Should women be allowed to go around topless in public?

[doesn't matter]

ugh, didn't notice the other page of replies. Can't be bothered.

After a while of boobs just being "there", it's highly possible that it won't become such an amazing thing to guys anyway. I guess I just really don't get why guys like boobs at all so I figure if it's always there and not sexualized, then wouldn't it serve to desensitize them to it and make it less "boobs = woody"?

I don't understand the decency argument at all though. We all have different morals. Even if it was legal here to go topless, I wouldn't because I wouldn't feel comfortable doing it. But I don't see why the girl down the street has to follow my values. On the other hand though, with the way breasts have been sexualized now and in the past, I don't think it's really possible to move past that into a place where breasts are seen as sexual in only certain situations; for example, necks can be seen as sexual in certain situations but they're not required to be covered up.

So I believe ideally it should be allowed, but our world is not an ideal one and we have a long way to go before it should be allowed in this world.

Guys like boobs because they are seen as a "front-ass". All primates have sex with the male behind the woman, but humans are the only ones that do it face to face. This is due to the lifelong presence of the female breast (after puberty), which is not seen in other primate species. The female breast has a sexual purpose, along with breastfeeding. This isn't about social conditioning, this is just male instinct (note I am speaking generally, of course there are exceptions amongst individuals).

Not that morals are subjective, but why should others be able to force their views down my throat? What if I do not want to see breasts everywhere? And yes, you are wanting to force it down our throats (or at least, change the world so we all willingly accept your views as truth), since that is what you described as an ideal world, where everyone conforms to your views.

Modest is 1) subjective, 2) a personal choice, and 3) not something you can force on someone if they aren't harming anybody.


I'm a little confused. Perhaps if you would tell us what "the value of women" is I would understand how an uncovered breast becomes debasing.

Relativism is self-contradicting. Your statement purports subjective/relativist values but is stated objectively.

When I speak of the value of women, I speak not of something that is quantifiable, but rather, something more... super. Sort of like a feminine ideal. One of the many values of the female is feminine beauty, which is something that should be treasured.

If you show off something special all the time, it loses it's value. No I'm not saying completely cover women up all the time, but when a woman is always showing off her breasts, she reduces her value to being just a pair of breasts, because that's all she depicted herself as. In that same regard, when a woman behaves like a man, and walks around topless, she throws away the feminine. I love women, and I want women to be women, not men.

Of course, the main reason why everyone should be clothed in public is because it's civilised and most everyone does not look good naked. Obesity is an epidemic and I do not want to see fat naked people everywhere :P

A) This is a stupid thread.

ur a poo-poo head :3

 

[Oryx]

ugh, didn't notice the other page of replies. Can't be bothered.


Guys like boobs because they are seen as a "front-ass". All primates have sex with the male behind the woman, but humans are the only ones that do it face to face. This is due to the lifelong presence of the female breast (after puberty), which is not seen in other primate species. The female breast has a sexual purpose, along with breastfeeding. This isn't about social conditioning, this is just male instinct (note I am speaking generally, of course there are exceptions amongst individuals).

Not that morals are subjective, but why should others be able to force their views down my throat? What if I do not want to see breasts everywhere? And yes, you are wanting to force it down our throats (or at least, change the world so we all willingly accept your views as truth), since that is what you described as an ideal world, where everyone conforms to your views.

Your idea of morals could apply to anything. Say I'm a Hasidic Jew and my beliefs are that women should have their hair covered at all times. Should I push for a law against having your hair showing? I could easily use the logic that "looking at other women with their hair showing forces their morals down my throat" as an argument. That alone proves that argument invalid - the fact that it can be used for literally any moral that happens in public, and would result, if followed, to a ban on anything that any one person finds offensive. Even outside of religion, take the small amount of people that have a problem with all shorts because they show too much leg. Should they ban all shorts because of those people protesting? The only difference between this and that is the amount of people. While normally that would mean something, in the case of rights that shouldn't mean a thing. The rights of someone who believe something different from you shouldn't trample your own just because there are more of them. That's why there are courts and such to uphold the rights of people whose beliefs are in the minority.

