Should women be allowed to be topless in public? Watch

Juichiro
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#81
Report 3 years ago
#81
(Original post by ivybridge)
They are a sexualised, private, area of a woman's body, like the sex organs of a male and a female and the backside.

Edit: I doubt very many women would take advantage of that freedom anyway.
And so is a (built) male's torso.
0
reply
ivybridge
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#82
Report 3 years ago
#82
(Original post by Juichiro)
And so is a (built) male's torso.
It is not an objective private area. The vagina, backside, penis and female breasts are.
0
reply
Juichiro
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#83
Report 3 years ago
#83
(Original post by ivybridge)
Yes, there is. Correct. And a very big difference between the face and breasts. Grow up and stop being petty.
Whether big or not is subjective.
Plus, you haven't said why that "big" difference means that people should merit different treatment.
0
reply
Juichiro
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#84
Report 3 years ago
#84
(Original post by ivybridge)
It is not an objective private area. The vagina, backside, penis and female breasts are.
What is private or not is subjective. There is no such thing as "objective private" area.
1
reply
Illiberal Liberal
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#85
Report 3 years ago
#85
(Original post by ivybridge)
It is not an objective private area. The vagina, backside, penis and female breasts are.
You only think that because that's what the society you have been brought up in has taught you.

Thus they are not "objective[ly]" 'private' areas.
0
reply
Macy1998
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#86
Report 3 years ago
#86
No. Men's nipples do not flap all over the place. If you want to go topless do it in the comfort of your home. In your home you are free to walk naked or topless.

And how is this going to benefit society? "Oh great! Free boobs for everyone! Who needs the internet when you have topless girls doing it for free?" Any girls interested in doing this do not feel violated when your jugs are on a man's camera or phone and used inappropriately.

I mean come on.
1
reply
ivybridge
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#87
Report 3 years ago
#87
(Original post by Juichiro)
Whether big or not is subjective.
Plus, you haven't said why that "big" difference means that people should merit different treatment.
Yes, and this was asking for my opinion - I gave it.

You have not said why they shouldn't. They should because it's common decency. Nobody needs to see people's private areas and there's a reason it is not permitted in public. It causes a lot of people to feel very uncomfortable.
0
reply
anonwinner
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#88
Report 3 years ago
#88
Only attractive women with nice breasts should be allowed to go topless, in my personal opinion of course...
0
reply
ivybridge
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#89
Report 3 years ago
#89
(Original post by Illiberal Liberal)
You only think that because that's what the society you have been brought up in has taught you.

Thus they are not "objective[ly]" 'private' areas.
Objectivity is a quality things have when they are fact. This is a fact about the considerations of the majority of today's society on this issue at large. Therefore, it certainly can be seen as objective.

Society tells you a lot of things you adhere to just because society said so. Don't pull that card.
0
reply
ivybridge
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#90
Report 3 years ago
#90
(Original post by Juichiro)
What is private or not is subjective. There is no such thing as "objective private" area.
In your opinion.
0
reply
PAStudent1996
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#91
Report 3 years ago
#91
I'd say no on the basis that it would just be odd, there'd be some big issue about 'men being more likely to rape women' or something.
Spoiler:
Show
inb4 feminists
0
reply
anonwinner
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#92
Report 3 years ago
#92
Why are so many feminists unattractive? Kind of disgusting tbh xD
0
reply
Juichiro
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#93
Report 3 years ago
#93
(Original post by ivybridge)
Yes, and this was asking for my opinion - I gave it.

