Feel like I’d also have a problem if I tried to go in public without a top due to having boobs (HRT <3) and I think most people would agree I’m not female.
There was a protest in front of the Scottish supreme court when the UK had a ruling that declared trans women were men because of their “biological sex”. So a bunch of trans women stood with their tits out and arms painted red since apparently they’re men and that’s OK
Ironically almost all media coverage of the event censored their breasts
We need to flip the script and make men’s nipples inherently sexual. They don’t even dispense milk (this is a lie but most people don’t know that) they’re just an erogenous zone.
While I agree, there is a connotation in many western countries to consider. Were women to be topless, they would be perceived as a thrill seeker, mentally ill, hippy, or something else in that vein because of religious customs dictating that arousal of your self, or even others is sinful. Changing perceptions would be a generational effort and, at least in the US, things are swinging more conservative rather than less.
But, in some parts of Europe, toplessness is accepted on both sides of the aisle, so the world isn’t wholly broken. Asia has smatterings of the same. I support egalitarianism in all things, and it’s deeply frustrating that the human body is, mostly, stigmatized through crystalized, cancerous religious repression
Were women to be topless, they would be perceived as a thrill seeker, mentally ill, hippy, or something else in that vein because of religious customs dictating that arousal of your self, or even others is sinful.
This is more of an argument to go topless than anything else.
The only states in the US that have statewide bans on female toplessness is Indiana, Tennessee, and Utah. The majority of states in the US explicitly allow femme people to go topless because masculine people are allowed to go topless.
How about we stop warning women about existing as women and push against people who would perceive women as “a thrill seeker, mentally ill, hippy, or something else in that vein” for judging them.
It is a violation of people’s sensibilities. People don’t wanna be exposed to nudity for personal or religious reasons. No need to expose yourself and violate that, no reason why one can’t just cover themselves up appropriately and avoid hurting others.
I agree with the first. I think evolution would disagree with the second. The main purpose for partial display (aka cleavage) is enticement for attracting potential mates.
I dived in a bit, and I will concede that sexual use is not the main reason, since they evolved from primates and previous species in order to produce milk. But all other species don’t have them constantly enlarged. Studies show that there are many factors at play, such as providing more area of touch for the human infant and perhaps a more constant source of food since human infants take longer to mature. But they did develop the use for sexual signalling too when we became upright, if for nothing else than for showing sexual maturity. The human brain has probably evolved along with those changes to select which characteristics evolved more pronounced.
So they have multiple uses. The very fact that they are a subconscious trigger for the male has to mean something.
Feel like I’d also have a problem if I tried to go in public without a top due to having boobs (HRT <3) and I think most people would agree I’m not female.
There was a protest in front of the Scottish supreme court when the UK had a ruling that declared trans women were men because of their “biological sex”. So a bunch of trans women stood with their tits out and arms painted red since apparently they’re men and that’s OK
Ironically almost all media coverage of the event censored their breasts
Everyone should be able to go topless if they wish. Boobs are not inherently sexual.
We need to flip the script and make men’s nipples inherently sexual. They don’t even dispense milk (this is a lie but most people don’t know that) they’re just an erogenous zone.
While I agree, there is a connotation in many western countries to consider. Were women to be topless, they would be perceived as a thrill seeker, mentally ill, hippy, or something else in that vein because of religious customs dictating that arousal of your self, or even others is sinful. Changing perceptions would be a generational effort and, at least in the US, things are swinging more conservative rather than less.
But, in some parts of Europe, toplessness is accepted on both sides of the aisle, so the world isn’t wholly broken. Asia has smatterings of the same. I support egalitarianism in all things, and it’s deeply frustrating that the human body is, mostly, stigmatized through crystalized, cancerous religious repression
This is more of an argument to go topless than anything else.
FREE THE TITTIES!
In abstract? Absolutely. All I’m going to say to this is to choose where you expend the effort wisely and spread the idea safely.
The only states in the US that have statewide bans on female toplessness is Indiana, Tennessee, and Utah. The majority of states in the US explicitly allow femme people to go topless because masculine people are allowed to go topless.
How about we stop warning women about existing as women and push against people who would perceive women as “a thrill seeker, mentally ill, hippy, or something else in that vein” for judging them.
I recommend heading to Utah to spread your ideas. Half of the US lives in deep, dangerous repression. Direct your misplaced aggression at them, not me
What? I live in the US. I’m speaking from my lived experience here. I agreed that Utah is one of the states that outlaws it.
I can’t have a conversation with you without being accused of being aggressive?
deleted by creator
Only when society ascribes sexuality to things that are inherently not sexual.
Boobs are not inherently sexual.
deleted by creator
Being topless is not sexual violence.
It is a violation of people’s sensibilities. People don’t wanna be exposed to nudity for personal or religious reasons. No need to expose yourself and violate that, no reason why one can’t just cover themselves up appropriately and avoid hurting others.
While you are correct that the US is more conservative, we do have nude beaches.
I think men should cover their chests too.
I’d rather give people the choice than to police their bodies.
I agree with the first. I think evolution would disagree with the second. The main purpose for partial display (aka cleavage) is enticement for attracting potential mates.
The same works with some nice hairy man pecs cleavage, what’s your point?
The main purpose of mammary glands is feeding offspring.
Boobs can be sexual, but they are not inherently so.
I dived in a bit, and I will concede that sexual use is not the main reason, since they evolved from primates and previous species in order to produce milk. But all other species don’t have them constantly enlarged. Studies show that there are many factors at play, such as providing more area of touch for the human infant and perhaps a more constant source of food since human infants take longer to mature. But they did develop the use for sexual signalling too when we became upright, if for nothing else than for showing sexual maturity. The human brain has probably evolved along with those changes to select which characteristics evolved more pronounced.
So they have multiple uses. The very fact that they are a subconscious trigger for the male has to mean something.
Yep, they can be sexual but are not inherently sexual.
It’s not just men that are turned on by boobs.
You’re absolutely right. For good reason, they’re wonderful.