If you don't like something, look away when it comes into your point of view. If you're so immature that you can't handle a split-second view of some boobs, then you have some problems to work out that I can't help you with.

Relativism is self-contradicting. Your statement purports subjective/relativist values but is stated objectively.

Relative values don't mean facts don't exist. Alcohol still affects your brain whether or not you believe drinking alcohol is wrong, for example. Besides, what he said was "Modesty is subjective", not "all values are subjective". And he's right. To some people, being "modest" involves wearing an ankle-length skirt and a cardigan. To others, wearing shorts and a t-shirt is 'modest'. Modesty is a matter of opinion, and therefore subjective.

When I speak of the value of women, I speak not of something that is quantifiable, but rather, something more... super. Sort of like a feminine ideal. One of the many values of the female is feminine beauty, which is something that should be treasured.

If you show off something special all the time, it loses it's value. No I'm not saying completely cover women up all the time, but when a woman is always showing off her breasts, she reduces her value to being just a pair of breasts, because that's all she depicted herself as. In that same regard, when a woman behaves like a man, and walks around topless, she throws away the feminine. I love women, and I want women to be women, not men.

I want women to be what they want to be. Why should your value of what you personally want women to act like trample my freedom to be who I wish to be? You're free to think what you want, until you start trying to use that as an argument to curtail the freedom of others. I like chest hair on men. I'm not going to go lobby for a law banning shaving of chests, because my wish for my men to have hair doesn't mean I have the right to disallow other people from not having hair. If you want a woman that doesn't want her breasts showing, no one's requiring that a woman show her breasts. I'm sure you'll eventually find your perfect Christian modest barefoot housewife regardless of the law regarding breast-baring.

Why should women conform to what you personally want to see in a woman? Why are your values the objective ones that the government should follow? You think they're right, plenty of other people think they're wrong. When in doubt (and there's obvious doubt here), err on the side of freedom.

Of course, the main reason why everyone should be clothed in public is because it's civilised and most everyone does not look good naked. Obesity is an epidemic and I do not want to see fat naked people everywhere :P

I find the places where they allow topless women and nudity just as civilized as places that don't. Do you feel that Ontario is less civilized than the US/Australia, or nude beaches are inherently uncivilized although there's literally no difference between it and a clothed beach except clothes?

And about people not looking good, I think you have a lot more to worry about...

Spoiler:

 

[Kirbychu]

Personally, I'm really against this, but that's the thing; that's just my personal view. I suppose that this shouldn't be prohibited... In the future... As mentioned before, boobs = sex in our society, so I feel that we'd first need to work our way to the point where we're not so afraid of nudity and have desensitize ourselves to breasts. I suppose you could argue that this throws away femininity to a degree and sort of blurs the line between male and female gender roles, but that's inevitable if we're going to strive for true equality, and is that really a bad thing?

 

[CyanFlame]

If boobs were allowed in public, I wouldn't walk around flashing them everywhere because... I wouldn't want to.

 

[Ivysaur]

It's shouldn't be illegal as long as it doesn't hurt anybody, and shops or private areas are still allowed to have their own etiquette rules. Not that everyone will start going naked around the street, and even if they do, you'll only have to look somewhere else if that offends you, the same way I run away from people smoking on my face.

 

[Dakotah]

Anyway to be quite honest, how often do you see a guy walking down the street without a shirt?

Quite often, actually. In fact, it was only a couple days ago as I was walking home from the e-bike shop that I saw a rather attractive looking young man walking across a parking lot carrying his shirt in his hand. It was a rather warm day.

I'm pretty sure that here in Ontario women are allowed to go topless. But you never actually see a woman go topless on the street here except for that one day a year when some ladies go topless in protest of not being able to go topless in public when they are already allowed to go topless in public. Not the most informed bunch.