1.You have not said why they shouldn't. 2.They should because it's common decency. 3.Nobody needs to see people's private areas and 4.there's a reason it is not permitted in public. It causes a lot of people to feel very uncomfortable.
1. Your assumption is false. I never said they shouldn't.
2. I think you are phrasing it wrong. The topic question is whether they should be allowed. You are saying that they shouldn't.
3. What's private or isn't is subjective. Some people think that visual displays of gay men should be private. Some people (like you) don't. Some people think that women's upper body area should be private. Some people don't. So strange to see you in different groups depending on whether it suits you.
4. That reason is the same why some people think that visual displays of gay men should be private. There was a thread about it few months ago in TSR. Some people are very uncomfortable with pictures like yours but you don't see the admins banning you. Not so long ago, you might have been banned. For exactly the same reason you give against women being topless. That's called double standard.
0
reply
ivybridge
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#94
Report 3 years ago
#94
(Original post by Juichiro)
1. Your assumption is false. I never said they shouldn't.
2. I think you are phrasing it wrong. The topic question is whether they should be allowed. You are saying that they shouldn't.
3. What's private or isn't is subjective. Some people think that visual displays of gay men should be private. Some people (like you) don't. Some people think that women's upper body area should be private. Some people don't. So strange to see you in different groups depending on whether it suits you.
4. That reason is the same why some people think that visual displays of gay men should be private. There was a thread about it few months ago in TSR. Some people are very uncomfortable with pictures like yours but you don't see the admins banning you. Not so long ago, you might have been banned. For exactly the same reason you give against women being topless. That's called double standard.
Holding a boy's hand if you're a boy or giving your boyfriend a kiss is different to a woman walking around with her breasts out. For a start, men would be foaming at the mouth everywhere because we live an a perverse Western culture.
0
reply
Illiberal Liberal
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#95
Report 3 years ago
#95
(Original post by ivybridge)
Objectivity is a quality things have when they are fact. This is a fact about the considerations of the majority of today's society on this issue at large. Therefore, it certainly can be seen as objective.
It is a fact (ostensibly) that the majority of British society today think that the body parts you refer to constitute 'private' areas.

Do not conflate that with: it is a fact that the body parts you refer to constitute 'private areas'.
0
reply
Juichiro
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#96
Report 3 years ago
#96
(Original post by ivybridge)
In your opinion.
No, it isn't. There exist human societies where female's upper bodies are not covered. Just like there exist human societies where visual displays of gay men are allowed. I find amusing that you are against one and in support of the other when both belong to the same category.
0
reply
ivybridge
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#97
Report 3 years ago
#97
(Original post by Juichiro)
No, it isn't. There exist human societies where female's upper bodies are not covered. Just like there exist human societies where visual displays of gay men are allowed. I find amusing that you are against one and in support of the other when both belong to the same category.
They are not at all comparable issues.
0
reply
Trevormacdonald
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#98
Report 3 years ago
#98
(Original post by defenestrated)
boobs aren't inherently sexual
they're a fetish
are we gonna say women aren't allowed to be bare feet now?
Er yes they are! Otherwise page 3 wouldn't exist. I don't get feminists these days page 3 boobs bad middle class protest feminist boibs good? #leftwinglogic.
0
reply
Juichiro
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#99
Report 3 years ago
#99
(Original post by ivybridge)
1.Holding a boy's hand if you're a boy or giving your boyfriend a kiss is different to a woman walking around with her breasts out. 2.For a start, men would be foaming at the mouth everywhere because we live an a perverse Western culture.
1. And plenty of religious people will tell you that holding holding a boy's hand if you're a boy or giving your boyfriend a kiss is different to holding a girl's hand if you're a boy or giving your girlfriend a kiss. And just like you are doing, they will use that difference as the basis for their rejection of homosexuality (and in your case female's freedom to expose their upper body).

2. And plenty of religious people would tell you that young men and women would be "deviated" from the "right way".

I love how you seem so progressive (pro-homosexuality) yet so conservative (restriction of women's freedoms).
0
reply
Ken_hudson
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#100
Report 3 years ago
#100
As a man,I'm gonna say yes fam,why not?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

People at uni: do initiations (like heavy drinking) put you off joining sports societies?

Yes (118)
63.44%
No (68)
36.56%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed