Attack of the Evil Nudists

[Drasiana]

WARNING, THIS TOPIC DEALS WITH NAKEDNESS, AND HUMAN BODIES HAVE BEEN KNOWN TO OFFEND PEOPLE FOR SIMPLY EXISTING. DO NOT READ IF THE MENTIONING OF NUDITY INSTANTLY TRANSFORMS YOU INTO A RAPIST/GAY/SATANIST/PROSTITUTE/TERRORIST/ALL OF THE ABOVE

Okay, so looking at the new NSFW tag and inspecting the rules, I came across a rule that while not unique to SFO in any way, shape, or form, reminded me of something that greatly annoys me.

C. Female Nudity: The full breast may not be shown, the area of the nipple must be covered; the crotch area must be covered, regardless if something can be seen or not.

D. Male Nudity: The crotch must be covered, regardless of if something can be seen or not.

Okay, so, like, why is it that only female nipples are percieved as a Great and Terrible Thing that must be censored from public view, and only male nipples are a-okay? The reasoning behind this is rediculously sexist to both genders.

#1 Well, breasts are sexually enticing to males, who won't be able to help themselves from devolving into a horny mess upon seeing a female nipple.

This is stupid. Firstly, you are portraying men as nothing but slobbering sex-hounds with a one-track mind and inability to think with their head instead of their privates. Secondly, you are holding up a bizarre double-standard without consideration that there exists in this world females who find male chests to be attractive. We manage not to turn into a pack of rapist hyenas upon seeing some dude sans shirt on the beach, so is it really a far stretch to hope men wouldn't do the same?

Yes, there is certainly more "specialness" promoted around ~seeing a female nipple~. This is because female nips are taboo. It's not just the "boobs are hot hurr hurr" instinct at work here, it's the sense of rebellion someone feels when they see something they're told they shouldn't at every step of the way. There's no big rush there when it comes to male torso nudity, because man-nipples are socially acceptable in public and on television.

This ALSO makes the assumption that gays/bisexuals are nonexistant entities.

#2 Women who want to go topless are promoting sexual promiscuity! Think of the children!

Or they're just out doing some necessary yardwork in 30C-degree weather and would feel a lot better if they could just pull off their shirt for a breather. You know, like men can do without question.

Also, watch any number of commercials that feature a topless, sweaty man shooting you the bedroom eyes. This is fine, but a woman doing the same is a slut? Remember, kids, sexuality is only a terrible thing when it's a woman expressing it! Call that lady a whore for posing sexy for a clothing commercial but when a shirtless toned man lets bodywash drip across his rippling abs it is the best commercial you have ever seen. Even if women can't let their boobies out, they sure can be hypocrites!

#3 Nudity is demeaning to women.

This is stupid. You were born naked, you shower naked, and you probably do a whole lot of other stuff naked that you'd rather the internet and others not know about. Having skin and body parts is not demeaning, and acknowledging that people have skin and body parts is also not demeaning, unless you feel like you're an amoeba trapped in the body of a woman, in which case you have more problems than an irrational fear of boobs.

If women are allowed to take their tops off in public, it's not like it would be a mandatory deal. All it would allow is women to make the CHOICE to take their shirt off in public, just as men are given the CHOICE to do the same. Showing a woman that happens to have boobs on television advertising shampoo in a sexy fashion is no more objectifying than the hundreds of commercials that do the same with men.

#4 Allowing women to go topless will increase their chances of being raped!

This is just disgusting. You're giving rapists control. Women should not be pre-emptively responsible for the unpredictable actions of some men. Again, they should teach not to rape rather than "don't be raped". It is not a woman's fault that a man may wrongly believe he is entitled to her body. Being cautious is one thing, but being legally and societally restricted in your personal choices is not an effective means at fighting misogynistic mindsets that spawn rapists and sexual offenders. You are allowing them to restrict these choices, you are forcing taboos onto natural aspects of the female body, and you are further increasing the appeal of the off-limits aspects that thrill the likes of sex offenders. Scum will always exist, and people have to learn to deal with them, but at the same time they should not be able to dictate the rights of an entire gender based on their own vile and illegal habits.

