|
| Thread: Topless Women & the 1st Amendment |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · «PREV |
|
Nidhgrin
Honorable
Famous Hero
baking cookies from stardust
|
posted March 13, 2005 12:31 PM |
bonus applied. |
|
Heya Peacemaker! Nice to see you too 
Quote:
Socio-Cultural Context
However, there are also a large number of websites which speak to the issue of cultural relativism concerning breasts, and the apparently arbitrary occasional sexual/social taboos against their exposure, with the United States at the top of the taboo list. One can say that technically, breasts may not be sexual organs, but culturally, just tell any American man breasts are not a highly integral point of interest in their sexual attraction to a woman, and most men will laugh you off the stage.
So to expand on your argument, Niddy, the intensely sexual cultural role that breasts play here pretty much makes them sexual organs for socio-cultural purposes. Thus the distraction level, or the effect, that bearing them would have on men might be very similar to the effect that men walking around with their sexual organs exposed would have on women. (I know you're not American but your argument surely applies in this culture as well as yours, perhaps more).
The Mystification of the Boob
Ironically, some of these same sites suggest that the reason this taboo exists is the mystification of the boob. This mystification only exists because nearly the entire populace is prevented from seeing breasts in their natural, non-sexual role, (such as simply bearing them in a nonsexual setting socially or breastfeeding). So the taboo is self-perpetuating.
I couldn't agree with you more. Like in the US, though probably a little bit less (going topless on beaches is more or less ok here), breasts play an intensely sexual cultural role here too. Undoubtably the mystification of the boob and the taboo surrounding bare breasts are two sides of the same story. Making bare breasts socially more acceptible will at the same time diminish the sexual connotation or role they play.
When taking a look at the 'natural state of the boob', I'd say in warmer (spare arid) environments bare breasts would be quite natural, where in cooler environments for practical reasons it would only be natural in the context of breastfeeding - which again for practical reasons would in winter times probably be done under shelter somewhere. If you look at the world today you can still see traces of those acceptance patterns when you take the climate zones into account.
Svarog,
>> slightly off topic
Saying that thinking is always free is a very dangerous assumption imo. You are conditioned to believe that the background colors behind posts on HC are white and grey, and at school they've undoubtably taught you that one added to one makes two. If you'd smoke and wouldn't have had a cigarette for a while you will get nervous and it will start to affect your thinking till you lit that cigarette. If there are commercials for pepsi in between a movie, and after that film you have a pepsi in a nearby cafe, your thinking is not free. If a bare breasted girl walks towards you by the side of the road, your thinking will not be free. I could go on for hours about this as I'm writing a study about it right now, but it's not the discussion here and belongs in a new thread if it needs be discussed. Your thinking will never be free, and realizing that is a first big step towards relativating your own thinking processes and being careful about conclusions you would draw out of situations when comparing those with others.
So yes, because of my cultural background, bare breasts out of their usual context are sexually arousing (or in their usual context for that matter ) I'm not saying I wouldn't like it, I'm saying bare breasts in public would limit my freedom of thought to a serious extent.
<< back on topic
Carefully choosing my words here so I don't come accross the wrong way. Being allowed to walk around with bare breasts will not fix any injustice or unfairness between men and women. Equal rights for men and women and a greater self-awareness might lead to a context where bare breasts would gradually become acceptable to the majority of people. An example to clarify, one oddly enough no one has used so far. In strictly islamic countries women (have to) wear the burkha, covering all but a small part of their face for the outside world. Unless the sharia has been implemented recently, in countries where this has been common for centuries, most women don't perceive this as a threat to their personal freedom. Yet in these countries women rights mean nothing at all and one could even put that women have the same, or in some cases an even lower status as animals. As one of the symbols of that injustice, not wearing the burkha very slowly becomes acceptible in countries where women rights are improving. This is a consequence of an evolution and it costs time. If the burkha were abolished for instance by the authorities, and would have to disappear from one day to the next, the majority of people (including women) would never accept it.
With bare breasts the situation is similar. A glass ceiling preventing women to climb up to the highest positions in firms, women performing the same tasks as men often have lower paychecks, there's a lot of domestic violence (5 times more women than men perish in 'accidents' with handguns in the US), ... There's still much work to be done, for women are all but equal to men in western countries. I'd say work away those causes of injustice, and the general climate will become more women friendly and who knows bare breasts will be socially acceptible in 10 or 15 years, without a fight.
