Envision, Create, Share

Welcome to HBGames, a leading amateur game development forum and Discord server. All are welcome, and amongst our ranks you will find experts in their field from all aspects of video game design and development.

Topless equal rights?

Man Cruelty I love your arguments because your actually giving me a smart one.  Your playing with the same game I am, we're setting our words specifically. That way we have loopholes to fall back one, we're narrowing it down - or broadening it greatly.

Problem is, I've got loopholes to.  If I didn't, this wouldn't be fun.  I can show you legally on the very constitutions our nation is built on, how enforcing a law stating women must keep their breast covered is discrimination, and can fall under a bigoted sex crime.  It can be sexual harassment, under our laws.  You can narrow it down, and I can broaden it to the same levels.

When you create a law, it must pertain to an equal group of people.  You can't create a law slated at a specific culture, sex, creed, or race.  It is discrimination of a high standard.  In the eyes of a black and white text, it is the same as saying all men of Jewish decent are breaking the law by having tattoos. Actually it's technically worse because the Jewish male more precise of a group - all men would have a better effect.  That all men must wear shoes in public, is the same to all women must wear tops in public.  There is no difference.  You find boobs sexual?  Good for you.  Some people for whatever reason find feet even more sexual.

We can banter around widening or lessening the curve here, but all we're proving is the same point 12x over.  Just because it's not a good reason to change does not equate that just because it's not a good reason not to change as being correct.

Diaforetikos":3h3b19az said:
Guys wanna make it legal so they can walk around getting hard all day. Free strip shows pretty much without the dancing and bottomlessness.
I actually found that very insulting.  I'm around breasts a lot.  It's been 90+ degrees nearly for two weeks, with heat indexes hitting even higher than 100.  Humidity alone has been in dangerous levels.  Women and men are wearing very little around where I live.  I have not yet gotten a hard on walking down the street seeing a woman with no bra in a tank top and sweating.  Like Ixis breasts aren't somehow special for me.  They don't automatically ring heaves of sexual desire.

I actually find it more erotic when a breast is slightly hidden.  A thin damp shirt is a lot more effective than a bare and exposed breast.  And that's what I've been around all week practically and except for a rare occasion of "Wow, she's got a nice set" there hasn't been a single urge - and even that was nothing more than a thought and observation... and a mental note in case of future happenings - though I'd be making that note even if she was wearing a thick and heavy baggy sweater.

Maybe if we didn't make things so special and exotic they wouldn't hold irresistible appeal.  I remember an old Jewish comedian.  His uncle used to get bacon, pork for you numbskulls who don't know is forbidden.  Yet, his uncle would get this bacon, and when the comedian was a child and behaved the uncle might sneak him a bit.  It was amazing he says.  Then, he gets older.  He buys bacon, a lot.  It's not amazing.  Because he can have it any time.  He can see it, he can smell, he can taste it any time he wants, and the appeal is gone.  When he was younger, it was a treat.

When I was 12 a breast was a treat.  A 15 year old's breast was a godsend.  I'm 25 now.  A breast is a breast.  It's a lump of flesh that in the right situation can be fun.  Otherwise... it's a lump of flesh.  The same as every other lump of flesh.
 
steve buscemi's internet browsing history (chimp porn)":7vty3xto said:
We can banter around widening or lessening the curve here, but all we're proving is the same point 12x over.  Just because it's not a good reason to change does not equate that just because it's not a good reason not to change as being correct.

well, i can agree with you there. that is to say, i wouldn't always agree with the ideal that something needs some kind of significant reason to change.. but, as it is, virtually nobody is directly affected by this very mild dress-code. with nobody affected, no significant reason for bringing about any change, and i'm forced to believe this is just another mindless feminazi rant about "we wanna do EVERYTHING the guys do, even if it dont make sense", which completely devalues the topic at hand. with no reason, nobody affected, and no merit, what you're left with is a pointless endeavor.

...and this is probably where my bias shows. feminists annoy me to the core.

steve buscemi's internet browsing history (chimp porn)":7vty3xto said:
Man Cruelty I love your arguments because your actually giving me a smart one.
:hercule:
 

$t3v0

Awesome Bro

A female chest has breasts (incase you didn't realise) which are sex organs (like a penis). Males don't have breasts (some do :3) so it's not considered indecent to reveal. The fact is females have two sexual organs that are considered sexual and males have 1 (a much more entertaining 1) so a female revealing their top half is indecent.

The fact that a pre-breast female has her top off could still be considered indecent but that's a matter of opinion. It only springs from the fact that it's considered indecent when they get whaps. I see a lot of naked children on a daily basis in the summer and it doesn't really bother me. I do feel a little awkward when they approach me though, where do you look!?

The most recent change in society with this point is the fact that having a camera with you in public places gets you some evil stares. I read in the paper a few weeks ago that a photographer who has been visiting the same spots for decades was asked to stop taking pictures there or he would face fines. I'm surprised parents can take pictures of their own kids without being given the lethal injection these days.

As a photographer I've never been asked to move on from somewhere I'm taking pictures of. But if I ever was I'd be sure to stress the point of "why?"
 

mawk

Sponsor

ixis":397be38o said:
There's nothing more that can be said about the topic, it's pretty unanimous: EVERYONE LOVES BOOBS!! (They're fun for boys and girls of all ages!) Society sucks for blah-blah-blah, we should all blah-blah-blah, we all agree it's blah-blah-blah.

Ok, now go run around outside topless changing the world and breaking down taboos and such. Just make sure you take lots of pictures and post them on here (y'know, pix or it didn't happen.)

I'll be waiting...

Alone at my place with the lights turned off...

Diaforetikos":397be38o said:
Guys wanna make it legal so they can walk around getting hard all day. Free strip shows pretty much without the dancing and bottomlessness.

For the record, ladies, and gentlemen, this is exactly what I meant when I said that people wouldn't take the issue very seriously until some serious envelope-pushing got done.

Lol tits lol i love them too lets have a titsparty you and mea nd girls with tits!!!
 
Chimmy Ray":2329leqb said:
For the record, ladies, and gentlemen, this is exactly what I meant when I said that people wouldn't take the issue very seriously until some serious envelope-pushing got done.

Lol tits lol i love them too lets have a titsparty you and mea nd girls with tits!!!

Can you predict the next time I'm gonna see some tits then? 'Cause I'm curious oh, Swami.
 
I think that a lot of people these days don't have a problem with nakedness (although I'd say the majority are prudes =p) but that isn't really the problem. If I was walking in the mall and there were a group of well-busted teenygirls out for a shop, there would be some serious issues (In my pants region). And the same for a lot of other guys. And women as well for that matter, it just wouldn't be quite so obvious. If the law suddenly changed so that there were no legal problems with full nudity, not a lot of people would start getting naked. Too many people feel uncomfortable with how they look (are embarrassed & want to hide themselves), others don't want people looking at them (in a pervy way). There would be plenty of exceptions, but overall nobody would want to start getting naked until everyone else was doing it.

And then we move on to the reason people wear clothes in the first place. Mostly protection from the sun, the cold, protective gear like shoes, hats and gloves, and also bras for obvious reasons (fried eggs on a nail... ha) Even if society was comfortable with full nudity, I would almost always wear shoes, shirt and shorts when I'm hot and jackets and jeans when I'm cold. So would a lot of people, and it would soon become custom and then tradition and then law - and we're back where we started! Or something.
 

mawk

Sponsor

Even if society was comfortable with full nudity, I would almost always wear shoes, shirt and shorts when I'm hot and jackets and jeans when I'm cold. So would a lot of people, and it would soon become custom and then tradition and then law - and we're back where we started! Or something.

Well, except in the aforementioned conditions in which men regularly go topless. We don't always need to protect ourselves from what environment there is -- this isn't the desert, where you need to bundle up just so that your sweat has a fighting chance at cooling you down. :P

Personally, I love going shirtless and will take any excuse to do so. I'm sure there are a lot of people who like to stay bundled up for various reasons, but remember that this is a discussion over whether or not topless women are socially acceptable -- not whether or not anyone wants to be topless in the first place. I think that "so what girls don't want to be topless anyway!" is besides the point.

Also, uh... I think you have some personal restraint issues if you get a visible boner just from seeing fully clothed cute girls. A trouser snake awakened at the wrong moment is the perfect way to turn any situation into an awkward one.
 
Chimmy Ray":265qoarb said:
Also, uh... I think you have some personal restraint issues if you get a visible boner just from seeing fully clothed cute girls. A trouser snake awakened at the wrong moment is the perfect way to turn any situation into an awkward one.

It might not be a personal restraint issue, some men get erections more often or at irregular intervals (most males go through such a process during puberty actually.) Besides the point he was talking about naked females, not clothed ones.

Back on topic, if it's a comfort issue why not wear a bikini top or a sports bra? They're cool and supportive as far as I know (that's not a rhetorical question, actually.)
 
WOmen wouldn't exacly have breasts if they had to be helpful to the human condition. The fact is, guys liking breasts is a deep-seeted psychological condition from a time when having big boobs was a hindrance to a woman's survival, thus proving that she was, in fact, fitter than the women with small boobs who weren't as handered. (Think about it, if boobs were really a good thing, why don't most mammals have them, instead of females having almost completely flat chests except when lactating) Think of it this way: there are two ways that natural selection theory works. The classic method is where a trait that helps a creature survive is desireble, and thus makes them better mates. A much more recent, but no less true, addition is that if a creature with traits that hinder survival can live to reproduce, they must have something else that ie even better for survival, and thus are even more desireable mates. Thus, men like boobs, and boobs get bigger through the generations. (If not noticeably, blame it on the slow mutation rate humans have compared to other animals, and the fact that boobs have essentially reached critical mass) This all leads down to the fact that boobs, for most men, are going to be arousing, even if they are common sight. I personally believe that women should be allowed to wear whatever they want in public, but I also believe thast there is a reason that women wear something over their breasts. Breasts need some suppor, or they end up sagging. Plus, from what I gather, it can hurt to have them moving too much, all the time.
 

mawk

Sponsor

ixis":bfr38tdh said:
It might not be a personal restraint issue, some men get erections more often or at irregular intervals (most males go through such a process during puberty actually.) Besides the point he was talking about naked females, not clothed ones.

A: He was referring to an erection caused by the sight of well-busted teen girls, not some poor teenager's fickle trouser snake.
B: Girls go to the mall completely nude? Have I been living in a convent all my life without knowing it?

Besides, I thought I addressed this earlier: whether or not women would want to go topless is besides the point. You can't deny someone rights on the basis that "oh well you guys don't want to do that anyway."

Also, unless you actually have breasts, you're not qualified to speak on how comfortable bras are.
 
Chimmy Ray":n3ckun8k said:
A: He was referring to an erection caused by the sight of well-busted teen girls, not some poor teenager's fickle trouser snake.
B: Girls go to the mall completely nude? Have I been living in a convent all my life without knowing it?

Besides, I thought I addressed this earlier: whether or not women would want to go topless is besides the point. You can't deny someone rights on the basis that "oh well you guys don't want to do that anyway."

Also, unless you actually have breasts, you're not qualified to speak on how comfortable bras are.

I think you're confused, I believe decemberfox was talking about a hypothetical situation wherein if a law was passed allowing public nudity then the arousal factor would be important. Then you said "I think you have some personal restraint issues..." and I responded by saying a person might not have personal restraint issues from such a situation, that some men can get strong erections at various moments for various reasons. Again, we're not talking about girls wandering around in the nude in real life, but a hypothetical situation where it could happen and the repercussions.

As for your second point, well, it goes both ways. Maybe I want to wear dresses on occasion. Not anything fancy but it's really freaking warm out and a nice light dress would feel right breezy. If I went out in public wearing such attire I'm sure to attract plenty of jeers as well as harassment from law enforcement officers. At the same time were I to walk around topless with my nicely shaped female breasts free to take in some air, I would get as many stares and comments as wandering around in a dress as a man, but probably in a more positive light (if you count cat calls as positive. At least they're not ready to beat you on account of being a "fairy".)

If you want to talk about the fairness of the situation you have to consider both sides. It's ignorant, but it's not as if men tell women to wear bras for fear of freak nipples decapitating folks right and left. Really it's all social pressures, and the same rules and social stigma affecting women also affect men.

And you can deny someone rights on flimsy reasoning. It shouldn't be the case, and yet it is. In fact, the world has a fun history of doing that all the damn time. And while most of the time I can understand fighting the power and going for equal rights, whether or not women should go topless is such a stupid subject. How about equal wages and feeling safe in the workplace?

As a sidenote, I'd like to think I am qualified to speak on how comfortable bras are. My exes never had penises but if I described to them the pain of accidentally pinching your dick with your pants zipper then they'd be pretty qualified to relate the story to someone else. And before the statement comes up, yes I know girls who have talked to me about the restrictions and sometimes comfort of orthopedic underwear. The fact that I talk to girls at times surprises even me!
 