#5 Well you wouldn't take your shirt off anyway!

The sad thing is, this is probably true, and not just because it's cold up here.

This is because I would, initially at least, be embarassed. Why is this? Because I and almost every other girl are taught right from the get-go that our breasts--you know, natural parts of our body--are dirty filthy things that nobody under any circumstances aside from the closest levels of intimacy should be allowed to see. Of course, they're not, but it's such a groomed instinct that it would be hard to break free of the mould. That is depressing, because there is no logical reasoning for this, and it only stems from age-old repression of female sexuality.

The first time I saw a naked woman was when I was on a cruise. I was thirteen. We stopped at an island called Labadee in the caribbean and one of the guests was tanning topless, floating on one of those foam bed thingies in the ocean. The ground did not crack and the serpents of Hell did not rise from within, men did not flock to her in sudden savage attempt to breed, and all women within a two-mile radius did not transform into a lesbian. The end result of that woman sun-tanning topless was that she got a nice and even tan like the dozens of men on the beach doing the same thing.

And it's not like she was a pasty smelly hambeast letting her flesh manatees go for a swim, either, she was actually fairly attractive.

Women should not have to feel shamed for having body parts that all women naturally have, and that share the same region and similar anatomical structures of men that are free to display theirs as they wish. Flashing a woman's nipple is not somehow magically dirtier than flashing a male's, and if the sight of a boobie turns you into a frothing madly-humping chihuahuaman then you need help.

[Milkyway64]

Sorry, was too busy picturing boobies to properly comprehend the point.

Jokes aside, you're mostly right, but I have something in particular I wanted to comment on.

Also, watch any number of commercials that feature a topless, sweaty man shooting you the bedroom eyes. This is fine, but a woman doing the same is a slut?

Actually, this (in most cases I know) also makes the male in question a slut. The only people who don't are the ladies getting fem boners over it, unless they are the kinky kind who like demeaning their objects of affection. Manwhores exist and are easy to pick out.

[Xortberg]

Actually, this (in most cases I know) also makes the male in question a slut. The only people who don't are the ladies getting fem boners over it, unless they are the kinky kind who like demeaning their objects of affection. Manwhores exist and are easy to pick out.

Not a commercial, but look at Lost: The number of times I saw sweaty, near-naked men while watching that show is kind of mind-boggling, and the only one with a 'slut' reputation was really Sawyer, who made that okay because he was also a badass and the slut aspect was kind of silly most of the time. At least, as far as I remember. Then there's the "Look at your man" Old Spice commercial, which features a perpetually topless seductive black guy fresh from the shower, and is hailed as genius. Dras is right about that point. Sweaty topless men are cool; sweaty topless chicks are sluts.

[Drasiana]

Then there's the "Look at your man" Old Spice commercial, which features a perpetually topless seductive black guy fresh from the shower, and is hailed as genius.

Perfect example. If the Old Spice guy was a woman addressing a male audience, there would be outrage over her either being a slut or a horrible nasty misogynistic objectification of the female gender.

[chaos_Leader]

I believe this double-standard is, at the very least, beginning to break down.

This is an old argument that's been going on a long-time running. It makes it kind of difficult to make a "debate" out of it when the only position I would take on this topic is "yeah, I agree" and "here's another example of this mean dichotomous double-standard!"

One thing you didn't mention in the rant: the nude body, male or female, rendered and/or presented for an artistic purpose. Every inch of the human form is often exposed, technically violating the terms described above, yet almost everyone (including many ultra-conservative) give such things a pass. I can open up a whole other can of worms here and delve into the bizarre realm of artsy-fartsiness if you'd like...