But enough boobtalk for now
|
|
Peacemaker
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Peacemaker = double entendre
|
|
posted March 13, 2005 05:23 PM |
|
|
Svarog and Niddy --
I have much to add to your posts but my hubby must work on the computer today.
So I will post an engaged reply soon as I get the chance -- but for now couldn't resist this one little comment:
Quote:
An example to clarify, one oddly enough no one has used so far. In strictly islamic countries women (have to) wear the burkha, covering all but a small part of their face for the outside world. Unless the sharia has been implemented recently, in countries where this has been common for centuries, most women don't perceive this as a threat to their personal freedom.
This is because most women in these cultural circumstances have no concept of having any rights to perseonal freedom to begin with. I think this may have been what you were saying Nidhgrin based on your next sentence. But more later!
____________
I have menopause and a handgun. Any questions?
|
|
Shiva
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted March 14, 2005 01:53 AM |
|
|
If you say woman are being battered, I'm with you
If you say woman should have equal jobs with equal
pay, I'm with you. If you say anything reasonable about social inequaties concerning women that need to be addressed, I'm with you. If you say woman should walk around with bare breasts, I'm not so sure, despite my off color statement of before.
This is a non issue in the forum of womans rights. Anybody pushing this is likely to marginalize the whole feminist movement, because so many people just don't or wont get it.
I just saw an episode on 60 minutes about the Dutch lady
involved in this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3974179.stm
This is a fight worth going for, this is an issue that
needs support. The right to bare breasts has absolutely
no moral stature to it, no matter what you say. I say that because even if you are "enlightened" enough to walk around like this, you are forgetting there are so many men who can't handle it. Don't say that's their problem, it becomes your problem when they come after you.
So put your juice behind those issues where woman are
getting hurt, instead of trying to create something out
of nothing.
____________
|
|
Svarog
Honorable
Supreme Hero
statue-loving necrophiliac
|
|
posted March 15, 2005 02:50 AM |
|
Edited By: Svarog on 14 Mar 2005
|
Quote:
Saying that thinking is always free is a very dangerous assumption imo.
You’re right. Bad wording there. What I meant was that while the thought itself is dependant on perception, it mustnt have anything to do with legal actions. No one has ever made thinking about anything punishable. In the same way, by saying that naked women limit males freedom of thought, you’re putting this thoughts in a legal context.
If we recognized the mind as an area for law and freedom enforcement, then, as you say, since thoughts are dependant on everything, we’d enter a swirling legal maze, where much of what we percept would be guilty of “bad thoughts”, and the only way to protect ourselves would be complete isolation.
On the other hand, I do believe that objects and material which encourage fascist thinking should be banned, because they potentially lead to fascist actions. But while I do think problems might arise from fascist thinking, I don’t think problems might arise if one thinks about sex.
Quote:
If the burkha were abolished for instance by the authorities, and would have to disappear from one day to the next, the majority of people (including women) would never accept it.
The case with naked boobs is different. Surely, you wont see every woman the next day walking on the streets without bra (as with muslim women walking without burkha). There will be slow and gradual attempts to push boobs in the public sphere, and only then after 10 or 15 years, as you say, womens breasts would become equally acceptable as male ones (even though i think it would take much longer). By making not covering tits illegal, you’re limiting the freedom of those women who want to do it. Very similar to the way Islamic countries implement the law of obligatory face covering (there too, men would be “thought distracted” by seeing female face, and women mainly agree with the practice). (see khaelo’s link for more detail on the ethical discussion behind this)
____________
The meek shall inherit the earth, but NOT its mineral rights.
|
|
Jebus
Promising
Supreme Hero
TheJester akaJeebs akaJebfoo
|
|
posted March 17, 2005 09:48 PM |
|
|
Personnally I've always found this type of protest to be based on a childish arument:
"If he can do it, how come I can't!"
With all the skimpy tops women are ALLOUD to wear, is it really necessary to expose it all? you can't tell me that it's ever that hot!!
Having said that, I'm not against women going topless. I'm just affraid that the same women who are fighting for that right will be the first women to charge someone for sexual harrassment for having glanced at her boobs!!
I aggree with those of you who have said that there are allot more important issues than this one.
