Federal Court: Women can be topless in public

Post Reply New Topic

I don’t see the subtlety in anything I have written. I assume that it is blunt and disrespectful.

I repeatedly say that I am in favor of enlightened self-interest, particularly, that of my own self. I am enlightened, to the extent that I understand the precepts of libertarianism and anarchism, but never claim to be one, unconditionally.


Flesh is revealed, ever more, not respecting the spirit of modesty. I say, allow social nudity. But, allow me the same freedom, to say, that is a naked person.

No mores, so presumably unchaste. Usually unfit and ungroomed, so, presumably, unhygeinic.

It can be like the writings of early explorers.

Did they suffer an identity crisis, from the shock of it all, or did it seem too ordinary.


Glad we’re in agreement.


I get that this is not intended to be fully serious, much less dissected.

But, these are examples of acceptable, social nudity.

And, even as a permissive person, you are making note of their physical flaws.

I think, these people want you to have magical feelings about naked women. But, out of the context of patriarchy, you start to get agender people and asexual people. Nudists report that, when it is so common, they are no longer sexually aroused. So, as a way to attract attention, to a political cause, it is self defeating, when the novelty is gone.

I am supposed to be a pig, and jump on everything. What if she isn’t special to me. What is the power in it.

Go ahead, but not on the furniture.

Why are Americans so terrified of a woman's chest? Not that unusual to see a topless woman at a beach in europe, it's just the human body!

Last edited by Biscuitman on 05 May 2017, 4:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

We have a stereotype, about older, European men in speedos, speaking of nudism.

I am in the arid, American Southwest, and see different amounts of nudism, at every social function.

When it is no longer an argument, it still comes across as boorish, like a body function -- for instance, picking your nose or farting.

They are not legal offenses and don't cause a riot.

If you criticize someone like that, they talk about their freedoms to do those things.

This is subjective but how much flesh is permitted is subject to situations/conditions i.e. beach/hot day = more exposure is permitted whereas urban/cold = less exposure and more covering up

Interestingly rules applied to women don't apply to men. Men are permitted to walk around without a shirt and doesn't apply to your classification as they are not considered "naked" therefore naked appears to only apply to women which is gender bias. I suspect this is where the judge is coming from in his decision.

If enough women (of all descriptions, including plus-size, elder, etc.) ignored the criticisms that make them self-conscious or uncomfortable about being seen in public, and appeared, together in large numbers, in public as nude as legally permissible, then most likely that self-consciousness would end.

Women are sometimes too sensitive to other women's criticism. All descriptions of women should feel comfortable being seen in public as they are. No one should feel ashamed so as to have to cover themselves. Fostering that fearful ashamed attitude is inexcusable.

There are two basic designs on which people are constructed*. It's no secret how people's bodies look. No secret is being kept by covering everyone up. So then, what's the point of the cover-up laws???
-----------------------------------------------------
* I emphasize that, if there are a few physically non-binary people, I wouldn't discriminate against them by requiring them to cover up. I believe that everyone should have the same rights. Why is it so important to keep secrets about the human body? What's the big deal?

Michael829

You are absolutely right!

Simple! puritanical Christianity, the legacy could be seen in Victorian England where women wore full outfits when going to the beach. We've been prudish ever since.

Men should never wear lycra. It was only ever meant for females, not males. Taking off one's shirt isn't a good idea for most of them either, and I really wish Putin would stop doing it.

People rarely complain about body-shaming men. It doesn't make as much difference in outcomes, though, since people comment far less on men's bodies than on their professional accomplishments. In the same setting, people will make more comments about women's appearance than their work-related achievements.

When will people learn to express their opinions as opinions, rather than trying to make them facts by stating them as though they were? Your sincere feelings do not make things true in general.

Shirts are for protection from cold. That's all. There's no reason to wear one on a hot day. ...for anyone, women or men.

Humans are a tropical species. A hundred degree Fahrenheit day isn't a problem at all. ....unless we have to wear a shirt.

Above in this thread I said that women of all descriptions and builds shouldn't have to wear a shirt.

I believe in equal rights in that matter.

We have to get past this notion that not covering-up means showing-off or displaying. When I said that women shouldn't have to wear shirts, I wasn't referring only to playboy-models.

Michael829

No shirt,no shoes,no service.
I think both sexes should wear a top in most public areas,unless at a beach,park or recreation area.Then what's good for the goose is good for the gander.Sun burned nips don't sound like fun to me,but whatever.

But why? Why should people have to artificially, unnecessarily, make themselves uncomfortable by wearing a shirt on a hot day?

On a 100 degree day, would I wear a shirt when walking up a steep hill with heavy groceries? No. Would you, if you didn't have to?

As I've said, there are basically only two designs on which humans are built, and we all know what they look like. No secret is being kept by requiring people to cover up. So what's the big deal?

Michael829

Oh yes I would.And I've seen plenty of hot days around a hundred and do yard and garden work in heat and humidity.Its more uncomfortable to not have a nice 100% cotton shirt on.If you want your nipple to get ripped off by a saw briar be my guest.Also,lots of bugs here.I don't want mosquito bites on my boobs.Or a melanoma.
I prefer to to not see shirtless sweaty tops of any sex.If I want to veiw that,I'd just go to a Rainbow gathering.
I could care less about what folks wear to a public beach or pool.

I think that when society's view of women having a perfect body, female sexualization, and all the other issues related to it have dissipated, then I would say topless women would probably be common in our everyday life.

-LegoMaster2149 (Written on September 12, 2017)

Laws can only be made against actions that violate the right of another. When a person is looking at a nude person, no rights are being violated.

But people's faces, of both sexes, are often sweaty on a hot day too. So doesn't that mean that we should all have to wear a ski-mask, so that people won't have to see our sweaty faces?

If not, why not, if torsos should be covered?

And how far do you take it? Should women not wear shorts on a hot day?

Michael829