/\ My friend was always going on about how uncomfortable her bra was and that if it wasn't for the looks she'd get she wouldn't wear one.

I don't mean to sound... however I sound, but I really hate phrases such as this:

How about equal wages and feeling safe in the workplace?

That's pretty much like saying: "sure shoplifting happens, but we shouldn't deal with it until lorry hijacking is dealt with as it's more serious". The points are nothing to do with one another and it is perfectly OK to deal with both, I know if I got run over and the hospital turned around and said "he's more important, he has cancer, even though you are here first" I'd be pretty pissed off.

Meh, that probably made no sense but it made sense in my mind.

If the little things aren't dealt with then the little people lose out, regardless of the bigger issues.
 

mawk

Sponsor

I think you're confused, I believe decemberfox was talking about a hypothetical situation wherein if a law was passed allowing public nudity then the arousal factor would be important. Then you said "I think you have some personal restraint issues..." and I responded by saying a person might not have personal restraint issues from such a situation, that some men can get strong erections at various moments for various reasons. Again, we're not talking about girls wandering around in the nude in real life, but a hypothetical situation where it could happen and the repercussions.
A: I'm never confused. I only seem that way because I walk like a stoner and enjoy hiding my rapier wit behind a dull persona.
B: You may be right.

As for your second point, well, it goes both ways. Maybe I want to wear dresses on occasion. Not anything fancy but it's really freaking warm out and a nice light dress would feel right breezy. If I went out in public wearing such attire I'm sure to attract plenty of jeers as well as harassment from law enforcement officers. At the same time were I to walk around topless with my nicely shaped female breasts free to take in some air, I would get as many stares and comments as wandering around in a dress as a man, but probably in a more positive light (if you count cat calls as positive. At least they're not ready to beat you on account of being a "fairy".)

If you want to talk about the fairness of the situation you have to consider both sides. It's ignorant, but it's not as if men tell women to wear bras for fear of freak nipples decapitating folks right and left. Really it's all social pressures, and the same rules and social stigma affecting women also affect men.

I don't get what you're saying here. I understand your point, that is, but I fail to see how it relates to what I've said (since me second point, marked B, was just a flippant little continuation of point A and was easily resolved by your first statement.) This is just like my "society needs to grow up before it's acceptable" spiel -- that is, if women started going topless all of a sudden, society would overreact, just as it would overreact if you wore a dress outside. In both cases, steps would need to be taken to ease society past the state of indignant shock it gets whenever it's moved a little further from its comfort zone.

And you can deny someone rights on flimsy reasoning. It shouldn't be the case, and yet it is. In fact, the world has a fun history of doing that all the damn time. And while most of the time I can understand fighting the power and going for equal rights, whether or not women should go topless is such a stupid subject. How about equal wages and feeling safe in the workplace?

"And you can beat a kid up for being gay. It shouldn't be the case, and yet it is. In fact, the world has a fun history of doing that all the damn time."

I'll get my four-by-four.

My point being, if you missed my overly melodramatic analogy, that since you just admitted it's wrong, why are you doing the same thing? That's like cheating in poker when you know it's wrong "because it happens all the time." For the purposes of the argument, let's assume the world is fair. In fact, let me rephrase things. You should not be able to deny people rights just because you assume they wouldn't use them. You should not assume that people would do just that, because I have a little more hope in humanity than that.

In addition, the world is not limited to solving one problem at a time. The private sector can introduce new standards for fair wages while the municipality discusses the issue of public nudity. Should we drop everything else and wait for peace in the middle-east before we take on any less significant issues?

As a sidenote, I'd like to think I am qualified to speak on how comfortable bras are. My exes never had penises but if I described to them the pain of accidentally pinching your dick with your pants zipper then they'd be pretty qualified to relate the story to someone else. And before the statement comes up, yes I know girls who have talked to me about the restrictions and sometimes comfort of orthopedic underwear. The fact that I talk to girls at times surprises even me!

First off, I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume that that bit near the end means you're enjoying a bit of self-bashing humour, rather than thinking "oh people on forums are all virgins, if I slip in facts about my sex life they'll respect me!" :x

They'd be able to say "well I guess it hurts a lot," since you've told them that much, but that's just hearsay -- they wouldn't actually know for a fact. And who knows, maybe for some people catching one's dick in a zipper is a pleasant and soothing experience?

