Topless equal rights?
- Thread starter Zelfouz
- Start date
Wyatt":zoapcyub said:
Yeah, I do in fact know what I'm talking about. Boobs are universally arousing to men in general. Hands/feet are not. That's why they're called fetishes.
And yeah, that's true about men being shirtless too... I was just saying.
Oh, and "wahay" isn't a fucking word.
Breasts are pretty universally seen as arousing in cultures where boobs are hidden. Other parts are seen as very arousing in cultures where other parts are hidden.
I call bullshit on that one, but I will grant that it's significantly easier and more common for men to rape women. If a someone wants to rape someone else it isn't going to matter how she's dressed. Rape is usually about the rapist exerting control over the victim in order to feel powerful or to stroke their pathetic ego as opposed to being overcome with sexual desire.
In any case, I don't think that "uncontrollable lust" is a decent reason to insist upon keeping people, especially women, wrapped up. That very same argument is used to insist upon the use of burkas, and even there rape continues to occur. Insisting that specific articles of clothing be worn in order to prevent rape does not work. Inhibiting freedom because you're concerned about provoking someone else's "uncontrollable lust" isn't going to fix anything, and only serves to promote inequality.
I call bullshit on that one, but I will grant that it's significantly easier and more common for men to rape women. If a someone wants to rape someone else it isn't going to matter how she's dressed. Rape is usually about the rapist exerting control over the victim in order to feel powerful or to stroke their pathetic ego as opposed to being overcome with sexual desire.
In any case, I don't think that "uncontrollable lust" is a decent reason to insist upon keeping people, especially women, wrapped up. That very same argument is used to insist upon the use of burkas, and even there rape continues to occur. Insisting that specific articles of clothing be worn in order to prevent rape does not work. Inhibiting freedom because you're concerned about provoking someone else's "uncontrollable lust" isn't going to fix anything, and only serves to promote inequality.
The only reason female breasts have to be covered is because they usually grow during puberty, and therefor are considered 'line characteristics'. (dunno if that's the good translation, used babelfish for that one..) Anyway, just like pubic hair, they are the signs of a female becoming female, and an attraction point to most men. Though I believe that "they are sensual" is the main reason for keeping 'em covered.
If women would uncover them casually at all times, these discussions would probably not exist, because breasts wouldn't be as special as they are now. They are a hype, 'cause they count as forbidden for everyone except a slight group of people. (save for pornstars.. they show 'em in public.. but hey, it's their job..) Anyway, I bet that if man grew breasts during their puberty, they'd have to keep it covered at all times too.
If women would uncover them casually at all times, these discussions would probably not exist, because breasts wouldn't be as special as they are now. They are a hype, 'cause they count as forbidden for everyone except a slight group of people. (save for pornstars.. they show 'em in public.. but hey, it's their job..) Anyway, I bet that if man grew breasts during their puberty, they'd have to keep it covered at all times too.
Buster":3inrpb0e said:
whatthefuck?!
so wait
women can't walk around wearing things that arouse others because men can't control their temptations?!
fuck man i really should have been more careful when i used to run around in miniskirts and low-cut shirts as a teenager! i mean men can't control the urge to rape, i should have known! i was ripe for the picking because of my outfit selections!
that's like the motherfuckers in the 50's, whenever a chick would get raped while wearing a short skirt they'd blame HER because "well, she shouldn't be walking around dressed like that!"
MOTHERFUCKERS, it was the piece of dogshit DUDE that did the raping!!!!
we're not a bunch of fucking dogs, letting our dicks do the talking! we're supposed to be human beings! sure we have urges, but if you can't keep yourself from raping someone, no matter HOW attractive, that's your own fucking fault!!!
I mean if it turns you on, go home and fap about it! what the hell in the world would ever give a man the reason to rape a woman other than a fucking disgusting power trip??
that sounds like the fucking middle east. they wrap their women in blankets so no men get a stiffy around them. well guess what, akbar, women should be allowed to wear whatever they want just like you. just because they have some jiggly parts that makes your pants tight, it doesn't mean you have any fucking right to judge them you fucking sexist pricks.
......... oops, sorry. that kind of shit sets me off.
anyway that's a horrible and totally invalid argument is what i was saying.
it's just that, boobs have become taboo over the centuries, outside the bedroom. that's really all it is.
i say, i don't give a flying fuck about what anyone does, so long as it doesn't infringe on my rights.
Not if anyone care, but where I live, people don't need to be on a nude-beach these days to let them loose. People just do it, and it's accepted. On the other hand, no one tried yet to go topless walking, not girls anyway, so I don't know how people react on that.
Either way, I think a breast-holder is so much more comfortable when walking, then without. Must be heavy.
Either way, I think a breast-holder is so much more comfortable when walking, then without. Must be heavy.
Venetia":2tepe59h said:
I was mostly just saying that to point out that covering breasts and covering feet/hands are completely different things. I've never heard of anyone going "ZOMG GUYS, AS SOON AS I SAW THIS CHICK'S TEETH, I JUST COULDN'T FUCKING CONTROL MYSELF!!! I THINK I NEARLY CREAMED MYSELF THEN AND THERE!!!"
I do agree, though, that the only reason breasts are so arousing to men is the whole forbidden factor about it. If it would have been established for centuries that women walking around topless were socially acceptable, then it wouldn't be nearly as big of a deal as it is now.
terramaster
Member
I think the strange thing is that you see baby girls in Huggies commercials completely topless (can you be slightly topless?).
Undiscovered (or recently undiscovered) tribes have no concept of being shirtless with women. It's probably very hot in the jungle so an absence of clothing might benefit.
Allot of it developed for a reason not just popping out of nowhere, the general comfort and for the need for protection in a vulnerable/important area (I'm a guy so I'm not so sure of that one XD) are the things that probably started it. Soon it probably became strange for someone not to.
Undiscovered (or recently undiscovered) tribes have no concept of being shirtless with women. It's probably very hot in the jungle so an absence of clothing might benefit.
Allot of it developed for a reason not just popping out of nowhere, the general comfort and for the need for protection in a vulnerable/important area (I'm a guy so I'm not so sure of that one XD) are the things that probably started it. Soon it probably became strange for someone not to.
terramaster
Member
missingno":16pxngdr said:
And to imagine some people find that attractive is beyond me in particular.