National Go Topless Day

[Sammy-San]

Is it wrong for a man to go topless?

Have you gone topless?

When are you going to answer the other questions I have asked?

What is the list of them?

 

[Archivist]

What is the list of them?

Questions have been posted multiple times, in fact you just quoted them in you post 1419. Why can't you answer?

 

[Sammy-San]

Questions have been posted multiple times, in fact you just quoted them in you post 1419. Why can't you answer?

Breasts are the outward symbol of sex as pertains to the woman's nipples. That which sustains life born from herself. Obvious power to bring forth the future from within that womb that is unseen.

 

[Sammy-San]

And we must agree to disagree.

Society "is what it is". If nothing else, even if you successfully managed to change society's view of decency (which I don't think is a good thing) there would certainly be problems to many in the meantime.

Where is the "loving" for them?

I'm sorry, but making the fallacious "men and women are (or must be made) the same" to be the highest moral guide to which all other concerns must bow is not inherently virtuous.

At over 800 posts though, you seem unlikely to see this.

(And I do in fact see your points, I just disagree with some of them and consider others not to be worth denying the opposing concerns. As I said - we simply disagree.)

Do you view this thread as people making excuses for nudity?

Even this article is simply explaining why liberal society is wrong. There is No Need to #FreeTheNipple - Kevin A. Thompson

 

[Archivist]

Do you view this thread as people making excuses for nudity?

Even this article is simply explaining why liberal society is wrong. There is No Need to #FreeTheNipple - Kevin A. Thompson

When you answer my questions I will answer yours. You did not answer what I asked.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Do you view this thread as people making excuses for nudity?

Even this article is simply explaining why liberal society is wrong. There is No Need to #FreeTheNipple - Kevin A. Thompson

I haven't been reading this thread since I last posted in it.

Really, you are asking me to speculate on people's motives, and we are not supposed to do that (we are taught this in our Church).

I know I said earlier in this thread that some will speculate that to be the reason, and whether it is or is not the reason, that is a problem (more so if the people speculating so are correct). But other than making that observation, I have nothing more to say about that. It's not my place to judge people's hearts. But some who do not know better will do so. And that is not good for them, nor is it good for any who might be tempting them to do so.

 

[Sammy-San]

Actually men have breast tissue and some men have larger breasts then some women. So again what is the difference between male nipples and female nipples. Remember, you raised the issue if nipples, not me.

It's the journey between Genesis 2 and 3.

Breasts are the outward symbol of sex as pertains to the woman's nipples. That which sustains life born from herself. Obvious power to bring forth the future from within that womb that is unseen.

Why Should Women not be Permitted to go Topless in Public?

 

[rjs330]

Isn't toplessness being immodest more than lust?

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

Well I would say that going topless is the immodest and shameful thing. I generally wouldn't consider going topless a lustful act. But doing so could cause someone to stumble into lustful thoughts which is also against Scripture.

 

[Sammy-San]

Well I would say that going topless is the immodest and shameful thing. I generally wouldn't consider going topless a lustful act. But doing so could cause someone to stumble into lustful thoughts which is also against Scripture.

Would you think it is for men? Your posts about that topic mentioned lust.
To me being topless even for men doesn't seem dignified.

http://www.plainbibleteaching.com/2006/04/01/modest-apparel/

What parts of their bodies did God cover so that they would no longer be naked? According to Strong’s Dictionary, the Hebrew word means a garment that went from the shoulders on down. God covered their chests and backs. After doing this, they were “clothed” and no longer “naked.”

 

[joinfree]

This Sunday is National Go Topless Day, ....

In the ancient Roman Empire for a Christian martyr "to become top-less" would sound "to become shorter, to become physically head-less".

 

[Go Braves]

National Donut Day, National Cheeseburger Day, National Topless Day, lol. I'm always topless at the beach, see no reason why ladies who want to be there shouldn't be legally able if they want.

 

[Archivist]

You know you keep talking about other cultures but I have yet to really hear about other cultures and the sex of breasts there. Please post a link showing the cultures of today that do not sexualize the female breast. Remember that just because they have nude or topless beaches does not mean that the breast is not considered sexual in that culture.

