasts, this wouldn't be the way to go about it. 90% of the breasts out there, when not supported, and/or after a certain age, don't exactly fit the criteria that most men fantasize about anyway.
Wow . . . "90% of the breasts out there . . . don't exactly fit the criteria." That right there says it all about the objectification of women's bodies.
i think you misunderstand what i meant by that. it is because the fashion and porn industries have made the standard impossible to replicate. it simply isn't natural. men have been conditioned, as women have as well, to believe that perky and "perfect" are achievable, and not only achievable, but expected. it shouldn't be. gravity simply does not work that way.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
free the nip ? sounds good to me, just out of curiosity how would you all feel about your mother's, sister's or wives flopping them bad girls out ?
At this point in time, female breasts are hidden with the exception of intimate times. Hence, they would obviously be sexualized. Based on this, exposed breasts today may mean one of a few things. Amongst others - a desire to be sexual/scandalous in public for one's own pleasure (exhibitionism), a desire to present oneself sexually for others' pleasure (promiscuity), a visible protest in favour of a new status quo where male and female breasts are equally sensationalized/de-sensationalized, or simply hopping on the bandwagon for any of the above reasons. There could also be one reason and several incidental reasons, based on others' perceptions.
Personally, I know my mother and sister. If they were to go topless, sure, because of today-state, I'd be extremely uncomfortable, but if they were doing this because of what they feel are progressive ideals towards equal gender perceptions, I'd be proud of them and hope they did so with caution because I don't trust my own gender. The issue is that I know my mother and sister, but most don't. Someone on the street could misconstrue progressive protest for promiscuity or exhibitionism, either of which could lead to unfavourable behaviours from observers.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
great response, I agree with you...even the nudity in protest part but all that said I don't trust people enough to allow or agree to family members doing topless protest's, you'd be amazed at a MC party, topless gal's are a very common thing and they are never attacked, not that I've ever witnessed or heard about anyway.
Godfather. said: free the nip ? sounds good to me, just out of curiosity how would you all feel about your mother's, sister's or wives flopping them bad girls out ?
At this point in time, female breasts are hidden with the exception of intimate times. Hence, they would obviously be sexualized. Based on this, exposed breasts today may mean one of a few things. Amongst others - a desire to be sexual/scandalous in public for one's own pleasure (exhibitionism), a desire to present oneself sexually for others' pleasure (promiscuity), a visible protest in favour of a new status quo where male and female breasts are equally sensationalized/de-sensationalized, or simply hopping on the bandwagon for any of the above reasons. There could also be one reason and several incidental reasons, based on others' perceptions.
Personally, I know my mother and sister. If they were to go topless, sure, because of today-state, I'd be extremely uncomfortable, but if they were doing this because of what they feel are progressive ideals towards equal gender perceptions, I'd be proud of them and hope they did so with caution because I don't trust my own gender. The issue is that I know my mother and sister, but most don't. Someone on the street could misconstrue progressive protest for promiscuity or exhibitionism, either of which could lead to unfavourable behaviours from observers.
Don't forget about the fact that it just means we're fucking hot under the extra padding of breasts and the shirt and bra is making it even worse.
Post edited by Kat on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Godfather. said: free the nip ? sounds good to me, just out of curiosity how would you all feel about your mother's, sister's or wives flopping them bad girls out ?
At this point in time, female breasts are hidden with the exception of intimate times. Hence, they would obviously be sexualized. Based on this, exposed breasts today may mean one of a few things. Amongst others - a desire to be sexual/scandalous in public for one's own pleasure (exhibitionism), a desire to present oneself sexually for others' pleasure (promiscuity), a visible protest in favour of a new status quo where male and female breasts are equally sensationalized/de-sensationalized, or simply hopping on the bandwagon for any of the above reasons. There could also be one reason and several incidental reasons, based on others' perceptions.
