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

[Aldebaran]

Not really. The culture can change in time, and freedom is always an issue.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Common decency doesn't change. Do you also think people should be allowed to run around naked in public. After all, our body is natural, and we are the only species on earth to wear clothing. If it's warm enough outside, shouldn't we all be allowed to be totally naked, even in front of other peoples' children? After all, it takes a village to raise a child, and children need to learn about what is natural, so why not teach them early? If the parents of those children don't like it, then we will call them "haters". In fact, we could just chant that word over and over again because repetition makes something true. Just ask any protester.....

 

[Cearbhall]

With the arrival of warm weather in the US, we again face the double standard of allowing men, but--in most places--not allowing women to go topless in public. Why not?

I can't think of any actual reason for it to be banned. It seems to be a purely cultural thing. Culture is weird.

That being said, fighting this law isn't one of my priorities. As irrational as it can be at times, culture serves an important purpose and I personally don't aim to tear it all down. I don't think we're quite at the point where it makes sense to do away with this double standard completely. It'll probably be part of a natural progression once transgenderism and gender fluidity become more socially acceptable and understood, leading to confusion about who exactly is allowed to go shirtless. Then people will see how arbitrary this law is.

 

[quatona]

Do women really WANT to go topless here in the US?

If not - this whole thread is pointless.

I´m sure some do. So this thread is not pointless.

 

[Cearbhall]

Common decency doesn't change.

Yes, it does. That's literally just another term for a certain aspect of culture. Norms labeled as "common decency" are not exceptions to the subjectivity of culture.

 

[Archivist]

Common decency doesn't change.

But it does. At one time it was considered indecent for men to go topless in public. Until after WWI it was prohibited by law. Today no one gives it a second thought.

My Amish neighbors follow an earlier requirement of common decency. Girls are required to wera dresses and hats in public. Men are required to grow beards once they have the ability to do so. Should we go back to that?

Do you also think people should be allowed to run around naked in public.

But this thread isn't about anyone going naked in public. It is about women having the right to go topless in public anyplace that men go topless.

After all, our body is natural, and we are the only species on earth to wear clothing. If it's warm enough outside, shouldn't we all be allowed to be totally naked, even in front of other peoples' children? After all, it takes a village to raise a child, and children need to learn about what is natural, so why not teach them early? If the parents of those children don't like it, then we will call them "haters". In fact, we could just chant that word over and over again because repetition makes something true. Just ask any protester.....

And, again, this thread is not about anyone going naked.

 

[Aldebaran]

But it does. At one time it was considered indecent for men to go topless in public. Until after WWI it was prohibited by law. Today no one gives it a second thought.

My Amish neighbors follow an earlier requirement of common decency. Girls are required to wera dresses and hats in public. Men are required to grow beards once they have the ability to do so. Should we go back to that?



But this thread isn't about anyone going naked in public. It is about women having the right to go topless in public anyplace that men go topless.



And, again, this thread is not about anyone going naked.

But why not? You're talking about exposing a part of a woman's body that has been considered indecent to expose, so why not expose the entire body, both of man and woman? I want to see where you draw the line.

 

[Cearbhall]

But why not? You're talking about exposing a part of a woman's body that has been considered indecent to expose, so why not expose the entire body, both of man and woman? I want to see where you draw the line.

It doesn't matter where he personally draws the line. The point is that there's a difference between a person's level of comfort (as a product of his/her culture) and claiming that something is objective and unchanging. There are certain things that I want to remain legislated even though I know that there's no real justification for doing so. If I lived in a different culture, that list would look different. If I had lived 100 years ago, that list would look different. If I were my great-granddaughter, again, different. I know that my values are not objective.

 

[SuperCloud]

But why not? You're talking about exposing a part of a woman's body that has been considered indecent to expose, so why not expose the entire body, both of man and woman? I want to see where you draw the line.

I'm trying to imagine a 240 pound woman, working a farm naked, in a July in Wisconsin.

