Poll: Do you think that women being topless in public should be allowed and accepted?

[Snowalker]

It's really not the same thing. That would be (kinda) like if guys didn't have to wear pants in public.

A good motto is: If it can swing, cover it up!

Edit: Of course my 2000th post would have be something like this... xD

No offense, but going on that, I here by degree, women do not have to wear pants or any lower halves any time it is acceptable for a man to take off his shirt

 

[QuickDEMOL1SHER]

I am going to say no.
I don't want to walk around with a boner all the time.

 

[FROGGEman2]

No, if only to even out the horrible taboo against male genitalia.

Not in public, i think. Same goes for manly men dripping with testosterone, actually. And you know why? Because it's distractive. If everyone will be staring at everyone else, we won't really get anywhere.

You remind me of Terry Prachett.

I like you.

[sub]Of course, I liked you before now, I mean, I've known you for ages, but this is special.[/sub]

seen them naked over 9000 times

IT'S OVER 9000!!!

[sub]Sorry. I'm just trying to casually point out how extreme your number is.[/sub]

 

[sneakypenguin]

My opinion: Breasts etc are only sexual because we are used to thinking them as such, which is why they are covered up. If they weren't they would simply become another feature, like the nose or legs (both of which can be equally attractive). A feature unique to women, true, but I've never seen a guy with legs like a woman either.

I've seen this a few times and just picked you at random to quote but I'm not quite sure I understand this view so much. Breast are one of those things that are "always" (for most) men a sexual thing, even if you've been with your wife/girlfriend for 15 years and seen them naked over 9000 times i'm sure you still find them/view them as sexual objects even though you know them inside and out. Some guys are leg guys/abs/face types (something that you see everyday in public) but its still sexual, so I don't think that breast would simply become another feature even if we as men saw them everyday.

 

[InvisibleMilk]

Show them to me... Show thhheeeemmmm to meeee!

 

[Ishnuvalok]

I just remembered this commercial.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fp9EXg0J6jw

 

[Sibbo]

Absolutely no way. Totally unacceptable, I'd walk around with a constant boner... ouch...

Wow your right blokes would have blue balls..... painful

 

[Noone From Nowhere]

I am going to say no.
I don't want to walk around with a boner all the time.

Try looking at the same nude scene in a movie (or game) everyday...all day. There's a reason why people throw out their porn magazines and videos(where people can stumble over them...literally.). That's without having 'ruined' them, either.

 

[Booze Zombie]

Well, if a bloke can do it, so can women...

I won't pretend I'm not looking, though.
That's probably why not many women do it, actually.

 

[QuickDEMOL1SHER]

I am going to say no.
I don't want to walk around with a boner all the time.

Try looking at the same nude scene in a movie (or game) everyday...all day. There's a reason why people throw out their porn magazines and videos(where people can stumble over them...literally.). That's without having 'ruined' them, either.

Good point. And you know what? Thats even more terrifying!

 

[The Warden]

You know, I wonder what it'd be like in this world if clothes weren't worn at all unless it was cold or raining...
It'd be disturbing to see all the fat people though, and erections would be in plain sight.
Like, kids in their teens would go to school, and all day have boners because of all the girls.
You know, it wouldn't be worth it.

 

[VanQ]

Do you REALLY want it to be OK for grandma to take her top and bra off at the pool?

Yeah I didn't think so.

 

[Dahni]

*snip*
If its made legal for women to be topless then naturally laws regarding people looking at them would be overturned.

perhaps, but then there's a lot of controversy that'd surround that. they'd be over-turned but that'd leave girls aged 16 more vulnerable to older men who are essentially pedophiles because those girls would be barely legal. It's considered extremely creepy for a significantly older guy to, say, look at a 16 year old's cleavage when she's wearing a low cut top. It'd only be made worse for girls who chose to go topless because now these men would be able to see what they were imagining. A woman's breasts are considered a sexual thing, so it's likely to turn on a fair few men if a good looking woman is wandering around topless.

It would distract guys FAR TOO MUCH. If I was in a park or somewhere like that with a guy I was dating, I don't want his attention to be split between the various women bounding around with their tits out & none of it directed towards me unless i punch him in the gut and put a pair of blinders on him.

See, this goes both ways, it's no fun to be at the beach/pool with your girlfriend when she's ogling the topless guys the whole time.

Indeed it does, however, girls aren't quite as mesmerized by it as men seem to be. I can quite easily be in a public place, see a guy with his top off and think "oh, he's quite nice" while still keeping most of my attention on the ongoing conversation. Guys are more noticeably distracted so it's more obvious when you've lost their attention. That's not to say all guys would be significantly distracted, but the vast majority would be.

+ guys seem to be more likely to vocalise it. If I was with my imaginary boyfriend, I won't point out that a guy is hot because that'd shoot his fragile ego down. Whereas, if he noticed a hot girl, if my past boyfriends are anything to go by, he'd either show physical signs that his attention has wandered or he'd struggle to contain himself and feel the need to tell me the girl he just saw was hot.

 

[OmegaXIII]

Beaches and pools generally noone bats an eyelid in my experience but parks i'm not so sure. I can definitely see your reasoning behind this but i dunno, the whole reason it is acceptable for men is because there is nothing of sexual note to the chest, whereas with women obviously there is.

A man's chest exerts pheromones, but besides that, that's immediately where women look is it not? Having perfectly sized, round breasts has the same effect as having massive, ripped pecs.

I've honestly been wondering myself why men can be bare-chested and women can't. There's not a whole lot of difference there.

Can't argue there. Perhaps it's just become such an accepted social norm that questioning it sounds really odd. That's the only explanation i can think of

 

[Binerexis]

Sudden over exposure to it would get rid of the sexual connection related to breasts. As soon as you see something all the time, it becomes that little bit less interesting. If women want to walk around topless, that's grand, there's no reason why anyone should be scared or offended about a part of the human anatomy.

I would link to goatse, but I think that might get me banned. I mean, the rectum is a part of the human anatomy too.

I can see your point with that but then I could argue that the extreme stretching of the rectum can be considered a fetish and/or that the rectum could be considered a directly sexual part of the anatomy (at least in the context of goatse).

 

[DuplicateValue]

I believe the Olympic games should be done nude.

Like old times, you mean?

 

[D-Cypher]

As much as a large part of me (well, statistically average part) wants to say "heck yes", realistically and honestly I feel it'd be inappropriate for anyone to be nude/topless in a public place. While i'm completely comfortable with the naked human form there are plenty of people who aren't and it'd be unfair to them.


Plus lets face it, if there were bewbs out all the damn time it'd kinda take the magic away from them.