Topless Women

but thats the thing about laws, if you make something illegal, you are opresing the ones who want to do it, and letting the ones who dont tell everyone what to do, if you make it legal, then the ones who dont like it can not do it, and the ones who want to can. It should be legal so women like you who feel that their breasts are too sexual can cover them, but women who are comfortable and want to go topless, can. Basicaly my stand is always that we should have any freedome that doesnt absolutely have to be taken away.

 

more males should have the same attitude

 

Pablo is AWESOME

And for the guys that say women shouldn't go topless because guys all over would go crazy and get horny... well is the problem the women or the males? mmm yea, how bout you wear blindfolds instead of us wear tops.

Just try to think of it this way.... what if it was illegal for guys to go topless?





you can get anything you want at alice's restaurant!

 

There IS a way around it. The sexualization of breasts is due to sick societies and those who devalue motherhood, devalue children, and devalue the NEED to feed children the way Nature intended. There is PLENTY of way around it. We need to cure the sickness of perverted, womyn and child hating societies, and one of the ways to do that is to make breastfeeding a very normal, uneventful, and uncommented way of life. Doing this can help to cure these societies. Define "discreet!" A sick society's definition of what should be "discreet" for a womyn may be very different than a healthy one's. Your definition of "discreet" may be different than mine. I think "discreet" is anything you need to do to feed your baby comfortably. I have worked in Lactation for close to 2 decades and have never seen a womyn take off her shirt in order to feed a baby in public, in fact, most of the time, most people don't even know what she is doing (although that should never be the goal of nursing in public) If a little nipple shows for a millionth of a second, when the baby is latching on or popping off the breast, this is not considered "indiscreet." It is just what babies do. What that baby and mother need to do to get that baby calmed down and fed is more important than "offending" uptights who have NO clue about proper infant care.

PLEASE also define "civilized!" Are you saying people who live differently than you are somehow "uncivlised?" Civilization is not defined by being more uptight and repressed than other societies, nor more controlling. And the feeling that mothers need to hide while feeding their children is nothing more than CONTROL, REPRESSION and lack of civilization.

MOST, if not all of the time, womyn DO nurse discreeetly. I have seen people complain when NOTHING is showing, either because they have a problem with womyn in general, or a number of the anti-breastfeeding contingent, (yeah, beleive it or not, there are people like this) and feel the need to try to stop others from succeeding where they failed. These are the two types of people I see most often complaining about breastfeeding in public. You won't EVER see a womyn or a man who have a healthy childrearing experience, including sucessful breastfeeding of their children, complaining about breastfeeding in public.

 

Another approach to the situation is the naturist view, which is to say that if you want to see it that way, the body certainly has sexual parts. But that doesn't mean that those parts (and note that they aren't going to be defined to anyone's satisfaction once and for all!) are inherently indecent and need to be hidden. We each have a body, and it does nobody any harm to see any part of it. We might want to DO certain things in private, and ask other people to do the same, but it isn't very productive to argue about whether a certain body part is "sexual". It is if you believe it is, and so what?

 

Maybe you should go live in a different society then. This is the way we do it in this country.

 

That's the most fuck-tarded "responce" I've ever read. Sociatal norms aren't static! Jesus! At one point in our history, a woman showing her ankle was considered obscene, but not any more. Please, post anything but that, bug! I just fuckin hate it when someone says you shouldn't do something 'cause it goes against the status quo! What a bullshit argument!

 

If you assume that people thinking something makes it true, then you could justify anything.

 

if breasts dont have to be sexual, and our society is "sick" for thinking that, then maybe were also "sick" for finding a penis and vagina to be sexual. is that what your trying to say?

 

If that is what hes saying, a penis and a vagina are sexual because they are sex organs. A womans breast, though we enjoy it sexualy, is for feeding a baby, which should be alowed everywhere, a penis or vagina, are primarily for urination and sex, neither of which should be alowed, say, out in the middle of a mall. Also i think in public places, having those parts touch benches and things that other people (posibly also nude) use, would be unsanitary. Breasts are not unsanitary, besides that they arent an outlet for waste, they dont tend to touch comon surfaces like genitals would when people sat.
Really all thats beside the point though, the issue was equality, men can be shirtless, and so should women be alowed to. Both sexes are restricted from going bare bottomed in the same areas, so there is no inequality there.

 

Its like saying "i dont need to see people mashing up food with their teeth and salivating in it untill its a fine mash and swallowing it"

That was friggin hilarious! True, but hilarious

 

Pablo, my man! I couldn't have said it better.


Vaginas and penises are exclusively for sex and (OK penises are for elimination, too) and that is not something than can't wait until those who are engaging in it are alone and in a private place. Babies NEED to be fed where ever and when ever they are, also, unlike elimination, breastfeeding doesn't transmit germs or pathogens, so you CANNOT compare feeding a baby human milk and the elimination action. Only a very sick person would do that.

GO PABLO!!!! You are wise, my freind.

 

Perhaps Mexico would be a better fit for you, Freaky.You don't have to do anything, anywhere. But if you choose to live here, you have no justification to bitch about it either. Fucktard.

 

I THINK THAT EVERYONE SHOULD BE ABLE TO GO EVERYWHERE NAKED!

 

breats are not a sexual thing.

 

things can be changed.

EVERYTHING IS OK IN PUBLIC

 

Sexual:

1. Of, relating to, involving, or characteristic of sex, sexuality, the sexes, or the sex organs and their functions.
2. Relating to, produced by, or involving reproduction characterized by the union of male and female gametes: sexual reproduction.

Hmm...breasts aren't either of these things. Therefore, I don't believe breasts are sexual. They can be SEXY. So can the neck, legs, arms, back, hair, the way some one looks at you, etc.

 

sex·u·al ( P ) Pronunciation Key (sksh-l)
adj.

1. Of, relating to, involving, or characteristic of sex, sexuality, the sexes, or the sex organs and their functions.
2. Implying or symbolizing erotic desires or activity.
3. Relating to, produced by, or involving reproduction characterized by the union of male and female gametes: sexual reproduction.

You know, there are a lot more pressing issues out there then women going topless in public.

Interesting how you left out the REAL number 2

 

not every dictionary is the same, buddy. Breastfeeding doesn't symbol sexual desire, anyway.