[Asper Sarnoff]

Pretty sure there's no real reason for SF-O's policy in this regard apart from basically just covering our asses so we won't have angry parents kicking in our doors, claiming we poison their kids minds because we *GASP* dare to hint to the fact women have breasts.

Personally, I have no issues with topless women. I swear, if a woman grabbed my head and stuffed it between her boobs, I would not be offended.

Jokes aside, I'd support a movement to make topless female non-tabu. There's no reason why they shouldn't be except "it just is that way". Don't think I would notice much of a difference though, of the reason you point out that everyone's been taught to be embarrassed about it and proably wouldn't dare anyway, and the fact that 99% of the time over here, it's just too darn cold.

[Redeemer]

I just like naked people. OLOLOLOLOLOL no really let me get to the point I'm trying to make.

There is certainly a very different reaction regarding topless women, as opposed to topless men. I personally blush when I see a topless man, just as I do when I see a topless woman. But that's because I'm pretty shy that way anyway, I guess.

I may avert my eyes from a topless person, but I'm not a prude. I quickly get over the shock of "OMG THEY'RE SHIRTLESS" and get on with my day, and this is regarding both men and women. I had a friend once, who I was very close to, and she used to just get changed in front of me and I quickly adjusted to her free-spirited ways and stopped caring about the nudity. She moved away, sadly. I actually miss the closeness we had, it was so innocent and liberating.

But I, myself, am terrified of revealing too much of myself. I guess this is, as Dras said, due to the fact that I was raised to keep myself covered up, being a woman and everything.

[King of the Shrooms]

umm well i live on a "noisy floor" in my college. "noisy" translates to "no rules" btw. there are topless PEOPLE , not men, not ladies, PEOPLE running around all the time.

[Steve]

This is because I would, initially at least, be embarassed. Why is this? Because I and almost every other girl are taught right from the get-go that our breasts--you know, natural parts of our body--are dirty filthy things that nobody under any circumstances aside from the closest levels of intimacy should be allowed to see. Of course, they're not, but it's such a groomed instinct that it would be hard to break free of the mould. That is depressing, because there is no logical reasoning for this, and it only stems from age-old repression of female sexuality.

I believes this falls into the social, cultural and religion "stigma". Funny enough, some parts of the world "allow" women to go topless without society going "WTF, YOU BITCH". Once upon a time, someone thought female boobs were evil, and male boobs were fine, and since women have been historically repressed, I wouldn't be surprised if there were more than just "sexual" reasons behind this "ban of boobs". After all, we still have some parts of the middle east that have women all covered up because showing even a tiny spot of leg would be a sign of "lust,misbehavior,sluttiness" (aka, religion BS)

Also, the social media makes a big deal about women boobs more than they do with men boobs.

Most religions pretty much see most sexual things as something "sinful" , and since boobs fall into the sexual realm, because someone thought it would be cool, you know, then that's more ammo against the booby front, which comes to the "excuse" we staff use to sadly, ban any kind of art that has bare boobs. Parents would go wild, and SF-O would get shut. In order to have boobs, we would need to kick up pretty much every member that is younger than 18. That also means we can't host a donation system, so yeah.

Funny enough.... Hollywood also makes the booby front something to be spoken off, after all, we have pg-15 movies featuring boobs now, and stuff like american pie helping this tabu about boobs only being sexual.

Like most girls, men are educated into thinking that breasts are part of a woman's private parts . This pretty much intensifies when said men get through puberty when the Testosterone levels are blowing up the roof, and later on, through adulthood, it simply remains as something "sexual". Teach a little boy about female boobs being normal, and remove any social ideas about them, and he won't develop into a boob seeking missile in the years to come. Finally, for most women, breasts are high end erogenous zones, which again, translates to sex, and we all know what old school parents think about that.

I do agree that most of this stuff is BS or simply excuses.

[Drasiana]

Teach a little boy about female boobs being normal, and remove any social ideas about them, and he won't develop into a boob seeking missile in the years to come. Finally, for most women, breasts are high end erogenous zones, which again, translates to sex, and we all know what old school parents think about that.

