Boobs are Free!

[The Kilted Heathen]

Another one of their headlines reads: "NASA detects something huge coming out of Uranus." So I have my doubts.

A funny headline, but it actually was something that was noticed. A storm of some sorts caused by solar radiation, if memory serves. The story here is legit.

 

[dgirl1986]

What are the chances that US run social media will follow this? Slim? Yeah I thought so.

 

[Revoltingest]

Kinda good evidence that the judge was wrong when he ruled that there is no difference between men and women's breasts, don't you agree?
Tom

Progress must be made, even if it means tortured reasoning & fallacious facts.
A good result....but in need of a smarter judge to advance it.

And now......

 

[Skwim]

Public display of pornography is - I'm pretty sure - restricted under the law. Isn't it?

Public display? I wouldn't be surprised if it is---god forbid that anyone see people supposedly enjoying themselves. I thought you were talking about making and the private viewing of porno.

.

 

[Skwim]

What are the chances that US run social media will follow this? Slim? Yeah I thought so.

In time perhaps. In quite a long time. Gotta protect the kids from . . . . from . . . . . .well, ya know. Gotta protect the kids.

.

 

[Twilight Hue]

United States Federal Court Rules Females are Free to Display Their Breasts in Public

"This has been ruled because there is no difference when it comes to male and female breasts. This ruling is something that will anger some and empower others."

I'm sure this will anger some - as the article predicts, but I think it's great!

I'm immensely overjoyed that the girls can come out without suffering penalty or prejudice. I fully support (heh) this ruling for breast equality.

Now that women have won the day, they may continue on with the time honored tradition to quickly cover their breasts whenever men happen to walk by.

That is all.

 

[Revoltingest]

We might note that they've been partially (even mostly) exposed all along.
The only change is that a little more is permissible now.

 

[Father Heathen]

it doesn't seem to be as strict as it used to be.

i.e. arbitrary.

 

[VioletVortex]

Where does the motivation for a woman to flaunt her breasts around come from anyway?

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Self-expression? Costume? Temperature?

 

[Skwim]

Self-expression? Costume? Temperature?

Sexual turn on. Exhibitionism. Tease. Promotion (prostitution)

.

 

[Flame]

Where does the motivation for a woman to flaunt her breasts around come from anyway?

If I can walk down main street of the town I live near with no shirt on and not get in trouble and a woman can't, there is an issue here. The motivation here is equality.

 

[metis]

If any of you have ever been to some of the beaches in the Caribbean, Europe, and even Israel, bare breasts are not only common, they tend to become passe after a while-- especially when you're my age. Don't get me wrong, a beautiful woman is a sight to behold, imo, but isn't it the same with seeing a handsome man if you're a women or gay man?

Seems to me that we have much more serious things that the politicians and courts need to work on.

 

[Valjean]

I just want to point out the women's boobs are sexy, so no it is not the same thing.

But aren't they sexy mostly because they're hidden? A century ago exposed women's legs were considered shocking and controversial. Today they're not. If breast exposure became normalized, perhaps they'd cease to shock, as well.

I think standards have gotten looser over the years; it doesn't seem to be as strict as it used to be.

Standards are like hemlines, they're constantly changing. Here in the US it's stricter now than it was a decade ago, or in the '70s.

Where does the motivation for a woman to flaunt her breasts around come from anyway?

From the taboo created by restrictive laws, of course.
Are topless males "flaunting?"
Remove the restrictions and we'd soon stop thinking of toplessness as flaunting, just as we stopped thinking of exposed legs as flaunting.

 

[Brickjectivity]

But aren't they sexy mostly because they're hidden?

I'm going to disagree on the basis of an argument I heard here: Video on youtube with an evolutionary discussion about why women have large, inconvenient breasts that are a compromise between convenience, provision and sexiness.

A century ago exposed women's legs were considered shocking and controversial. Today they're not. If breast exposure became normalized, perhaps they'd cease to shock, as well.

I follow, and I am not saying that we need to outlaw exposure to breasts. What I am saying, however, is that people wear clothes for a reason, and for that reason clothing can be reasonably regulated. We wear clothes to help us all get along better, not just to protect us from the elements. So for example its not a good idea for co-ed high schools to have girls and boys go topless. They will get along better with shirts on and the boys will be more likely to think about their studies. Its easier, because boys are visually excited by breasts. Dress codes are a judgment call, but they are not unreasonable.

 

[fantome profane]

I'm going to disagree on the basis of an argument I heard here: Video on youtube with an evolutionary discussion about why women have large, inconvenient breasts that are a compromise between convenience, provision and sexiness.

I follow, and I am not saying that we need to outlaw exposure to breasts. What I am saying, however, is that people wear clothes for a reason, and for that reason clothing can be reasonably regulated. We wear clothes to help us all get along better, not just to protect us from the elements. So for example its not a good idea for co-ed high schools to have girls and boys go topless. They will get along better with shirts on and the boys will be more likely to think about their studies. Its easier, because boys are visually excited by breasts. Dress codes are a judgment call, but they are not unreasonable.

I have no problem with this, but you can make the dress code apply to both genders equally. There are certainly places and times that men should not be allowed to go around topless either. So if you want to zone an area where shirts are mandatory, fine. But it should apply equally.

 

[Akivah]

I hope this is sarcasm.

Nope. A court that tells same sex people that they can be married obviously has no trouble telling women to parade around showing their breasts in public. I'm sure that animal rights activists will soon be told that they can marry animals by this travesty of a court.

 

[Akivah]

And remember, it was a stupid COURT that said it was okay for a black man to marry a white woman (Loving v Virginia). Just shows ya, eh?

False equivalence.

A man of any color can procreate with a woman of any color.

 

[Akivah]

Where does the motivation for a woman to flaunt her breasts around come from anyway?

I comes from a twisted belief that men and women are the same, and everything that one sex does, the other one should do. I suspect the court will next rule that men are forbidden to pee standing up, since it causes inequality with women.

 

[columbus]

False equivalence.

A man of any color can procreate with a woman of any color.

That's the false equivalency.
People get married with no intention or ability to procreate. People procreate with no intention of getting married.

Reducing Marriage to "socially sanctioned breeding pair" is demeaning to the institution and participants both.
Tom