This is from an article entitled "No, You're not Hardwired to Stare a Women's Breasts" by Michelle Smith:

"What is often overlooked in discussions about the sexual appeal of breasts is the fact that they have not always been regarded as irresistibly attractive in all points in history and across all cultures. Other parts of women's bodies have been viewed as more enticing than breasts, including buttocks, legs, ankles, hair, and feet. Bound feet (or the "golden lotus") in ancient China had strong erotic connections and acts that could be performed with them were detailed in illustrated sex manuals."

Western culture has had a strong influence around the world, but even today breasts are not sexualized in many parts of Africa and South America.

How much time have you spent on topless beaches? I have said several times on this thread that you can always pick out American men on such beaches--they are the ones walking around staring at the topless women. The locals on't pay much attention.

And I am not talking about going out for a few drinks. I am talking about partying where everyone goes out and drinks to excess.

So, unlike women going topless, all three of the examples you listed are discussed negatively in scripture.

 

[Archivist]

What post are you referring to?

Not playing games with you. I have identified which post several times. You have ignored that.

 

[rjs330]

This is from an article entitled "No, You're not Hardwired to Stare a Women's Breasts" by Michelle Smith:

"What is often overlooked in discussions about the sexual appeal of breasts is the fact that they have not always been regarded as irresistibly attractive in all points in history and across all cultures. Other parts of women's bodies have been viewed as more enticing than breasts, including buttocks, legs, ankles, hair, and feet. Bound feet (or the "golden lotus") in ancient China had strong erotic connections and acts that could be performed with them were detailed in illustrated sex manuals."

Western culture has had a strong influence around the world, but even today breasts are not sexualized in many parts of Africa and South America.

How much time have you spent on topless beaches? I have said several times on this thread that you can always pick out American men on such beaches--they are the ones walking around staring at the topless women. The locals on't pay much attention.



So, unlike women going topless, all three of the examples you listed are discussed negatively in scripture.

Does Steven Smith have research and specifics from those cultures to back up his thoughts on the subject. Where is the research and surveys to indicate that the South American men

This is from an article entitled "No, You're not Hardwired to Stare a Women's Breasts" by Michelle Smith:

"What is often overlooked in discussions about the sexual appeal of breasts is the fact that they have not always been regarded as irresistibly attractive in all points in history and across all cultures. Other parts of women's bodies have been viewed as more enticing than breasts, including buttocks, legs, ankles, hair, and feet. Bound feet (or the "golden lotus") in ancient China had strong erotic connections and acts that could be performed with them were detailed in illustrated sex manuals."

Western culture has had a strong influence around the world, but even today breasts are not sexualized in many parts of Africa and South America.

How much time have you spent on topless beaches? I have said several times on this thread that you can always pick out American men on such beaches--they are the ones walking around staring at the topless women. The locals on't pay much attention.



So, unlike women going topless, all three of the examples you listed are discussed negatively in scripture.

I did a little research on my own and guess what? South America has a booking inappropriate contentography culture among their own people. Seems like the woman's breasts is a sexual object there too and not just among Western white men. In fact there is a lot of breast augmentation being done there amongst the populace because the women want to be even more attractive to the men. This whole idea of other cultures not think the breast is any big deal is such nonsense and a bit or research proves that out. Sure some cultures might consider a bigger behind to be more attractive than the breast. But that doesn't mean they consider the female breast to.be no more different than the finger or whatever. Women's breasts are universally accepted as a sexual part of a woman's body. In some cultures more in others less.

American men may not be able to hide their oggling as well as the foreigners who fo to the topless beaches all the time. But that doesn't mean that they don't look or don't care. They just disguise it better.

And once again the bible calls nudity shameful and the woman's breasts are nudity when uncovered in public. As I've shown Scripture does not specifically speak to the groin either so either both are nudity or neither one is. You can't claim scripture supports one over the other.

 

[Sammy-San]

Does Steven Smith have research and specifics from those cultures to back up his thoughts on the subject. Where is the research and surveys to indicate that the South American men


I did a little research on my own and guess what? South America has a booking inappropriate contentography culture among their own people. Seems like the woman's breasts is a sexual object there too and not just among Western white men. In fact there is a lot of breast augmentation being done there amongst the populace because the women want to be even more attractive to the men. This whole idea of other cultures not think the breast is any big deal is such nonsense and a bit or research proves that out. Sure some cultures might consider a bigger behind to be more attractive than the breast. But that doesn't mean they consider the female breast to.be no more different than the finger or whatever. Women's breasts are universally accepted as a sexual part of a woman's body. In some cultures more in others less.

