No regard...for the desire of women

[rainerann]

Given that, generally speaking, here in the States, a man can mow his summer lawn and drive around town shirtless, to the skin, should a woman be allowed to do the same? If not, why not? If I were to accept the premise that "covering that is required by law with legal consequences is oppression," would I not have to conclude that to require a woman to wear a top, and to arrest her for "indecent exposure" or something similar if she does not, is oppressive? For that matter, if I accept the premise, I am forced to conclude that all laws requiring any clothing are oppressive. Even though I am unconvinced, in theory more than actual practice, I am becoming a radical, nudist libertarian .

You're saying this like it is a legitimate comparison to begin with. In reality, what you have is a law requiring women to oppress their creative freedom and wear only one garment that has legal consequences for not wearing this.

You are comparing this with a debate that could be discussed as reaching a conclusion of creating a law that causes women to not be topless.

Even if I don't think something like this is necessary to do, for the sake of showing that the comparison is not the same thing. Let's say that we did make it illegal for women to be topless.

Why would we make something like this illegal? Because women being topless has a sexual effect. I mean seriously. When people are naked, because of whatever reason you want to give it, I say it is the result of the fall. Either way, the reality is that people are most often naked to bathe, go to the bathroom, or have sex. I don't think anyone has ever surveyed how many people enjoy watching TV in their living room naked, but I would imagine it is more common for people to get naked to have sex than sit in their living room's naked.

As a result, other people just don't want to see people the way the person having sex with this person does. Because people are most often naked when they are having sex and only during this time, a shyness is created because it is hard to have sex with more than one person at the same time. It is just hard to pay attention to more than one person in this way for whatever reason you want to say. I say because God created marriage in the Garden, but say whatever floats your boat. It is anatomically difficult, whatever.

So most adult people intuitively feel a connection to someone in a sexual way that makes them feel uncomfortable unless they are children who haven't had sex before. If you are a child who hasn't had sex, a naked person is probably no big deal.

If you are an adult person who has sex before, then this creates a certain degree of unconscious discomfort. The person thinks about the person they are having sex with. They think about the person the naked person is having sex with. The whole things lead to thoughts of sex subconsciously.

A woman's breasts are a sexual part of their bodies in a way that is similar to a penis and a vagina. Showing a woman's breasts is similar to showing a penis or vagina. People think of sex. A man's chest is not a sexual part of their body. This is an anatomical difference. People can try to minimize this all they want, but I buy my own bra's and undergarments and a woman's breasts are a sexual part of their body.

Men don't decorate their chests for sexual experiences the women do because it will serve no purpose. A woman can and this can contribute to a sexual experience. Just gonna be blunt about it. This is why many people would want to retain individual boundaries that allow them to not have to be exposed to another woman's sexual parts of their bodies. I don't think it should be made illegal, but I don't think someone should have the right to step on my individual rights to create boundaries and not be exposed to another person's sexual parts. Freedom is not defined as a blatant disregard of another person's individual rights.

Therefore, the comparison is just invalid to begin with. It would be more valid to compare this with skimpy clothing and I honestly don't mind skimpy clothing. I find it very uncomfortable to wear. I don't want to be forced to wear it. I would find it very irritating to have people flirting with me because of wearing skimpy clothing, but if that is what you enjoy that is someone's choice.

It is not illegal to not do this so the reality of living in a country where people choose to wear things like this would be comparable to someone having the choice to wear a veil. It would not be comparable to wearing a veil because it was required by law.

There would be osmosis between choosing to wear a veil and choosing to wear skimpy clothing that you could say created a contradiction in objecting to wearing a veil. However, it is not a contradiction to object to a law requiring a veil when there is no comparable law requiring skimpy clothing.

 

[Lisa]

Sure. I have essays to mark, have a good evening.

Enjoy your evening.

 

[Kung Fu]

You guess about a lot of things don’t you?

No, not at all. I don't say anything that isn't the truth. God bless you, Lisa.

 

[Lisa]

No, not at all. I don't say anything that isn't the truth. God bless you, Lisa.

You don’t know me, but you are guessing that my problems have to do with a lack of family....how is that truth?

 

[Kung Fu]

You're saying this like it is a legitimate comparison to begin with. In reality, what you have is a law requiring women to oppress their creative freedom and wear only one garment that has legal consequences for not wearing this.

You are comparing this with a debate that could be discussed as reaching a conclusion of creating a law that causes women to not be topless.

Even if I don't think something like this is necessary to do, for the sake of showing that the comparison is not the same thing. Let's say that we did make it illegal for women to be topless.