I lol'd at "boob-seeking missile".

But yeah. Even then, the nipples/chest area can be erogenous for men too, so...*shrug*

Glad to see most people here are agreeing, though.

[Harlow]

Yeah, I know. Every woman who enjoys her body's a slut, and every man who takes care of his body's gay. It's the only way.

Well, I do agree on a "no-shirt no-taboo" movement for women on the areas normally acceptable on men. Course, agreeing with the liberty to choose.

And to add another note: Babies are normally the biggest boob-junkies...

[ballisticwaffles]

i swear to god if this topic makes my Night time shirtless escapeds come to a close i am blaming you all.

[Dr. Orange]

This topic is ... different.

I have no problem with a topless woman or a toplass man alike. There no problem in either, and I don't believe it's wrong when a woman shows of her ... "bazongas."

(Being born in a very strong minded Christian family, taugh me never to use these kinds of words.)

I don't see any problem with men showing their chest, so why should women?

[Steve]

But yeah. Even then, the nipples/chest area can be erogenous for men too, so...*shrug*

Yeah, but that falls into the category of less than average, me thinks, even so,some women just don't consider that part to be erogenous for them, which makes the sexual reason go straight to hell.

Well...there's also the other side of the coin, people can develop random erogenous zones, ears, knees, etc; which is why I believe that using the "omg, women get turned on by this" reason is BS.

At any rate, yeah we are entitled to silly rules.

[chaos_Leader]

"So why is it that we hang onto these silly rules?"

http://www.youtube.c...RdfX7ut8gw#t=3s

Edit: What? No nifty in-post vids? I was tryng to make a point too .

Edited October 26, 2011 by chaos_Leader

[Asper Sarnoff]

But yeah. Even then, the nipples/chest area can be erogenous for men too, so...*shrug*

They are?

>__>

<__<

*fondly findly*

[Thu'um]

I am very very reservative when it comes to sexuality. If i saw a woman walking around topless in public i would judge her a slut( i would not however act upon my judgement) and the same goes for a man. In certin places revealing clothes arn't proper. In school if girls were to go nude( or guys) it would be extremely distracting and premote a whole lot of improperconduct.

[Drasiana]

Wow how about the beach or the pool, AJC? Does your brain collapse in on itself upon visiting those places?

[Xortberg]

Somehow we can always rely on at least you, AJC, to be willing to take the opposite side in a debate. Makes things much more fun

I am very very reservative when it comes to sexuality. If i saw a woman walking around topless in public i would judge her a slut( i would not however act upon my judgement) and the same goes for a man.

Glad to see you at least don't discriminate, but I've got several examples where you'd be horribly unfair in doing so. For example, I ran cross country throughout high school. Running around in the armpit of Kentucky during the hot summer, it tends to get pretty uncomfortable if you're wearing a shirt. Being a guy, I was able to run without my shirt, which was a damn lifesaver. So, even though I had a valid excuse to do so, running around shirtless would make me a slut?

In certin places revealing clothes arn't proper. In school if girls were to go nude( or guys) it would be extremely distracting and premote a whole lot of improperconduct.

I hate to use a Bible reference, but what about Adam and Eve? They supposedly managed to be naked around each other because they in no way thought of nakedness as something naughty or to be hidden. Whether you believe in them or not, the moral there - that being, the only reason nakedness is seen as bad is because we teach it - is true. I was born naked, and so was Dras, and you. As little kids, we don't give two shits if we're naked or if we see other naked people. The only reason we ever start seeing it as bad is because we're taught that way and forced to act in accordance with the whole silly taboo.

Now, if we were to abolish it right now and guys and girls started going to school in the nude? Yeah, there'd be a shit-ton of distracted boys and giggling girls. Keep that practice up for a few generations? Nobody'd give a shit that the head cheerleader just walked into school naked. Well, no more of a shit than they'd give now at her little miniskirt.

