posted March 14, 2013 04:53 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre35:

Uptown, we used to have a bi annual bare breast protests and beforehand some of the bare chested activists would wander around town.

Did not phase anyone that I could tell.

Certainly not I, BUT the fuddy duddies in the legislature HAD to pass a law banning the public baring of breasts b/c someone, somewhere was upset over it.

For myself, when I see a woman with large breasts my first question is

"I wonder if her back hurts from those things"?

---

posted March 14, 2013 05:03 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by mockingbird:
Or increase the incidence of men getting shot in the face

---

I agree or at least a lot more men kicked in the groin.

posted March 15, 2013 03:17 AM              

quote:

---

Originally posted by mockingbird:
Or increase the incidence of men getting shot in the face

---

posted March 15, 2013 07:07 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by peregrine:
but u know i didn't mean a rapist out on the street. maybe from a window he sees a woman's breasts and is a sick **** . seeing it triggers his action to rape to stalk whatever... people don't wear much where i'm from but not a lot are topless.

---

See, I disagree - at least if it became a societal norm.

People adjust to what they see.
In the Victorian period, ankles were considered terribly scandalous

posted March 15, 2013 08:25 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by mockingbird:
See, I disagree - at least if it became a societal norm.

---

I have the same opinion, and as far as I know, rape doesn't happen more frequently in countries where women go topless.

Really, I think the laws banning women from exposing their chests, as Padre mentioned, are discriminatory and backwards. Men can't contain themselves or their temptations, therefore women have to fix the problem? I just remember sometimes walking far distances with a hungry, crying baby, to find a restroom where I could nurse in private (oh and thanks for not even providing a chair, all you keepers of public restrooms. It's not like anyone realizes nursing mothers exist.)

posted March 15, 2013 09:48 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
I have the same opinion, and as far as I know, rape doesn't happen more frequently in countries where women go topless.

Really, I think the laws banning women from exposing their chests, as Padre mentioned, are discriminatory and backwards. Men can't contain themselves or their temptations, therefore women have to fix the problem? I just remember sometimes walking far distances with a hungry, crying baby, to find a restroom where I could nurse in private (oh and thanks for not even providing a chair, all you keepers of public restrooms. It's not like anyone realizes nursing mothers exist.)

In a culture more considerate to women and children, that wouldn't happen. We are moving in that direction...several of my friends will nurse in public...but I tried that before and hated getting stared at.

---

posted March 15, 2013 11:15 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pisces-Sweety:
I strongly object to this. I think it's inappropriate.

---

Why's that?

This has seemed like a generally respectful discussion of social mores and norms.

posted March 15, 2013 11:23 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
I have the same opinion, and as far as I know, rape doesn't happen more frequently in countries where women go topless.

Really, I think the laws banning women from exposing their chests, as Padre mentioned, are discriminatory and backwards. Men can't contain themselves or their temptations, therefore women have to fix the problem? I just remember sometimes walking far distances with a hungry, crying baby, to find a restroom where I could nurse in private (oh and thanks for not even providing a chair, all you keepers of public restrooms. It's not like anyone realizes nursing mothers exist.)

In a culture more considerate to women and children, that wouldn't happen. We are moving in that direction...several of my friends will nurse in public...but I tried that before and hated getting stared at.

---

Funny thing is, my Town, Asheville, it really was no big deal, a pair of women walking around topless was met with a "meh".

Will say nursing was a bit odd looking at first, not in a sexual way, but in more of "..now there is something I haven't seen" sort of way.

I'm very much a proponent of people feeling free, as long as it does not interfere with someone else's freedom.

posted March 15, 2013 11:52 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pisces-Sweety:
Also, I'm completely against the idea of exposing oneself like this in general. I mean if we were supposed to do that then we're really no different than animals. I mean we have to have some limits to what we can do or show.

---

And that's an opinion - one it's your right to have within the context of this discussion.

I didn't necessarily mean "norm" as in "this is normal", but rather "group-held beliefs about how members should behave in a given context".

posted March 15, 2013 11:57 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by juniperb:
I`m totally amused men see breasts as sexual. A breast is for the express purpose of feeding an infant... what does this say about our menfolk

---

It's complicated.
I think that, with our species, they are a secondary sex characteristic.
Most other mammals mammary glands don't enlarge at puberty and stay enlarged through the reproductive years.
The surrounding tissue may slacken post-engirgement and nursing, but not even chimpanzees have "breasts".

Across the board, though, the primary physiolocal function remains the production and secretion of milk.

posted March 15, 2013 05:00 PM            

And no, I don't see it as "if that's ok then so is all other kinds of nudity." Other things have to be considered as well.

People who use "sexual purity" as a form of morality have no morals. Too many of them will inflict violence, even sexual violence, on others with no real guilt, and may even feel a sense of righteousness in being evil, but think they're so moral because they want a woman's breasts or face covered. Heck, more than one has argued that the reason God destroyed Sodom, and was right to do so (and thus right to commit genocidal slaughter against gays today) is because of Sodom, and had the men of the city heterosexually raped Lot's virgin daughters (one Muslim said Lot actually offered them to be "married" to the entire city, but I don't know if that's an actual Muslim teaching or his own private BS) then God would've been ok with it. And then there are incidents like that disgrace in Australia (unless I'm confusing them with another series of Australian rapes then some rapists involved said the girls had "no right to say no" as their dress was provocative, and at least one religious leader excused their actions because they were "uncovered meat ripe for snatching" and thus immoral, but the rapists were moral). These people are far more dangerous than full frontal nudity could ever even aspire to be, and for all their talk of "morals" they have no idea of the actual concept having mistaken the "golden rule" for misogyny, bigotry, and perhaps even self-hatred. (And if such nudity comes off as "sexual" that both offends and entices men into orgies and even rape then it's not that the body is "dirty" but the oh-so-"righteous" mind that is filthy. And prohibiting a movie to younger viewers because of a woman's breast or someone smoking pot in a positive context while brutal violence by heroes does not gain the same censorship shows just how SICK our society is.)

posted March 15, 2013 05:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lexxigramer:
Actually cows do have udders that enlarge as they become adults and stay that way.
I have seen many an older cat and dog keep their enlarged breasts even when not nursing.
Also many men have breasts as large or larger than some women.
Not just obese men either.
Are those B to D cup men's breasts also secondary sexual features?
I think breasts seen as sexual and to be hidden is just a societal conditioning thing.
Some might argue that women's nipples and areolae display erectile tissue so that means they are sexual objects.

Well men's also do that.
As to proper or shameful, whatever about showing one's body parts or all;
A guy in just a g-string on the beach;
and or a woman in a bikini so small she must shave her pubic area in a futile attempt to try and hide that there may be less than an inch of fabric barely hiding her labia etc.;
is a joke in my opinion.
I am like;
you all look so ridiculous.
You are not hiding anything.
In fact I feel it is that micro-minimalistic faux "clothing" meant to tease that brings on the sexual titillation;
not topless or full nudity.
In fact I have, as most do;
become quite bored with nudity.
It does not mean anything after seen enough.
PS.
As far as the sacredness of the human body;
why some see a woman's body as more sacred and oddly more a thing to be ashamed of than men's bodies;
or to be ashamed of our bodies no matter what gender, or variations in gender. or age, race, size, and so forth;
just seems so wrong to me.
Animals do not think that way.
PPS.
The only thing I see as logical for covering up our bodies is for;
warmth
protection from injury
shielding from the sunburning rays
public safety/ie; hygienic reasons
fashion
personal identity
But covering for shame?
Shame of the human body is a societal construct.
Shame for our natural forms is a sad development of the sapient mind.

---

Breasts are, scientifically, a secondary sex characteristic of female humans.
It is not a universal and certainly varies from person to person and population to population, but if you put breast size on a scatter plot graph, men of reproductive age will tend to be on one side and women of reproductive age will tend to be on the other.
That is not to say that those who are not on the "right" side are bad - it's not a judgement on their bodies or their persons - it's just statistics.

...and that's not to say that I think that breasts are shameful or something to be hidden.

Deep voices and chest hair are similarly male secondary sex characteristics (again, statistically - there is certainly variation both individually and by population) and they're not shameful or hidden.

I was taking issue with the assertion that female breasts are only for feeding babies (and I'm pro-breastfeeding, even public breastfeeding).
They have the same potential to arouse that (to hearken back to my earlier example) a deep voice may have.
I know a deep, masculine voice turns me on...but I don't ask men to speak through filters

posted March 15, 2013 05:53 PM              

quote:

---

Originally posted by ail221:
So if anything that is sexually arousing should be covered maybe men with their deep voices and scruffy chin hair should wear veils and carry voice scramblers.

---

posted March 15, 2013 09:48 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by juniperb:
I`m totally amused men see breasts as sexual. A breast is for the express purpose of feeding an infant... what does this say about our menfolk

---