Personally, I know my mother and sister. If they were to go topless, sure, because of today-state, I'd be extremely uncomfortable, but if they were doing this because of what they feel are progressive ideals towards equal gender perceptions, I'd be proud of them and hope they did so with caution because I don't trust my own gender. The issue is that I know my mother and sister, but most don't. Someone on the street could misconstrue progressive protest for promiscuity or exhibitionism, either of which could lead to unfavourable behaviours from observers.
Don't forget about the fact that it just means we're fucking hot under the extra padding of breasts and the shirt and bra is making it even worse.
underbreast sweat is a real thing, and from what I can tell, it's kind of uncomfortable.
Post edited by Kat on
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
Comments
-EV 8/14/93
-EV 8/14/93
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
After a day of that, of just one woman being topless, it already started to desensitize me.
-EV 8/14/93
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
I would be completely fine if they banned racist slogans and clothing in public. I dont think yelling "I hate n---ers" in public should be a protected speech. And if you survive long enough doing that, you should face a fine or other consequence. But then it comes down to what is offensive? Theres where I think the common vote rules over my personal opinion. I dont see the confederate flag as offense because I associate it with D of H, but I understand that most view it differently and would be compeltely fine if it wasnt allowed in public anymore.
I understand the logistics of such laws are impossible, but I dont disagree with the idea of it, and restricting hate speech.
Are bare breasts taboo because men can't control themselves?
Or, men can't control themselves because bare breasts are taboo?
Either way, we're punishing/controlling/censoring women for the actions of men.
-EV 8/14/93
so confederate flag comparison aside, how is baring breasts disrespectful to others? and in that context, where is the line drawn? I mean, really, if we're talking about offense of the breast and not the nipple itself, why are giant billboards for clothes allowed with little to no outrage when it shows nearly everything but the little nub on the breast?
if it's only the nipple that's the problem, why are men allowed to bare it? if the WHOLE BREAST is the sexual part, isn't it hypocritical to be ok with string bikinis or side-breast modellling shots or front shots with nothing but fingers covering the nipples but not be ok with the nipple being shown?
-EV 8/14/93
Cincinnati 2014
Greenville 2016
(Raleigh 2016)
Columbia 2016
To me, the shamers are the shameful ones.
If the nip is freed, has nothing to do with age. Even in my "perky" youth, roaming around topless in public wasn't something to which I aspired or wanted. Others want that? Let 'em loose! Not like it would infringe on me in any way.
-EV 8/14/93
-EV 8/14/93
but, like you, as a male, my thoughts only hold so much weight on the matter.
-EV 8/14/93
And, I would hope, that young girls *edit (and boys) DO see what real (ie, not manipulated, photoshopped, etc.) bodies look like in their daily life...in their real life. That they learn while it's nice to feel pretty - and really, what is that, anyway? - learn to be comfortable in their own skin, accept certain physical "flaws" (again, what is that, anyway?) ...easier said than done, I know. That shit can take a while!
Guess my point is that character and smarts and compassion and all that other good stuff are so much more important, in the end. Gender aside, that's what makes someone attractive to me. Not solely their breasts, or well-rounded butt (can I say butt?!), or six-pack abs or huge guns, and on.
It's the MEAT of the person.
That said, while we wouldn't ogle, pretty sure my husband and I would "notice" a topless woman driving or at the farmer's market or what have you, regardless of the state of her breasts.
even if I look and act really crazy.
-EV 8/14/93
Personally, I know my mother and sister. If they were to go topless, sure, because of today-state, I'd be extremely uncomfortable, but if they were doing this because of what they feel are progressive ideals towards equal gender perceptions, I'd be proud of them and hope they did so with caution because I don't trust my own gender. The issue is that I know my mother and sister, but most don't. Someone on the street could misconstrue progressive protest for promiscuity or exhibitionism, either of which could lead to unfavourable behaviours from observers.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
to allow or agree to family members doing topless protest's, you'd be amazed at a MC party, topless gal's are a
very common thing and they are never attacked, not that I've ever witnessed or heard about anyway.
-EV 8/14/93