[Thu'um]

I beilive the way things with beaches and pools are now is fine. If i want to go to a beach were i can reveal my self i can and people who don't want to deal with it or might be offended by it don't have to see it. I can go to a pool were i don't have to worryabout seeing nude people, and if the wanna go nude there is a designated pool for that.

[Drasiana]

Would you care to acknowledge any other points brought up by Xort?

Also, again, why do you find it acceptable for men to remove their shirts at beaches, but not women? Women aren't somehow "more nude" than men without their shirts.

[Thu'um]

Would you care to acknowledge any other points brought up by Xort? and yes xort while often do argue the oposing point in this topic i am posting my literal feelings on nudity

Also, again, why do you find it acceptable for men to remove their shirts at beaches, but not women? Women aren't somehow "more nude" than men without their shirts.

if you note the post times he post only seconeds before i did i had no way of knowing that he had posted and couldn't aknowalgde points i had no idea existed.

Xort your whole example is unfair for women. Women have breasts this makes them top heavy and also makes them have more flesh over their chest gathering more internal heat, even if you both had shirts off men generaly have an adventage due to physical build . and what about females just wearing a sports bra? their are many garmets they can wear that release quite a bit of heat with out having to go nude. besides i have heard it harder for women to run run with out a bra . but what will happen when i go to take the SAT and the girl next to me is nude....i can asure you it will make it much harder for me to focus or do well. infact just in school work in general i would do poorer. i would feel sexual implulses often and who wants a boner the whole day? Besides many adolestents would act upon these sexual impolses and that might lead to teenage pregnancy which is a bad thing.

Remeber what happened when adam and eve ate the apple and became intelligent? the became more then animals and they saw that they were nude and were ashamed. they then made clothes and thats aperently why you and i where then now. I disagree that it will eventualy be normal. as a child my sisters never wore clothes around the house, so from a very young age i was quite formiler with what the oppsite sex was like. however sexuality and sexual development still remaned to me as highly personal things that could some one might be quite embarrsed about. i think it will remain like this for the entirety of human civilization. after all dras may be all for ya lets all go nude! but what about for thoase who might be ashamed or nervous about their bodies. if people are so willing to let their sexuality loose why can't i go up to any woman and simply ask how many times they have had sex or what kind the prefer. infact a certin member here had openly listed their a sexual fantasy of theirs and dras was quick to tell the person it was unproper. so why is nudity proper? the human body is a highly personal thing. i don't go around telling people how far through pubirty i am and i would be very uncomfortable with them knowing that.

i define nudity as the visiblity of organs that a gender develops through out puberty. men don't devlop breasts, woman do. And don't pull " well i find manly abs atractive. well i find woman's legs atractive and yet i don't consider that nudity.

[Harlow]

Well, one can make the rule, but the question is: Are women going to follow it? Are enough women willing to go topless on allowed places?

I agree with Steve about relating them with the "private" parts.

[Redeemer]

The only one to ever see any skin on my torso would be my other half. I wouldn't embrace the idea of walking around shirtless, but I am naturally very shy about my appearance and such.

[Milkyway64]

Glad to see you at least don't discriminate, but I've got several examples where you'd be horribly unfair in doing so. For example, I ran cross country throughout high school. Running around in the armpit of Kentucky during the hot summer, it tends to get pretty uncomfortable if you're wearing a shirt. Being a guy, I was able to run without my shirt, which was a damn lifesaver. So, even though I had a valid excuse to do so, running around shirtless would make me a slut?

Well you kinda are a slut, but that's beside the point.

In a society where toplessness would not only be encouraged, but the norm, I'd still probably be the same. If I'm not in a full shirt and long pants, I don't FEEL right. It's not necessarily embarrassment like Hayley's case, it just throws my comfortability completely out of whack. I can't stand wearing shorts, for instance. Just having one half of my legs covered and not the other feels inconsistent and I'll never stop noticing it, as would not having sleeves on an otherwise complete shirt.