Yes, you're right. Women in Ontario are allowed to go topless in public. But as you also point out, it's not very common for them to do so. There are occasions though, that I do see women topless and I shake my head in disgust every time I hear some guy making a rude remark about her breast.

So, I think even if it were legal, as it is here, people still wouldn't do it because they just don't want to.

Yep. Isn't free choice a wonderful thing?

A females chest is not the same as a males. Not biologically, and especially not morally ... Because of the certain purpose that female breasts have, that male breasts don't. If male breasts would have the same function as females, guys wouldn't walk around topless either

This is not entirely correct. A male's breast is as capable of producing milk as a woman's, given the right circumstances.

Tbh I'm getting sick and tired of people constantly wanting to equalize EVERYTHING between males and females, you just can't do that, we're not equal, we're different. Since when do girls want to walk topless btw, just because guys can?? It's just ridiculous lol.

I'm sorry you think equal rights is a wasted effort. Where I live, being topless in public is perfectly legal, whether you are male or female. There are people who obviously think it's wrong, but there's a simple solution for them ... don't go outside.

 

[Magdalena~]

^ Exactly.

The appearance of a woman's breast is the same as a male breast, with the exception that women tend to have more adipose tissue. Overweight and obese men could potentially carry breasts that appear similar to females breasts if their body fat percentage is more than 25%. Also, some women, especially those who engage in professional weight lifting, may have less adipose tissue.

I can attest to this. Plenty of guys I've seen at the pool have been walking around flaunting bare breast that is much more impressive than mine.

I'm not much for public toplessness in general. I see guys walking around without a shirt on and I'm like "get a room man c'mon". It's not fair to have a double standard. Either everyone should be allowed to be topless, or no one should. In my opinion, public toplessness is acceptable for both genders in "swimming areas" but in general I don't think people should be going without a shirt in any other public place aside from a pool or beach.

I don't really think a lot of women would want to take advantage of this in the first place (I certainly wouldn't) but I think the choice should be there nonetheless.

And just fyi, a man's chest/belly, to me, is just as erotic as that of a woman. Just throwing that out there.

Edit: Shirt and shoes is general policy and should be applied to both men and women; private institutions should be able to establish whatever rules they like but I don't believe in double standards no matter the situation.

 

[Esper]

When I speak of the value of women, I speak not of something that is quantifiable, but rather, something more... super. Sort of like a feminine ideal. One of the many values of the female is feminine beauty, which is something that should be treasured.

If you show off something special all the time, it loses it's value. No I'm not saying completely cover women up all the time, but when a woman is always showing off her breasts, she reduces her value to being just a pair of breasts, because that's all she depicted herself as. In that same regard, when a woman behaves like a man, and walks around topless, she throws away the feminine. I love women, and I want women to be women, not men.

Granted, something which is always seen becomes commonplace, but since I don't believe there is anything inherently ideal about breasts (any more so than anything else about the human body) not do I believe in an ideal femininity I don't think breasts becoming something seen as commonplace is all that bad.

I don't see how a woman would become seen as just a pair of breasts. If anything I think idealizing breasts is more likely to do that. Forbidden fruit and all that.

 

[Yoshikkko]

I'm sorry you think equal rights is a wasted effort. Where I live, being topless in public is perfectly legal, whether you are male or female. There are people who obviously think it's wrong, but there's a simple solution for them ... don't go outside.

No, that's not what I said at all. What I said was that people keep on wanting to equalize things between us, while you can't do that because we are completely different. And I'm not saying it shouldn't be legal, I don't care if girls want to walk around topless if that floats their boat. What bothers me is the true intention behind it, which is not wanting to walk around topless, but to equalize. Because really, how many females do you actually see walking with bare chests? Pretty sure it's close to zero.

 

[-ty-]

^ Well, many women would like to breastfeed in public, or like many men who take jogs shirtless, many women might want to. The true underlying concept is not some feminist conspiracy, but rather, it is for less governmental regulations on our personal decisions that do not affect others. If the government can pick and choose which things men can do, and which things women can do, there is a blatant double-standard being created.