(oh and i like boobies)
____________
"You went over my helmet??"
|
|
Khaelo
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Underwater
|
|
posted March 17, 2005 10:56 PM |
|
Edited By: Khaelo on 17 Mar 2005
|
Quote:
Personnally I've always found this type of protest to be based on a childish arument:
"If he can do it, how come I can't!"
This kind of argument is only childish when the obvious answer is, "Because he's older than you are!" That's not the case here -- men and women are supposedly equal. There's no logical reason to forbid it.
Quote:
With all the skimpy tops women are ALLOUD to wear, is it really necessary to expose it all? you can't tell me that it's ever that hot!!
Well, why don't men just wear skimpy tops instead of taking it all off? Oh yeah, straps and bindings are uncomfortable.
Don't get me started on the "men can't handle the sight of naked breasts" argument. I realize that it's meant sincerely and innocently here, but it has unfortunate relations with more insiduous lines of reasoning, as has been pointed out re: burkhas. Furthermore, and more importantly IMHO, no one asked whether women were able to handle the sight of men's bare chests.
No, the nudity laws aren't a major problem unto themselves. They are symptoms of a major problem. Why are people are concerned with how the sight of women affects men, but not how the sight of men affects women? Why is physical beauty weighted more for girls rather than for boys? Why are extraneous areas of women's bodies sexualized, and not men's? It's a control thing. It's a power thing. It's a status thing. And the whole system's got to come crashing down if we're going to have true equality.
Yes, it has to be a gradual change. If things go too fast, it will backfire. But how better to demystify the boob than to uncover it!  Things aren't nearly so scary once they've become familiar. As for these workplace scenarios, unless your workplace allows men to wander about topless, I see no reason why women would be showing up without shirts either. The goal here is equality, not a new double standard. If the rule is "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service," that goes for everyone. If coming into work shirtless is unprofessional, that goes for everyone. The situations we're looking at here are actually quite casual: beaches, parks, lawn-mowing, bicycling, jogging...(where else do men go shirtless?)
Edit: tweaks.
____________
 Cleverly
disguised as a responsible adult
|
|
Jebus
Promising
Supreme Hero
TheJester akaJeebs akaJebfoo
|
|
posted March 17, 2005 11:13 PM |
|
Edited By: Jebus on 17 Mar 2005
|
Quote:
Quote:
Personnally I've always found this type of protest to be based on a childish arument:
"If he can do it, how come I can't!"
This kind of argument is only childish when the obvious answer is, "Because he's older than you are!" That's not the case here -- men and women are supposedly equal. There's no logical reason to forbid it.
I completely agree and I'll be the first to get annoyed when a guy is walking down the street bare chested just for the sake of "beeing cool"! Personally if you're at the beach, in a park (or anything recreational) beeing bare chest can be appropriate but otherwise, men and women a like should cover up!
(sorry cutting it short.. done work)
____________
"You went over my helmet??"
|
|
Shiva
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted March 19, 2005 03:24 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Don't get me started on the "men can't handle the sight of naked breasts" argument. I realize that it's meant sincerely and innocently here, but it has unfortunate relations with more insiduous lines of reasoning, as has been pointed out re: burkhas. Furthermore, and more importantly IMHO, no one asked whether women were able to handle the sight of men's bare chests.
Face, it men are a victim of their sexuality, just as woman are. That means its kind of silly to expect eveyone to be absolutely in control of their response in every situation. If you wish to "innocently" provoke people thats up to you. And if you find mens chests provocative, by all means, ask them to cover up. However, a mans chest does not have the significance in our culture that a womans breast does. Granted, that is a cultural thing and can be changed, but if you wish to bring in other cultures (ie the burkha) how about the Afican tribal culture? Woman have walked there bare-breasted for ages, and that has not stopped polygamy and ownership of woman from being rampant.
Why do I bring this up? Because I still think that bare
breasts have nothing to do with womans liberation. It is
wrong to think that every woman who covers herself up
is unliberated. Many ladies are quite happy living with
ancient traditions that they are satisfied with. Modern
does not always mean better, it just means sociey is
looking for something else, but that something else has
yet to be established. Modern science may wreck the world
we are not sure yet, but the ecology is taking a beating.
Modern morality may wreck the world, or it may not. Some
care needs to be taken before we rush whole heartedly
into every new thing just because its new and against
the status quo.
