National Go Topless Day

~Anastasia~ · Apr 15, 2017

Superhero Sam said:
What do you mean by precise legal terms?

I mean the way the conversation seems to be trying to define WHY it is or isn't ok.

Cartoon or real, how realistic, men or women, how large, what age, because of the feminine face, and so on. These things are just smokescreens that begin to confuse the issue.

I just think it's better to look at the question in a perfectly straightforward way.

IMO, it really does have to do with society and the way we think about women's breasts.

It seems the OP is suggesting that it's better to desensitize men to consider breasts as being sexual, so that it would be ok to have them uncovered.

That's a whole other issue, and I would object to it on two grounds ...

One being, I don't think it's generally good to consider desensitizing ourselves in general, especially so that it becomes ok to do something that is not now ok. Baring breasts is a fairly innocuous example as possibilities go, but overall such movement serves to debase society. Put a little more simply, I think becoming purposely insensitive to things we consider morally wrong is a move in the bad direction - in general.

More importantly, I'm almost surprised no one has commented that it might not be pleasing to the population in general to de-sexualize breasts. If a man enjoys his wife's breasts (and God obviously gave husbands this as a gift, if we believe the principles hinted at in Song of Solomon) ... then this would deny him that pleasure?

Likewise, some women might enjoy having them as a sexual feature, both for their ability to feel desirable to their husbands, and for the fact that it is a normal physiological response for women to be physically aroused by sensations associated with the breasts, I think more so than men (though I honestly have never had the interest to bother verifying this).

So on that last point, even if we culturally make them not sexualized, I do believe God has rather hard-wired them to be that way, to some degree at least, in a neurological sense.

Sammy-San · Apr 15, 2017

~Anastasia~ said:
I mean the way the conversation seems to be trying to define WHY it is or isn't ok.

Cartoon or real, how realistic, men or women, how large, what age, because of the feminine face, and so on. These things are just smokescreens that begin to confuse the issue.

I just think it's better to look at the question in a perfectly straightforward way.

IMO, it really does have to do with society and the way we think about women's breasts.

It seems the OP is suggesting that it's better to desensitize men to consider breasts as being sexual, so that it would be ok to have them uncovered.

That's a whole other issue, and I would object to it on two grounds ...

One being, I don't think it's generally good to consider desensitizing ourselves in general, especially so that it becomes ok to do something that is not now ok. Baring breasts is a fairly innocuous example as possibilities go, but overall such movement serves to debase society. Put a little more simply, I think becoming purposely insensitive to things we consider morally wrong is a move in the bad direction - in general.

More importantly, I'm almost surprised no one has commented that it might not be pleasing to the population in general to de-sexualize breasts. If a man enjoys his wife's breasts (and God obviously gave husbands this as a gift, if we believe the principles hinted at in Song of Solomon) ... then this would deny him that pleasure?

Likewise, some women might enjoy having them as a sexual feature, both for their ability to feel desirable to their husbands, and for the fact that it is a normal physiological response for women to be physically aroused by sensations associated with the breasts, I think more so than men (though I honestly have never had the interest to bother verifying this).

So on that last point, even if we culturally make them not sexualized, I do believe God has rather hard-wired them to be that way, to some degree at least, in a neurological sense.

I read that the highly sensitive regions are what the bible defines as nakedness. Do you agree?

~Anastasia~ · Apr 15, 2017

Superhero Sam said:
I read that the highly sensitive regions are what the bible defines as nakedness. Do you agree?

Again, trying to make definitions leads to trouble. Fingertips and eyelids are highly sensitive.

Some areas of the body are sensitive in a particular way (i.e. sexually), but I'm not aware if there is any real data on variations between persons on this. People could argue that some degree could be conditioned, though I believe some degree is also inherent.

But I'd say this is more smokescreens and diversions.

Sammy-San · Apr 15, 2017

~Anastasia~ said:
Again, trying to make definitions leads to trouble. Fingertips and eyelids are highly sensitive.

Some areas of the body are sensitive in a particular way (i.e. sexually), but I'm not aware if there is any real data on variations between persons on this. People could argue that some degree could be conditioned, though I believe some degree is also inherent.

But I'd say this is more smokescreens and diversions.

Sensitive refers to nerve endings.

Sammy-San · Apr 15, 2017

~Anastasia~ said:
Again, trying to make definitions leads to trouble. Fingertips and eyelids are highly sensitive.

Some areas of the body are sensitive in a particular way (i.e. sexually), but I'm not aware if there is any real data on variations between persons on this. People could argue that some degree could be conditioned, though I believe some degree is also inherent.

But I'd say this is more smokescreens and diversions.

Do you think I focus too much on irrelevant speculation?

Sammy-San · Apr 19, 2017

rjs330 said:
If you think men showing their chests in public is the same thing as women then I have nothing more to say. You are too far gone to even have a conversation with. I've provided scriptures about nakedness. Also take a look at what the scriptures have to say about a woman's breasts. It speaks of them primarily in two ways. One as a breastfeeding mother and the other as a sexual object between a woman and her man. It never talks about them in any other fashion. On the other hand it says very little to nothing about a mans bare chest.

Do you think it is immodest for men to show their chests?

Sammy-San · Apr 20, 2017

Tetra said:
Biblical evidence nudity is inherently wrong...

Thats subjective.

Why do you disagree that men's chests aren't nudity?

Tetra · Apr 20, 2017

Superhero Sam said:
Why do you disagree that men's chests aren't nudity?

I don't. When I wrote it's subjective... that was in reference to you saying it's not a bad a women exposing their chest.

My wife goes topless outside, and it's legal to do so where I live. She doesn't care at all. I also often go topless, and I don't care. This is such a non-issue.

