I've always wondered what it would be like to visit a nudist beach...

I once saw a VERY VERY fat hairy guy walking around on a beach. Furry flabs were jiggling all over the place, his man-boobs were bouncing, and the like. In fact, his boobs were bigger than my boobs. If men who are "top heavy" like that can walk around topless on beaches, I don't see why women can't.

The only problem is that some cultures (for example, the one I am a part of) tend to over sexualize things like that. It just isn't as simple as making it legal and immediately everyone will be accepting. Pa-chinko pretty much summarized my thoughts on this.

In some places in the world you can walk around practically naked and no will care. In others, you have to completely cover up. Why? Because cultures vary.

Being topless may not be a sexual act, but the reason that women who are not pregnant and have not had children is so that they can sexually arouse men. With most other animals (possibly all, I'm not entirely sure) female breasts only form properly during pregnancy, but human women have breasts because it helps them attract males. Since their purpose is to find a male to father your child, I would say that it is best that women do not go topless.

@The Roze-
I am not sure that I am comfortable with the implications of your reasoning. You seem to be implying that because males might get sexually aroused we should not allow females to go topless.

I don't entirely agree with Roze either, but I find the statement does have its merits.

I am disagreeing with the argument some are making that bare breasts are not sexual, which they are because the reason women's breasts are there is to sexually arouse

but why should we have to deal with harassment. How many men get harassed for being topless. It's not fair that women can not.

Breasts are only sexual because society makes them so. I don't see breasts as sexual organs so why should I be restricted by some prudes views on whats 'proper'.

Actually I'm going to quote the new Alice in Wonderland movieIf I wish to be topless, then I'm going to be topless. My brother and father can do it, why not I or my mother or my sister?

I 100% agree with Codette; it's absurd.. However, people have made such a big deal out of breasts that of course I would be uncomfortable. Unless I live in a place in Europe where they don't deem breasts as something sexual at first glance, I won't go toppless. There are way too many pervs out there.

But the purpose of breasts in women who are not pregnant or do not have children is to sexually arouse, so yes they are sexual.

But I don't understand why what I can and can't do is defined by the two mounds of fat on my chest.
I DONT view breasts as sexual. They are tools to feed my young- Although I probably will never have any- so they're useless mounds of fat on me.

If someone else gets sexually aroused by them, it's their problem not mine. I get aroused everytime I see a guy with beefy-thick-like-tree-trunk- arms, but that doesn't mean every guy with arms likes that has to wear baggy clothes to hide them, or that I become a savage animal that can't control my desires.

Alright yes womens breast serve a purpose, but appearance-wise there is no difference between me going topless and a guy with moobs, so why can he go topless and I cant? If anything the fact that I wear my chest with pride should allow me to go topless more often then the fat man next door. *shudder*

Frankly I don't care what people think. If I feel like being topless, I'm going to go topless. People can curse me out, or make all the remarks they want, I wont listen. And the first guy that tries to touch me is going to find my knee in his gut. *shrugs*

I disagree with breast being sexual. There are cultures where people wear no tops. They are not sexualized and men don't harass tehir women because they're not wearing tops. As I mentioned, I've been to a nude camp and no one harassed me because my breasts were showing. It's the way society thinks, not a 100% natural thing for people (not just men) to find women's breast to be sexual.

I am not sure who is making such an argument. As I myself have not seen anyone say that breasts are not sexual. Rather I have seen people identifying that the ways in which people experience, and perceive, their bodies are heavily influenced by the sociocultural context which they find themselves within.

The only difference between male and female breasts are hormones, so I don't see any reason why not. We live in a culture where the female breast has become this sexual and taboo thing. Hell, everything in society has a sexual connotation.

This is one of those depends moments for me; probably will have a lot. If it is an archic government, one that you can't take your own land from, then it SHOULD NOT be illegal. If it is one where you have the option to sign up your land to any government or just yourself, then it is up to you.

Personally, I do not think I should have to hide them and would not make any such law on my own property, unless it is instigating sexual thoughts. If I was amongst those who understand that I am not trying to draw their attention and they are not affect, I would do it.

Also, are those darkened states the topless ones? If so, awesome. I am moving from a topped to topless.

I should add: It is confirmed to be healthier for multiple reasons too, if it encourages at least being allowed to go braless. The bra constricts and affects the lymphnodes--I think that was what they were called--and it also prevents anyone's natural muscles from supporting the weight, causing more sag from weakened muscles, though it does allow them to become larger.