 

[Esper]

I don't know about jogging. That seems like something a lot of women would want sports bras for, but yeah, exercising in general or just, I dunno, stepping out to get the mail or something without having to worry about covering up or taking a quick break on a hot day and cooling off for a moment. You don't see women going around topless is because right now it is something that they could get in trouble for because of the laws we have.

 

[Dakotah]

No, that's not what I said at all. What I said was that people keep on wanting to equalize things between us, while you can't do that because we are completely different. And I'm not saying it shouldn't be legal, I don't care if girls want to walk around topless if that floats their boat. What bothers me is the true intention behind it, which is not wanting to walk around topless, but to equalize. Because really, how many females do you actually see walking with bare chests? Pretty sure it's close to zero.

The sexes really aren't all that different if you think about it. Our anatomy is almost completely the same. Remember, as mammals, we all begin as female in the womb to begin with. And when it comes to the sex organs, they're pretty much the same, just arranged differently. The differences between males and females are superficial at best.

The only reason I can see that someone would focus only on the differences is because they're so used to seeing what's different in people rather than what is similar. I, on the other hand, tend to see what is similar in people rather than what is different.

 

[Kura]

The sexes really aren't all that different if you think about it. Our anatomy is almost completely the same. Remember, as mammals, we all begin as female in the womb to begin with. And when it comes to the sex organs, they're pretty much the same, just arranged differently. The differences between males and females are superficial at best.

The only reason I can see that someone would focus only on the differences is because they're so used to seeing what's different in people rather than what is similar. I, on the other hand, tend to see what is similar in people rather than what is different.

As an artist I can say I completely disagree with you. Even the way a man's forearms are shaped or fingernails are shaped opposed to a female are vastly different. And I wouldn't really call it being superficial.. it's just the truth. The shape of a man's torso or even feet are so different than a woman's.. but it's not a bad thing that we are different.

 

[.:CoralSoda:.]

Sure, women should be allowed to go around topless in public. Will it happen? I don't think in my life time.

As a guy, I'm not gonna lie though, if the women was attractive I'd have a hard time not staring. But I figure it could be bad to, since there are fat hairy men that walk around with there shirt off, so there could be fat (please not hairy) women walking around topless.

 

[TRIFORCE89]

No, that's not what I said at all. What I said was that people keep on wanting to equalize things between us, while you can't do that because we are completely different. And I'm not saying it shouldn't be legal, I don't care if girls want to walk around topless if that floats their boat. What bothers me is the true intention behind it, which is not wanting to walk around topless, but to equalize. Because really, how many females do you actually see walking with bare chests? Pretty sure it's close to zero.

I agree. There isn't really a demand for it. It is superficial equality. Equality for the sake of equality, but it is entirely useless. Nothing gained

 

[Dakotah]

As an artist I can say I completely disagree with you. Even the way a man's forearms are shaped or fingernails are shaped opposed to a female are vastly different. And I wouldn't really call it being superficial.. it's just the truth. The shape of a man's torso or even feet are so different than a woman's.. but it's not a bad thing that we are different.

Let's not nit pick here. You're talking about really minor differences. Things that most people wouldn't even notice. If you really want to get specific, then every human being is created differently. From the shape of one's ear lobe to the size of one's hand.

My point is, the differences between a male and a female are not so great as to treat either differently. Both are humans and both should be treated the same under the law.

 

[Oryx]

I agree. There isn't really a demand for it. It is superficial equality. Equality for the sake of equality, but it is entirely useless. Nothing gained

What's the problem with equality for the sake of equality? Equality is a pretty noble cause, and regardless if 90% of women will choose to wear a shirt all the time, the other 10% who want to go topless for whatever reason they choose should have the right to.

Why should freedom be restricted for women in this capacity? What logical reason do you have? Freedom shouldn't be restricted unless there's a good reason for it, otherwise, we might as well ban everything that isn't done by the majority of people. Most people don't have mopeds, so let's ban mopeds, since there's not a huge demand for it! Etc. Unless there's a reasonable argument to ban something, it shouldn't be banned. That's just logical.