Sammy-San · Apr 21, 2017

Tetra said:
I don't. When I wrote it's subjective... that was in reference to you saying it's not a bad a women exposing their chest.

My wife goes topless outside, and it's legal to do so where I live. She doesn't care at all. I also often go topless, and I don't care. This is such a non-issue.

Can a Christian be a nudist? What does the Bible say about nudity?

Even in “asexual” contexts, public displays of nudity dishonor God by pretending an innocence that no longer exists. A Christian should definitely not be a nudist or participate in nudist activities.

Tetra · Apr 21, 2017

Superhero Sam said:
Can a Christian be a nudist? What does the Bible say about nudity?

What's your point...

Superhero Sam said:
Even in “asexual” contexts, public displays of nudity dishonor God by pretending an innocence that no longer exists. A Christian should definitely not be a nudist or participate in nudist activities.

^^^ Biblical support please.

Sammy-San · Apr 21, 2017

Tetra said:
What's your point...

^^^ Biblical support please.

Based on what I see on ads, even secular people know the results of the fall-what parts of our body are now unpresentable and shameful for others to see.

Tetra · Apr 21, 2017

Superhero Sam said:
Based on what I see on ads, even secular people know the results of the fall-what parts of our body are now unpresentable and shameful for others to see.

No idea what you're talking about.

Sammy-San · Apr 21, 2017

Tetra said:
No idea what you're talking about.

Why are you so in favor of women indecently dressed?

Tetra · Apr 21, 2017

Superhero Sam said:
Why are you so in favor of women indecently dressed?

... because I don't think it's "indecent".

Also, it's a silly question, I could simply ask you...
Why are you in favor of controlling women?

Sammy-San · Apr 21, 2017

Tetra said:
... because I don't think it's "indecent".

Also, it's a silly question, I could simply ask you...
Why are you in favor of controlling women?

Even in Europe they aren't as tolerant of half naked women as people here think.

Root of Jesse · Apr 21, 2017

dayhiker said:
Paul lived and ministered in Greek towns. Public baths were were everyone went to use the bathroom, to wash, get massages and to be social. Some baths even had libraries where one could pick up a book and read it at the bath. Nudity was the way people were in the baths. Paul also used the Olympics as examples of how Christians should run the race. Racers and other participants in the Olympics were nude. We don't have any apostle talking about how shameful it was to go to the baths and be naked. If nudity was so shameful I don't think Paul would have been using them as examples of how Christians are to run the race.
There is not command to be nude in the Bible. Neither is there a command to be clothed. The commands to be clothed are around being clothed in the righteousness of Christ which we do by faith not by some physical act of putting on clothes.

Going to the beach and getting brown breasts is different than going to the public baths and taking off clothes, sorry to break the news to you. Nudity of necessity is different from nudity for fun. The fact is, in our over-sexualized environment today, it's less appropriate than it was when public baths were the norm.

Root of Jesse · Apr 21, 2017

Armoured said:
Do you dress, eat, live, and work like those in the New Testament, or is it just nudity you copy? Show me where the NT mentions indoor plumbing? I assume you don't think that absence makes the flush toilet immoral.

I do cover myself, and work hard to live and work as those in the NT did. A flush toilet is different than personal prudence and chastity.

Root of Jesse · Apr 21, 2017

Archivist said:
Consistency is all that I have been arguing for in this thread.

That's the reason that the argument that women going topless will cause men to sin doesn't hold water, since men going topless causes some women to sin but men do it all the time

But should they? I don't see many men going around town topless, btw.

OK.

No one has said otherwise. In fact at one time men were also required to cover their different looking chests.

Yes, exactly, and it should be considered today.

As I have pointed out numerous times, at one time men had to wear tops. It is too late to require that the establish equality. It isn't too late to make it legal for women to go topless.

Why is it too let to establish a trend, whether or not its followed universally? I don't particularly like being exposed to men's chests and hairy stomachs, and it's not a sexual thing.

Actually nudity is accepted in many civilized nations.

That's not the question. Abortion is accepted in 'civilized' nations and is wrong, too.

Then why are you here?

Actually if you have read the thread you know that I have never said that women should go topless. I've said that they should have the right to do so. That decision should be an individual choice. If it were to become the norm it waouldn't be a big deal.

Having the right to do anything and whether they should do that thing are two totally different issues. And you're not talking about rights, you're talking about license.

Pushing for equality is hardly "causing all sorts of dissension, controversy, and disruption in the body."

But arresting topless women and jailing them for doing what men commonly do is perfectly fine.

Sammy-San · Apr 21, 2017

Root of Jesse said:
But should they? I don't see many men going around town topless, btw.Yes, exactly, and it should be considered today.Why is it too let to establish a trend, whether or not its followed universally? I don't particularly like being exposed to men's chests and hairy stomachs, and it's not a sexual thing.That's not the question. Abortion is accepted in 'civilized' nations and is wrong, too.Having the right to do anything and whether they should do that thing are two totally different issues. And you're not talking about rights, you're talking about license.

What is your view on modesty? Some cultures view neck and bare arms, or even bare hair as immodest. I am not talking about nudity, just immodesty.

Tetra · Apr 21, 2017

Root of Jesse said:
Going to the beach and getting brown breasts is different than going to the public baths and taking off clothes, sorry to break the news to you. Nudity of necessity is different from nudity for fun. The fact is, in our over-sexualized environment today, it's less appropriate than it was when public baths were the norm.

How do you know it's not Christian's obsessions with modesty creating the "over-sexualization"? I think you're presupposing it's not, the argument here is that it may be.

National Go Topless Day

† Handmaid of God †

Newbie

† Handmaid of God †

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency