U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Old 08-26-2009, 09:31 PM
 
11,001 posts, read 6,575,759 times
Reputation: 8234
It used to be women keeping other women in check, back in the days. Now, nobody wants to do or say anything to stop the excess nudity going on thanks to rich, famous singers, like Jennifer Lopez, who flaunt everything. Now what sells is nudity and everyone wants a piece of the profits. So its only getting more and more outrageous. Yuck!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-26-2009, 09:50 PM
 
603 posts, read 733,734 times
Reputation: 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by RVlover View Post
For one or more of these reasons :

1. Because they need attention from men due to being insecure.
2. Theres the bad boy image, so, they feel they need to portray the bad gurl image to be cool., and equal.
3. They want to get the most out of life by doing rebellious things.
4. They dont care about being a bad example to young children .
5. They are bored and this is supposed to lift their spirits.
6. Its a good feeling of power and control cause it makes them feel in-charge .
7. Being in the spotlight gives them a sense of fulfillment.
8. Theyve so suppressed thier moral conscience that they no longer know (or care) what is right from wrong.
9. They are generally unhappy with life or themselves and this is hopefully going to help a little .
10. They get a momentary high from doing something wrong and outrageous and/or they like to brag about it to their friends who will hopefully given them the thumbs up.

Its an act of sexual perversion which a counsellor should be sought for before they end up getting in serious trouble .
You are responsible for your own actions. You choose how to behave. It IS about control. If I'm playing cards and the guy next to me is showing me his hand, I don't look. I look away.

It doesn't matter what women wear, some guys will just be pervs either way. I could wear a turtleneck sweater and baggy pants and still get inappropriate comments.....when I worked in the state mental institution. We had a dress code....but remarks were made either way.....not to me....but other therapists.

Certainly being completely topless is different then showing cleavage, but how you react is your responsibility....or you might get into serious trouble.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2009, 02:53 AM
 
455 posts, read 610,435 times
Reputation: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisC View Post
Well I'll tell you what: you guys just strip down and do your thing. It doesn't appeal to me at all--especially when I want to hold my food down. The solution is, you guys move to the gulf states, the rest of us move to the northern border area (say International Falls MN) where such spectacles would result in amputation, and we'll all be just fine...
We should probably ban clothed overweight people from being able to walk in public as well, or only allow it in the gulf states, right? Also, anybody with any disabilities/disfigurations should be not allowed outside either, at least without a full body suit so people can keep their food down. Also, really short people, really skinny people, people with weird piercings, bad teeth, etc.

You need to ask yourself why you are so uncomfortable with exposed skin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2009, 04:23 AM
 
252 posts, read 356,660 times
Reputation: 345
This thread reminds me of while I was vacationing in spain, watching the news, and while the weatherman was talking about what a nice day it was, they were showing pictures of topless women on the beach. This is the same spain that has catholicism as its official religion and where entire cities shut down on sunday because they're so religious.

Shows you just how obsessed americans are about seeing a boob in public. The ones throwing a fit are the real pervs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2009, 05:16 AM
 
1,996 posts, read 3,575,011 times
Reputation: 1374
Seeing a boob at the beach is different than seeing a boob while I take a stroll and window shop. I say beaches should be optional topless, but for the love of God, put a bra on and cover up. That goes for men too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2009, 05:24 AM
 
742 posts, read 641,564 times
Reputation: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maude Kipz View Post
This thread reminds me of while I was vacationing in spain, watching the news, and while the weatherman was talking about what a nice day it was, they were showing pictures of topless women on the beach. This is the same spain that has catholicism as its official religion and where entire cities shut down on sunday because they're so religious.

Shows you just how obsessed americans are about seeing a boob in public. The ones throwing a fit are the real pervs.
well aren't you just superior?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2009, 06:54 AM
 
Location: 125 Years Too Late...
6,570 posts, read 4,973,126 times
Reputation: 6099
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickmahorn View Post
We should probably ban clothed overweight people from being able to walk in public as well, or only allow it in the gulf states, right? Also, anybody with any disabilities/disfigurations should be not allowed outside either, at least without a full body suit so people can keep their food down. Also, really short people, really skinny people, people with weird piercings, bad teeth, etc.

You need to ask yourself why you are so uncomfortable with exposed skin.

Ummm, did I say anything about those sorts of folks you mention? I'm talking everybody. Seriously, most people are not impressed by folks walking about with no clothing. And before you say it is not about that... tell me what it is about then?

From a practical standpoint, unless it is so hot that you're about to have a heat stroke, there is absolutely NO good reason for not having clothing. We wear clothing to serve the purpose that fur serves for other animals. You see, evolution did not provide us with the proper protection from the elements. Evidently it didn't provide us with any brains either.

Think about it: you risk overexposure to the sun/sunburn, insects, cold/frostbite, etc. I guess you might want to ask yourself why you wish to forgo the practicality of clothing in favor of ridiculousness. There’s a damn good reason our distant relatives, the Neanderthals (or such creatures of the time), probably figured out that clothing was a good idea how long ago? About a couple of hundred thousand years ago? They are smarter than we are? Evidently.

Like I said, try going topless in North Dakota in January… you might then understand what purpose clothing serves (assuming you live through the experience).

Just for the record, this is not a religious argument for me. It's about practicality and having just a minimal amount of taste. It's the same reason I'd not really want to be subjected to all men roaming around in Richard Simmon's compression shorts and a spandex top. Give me a break.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2009, 09:40 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn
40,060 posts, read 18,449,242 times
Reputation: 10077
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandycat View Post
Seeing a boob at the beach is different than seeing a boob while I take a stroll and window shop. I say beaches should be optional topless, but for the love of God, put a bra on and cover up. That goes for men too.
It's actually not an issue until people make it one. Human beings are not biologically required to wear clothes--the absence of same happens to be the natural condition.

I, personally, don't care what anyone else is wearing (or not wearing, as the case may be). I will not interfere with them, and all I ask is the same consideration in return.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2009, 09:56 AM
 
Location: Cumberland Co., TN
10,646 posts, read 10,269,827 times
Reputation: 10541
Omaha,
Really, is this the best you can come up with?

Quote:
Why is it appropriate for a business to require a dress code? That's discrimination!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2009, 09:58 AM
 
455 posts, read 610,435 times
Reputation: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisC View Post
Ummm, did I say anything about those sorts of folks you mention? I'm talking everybody. Seriously, most people are not impressed by folks walking about with no clothing. And before you say it is not about that... tell me what it is about then?

From a practical standpoint, unless it is so hot that you're about to have a heat stroke, there is absolutely NO good reason for not having clothing. We wear clothing to serve the purpose that fur serves for other animals. You see, evolution did not provide us with the proper protection from the elements. Evidently it didn't provide us with any brains either.

Think about it: you risk overexposure to the sun/sunburn, insects, cold/frostbite, etc. I guess you might want to ask yourself why you wish to forgo the practicality of clothing in favor of ridiculousness. There’s a damn good reason our distant relatives, the Neanderthals (or such creatures of the time), probably figured out that clothing was a good idea how long ago? About a couple of hundred thousand years ago? They are smarter than we are? Evidently.

Like I said, try going topless in North Dakota in January… you might then understand what purpose clothing serves (assuming you live through the experience).

Just for the record, this is not a religious argument for me. It's about practicality and having just a minimal amount of taste. It's the same reason I'd not really want to be subjected to all men roaming around in Richard Simmon's compression shorts and a spandex top. Give me a break.

This is the point I was making where it seems evolution "evidently didn't provide us with any brains". You are trying to apply your personal subjective taste to regulate how a larger population can live their life. I was replying to the logic that since you cannot keep your food down, it should not be allowed.

The examples I provided (fat people, really skinny people, disabled, etc.) could all fall under bad taste for certain people. For instance, I do not enjoy seeing fat people. I think being fat is in bad taste. However, I would NEVER suggest that fat people shouldn't be allowed within my sight. I do not think that a personal taste should be the justification for limiting what others can do. After all, perhaps there are people out there who think traits that I possess should limit my freedoms within this life.

You talked about 'practicality' in your response, which is a good direction for your argument. You started attempting to use an objective argument, instead of primarily a subjective. However, you still sprinkled in assertions of your taste within those points. I'll ask you this: Given an environment where it's not too cold, not too hot, and not insect-infested, WHY should people be legally prevented from removing an item from the top half of their body?

Your arguments about the practicality also are only limited to the 'personal'. Sure, it may not be practical for someone to be topless in a snowstorm. However, how does that affect YOU? THEY will be cold. If they want to risk frostbite, shouldn't they have the freedom to be able to?

There is nothing inherently wrong with being topless. Everybody processes the sensory information in different ways. Your views on it are the result of social programming. I addressed you because I found your implication that your personal taste should drive policy to be illogical. I am of the ilk that thinks we should find an OBJECTIVE rationale (not based on taste) when trying to justify whether to limit a populace's freedom.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $79,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top