An example from my own life is: I grew up in the free
love era. Free love broke more hearts then it helped.
Very few people are capable of living without jealousy
and attachment, which is what it takes to have that kind
of way of life work. SO in the end, its better to
recognize limitations, meaning the boundaries of
relationship rather than expect that we can cross
the line without any consequences.
Its also true our views change as we grow. I don't think
the same way I did 20 years ago. Experience is the
greatest teacher of all, and that takes time. Tradition
is a body of other peoples experience that is passed from
generation to generation. Perhaps it suits us or not.
Still, I don't believe it can all be swept away as being
useless.
____________
|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
posted March 19, 2005 04:55 PM |
|
|
Shiva Speaks Volumes
Quote:
Women have walked bare-breasted for ages and that has not stopped ownership of women from being rampant.
I wish I could post more but I can't so I'll simply mirror this incredible statement made by Shiva. Here is a woman with an enormous amount of good judgment.....in my opinion.
____________
Roses Are Red And So Am I
|
|
Shiva
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted March 19, 2005 05:03 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I wish I could post more but I can't so I'll simply mirror this incredible statement made by Shiva. Here is a woman with an enormous amount of good judgment.....in my opinion.
Thanks but I'm a man...
____________
|
|
Aculias
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Pretty Boy Angel Sacraficer
|
|
posted March 19, 2005 06:33 PM |
|
|
Maybe COnsis wants to see you topless
____________
Dreaming of a Better World
|
|
Shiva
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted March 19, 2005 10:06 PM |
|
|
I'm sure he would be really...
disappointed
____________
|
|
Khaelo
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Underwater
|
|
posted March 20, 2005 12:08 AM |
|
|
My points seem to have gotten lost in transmission.  I called the nudity laws a "symptom." The disease is sexism. Allow me to clarify that metaphor:
I did not mean to suggest that fixing the symptom will fix the disease. Allowing women to go without tops will not stop men from objectifying women. However, the fact that women cannot go without tops is reflective of how men do objectify women. The female breast is needlessly sexualized, unlike male secondary sexual characteristics. (See Peacemaker's links.) Desexualizing the female breast is akin to taking painkillers for cancer. They eases an immediate problem; they don't address the cause. That doesn't make painkillers worthless. They're part of a larger treatment.
I also did not mean to suggest that the disease manifests the same symptoms in all patients. The reference to burkhas was to highlight the similarity between our symptom of misogyny -- the argument in question -- and the same symptom manifested more obviously in another culture. Bringing in a culture that doesn't show this symptom at all doesn't speak to my point.
I already conceeded the point of gradual change. Control over emotions, including sex, is sketchy at best. People have to get used to these things. Topless beaches are a good start.
Quote:
It is wrong to think that every woman who covers herself up is unliberated.
Agreed. Allowing the option of being uncovered doesn't negate the option of covering. The point is having both options in the first place. This has been a problem in Muslim cultures with regard to veiling, unfortunately.
Finally, modernity. Did somebody say modern was better? My goal is equality. If tradition doesn't collide with equality, there's no problem. I don't object to sexism (including nudity law) because it's old. I object because it's unfair.
In other words, the 15-20 year timeframe for getting female breasts out of hiding sounds reasonable and worthwhile. Is it just me, or is there a lot more agreement in this thread than the debate would indicate?
____________
Cleverly
disguised as a responsible adult
|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
posted March 20, 2005 12:24 AM |
|
Edited By: Consis on 19 Mar 2005
|
Uh.....
Shiva....considering your profile says nothing.....I will not apologize. I took it upon myself to guess at your sex. I won't be the first or the last as long as members such as yourself keep basic information in your profile blank.
bort knows this well. He is the enigma poster and I have guessed more times than I can remember. And I've been wrong every single time right bort? I am horrible at guessing.
Let this be a lesson to anyone who has not at least filled out the basics in their profiles. If you don't want people to make mistakes about who you are(i.e. clueless guessing) then I suggest you spend the time to at the very least fill out the basics. Five minutes is all it takes to complete your own profiles.
Have a nice day 
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I
|
|
Shiva
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted March 21, 2005 02:03 PM |
|
Edited By: Shiva on 21 Mar 2005
|
Quote:
I also did not mean to suggest that the disease manifests the same symptoms in all patients. The reference to burkhas was to highlight the similarity between our symptom of misogyny -- the argument in question -- and the same symptom manifested more obviously in another culture. Bringing in a culture that doesn't show this symptom at all doesn't speak to my point.
I hope I'm allowed to bring in other points than what you
mention. Thats the nature of debate. My argument is
that bare breasts are a minor point, maybe a trivial
one in terms of womans equality. Addressing the problem
is correctly done through education, but focusing on
trivial matters that may alienate many people is not
the way. I believe, and I talked to a few woman I know,
that this issue is one championed by those from the
fringe of the womans movement. It will not help your
cause. Whereas, the muslim lady who led prayers in New
York did more than all the bare breasted woman will ever
do.
Quote:
Finally, modernity. Did somebody say modern was better? My goal is equality. If tradition doesn't collide with equality, there's no problem. I don't object to sexism (including nudity law) because it's old. I object because it's unfair.
Its just a question of what kind of social change will
produce the desired effect. Equality is an interesting
thing. It doesn't mean we are all the same. We are not.
Yet we have similar characteristics. Discrimination based
on religion, creed and sex are despicable, but how about
discrimination based on intelligence, ability and
financial capability? They are much more subtle things
and although we like to think that all have an even chance in life, we don't. Equality, in fact, does not
really exist, yet in the present day, the many, at least
in Western society, have access to things that were never
dreamed of before.
And although I decry sexism, either male to female, or
female to male(lets not forget that either), I have to
admit that woman and men are not the same, either
body-wise or in their emotional-psychological makeup.
There always is a possibility to break out of
stereotypes, but I don't believe playing with the symptoms will do that. Such an evolution takes changing
the whole paradigm of the way we think, so that we don't
believe we are just these limiting bodies or minds. Thats
why I became interested in spiritual things, but that
truly is another story.
To close, I believe in peoples liberation, not mens or
womans lib, clothed or unclothed
PS. Consis, I'm not offended and there was no need
to even consider an apology. I just wondered why you
assumed I was female, aside from the fact that in
Heroes, Shiva is a female. The guys who wrote this
game have their mythology wrong, Shiva is the Hindu
god of destruction. Of course, if I truly believed
what I wrote to Khaelo, I would accept that I am woman
....
____________
|
|
2XtremeTotake
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 21, 2005 03:21 PM |
|
|
Topless women in public
Sounds good.
____________
I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met.
|
|
Khaelo
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Underwater
|
|
posted March 22, 2005 05:42 PM |
|
Edited By: Khaelo on 22 Mar 2005
|
Quote:
My argument is that bare breasts are a minor point, maybe a trivial one in terms of womans equality.
"Minor" I agree with, "trivial" I don't, and I'm content to leave it at that. (leaving debate, want closure  )
Equality: agree with all this.
Men/Women: I'm not going this round on HC again. Suffice to say, I think the biological differences are simply insufficient to support the structures that society builds around them. Humans are humans are humans. [Edit: Just my position, not something I want to debate; not trying to drop bomb here and run. I suspect this is another "agreed."]
Quote:
To close, I believe in peoples liberation, not mens or womans lib
Agreed again.
____________
Cleverly
disguised as a responsible adult
|
|
Shiva
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted March 22, 2005 06:07 PM |
|
|
Thanks for sharing your views, Khaelo. I think we do agree
on most things. Best not to get lost in other stuff. By
the way, why are you sad today?
____________
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted March 23, 2005 07:20 AM |
|
|
I think that it is understandably weird for some people, mainly because for the longest time it has been taboo due to the fact that women have breasts and hopefully men don't.
I think it makes perfect sense. When you think about it, to say such a thing is pretty dated. I mean the only thing that could be detrimental about this would be having saggy old fat women walking around while you're trying to enjoy a nice meal, which I guess would be quite off-putting. But then again, topless women would be not allowed in restaurants and places like that, just as men aren't. It's called a dress-code, and it has nothing to do with the Constitution.
But where it is allowed, it's just as bad to see obese, sweaty men walking around topless as it could be with any woman. And as I said before, the fat men would probably have man-boobs 
So I see the reasoning behind both arguments, and I don't see why women shouldn't be able to walk around topless.
____________
John says to live above hell.
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
posted March 31, 2005 07:43 PM |
|
|
Speaking of showing nipples....
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
| |
|
|