American men may not be able to hide their oggling as well as the foreigners who fo to the topless beaches all the time. But that doesn't mean that they don't look or don't care. They just disguise it better.

And once again the bible calls nudity shameful and the woman's breasts are nudity when uncovered in public. As I've shown Scripture does not specifically speak to the groin either so either both are nudity or neither one is. You can't claim scripture supports one over the other.

Is this what you mean by sexual?

Genesis 2 and 3.

Breasts are the outward symbol of sex as pertains to the woman's nipples. That which sustains life born from herself. Obvious power to bring forth the future from within that womb that is unseen.

Why Should Women not be Permitted to go Topless in Public?

 

[Archivist]

Does Steven Smith have research and specifics from those cultures to back up his thoughts on the subject. Where is the research and surveys to indicate that the South American men


I did a little research on my own and guess what? South America has a booking inappropriate contentography culture among their own people. Seems like the woman's breasts is a sexual object there too and not just among Western white men. In fact there is a lot of breast augmentation being done there amongst the populace because the women want to be even more attractive to the men. This whole idea of other cultures not think the breast is any big deal is such nonsense and a bit or research proves that out. Sure some cultures might consider a bigger behind to be more attractive than the breast. But that doesn't mean they consider the female breast to.be no more different than the finger or whatever. Women's breasts are universally accepted as a sexual part of a woman's body. In some cultures more in others less.

Perhaps you should read what is written. I specifically said in my earlier post that "Western culture has had a strong influence around the world, but even today breasts are not sexualized in many parts of Africa and South America." You are speaking of the areas of South America that have been influenced by Western culture. I am speaking of the native culture that have not been so influenced.

American men may not be able to hide their oggling as well as the foreigners who fo to the topless beaches all the time. But that doesn't mean that they don't look or don't care. They just disguise it better.

First, how much time have you spent on topless beaches?

Second, yes even foreign men would probably check out a very attractive well-endowed topless woman on a beach. Guess what, women check out good-looking topless men on beaches. the difference is that we allow men to go topless while in most of America we fine or jail women who do so. Double standard? I think so.

[QUOTE}And once again the bible calls nudity shameful and the woman's breasts are nudity when uncovered in public. As I've shown Scripture does not specifically speak to the groin either so either both are nudity or neither one is. You can't claim scripture supports one over the other.[/QUOTE]

Still waiting for you to show me anything in scripture that says that women should not go topless in public. Anything. Please.

 

[Sammy-San]

Perhaps you should read what is written. I specifically said in my earlier post that "Western culture has had a strong influence around the world, but even today breasts are not sexualized in many parts of Africa and South America." You are speaking of the areas of South America that have been influenced by Western culture. I am speaking of the native culture that have not been so influenced.



First, how much time have you spent on topless beaches?

Second, yes even foreign men would probably check out a very attractive well-endowed topless woman on a beach. Guess what, women check out good-looking topless men on beaches. the difference is that we allow men to go topless while in most of America we fine or jail women who do so. Double standard? I think so.

[QUOTE}And once again the bible calls nudity shameful and the woman's breasts are nudity when uncovered in public. As I've shown Scripture does not specifically speak to the groin either so either both are nudity or neither one is. You can't claim scripture supports one over the other.

Still waiting for you to show me anything in scripture that says that women should not go topless in public. Anything. Please.[/QUOTE]

The Bible portrays being nude as shameful and degrading.

 

[Archivist]

The Bible portrays being nude as shameful and degrading.

So is a topless man nude? If not, a topless woman is not nude.

 

[rjs330]

Perhaps you should read what is written. I specifically said in my earlier post that "Western culture has had a strong influence around the world, but even today breasts are not sexualized in many parts of Africa and South America." You are speaking of the areas of South America that have been influenced by Western culture. I am speaking of the native culture that have not been so influenced.



First, how much time have you spent on topless beaches?

Second, yes even foreign men would probably check out a very attractive well-endowed topless woman on a beach. Guess what, women check out good-looking topless men on beaches. the difference is that we allow men to go topless while in most of America we fine or jail women who do so. Double standard? I think so.

[QUOTE}And once again the bible calls nudity shameful and the woman's breasts are nudity when uncovered in public. As I've shown Scripture does not specifically speak to the groin either so either both are nudity or neither one is. You can't claim scripture supports one over the other.