Why would we make something like this illegal? Because women being topless has a sexual effect. I mean seriously. When people are naked, because of whatever reason you want to give it, I say it is the result of the fall. Either way, the reality is that people are most often naked to bathe, go to the bathroom, or have sex. I don't think anyone has ever surveyed how many people enjoy watching TV in their living room naked, but I would imagine it is more common for people to get naked to have sex than sit in their living room's naked.

As a result, other people just don't want to see people the way the person having sex with this person does. Because people are most often naked when they are having sex and only during this time, a shyness is created because it is hard to have sex with more than one person at the same time. It is just hard to pay attention to more than one person in this way for whatever reason you want to say. I say because God created marriage in the Garden, but say whatever floats your boat. It is anatomically difficult, whatever.

So most adult people intuitively feel a connection to someone in a sexual way that makes them feel uncomfortable unless they are children who haven't had sex before. If you are a child who hasn't had sex, a naked person is probably no big deal.

If you are an adult person who has sex before, then this creates a certain degree of unconscious discomfort. The person thinks about the person they are having sex with. They think about the person the naked person is having sex with. The whole things lead to thoughts of sex subconsciously.

A woman's breasts are a sexual part of their bodies in a way that is similar to a penis and a vagina. Showing a woman's breasts is similar to showing a penis or vagina. People think of sex. A man's chest is not a sexual part of their body. This is an anatomical difference. People can try to minimize this all they want, but I buy my own bra's and undergarments and a woman's breasts are a sexual part of their body.

Men don't decorate their chests for sexual experiences the women do because it will serve no purpose. A woman can and this can contribute to a sexual experience. Just gonna be blunt about it. This is why many people would want to retain individual boundaries that allow them to not have to be exposed to another woman's sexual parts of their bodies. I don't think it should be made illegal, but I don't think someone should have the right to step on my individual rights to create boundaries and not be exposed to another person's sexual parts. Freedom is not defined as a blatant disregard of another person's individual rights.

Therefore, the comparison is just invalid to begin with. It would be more valid to compare this with skimpy clothing and I honestly don't mind skimpy clothing. I find it very uncomfortable to wear. I don't want to be forced to wear it. I would find it very irritating to have people flirting with me because of wearing skimpy clothing, but if that is what you enjoy that is someone's choice.

It is not illegal to not do this so the reality of living in a country where people choose to wear things like this would be comparable to someone having the choice to wear a veil. It would not be comparable to wearing a veil because it was required by law.

There would be osmosis between choosing to wear a veil and choosing to wear skimpy clothing that you could say created a contradiction in objecting to wearing a veil. However, it is not a contradiction to object to a law requiring a veil when there is no comparable law requiring skimpy clothing.

LOL. Basically you're a hypocrite. Just because you don't like the comparison doesn't mean it's invalid. You wrote such a long post only to say "but but it's not a fair comparison".

 

[rainerann]

LOL. Basically you're a hypocrite. Just because you don't like the comparison doesn't mean it's invalid. You wrote such a long post only to say "but but it's not a fair comparison".

What is the difference for you when you see naked breasts and when you see a bikini? Would you rather see a woman's naked breasts when you are having sex or would you rather see her in a bikini top the whole time? When was the last time you had sex and your wife wore a bikini top the WHOLE time?

Yah, most people don't wear the bikini tops for even half the time when they are going to have sex. There is a difference between a bikini top and being topless. A woman's breasts are a sexual part of her body.

And, in reality, I can write long articles for myself because I have enough to say on my own without quoting someone elses article.

 

[mecca]

A woman's breasts are a sexual part of her body.

They don't have to be... It's true that a lot of men sexualize women's breasts and women don't sexualize men's but it doesn't have to be that way. In certain contexts, a body part is just a body part... Women use that body part to feed their children, that's not sexual. And people should be able to see a breast in a non sexual way, like in artwork or at a beach.

 

[Lisa]

And, in reality, I can write long articles for mysel

At least you have a thought out response rather than calling someone a hypocrite and trying to act as if their response was foolish.

 

[Lisa]

They don't have to be... It's true that a lot of men sexualize women's breasts and women don't sexualize men's but it doesn't have to be that way. In certain contexts, a body part is just a body part... Women use that body part to feed their children, that's not sexual. And people should be able to see a breast in a non sexual way, like in artwork or at a beach.

Uh, huh...back to reality....

 

[mecca]

Uh, huh...back to reality....

Excuse you?

 

[justjess]

1) marijuana is not legal... lol its the same schedule as heroin.

2) in countries were bare breasts are the norm breasts arent seen as sexual.. they are just breasts. No ones uncomfortable with this except puritan westerners and even then many european countries deviate from this american norm as well. Its actually weird fpr women to not be topless on beaches in much of europe.

Im still working my way through this thread but those stuck out at me..

 

[mecca]

2) in countries were bare breasts are the norm breasts arent seen as sexual.. they are just breasts. No ones uncomfortable with this except puritan westerners and even then many european countries deviate from this american norm as well. Its avtually weird fpr womrn to not be topless on beaches in much of europe.

Exactly, that's what I was saying.

 

[justjess]

Well, women do wear the tent, and I do question whether they really want to or they have to put of fear. And if it is out of fear they wouldn’t be able to truly be honest about how they feel.

Then how do u explain american muslim converts deciding to wear the "tent"?

 

[rainerann]

1) marijuana is not legal... lol its the same schedule as heroin.

2) in countries were bare breasts are the norm breasts arent seen as sexual.. they are just breasts. No ones uncomfortable with this except puritan westerners and even then many european countries deviate from this american norm as well. Its actually weird fpr women to not be topless on beaches in much of europe.

Im still working my way through this thread but those stuck out at me..

If it were only puritan westiners who felt this way, we wouldn't be having this discussion at all. I don't know where the topless beaches are in China, Japan, India, Iran, or Saudi Arabia either.

but, I look forward to seeing what else I say in this thread that stands out for you again.

 

[justjess]

If it were only puritan westiners who felt this way, we wouldn't be having this discussion at all. I don't know where the topless beaches are in China, Japan, India, Iran, or Saudi Arabia either.

but, I look forward to seeing what else I say in this thread that stands out for you again.

Nice attitude... i see in my absence youve become friends with she who will not be named so i guess the attitude shouldnt surprise me

The world is basically split between people who see boobs=sex and people who dont. So your argument that this is the natural and correct way of things is moot anyway. Breasts dont automatically equal sexual, thats a cultural imposition.

 

[Lisa]

Then how do u explain american muslim converts deciding to wear the "tent"?

How do you want me to explain it? I don’t think any woman should have to wear such a thing for closeness to God.
It’s not the outer appearance God looks at, He looks at the heart.

 

[Lisa]

see in my absence youve become friends with she who will not be named

Who is that?

 

[floss]

All you've done is show me some kids dressing up as their mum. How is this oppressive? It's actually sweet and shows they have a strong bond.

One of the videos say 'niqab baby lol'. Surely you know what lol means...

You claimed that children wear niqab for religious purposes and you've not been able to demonstrate any evidence for this. Show me a verse which commands the covering of kids or women's faces.

Back to researching google it is.

who is dressing the kid up? did the kid buy the kid niqab and wear it to mirror their mother? that's okay, I know you're dishonest muslim practicing taqiyya. moving on.

 

[Kung Fu]

What is the difference for you when you see naked breasts and when you see a bikini? Would you rather see a woman's naked breasts when you are having sex or would you rather see her in a bikini top the whole time? When was the last time you had sex and your wife wore a bikini top the WHOLE time?

Yah, most people don't wear the bikini tops for even half the time when they are going to have sex. There is a difference between a bikini top and being topless. A woman's breasts are a sexual part of her body.

And, in reality, I can write long articles for myself because I have enough to say on my own without quoting someone elses article.

"But...but... it's not a fair comparison". Don't put out ideas that have logical ramifications when worked out that you might not like.

 

[rainerann]

Nice attitude... i see in my absence youve become friends with she who will not be named so i guess the attitude shouldnt surprise me

The world is basically split between people who see boobs=sex and people who dont. So your argument that this is the natural and correct way of things is moot anyway. Breasts dont automatically equal sexual, thats a cultural imposition.

Tell that to the marketing industry and porn industry. I don't know what your other comment has to do with anything either. I was commenting on the frequency that you seem to comment on things I have said without quoting me for saying them, which is fine. In general, I had said before a long time ago that I know you don't like most of what I believe in or say. That was already present to begin with. This is just really just the usual disagreement we have always had Jess. It has nothing to do with anyone else.

Nevertheless, the slogan "sex sell" seems to contradict what you are saying about the benign nature of showing someone's breasts.

In additions to this, individuals also have the right to create boundaries without creating the requirement to make women being topless illegal. That is what I have already explained. Individual rights remove the need to create laws for preferences like being topless or not being topless. I should also have the right to say that someone should wear a shirt in my own home, on my property, and to some degree in public places that I share with other people. Having this right removes the need to create a bunch of laws.