 

[Esper]

I agree. There isn't really a demand for it. It is superficial equality. Equality for the sake of equality, but it is entirely useless. Nothing gained

I disagree that nothing is gained. Women gain the freedom to be topless. It's easy to say that "nothing is gained" if it's not a freedom you're going to avail yourself of, but it's still something gained. Yes, there are better things we could be fighting for, but this is still a freedom that's being restricted and it's not like it would take a lot to decriminalize this.

 

[TRIFORCE89]

What's the problem with equality for the sake of equality? Equality is a pretty noble cause, and regardless if 90% of women will choose to wear a shirt all the time, the other 10% who want to go topless for whatever reason they choose should have the right to.

Why should freedom be restricted for women in this capacity? What logical reason do you have? Freedom shouldn't be restricted unless there's a good reason for it, otherwise, we might as well ban everything that isn't done by the majority of people. Most people don't have mopeds, so let's ban mopeds, since there's not a huge demand for it! Etc. Unless there's a reasonable argument to ban something, it shouldn't be banned. That's just logical.

On the social injustice ladder, I'd rank topless ladies near the bottom. How about the some priorities?

I didn't say ban stuff that the majority of people don't use. There's just bigger fish to fry first, that would be a better use of time, money, and discussion. I think you should target issues that affect a much greater array and number of people before you start passing "equality on paper" and grandstanding.

It's legal where I am. And no one goes topless (I don't know where this magical wonderland Jay_37040 lives is XD). So much so, that only time I've ever seen any woman go topless was at a rally to protest not being able to go topless.... even though they can go topless. That's just how much the concept is in the public consciousness. Even the people for it don't even know its already legal.

So, I don't see this as some great social injustice.

I disagree that nothing is gained. Women gain the freedom to be topless. It's easy to say that "nothing is gained" if it's not a freedom you're going to avail yourself of, but it's still something gained. Yes, there are better things we could be fighting for, but this is still a freedom that's being restricted and it's not like it would take a lot to decriminalize this.

It may be a freedom. I don't think it's a right necessarily. That its legal here doesn't bug me either way, because no one goes topless. I see it as a non-issue. It sure isn't a voting issue for me. But, honestly, society as whole, rightly or wrongly, views bare breasts in a sexual light. If you they sell undergarments for the body part, then it's not really supposed to be out in the open. Are you going to complain about a guy's "lack of freedom" to wander around all dangling and what not? Let's reverse evolution altogether and just wander around naked all day.

I'm a 20-something straight male. I'm not opposed to seeing boobs XD But, when you're out in public I think there is a certain level of decency that society expects. Not a uniform or a dress code, but they don't want to be forced to feel uncomfortable just because they want to walk to the grocery store either. If undergarments exist for the body part and are widely used, then they stay covered in public. The argument was made before that the breast's function is not inherently sexual. Okay. How about the rear-end? Same logic applies there. Should we all walk around with backless pants? The majority of people don't want to see it.

(Breastfeeding being an exception)

 

[Kano Shuuya]

You know, since men can go around topless in public. People against this argue that women should not be allowed to because men would be aroused by an attractive woman's chest. Are women not aroused by an attractive man's chest, as well?

Discuss.

I think it's the way that women (some) carry themselves. Guys might walk around topless and silently show off if they're walking down a street, or working in the yard, etc, but you'd never walk through a bookstore and see any guy walking around half naked. It's not like they do it every where. So no, I don't think that women should be allowed to whip out their boobs in a grocery store. XD

Now, under the same idea of them walking around shirtless on the street or something, I've been known to have a family friend who does that regardless of whether or not it's fully allowed. Or course she's really really high a lot of the time. >__>

Generally, if women were suddenly allowed to do it by law and it was normal, we'd get used to it. Though, I think it would take awhile because at first it would be sexy timez all over the place. Especially since, like I started to say, a lot of women try to turn their breasts into something more sexual than they actually are. They kind of ruin it for everyone, depending on how you look at it.