• Ever thought it'd be cool to have your art, writing, or challenge runs featured on PokéCommunity? Click here for info - we'd love to spotlight your work!
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.
    Register

Should women be allowed to go around topless in public?

As a 23 year old man who loves breasts I'd vote yes but you'd have alot more pervs and what not. Perhaps groping happening and sexual harassment. Seriously if a double D woman walked down the street I'd stare like my eyes were glued to her chest making her very uncomfortable and god forbid her man is with her it might cause a fight..
 
Huh. It seems my post was deleted by... myself?

Anyway, I said I guess we are just not mainstream enough to "stop living in the 17th century, and smell the 21st century.". Other countries have a lot less... censorship for this kind of thing. At least, that is what others were saying in that article's comments.
 
Some women couldn't even walk around showing their ankles before.
Hopefully things change soon and women can walk around topless.
 
As long as men think inappropriately around topless women, it should be banned. And I'll be the first to admit I could not walk through Times Square with topless women all over the place and NOT think inappropriately...

Now, let's not take it to extremes. Are there some men that might find ankles, er, "pleasing"? Maybe, but they would be very, very rare, so we should only take that which would be commonly viewed as sexually explicit.
 
LonsoKitty's talking about Magmaruby and Aquaapphire's post a page back. Once upon a time, in a land of sand and pyramids, men of Egypt thought women's ankles were "erotic" in physique.

As I said before in my post a page back:
Musketeer said:
If we had't have considered it "taboo" in the first place, we wouldn't be viewing it the same way today!
Click to expand...
 
I'm all for equality, but as far as I'm concerned women walking about topless in public is likely to cause more problems than it solves.

First of all, topless women walking the streets will turn more heads than there are hairs on Brian Blessed's chin, which will defeat the objective, since boobs will continue to be viewed as a sexually associative body part.

Secondly, boobs are already a key factor in sexual activity between humans and play a large role in many pornographic videos that can easily be found on the internet. Because of this, it's likely that they'll always be considered sexually arousing, and thus taboo.

It also opens the door for perverts to take sly photos without women noticing.

Yeah, it's just a bad idea. I'm not against the idea, I just don't really see what good can come out of it. To be honest, I don't really think men should be walking around topless either. It comes across as slightly indecent. Just my opinion.

Actually, can any women on this forum confirm that if women walking around topless was eventually allowed, they'd follow this new trend (bearing in mind the number of perverts you'll undoubtedly pass by in public)?
 
Last edited:
I don't think most males, and some females, will disagree with wanting to see more topless woman and this is the reason I say they shouldn't.

In this age where the female chest is a turn on and there are a lot of sexual predators out there, it would only end up being uncomfortable for females when they have about 80% of the male passers by, staring at a their chest.

The other side, which I just thought of, is at what age would a woman be allowed to be topless in public? 16? 18? 21? In England, you are 'allowed' to have sex at the age of 16, so does that make it a good age for a woman to walk around topless? But then, think of the amount of paedophiles this could bring out from the woodwork.

I am against this, because the safety of women could be jeopardize, in some cases.​
​
 
-ty- said:
I made a thread similar to this, but it was closed. Hopefully it will not this time around.

Either both men and women should not be allowed to or both should be allowed to in order to be equitable. Of these two options, it makes the most sense that both men and women should be able to be in public without a shirt on. Many people may be against it morally; however, we don't have the right to coerce a woman to share our same moral beliefs, and thereby, wear a shirt. Businesses and restaurants have the right to dictate which clothes are appropriate however.
Click to expand...
well legally there is justifications on treating them diferently, since they are emotionally, and physically different. As such they fall under different court classification( intermediate clasification)

If you go by Nietzsche will to power, it is our conscience to seek the truth, then when we find it to share it\ force it on others. So if one believes it is wrong morally, then they have to force that truth on others to make that morality a reality.
 
Last edited:
NarutoActor said:
If you go by Nietzsche will to power, it is our conscience to seek the truth, then when we find it to share it\ force it on others. So if one believes it is wrong morally, then they have to force that truth on others to make their morality a reality.
Click to expand...
And that's why we don't let Nietzsche write our laws for us. That particular philosophy goes against our ideas of personal freedom and respect for differences.
 