I'd hate to meet those people.
 
Commander Wyatt":t9r5g2km said:
/\ My friend was always going on about how uncomfortable her bra was and that if it wasn't for the looks she'd get she wouldn't wear one.

Well my friends have talked about that, but also about how uncomfortable it is to not wear one at times, or going out running without one on. In fact I believe some other posters on this forum said such (and in this thread, but I forget where.)

And while you have a point, and my argument is pretty shit, walking around in public topless seems like such a trivial issue. A better analogy would be "sure sip stealing happens, but we shouldn't deal with it until hijacking is dealt with as it's more serious." If someone can give me a strong enough reason for why women should be topless other than "it's uncomfortable sometimes" then I'll change my mind, but until then why bother?

And to further flop around on what my position on the issue is, I'd like to suggest we change society, not the law. Then again I'm mostly against the incredibly stupid Janet Jackson style hysteria, and I do like to see nipples. But in reality it really doesn't seem like that big an issue (despite my long-ass posts, lol. But truth be told I'm mostly doing this for shits-n-giggles.)

http://www.sho.com/site/ptbs/previous_e ... =s5/breast

lol, Chimmy just made a long as response @_@

ehh, fuck.

Ok, I agree with your second point, but what I was trying to say I guess is that men face the same problems but don't seem to be bothered by it, like many women haven't really thought about the topless law, or don't care one way or the other, but that's mostly speculation on my part. You're taking a pretty positive stance on the whole issue as well as making really dramatic comparisons. The only real reason to change the law that I can think of is supposedly men use it to keep womyn down. We could solve the topless phobia the public has, but that's based around if you see it as a "problem." I don't see it as a problem, I see it as an inconvenience at times, but otherwise not a problem, just like men wearing skirts.
 
It's less about whether or not removing such laws has a benefit, more that the laws shouldn't be there in the first place.

It is illegal for the Queen of England, or the Prime Minister, to be a Roman Catholic. A pointless law, and never brings up much trouble (except for Blair who waited until leaving office before declaring Catholicism), but just because the law doesn't do anything much doesn't mean it should be left there.
 

mawk

Sponsor

Yeah, I'd enjoy it if you'd bring up an argument that didn't include "well it doesn't need to be changed" or "it's pointless to try to change things" or "people don't want to do that anyway." A futilist standpoint is usually completely useless to a discussion. :P
 
Commander Wyatt":s7dz8fhc said:
It's less about whether or not removing such laws has a benefit, more that the laws shouldn't be there in the first place.

It is illegal for the Queen of England, or the Prime Minister, to be a Roman Catholic. A pointless law, and never brings up much trouble (except for Blair who waited until leaving office before declaring Catholicism), but just because the law doesn't do anything much doesn't mean it should be left there.

True, but the defendant could claim that she was doing no wrong, and that persecution of her for being topless in a certain situation is unconstitutional. If you look, the laws are pretty damn flimsy at times. Regardless, would anyone here actually call their congressman or women to try and change the situation? Would anyone email their alderman or pass out flyers? Do anything other than sit around and talk about why the law sucks? Realistically most of you wouldn't (unless you would now to spite me.) I've seen plenty of women topless in plenty of public situations and no one really cares because it's never a sexual situation. At worst some other woman will flip the fuck out over seeing some other women's nipple while breast-feeding. They'll try suing said woman, the law will laugh at their ignorance and folks will move on with their lives.

@Chimmy: Well, I'm sorry if the reasons are unsatisfactory but they are the reasons. Sucks that they're as weak as water soaked paper, but realistically it is the case.
 

mawk

Sponsor

Uh?

You're backing up your futilism with more futilism. ·_·

I'm telling you that we are discussing the nature of public indecency. Whether or not, in a realistic situation, any action would be taken towards a resolution (and whether or not people would make use of the newfound freedom) is immaterial to the discussion. We are asking you for the forecast and you are telling us that if we move to a different city it won't matter.
 

Thank you for viewing

HBGames is a leading amateur video game development forum and Discord server open to all ability levels. Feel free to have a nosey around!

Discord

Join our growing and active Discord server to discuss all aspects of game making in a relaxed environment. Join Us

Content

  • Our Games
  • Games in Development
  • Emoji by Twemoji.
    Top