Things to make you go "hmmmm"

[maquiscat]

My brother posted the following on his facebook page and I thought I'd bring it up for discussion because I think he makes a very good point.

OK...bear with me...something that's making me go "hmm..."

Both of these pictures depict LEGAL states of public dress. Not necessarily tasteful, but neither person would be getting hauled in, either, necessarily. (YMMV. Check local statutes.)

What the man is allowed to show is different from what the woman is allowed to show. Of course, I understand how that came to be. My confusion arises from the fact that what SHE must keep covered aren't the bits that are different...it's the exact same thing that HE's allowed to show with impunity. It's only naughty if SHE shows that one little bit extra. So what is male society trying to do, exactly? CLAIM the nipple?
Just...logic? Where? I know. When has sexism been logical? I guess that's my point.

 

[Robbie Loucks]

I always wondered the same thing. I'm not trying to get every woman to show me her breasts, but I acknowledge that hiding them are more for cultural reasons than logical.

 

[maquiscat]

I always wondered the same thing. I'm not trying to get every woman to show me her breasts, but I acknowledge that hiding them are more for cultural reasons than logical.

And now that I think about it, there really is no difference in most kids, and for women with "A" cups,...well some body builder men have more up top than they do.

 

[Gipper]

If they all went topless, I'd go around chasing big titty women so they get black eyes.

 

[Viv]

If they all went topless, I'd go around chasing big titty women so they get black eyes.

Or you'd get a sore face.

US attitude to nudity is just strange. Particularly for a country which hosts the biggest porn industry in the world, what is it all about...hypocrisy. On European beaches, nobody cares if you're topless.

 

[Gipper]

Or you'd get a sore face.

US attitude to nudity is just strange. Particularly for a country which hosts the biggest porn industry in the world, what is it all about...hypocrisy. On European beaches, nobody cares if you're topless.

Assault by big titties? I'm good with that.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Americans still have the Puritanical streak of their ancestors -- one of the last branches of Christianity to consider a woman's hair and ankle obscene.

It originates from a desire to control women, but now it's simply become a neurotic sexual cognitive dissonance.

We're sort of ok with boobs if there's a baby attached to them. Mothers being publicly mothers is non-threatening to a culture that demonizes female sexuality.

What we can't quite seem to get is that boobs are not either sexual or maternal. Sometimes they're just... there. Most of the time, boobs are not doing anything at all. They are simply part of being a woman.

Most of the West is getting over this slowly but surely, at various speeds. Some cultures never had this issue to begin with and female breasts just being breasts don't turn any heads.

But as usual, America is lagging behind most of the developed world in recognizing that women don't always need to have an implied "use" -- sex object or reproducer. Sometimes they're just people going about their lives. And our inability to accept that notion as a culture is why female nipples still make people freak out.

I will never understand how no one cares about the mild-to-moderate gore on Law and Order SVU broadcast on network TV, but Janet Jackson's nipple caused national uproar. We're more afraid of women's breasts, and sexuality in general, than we are of violent rape and murder.

 

[Gipper]

Americans still have the Puritanical streak of their ancestors -- one of the last branches of Christianity to consider a woman's hair and ankle obscene.

It originates from a desire to control women, but now it's simply become a neurotic sexual cognitive dissonance.

We're sort of ok with boobs if there's a baby attached to them. Mothers being publicly mothers is non-threatening to a culture that demonizes female sexuality.

What we can't quite seem to get is that boobs are not either sexual or maternal. Sometimes they're just... there. Most of the time, boobs are not doing anything at all. They are simply part of being a woman.

Most of the West is getting over this slowly but surely, at various speeds. Some cultures never had this issue to begin with and female breasts just being breasts don't turn any heads.

But as usual, America is lagging behind most of the developed world in recognizing that women don't always need to have an implied "use" -- sex object or reproducer. Sometimes they're just people going about their lives. And our inability to accept that notion as a culture is why female nipples still make people freak out.

I will never understand how no one cares about the mild-to-moderate gore on Law and Order SVU broadcast on network TV, but Janet Jackson's nipple caused national uproar. We're more afraid of women's breasts, and sexuality in general, than we are of violent rape and murder.

Your nipples don't make me freak out.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Your nipples don't make me freak out.

How do you know? They're really quite terrifying. They require a muzzle.

 

[Gipper]

How do you know? They're really quite terrifying. They require a muzzle.

They taste fine to me.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

My brother posted the following on his facebook page and I thought I'd bring it up for discussion because I think he makes a very good point.

It's very clear to me.
He has pectoral muscle definition and she has breast tissue.

Breast tissue and the exposed nipple is sexually suggestive. Pectoral muscles are not.

Why is this?

It's a societal value. The breasts are sexualized (as they should be). To expose them, especially if you're an attractive person, is to be sexually alluring/suggestive/inventive.