By the way... if everyone starts going naked it's only going to be us dark skinned people that's going to survive. The white people will fry under the sun or die of skin cancer.

Just kidding. (No I'm not.)

By the way... I loved your comment about repetition, repeating something, and protestors. So true. I'm happy there is at least one other human on earth that notices this.

 

[quatona]

Common decency doesn't change.

Yes, it has always changed and it does change. Demonstrably.

Do you also think people should be allowed to run around naked in public.

Personally, yes, I think they should - but that´s a different question.

After all, our body is natural, and we are the only species on earth to wear clothing.

That´s wouldn´t be my argument. I´m not advocating to model our behaviour after that of other species.
If that´s your argument, it´s up to you to defend it.

If it's warm enough outside, shouldn't we all be allowed to be totally naked, even in front of other peoples' children?

In my opinion, yes, sure - but that´s a different question.

After all, it takes a village to raise a child, and children need to learn about what is natural, so why not teach them early?

What is it with you and making up poor arguments for positions you don´t even hold?

Now back on topic.

 

[quatona]

I'm trying to imagine a 240 pound woman, working a farm naked, in a July in Wisconsin.

And what´s the result of your efforts?

By the way... if everyone starts going naked it's only going to be us dark skinned people that's going to survive.

Fortunately this thread is not about going naked, and even less about everyone going naked.
Btw, there´s effective sun protection available who want to expose their skin to the sun.

 

[SuperCloud]

Quatona said:

And what´s the result of your efforts?

My mind feels heavy.

And my allergy symptoms are developing.

 

[Rationalt]

Ever walked past the romance novel aisle in a bookstore? All those shirtless men are there for a reason.

Not noticed. I did walk past those rows of novels but not of my own volition.

I didn't notice any shirt less men but I am wondering now why we don't have some kind of half cut shirts like half cut tops women wear.May be the Parisians have such collection .

 

[Rationalt]

Quatona said:


My mind feels heavy.

And my allergy symptoms are developing.

The power of visuals .

 

[Rationalt]

I don't care what the law or opinion of people say or if women go topless. I am just countering the arguments equating topless men and women.

 

[OGM]

On a related note...this posed by CNN:

Why getting naked on holiday is a big thing in Germany: A German reveals all

Getting naked in Germany: A local reveals all - CNN.com

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/06/travel/naked-germany/index.html

 

[Archivist]

But why not? You're talking about exposing a part of a woman's body that has been considered indecent to expose, so why not expose the entire body, both of man and woman? I want to see where you draw the line.

Until after WWI it was considered equally indecent for men to go topless. All we are talking about is giving women the same right that was given to men, that being the right to go topless in public.

If you want to discuss whether everyone should have the right to go nude in public please start your own thread. That would be an entirely different issue.

 

[OGM]

And in Africa, how is it different?

Yeah really...Even in the 1960's Nat Geo would show breasts on Africans during prime time. Yet during a Super Bowl partial breast they wanted to fine everybody.

 

[ananda]

Follow cultural expectations and behaviors if one desires to be a harmonious part of that culture - not because those behaviors are inherently "wrong" or "right".

Find another (more compatible) culture to live amongst if one is compelled to do something different which offends the culture you're with.

The evil committed by counter-cultural activists is the evil of formenting disharmony, discord, and schisms in a culture.

Don't force yourself upon others. Simple as that.

 

[OGM]

My point is many hours of "African" breast could be shown on U.S. television. Yet when the same networks, the FCC and even the public would have a problem with "non-African" breasts. What gives?

 

[ananda]

My point is many hours of "African" breast could be shown on U.S. television. Yet when the same networks, the FCC and even the public would have a problem with "non-African" breasts. What gives?

Context, like my prior post explains.

In context of a documentary, it is harmonious to show African breasts as an natural part of the expression of their African culture. In context of a Super Bowl - an expression of American culture - it is improper.