Ok, I just want to answer the question. For religion (even though I'm catholic), all I say is be good, and don't do bad things. Now onto my answer.

NO. I don't think women should go around topless in public. It would create WAY too many distractions since most guys think with their you-know-what.

Some guy could be driving a car and see a topless babe walking on the sidewalk. He isn't paying attention to the road, and most likely crashes into a car, person, building, or dog. I wouldn't want any of my friends or family getting hurt, nor my house, my car I'll get in 5 years, or my dog. And that's only one guy.

If there are more people like the guy described above (which there are) chaos will insue and MANY people, buildings, and dogs will get hurt. So my answer is no.
 
Toujours said:
Related: saw a news story about a woman who had a double mastectomy due to cancer and wanted to swim topless in a pool because swimsuit tops are severely uncomfortable for her. They eventually allowed it after she fought tooth and nail, but only when the pool was adults only.

https://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2018485244_swimmer.html
Click to expand...
Good for her, I say. Don't really get why only she is exempt and no one else with such scars, hopefully that'll change.

Personally, I just wouldn't go swimming in a public pool. I just wouldn't want to make a fuss out of it. But, that's just me. If I had my own pool, I'd do whatever though.
 
xelarator said:
Some guy could be driving a car and see a topless babe walking on the sidewalk. He isn't paying attention to the road, and most likely crashes into a car, person, building, or dog. I wouldn't want any of my friends or family getting hurt, nor my house, my car I'll get in 5 years, or my dog. And that's only one guy.

If there are more people like the guy described above (which there are) chaos will insue and MANY people, buildings, and dogs will get hurt. So my answer is no.
Click to expand...
This is not likely to happen. If being topless were legal, few women would take advantage of the freedom. Of those who do, only a portion of them will be considered attractive to each individual passerby. Only a fraction of that number will be in an area where they would even have the potential to distract drivers. And on top of that, only a small fraction of drivers will be so distracted that they cause an accident. They'll most likely be bad drivers in the first place and any damage they cause will be due to their bad driving habits rather than to a distraction. After all, there are already plenty of people out there who could be a distraction to drivers, but we don't assume they are the cause of accidents.

NarutoActor said:
That dosen't mean anything, with this logic public nudity is alright.
Click to expand...
Perhaps that should be considered acceptable as well.
 
Oh my god, they're boobs, not the freaking swastika, I say let them be free and bounce in the open air. Since when have boobs been so sexualized that most people forget that they're just mounds of fat and tissue on your chest. Why should women be ashamed of what they were born with? Both men and women have boobs and if a man with bigger boobs than a woman can go topless on a beach or in public on a hot day, why the hell is it made so much more sexual when assigning a gender to it?

People get turned on even without seeing the exposed flesh and not all boobs are wonderfully round and soft like they show in magazines and pornos. Boobs can be saggy or perky or cylindrical or cone shaped but in the end, they're just boobs.

The tongue is more sexual than boobs and we're not forced to dress it up, goodness.

That being said, it might be impractical for some women to go long without wearing some sort of support, especially when performing exercise, so it's like...yeah...that's my main concern. The practicality of it, other than just to relax on a hot day outside XP
 
They already are allowed to in Ontario, Canada. They have been able to for quite some time.
 
If a girl wants to show her breasts off to the public, I say go for it. She'd better be prepared to get into a lot of trouble and humiliation with almost everyone she runs into though.
 
As a girl, I would not follow this even if it were allowed. I mean, I get enough of the pervy kids in my grade (8th) staring at me already, don't need to give them the impression of being a sl*t. I think that maybe we should have the OPTION of it, but there would be an age limit, like 18+. But really, I don't exactly want to see fat, lazy ladies that are too lazy to put on a shirt walking around with their tits jiggling around. That's gross. I doubt that anyone taking advantage of this new freedom would be attractive in any way, because unless you are a cheap prostitute, you should at LEAST have a liiiittle dignity.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top