The male chest, however, is usually a sign of fitness and masculinity. We don't sexualize the muscled chest in that same way. Fitness is what we sexualize.

Clearly - I spite the arguments that women should be allowed to go around topless just because guys do. When people hold this view in an effort the de-sexualize the breast I get offended. I like my breasts to be seen as feminine/attractive/sexy and not what they really are: flabs of fat.

They have a natural purpose, but for me that purpose is long gone - so if they aren't seen as feminine or sexy I'd actually have the removed because, otherwise, they're just disgusting.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

It's very clear to me.
He has pectoral muscle definition and she has breast tissue.

Breast tissue and the exposed nipple is sexually suggestive. Pectoral muscles are not.

Why is this?

It's a societal value. The breasts are sexualized (as they should be). To expose them, especially if you're an attractive person, is to be sexually alluring/suggestive/inventive.

The male chest, however, is usually a sign of fitness and masculinity. We don't sexualize the muscled chest in that same way. Fitness is what we sexualize.

Clearly - I spite the arguments that women should be allowed to go around topless just because guys do. When people hold this view in an effort the de-sexualize the breast I get offended. I like my breasts to be seen as feminine/attractive/sexy and not what they really are: flabs of fat.

They have a natural purpose, but for me that purpose is long gone - so if they aren't seen as feminine or sexy I'd actually have the removed because, otherwise, they're just disgusting.

Why does something being feminine or sexy mean it should be covered?

So much of how we look is dictated by our sex and hormones. The entire shape of our faces, our waists, our hips, our leg structure -- and any of these things can be considered feminine and sexy. And yet we're not required to cover any of them... except breasts.

This is what I don't understand. I find the masculine jaw line sexy -- more so if it's got a day or two or beard growth on it. I find masculine hands sexy. And these are things that show even in business attire.

There are men who find feminine brow shapes sexy -- the openness they give our eyes. They find the curve of our legs sexy -- usually with a slight inwards turn to recenter our feet under our hips. These are things that show even in business attire.

Why should only breasts be covered?

Why should something be covered simply because it is feminine?

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Why does something being feminine or sexy mean it should be covered?

So much of how we look is dictated by our sex and hormones. The entire shape of our faces, our waists our hips, our leg structure -- and any of these things can be considered feminine and sexy. And yet we're not required to cover any of them... except breasts.

This is what I don't understand. I find the masculine jaw line sexy -- more so if it's got a day or two or beard growth on it. I find masculine hands sexy. And these are things that show even in business attire.

There are men who find feminine brow shapes sexy -- the openness they give our eyes. They find the curve of our legs sexy -- usually with a slight inwards turn to recenter our feet under our hips. These are things that show even in business attire.

Why should only breasts be covered?

Why should something be covered simply because it is feminine?

People who spend their time complaining about it (like - trying to change laws and such) remind me of my children when they're jealous of each other's gifts at Christmas time and whining about not getting the same exact thing.

But then, when I do give them the same exact thing, they whine about that, too, and fight over the fact that they all look the same and they can't tell them all apart.

Ask these same women whether men should be able to wear stilettos, high heels, lingerie and all that and they'll probably laugh. So the whole 'gender equality' argument is usually one-sided and full of tripe when it comes to this topic.

Most women who make this argument aren't wanting the breast to be seen as 'less sexy' - they just want to show them off. Very FEW women truly want them to no longer be sexualized. Very FEW want to be seen in people's mind on the same level as a man: no big deal, nothing to notice.

Aside that: the breast is equated to genitalia, almost, not jaws and knees and other body parts (which is always the argument presented when this topic comes up. "but I like backs" "but I like biceps" "but I like legs") . . . and it holds no water. We're talking about society in general, not individuals.

And as for why I should be seen differently than a man, or treated differently: It's not that I am treated differently than a man. It's that men and women are just different from each other.

All in all: Some women are trying to sell me the belief that by not going around topless I'm missing out on something - or that it's bad to not be able to - and I really don't feel it or believe it.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

People who spend their time complaining about it (like - trying to change laws and such) remind me of my children when they're jealous of each other's gifts at Christmas time and whining about not getting the same exact thing.

But then, when I do give them the same exact thing, they whine about that, too, and fight over the fact that they all look the same and they can't tell them all apart.

Ask these same women whether men should be able to wear stilettos, high heels, lingerie and all that and they'll probably laugh. So the whole 'gender equality' argument is usually one-sided and full of tripe when it comes to this topic.

Most women who make this argument aren't wanting the breast to be seen as 'less sexy' - they just want to show them off. Very FEW women truly want them to no longer be sexualized. Very FEW want to be seen in people's mind on the same level as a man: no big deal, nothing to notice.

Aside that: the breast is equated to genitalia, almost, not jaws and knees and other body parts (which is always the argument presented when this topic comes up. "but I like backs" "but I like biceps" "but I like legs") . . . and it holds no water. We're talking about society in general, not individuals.

And as for why I should be seen differently than a man, or treated differently: It's not that I am treated differently than a man. It's that men and women are just different from each other.

All in all: Some women are trying to sell me the belief that by not going around topless I'm missing out on something - or that it's bad to not be able to - and I really don't feel it or believe it.

I don't see any of this reflected in reality.

The people complaining about people "looking the same" are far-right conservatives who hate seeing women out of their "place." Totally different group of people than those who get serious about nudity legislation -- mostly progressives.

Progressives are generally more sensitive to gender variation than more conservative people. I haven't met very many who would laugh at a non-gender conforming man.

Most of the women I know who get serious about this just don't want to be so damn hot in the summer. And quite a few women don't want to be noticed, unless they are TRYING to be sexy. Some women don't see themselves as perpetual sex objects and like to get on with the business of being a person now and again.

Those legs that are no big deal in a business skirt are suddenly a very big deal when she wants to turn on her partner and uses her body to reflect that, are they not?

The way society equates breasts has nothing to do with what they really are.

No one has ever said you must be topless, were it to become legal.

Nothing you've said indicates you have ever spoken to a real living person about this.

 

[Gipper]

Why does something being feminine or sexy mean it should be covered?

So much of how we look is dictated by our sex and hormones. The entire shape of our faces, our waists, our hips, our leg structure -- and any of these things can be considered feminine and sexy. And yet we're not required to cover any of them... except breasts.

This is what I don't understand. I find the masculine jaw line sexy -- more so if it's got a day or two or beard growth on it. I find masculine hands sexy. And these are things that show even in business attire.

There are men who find feminine brow shapes sexy -- the openness they give our eyes. They find the curve of our legs sexy -- usually with a slight inwards turn to recenter our feet under our hips. These are things that show even in business attire.

Why should only breasts be covered?

Why should something be covered simply because it is feminine?

I've never wanted to suck on a woman's eyebrow.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

I don't see any of this reflected in reality.

The people complaining about people "looking the same" are far-right conservatives who hate seeing women out of their "place." Totally different group of people than those who get serious about nudity legislation -- mostly progressives.

Progressives are generally more sensitive to gender variation than more conservative people. I haven't met very many who would laugh at a non-gender conforming man.

Most of the women I know who get serious about this just don't want to be so damn hot in the summer. And quite a few women don't want to be noticed, unless they are TRYING to be sexy. Some women don't see themselves as perpetual sex objects and like to get on with the business of being a person now and again.

Those legs that are no big deal in a business skirt are suddenly a very big deal when she wants to turn on her partner and uses her body to reflect that, are they not?

The way society equates breasts has nothing to do with what they really are.

No one has ever said you must be topless, were it to become legal.

Nothing you've said indicates you have ever spoken to a real living person about this.

You know - there is a solution: have your breasts surgically removed. You know, if the concern is comfort during the hot summer and not things like just wanting to be topless / treated the exact same as a man. Or: push to have it illegal for anyone to go around topless.

But yet these people don't want to have their breasts removed. They don't want to be breast-less like a man is. They don't want to push to make it illegal for men to go topless. (Albeit - it seems a few do).

Per me not talking to anyone in real life - funny that's your argument. I've actually engaged quite a few people in this discussion. It comes up in sociology, psychology, and socio-political classes the most. The want to be topless isn't as common as you might think. In all the time this has come up in group discussion on campus and so on the guys seem gung-ho for it (of course they want to see breasts) and the girls don't.

I've yet to me another female in real life who supports it. They're few and far between - sometimes they pipe up on the internet but not very often.

And of those that are pro-active it seems the most common thing is the pride of having breasts and then showing them off. They wanted the attention and the whole big-deal out of it. Very few of these outspoken people seem to actually want to show off their breasts without getting noticed for it.

I don't see why it's that big of a deal. What's wrong with just wearing some clothes? Nothing. Nothing at all. All it comes down to is that some people just don't want to.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

You know - there is a solution: have your breasts surgically removed. You know, if the concern is comfort during the hot summer and not things like just wanting to be topless / treated the exact same as a man. Or: push to have it illegal for anyone to go around topless.

But yet these people don't want to have their breasts removed. They don't want to be breast-less like a man is. They don't want to push to make it illegal for men to go topless. (Albeit - it seems a few do).

Per me not talking to anyone in real life - funny that's your argument. I've actually engaged quite a few people in this discussion. The want to be topless isn't as common as you might think. In all the time this has come up in group discussion on campus and so on the guys seem gung-ho for it (of course they want to see breasts) and the girls don't.

I've yet to me another female in real life who supports it. They're few and far between - sometimes they pipe up on the internet but not very often.

Geez. What crawled up your backside?