Still waiting for you to show me anything in scripture that says that women should not go topless in public. Anything. Please.[/QUOTE]

Once again you fail to show how showing a women's breasts are not nudity by Scripture. Your argument is invalid due to the fact that the bible doesn't say anything about groins either. By you faulty argument we would have to say that showing ones groin is not nudity either since the Bible doesn't specifically say what you demand it says in order to make your claim. The Bible talks about nakedness from Genesis on. It talks about it being shameful. Yet no where does it say "thou shalt wear a loin cloth at all times.". When God covered Adam and Eve's nakedness it does not say he covered their loins. Perhaps he just covered their chests. Maybe we have it backwards. Maybe we should be running around without pants and covering our chests? There are faults in your scriptural logic.

Ok and since you admit that foreign men check out women's breasts you admit it's a sexual object. And quit blaming Western culture for that. Seriously? Please provide the research that backs your claim. All over the world men gaze at women's breasts sexually and it's all Western cultures fault? Men didn't have any idea that the breast was sexual until white European men went abroad and started teaching all these other cultures that women's breasts we're something sexual? Please provide proof of that.

And praytell just what native culture are you referring to and please provide proof that women's breasts in those native cultures we're not sexual in any way.

And no I don't go to nude or topless beaches. Since you know my thoughts on it, I can't imagine why you would ask me the question.

 

[Archivist]

Once again you fail to show how showing a women's breasts are not nudity by Scripture. Your argument is invalid due to the fact that the bible doesn't say anything about groins either. By you faulty argument we would have to say that showing ones groin is not nudity either since the Bible doesn't specifically say what you demand it says in order to make your claim. The Bible talks about nakedness from Genesis on. It talks about it being shameful. Yet no where does it say "thou shalt wear a loin cloth at all times.". When God covered Adam and Eve's nakedness it does not say he covered their loins. Perhaps he just covered their chests. Maybe we have it backwards. Maybe we should be running around without pants and covering our chests? There are faults in your scriptural logic.

Perhaps you should take time to study what scripture actually says. Genesis tells us that Adam and Eve made coverings for themselves out of fig leaves. The King James Version specifically calls the coverings they made for themselves "aprons," which would cover the groin area. The Revised Stand Version uses that same term. The Geneva Bible uses the term "breeches," which would also cover the groin area. YLT says that they made "girdles," which would also cover the groin area. Now, we could get into a translation battle--some like NIV simply say they made "coverings"--but there is nothing stating that they did not cover their groins. However, none says that Eve covered her breasts.

Genesis also tells us that the lord then made "coats of skins" for them. that would imply that their groin area was covered, but if you don't like that reasoning then the following is from chapellibrary.org: "Although we have no “snapshots” of Adam and Eve’s apparel, the word coats is consistently used throughout the O.T. to mean a tunic-like garment. Coats in Genesis 3:21 is kuttōnet from an unused root meaning to cover. The kuttōnet was the ordinary garment worn by man and woman as seen in the tunics of skin worn by Adam and Eve. This shirt-like garment usually had long sleeves, and extended down to the ankles when worn as a dress coat."

Of course I regard Genesis as an allegory, but since you read it as literal history this should answer your questions.

Ok and since you admit that foreign men check out women's breasts you admit it's a sexual object. And quit blaming Western culture for that. Seriously? Please provide the research that backs your claim. All over the world men gaze at women's breasts sexually and it's all Western cultures fault? Men didn't have any idea that the breast was sexual until white European men went abroad and started teaching all these other cultures that women's breasts we're something sexual? Please provide proof of that.

I've provided evidence throughout this thread, as have others. You have provided nothing but opinion. And, no, I'm not "blaming" West culture for anything. I'm stating a fact.

And pray tell just what native culture are you referring to and please provide proof that women's breasts in those native cultures we're not sexual in any way.

First, I believe you mean "were not" not "we're not."

Second, I've already referenced an article that discusses this.

And no I don't go to nude or topless beaches. Since you know my thoughts on it, I can't imagine why you would ask me the question.

If you have never visited a topless beach--and pretty much any beach in southern Europe is officially topless--then how do you know that European men look at topless women but "they just disguise it better." More opinion from you.

BTW, guess what, people are going to check out attractive individuals of the opposite sex. It happens regardless of what people are wearing unless they are wearing burquas.