So you'd rather ban men from doing things than allow women to do something that you personally wouldn't do? If you don't want to be topless, just don't be. Why does it bother you so much if some other woman does?

Why are you so pissed off that some women would like to be able to go topless? How does treating women equally under the law make you not a woman anymore? They aren't trying to be "like men." They just want to be equal under the law.

And here's another question for ya. How is banning men from doing it not also "trying to pretend men and women are the same"? By your reasoning that legal equality is equivalent to denying the sexes are different, isn't it exactly the same? After all, then men and women would have the same laws applied to them. By your rational, this is means society is somehow trying to homogenize the sexes.

I never said it was common. What I said is that nothing you've argued is anything I have ever heard in reality, online or off. It's exactly like your rant about feminism a couple months ago, and you eventually admitted you had no idea what most feminists actually think or do.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

and you eventually admitted you had no idea what most feminists actually think or do.

Excuse me? Where did that come from?

We're discussing our different views per breast exposure and then all of a sudden you make it personal?

My issues in regard to "feminism" have nothing to do with gender equality or breast exposure and everything to do with the over-the-top mysandrists that use the concept of 'feminism' to be divisive and insulting to both men and women.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

I never said it was common. What I said is that nothing you've argued is anything I have ever heard in reality, online or off.

No, it's my interpretation - my analysis - of the potential drive that some people have behind their actions.

And yes, it's not that comment, but then why does the debate keep coming up? I've met only a few guys who think the idea is hot - and beyond that - no one I've ever talked to holds the view. You seem to, though I can't quite tell if you're just arguing the Devil's Advocate or not. And really - just not that many even online are pro the concept. So . . . I guess people just like the debate?

In order for me to get why someone opposes something I have to understand the problem they have with it and there has to be negative impact behind it as well. And when it comes to this topic I just don't get what's wrong with wearing a bikini top or a shirt, and I don't see any negatives that come from it, either.

 

[Viv]

No, it's my interpretation - my analysis - of the potential drive that some people have behind their actions.

And yes, it's not that comment, but then why does the debate keep coming up? I've met only a few guys who think the idea is hot - and beyond that - no one I've ever talked to holds the view. You seem to, though I can't quite tell if you're just arguing the Devil's Advocate or not. And really - just not that many even online are pro the concept. So . . . I guess people just like the debate?

In order for me to get why someone opposes something I have to understand the problem they have with it and there has to be negative impact behind it as well. And when it comes to this topic I just don't get what's wrong with wearing a bikini top or a shirt, and I don't see any negatives that come from it, either.

With respect, your comments appear very extreme and the suggestion that women should lop their bits off is ridiculous. You might consider the possibility that other people are different and you have no idea what their motivation is.

In UK, we don't generally do topless probably because of the weather, but when we go on holiday in Spain/France etc (everyone goes there) people are topless if they want to be and nobody gives a flying f***. The Nordics have never really given a flying f*** about crap like this. It's about doing whatever you want, not feminism.

The only time it gives pause for thought is when you see some weirdo gawper like Gipper there, who takes the freedom away through inappropriate behaviour, or when there are children around I would not be topless. Plenty of women are though.

 

[Gipper]

some weirdo gawper like Gipper there.

Hope that was worth it.

 

[KevinKohler]

With respect, your comments appear very extreme and the suggestion that women should lop their bits off is ridiculous. You might consider the possibility that other people are different and you have no idea what their motivation is.

In UK, we don't generally do topless probably because of the weather, but when we go on holiday in Spain/France etc (everyone goes there) people are topless if they want to be and nobody gives a flying f***. The Nordics have never really given a flying f*** about crap like this. It's about doing whatever you want, not feminism.

The only time it gives pause for thought is when you see some weirdo gawper like Gipper there, who takes the freedom away through inappropriate behaviour, or when there are children around I would not be topless. Plenty of women are though.

Sooo....what I'm getting here is, move to Europe, see more boobs.

What's your immigration policy like?

 

[KevinKohler]

On a serious note....

It all boils down to Puritanism, and more importantly, the temperance movement this country experienced at the turn of the century (last century), and is still phasing out to this day.

Original sin, folks. Feminine whiles being the source of all greed, misery, war, etc on earth. If it had been Adam seduced by the snake who in turn gave the apple to Eve, it would be men's nipples that need to be covered.

However, that's sorta putting the cart before the horse. The tribesmen, or culture, from which the Old Testament sprang was/is patriarchal, and in every since imaginable, anti feminist...so it's only logical that the villain, or dupe, is female, and not male.



Flame on.

 

[Gipper]

At this point, it's just because of the fact that it'd be a giant distraction for society. Once the novelty wears off, it'd be ok.

 

[Viv]

Hope that was worth it.

Your constantly inappropriate schoolboy remarks are funny, but anyone else's are personal attack. Righto.

Must be another cultural difference.