Just because the law deems that you can be topless doesn't mean it will be accepted willingly.

Cora Lorington: I do not know if that was directed at me, but I agree.

Could you please explain a little more what you mean here? I ask out of genuine curiosity. :)
Likewise, simply being a law does not mean it will be upheld. However I don't think people in this thread are talking on a strict legality basis.

No problem. I already gave a definition of archic and gave the opposite of that in the response, so I'll take a guess on what needs clarification. :)

If it is the "up to you" part, then by that I mean, either you accept the terms of joining that voluntary governance or you take your land and leave. For instance, if I was a nudist that wanted protection but I did not have enough resources to do that on my own, I go to a defense agency or team up with other homeowners for security. However, in order to do so I have to wear clothes or say they made that law afterwards through whatever (democratic, hopefully,) system they have set up, then I have a choice at that point. Go to another agency/homeowners association (LOL), stay there or leave and try on my own. No one is forcing me to decide which of these, so if I choose to stay and then continue to break that law, that is on ME.

It was direct at Kriemedesan's statement that she would move to a state where it is legal.

I saw an old man the other day trimming his hedge topless and to be blunt it was not a pretty sight, in fact it looked like a mix up of dry withered tanned chamois leather and elephant skin. On that basis I would say that we swing the whole thing the other way and ban all forms of topless between both genders.

Personally, I'm stickled a bit by the word 'allowed', but that's not on Yaks' head, that's the perfectly legitimate term in this case. And that's what swaying my mind here. It's they're own body, the concept of regulating it when they aren't actually making active moves to confront others with it (i.e. walking up to someone and flashing them, that's a direct encounter with intent) seems absurd. In some ways, clothes are bizarre things in and of themselves. Though useful when it comes to regulating temperature.

...
 

do you really want guys looking at your chest all day long? Guy can't help but look and get a boner at the same time. Modern days breast is sexual. You ever seen porn where a guy stick his penis between the girl breast? that what guys be thinking and also thinking of foddling them. Not only that the males would get blue balls (referring to when a guy can't cum, there balls go blue) and it's painful for them. It would just tease them to death. Another thing. would you like your bf looking at other girls breast? what about how a father thinks when an old person is staring at his daughter or some teenager? would you enjoy people stare at your daughter chest?

Everyone would stare at you >.>. I don't have a problem going shirtless itself. it just all the men and little boys that be staring at you.

legalizing it all allows women with shaggy and wrinkly boobies to go shirtless. DO you really want to see other women boobies? i sure don't. speacially wrinkly shaggy ones (no offence old people).

That's unfair to say that men will all be idolizing bare breasts as a sexual thing. Yes, there will be a chunk of them that will but not all. Society just has sheltered the women's body where now if you'd expose something that's not really "normally" seen it's shocking to see as you can say.

And who's to say that someone's boyfriend will look? Not all men find breasts "important". A boyfriend can just overlook it depending who he is as a person. You act like men are immature and are all dogs. Whether you mean it or not, that's how you're coming off.

If more women are allowed to walk topless and it becomes a regular thing; families can teach their children that there's nothing wrong with it. People can get comfortable with the idea if became a normal act in society. But as of right now; if you were to walk topless and be the only woman; than yes you will gain a lot of attraction versus every other woman with a bare chest in public.

Of course, there will always be creeps. Someone will always stare. There are those men who still stare at women's breasts even when covered. You can't eliminate that factor.

Concerning the older women being shirtless. Don't look. Also, I don't think breasts get wrinkly because that would be shrinking; if anything they sag which isn't bad looking. I've been life drawing classes and a lot of our female models are women in their 50's and maybe higher and their breasts look fine. They may not be perky but they're not disgusting or anything.

Oh, those poor men! How dare the womenfolk cause them to suffer arousal and then not be able to do anything about it?! Such cruelty!

How dare we think that men could act with dignity and honor even in the face of breasts? Those skin bags of fat with their allure bring even the greatest man to his knees! There's not a single man who could ever resist them..!

Look - if we treat breasts as sexual they then become sexual. This is fact. Y'know the cure for this? Regarding them as non-sexual.

Who cares if a guy pops a boner? That's his problem - not anyone else's.
Who cares if your boyfriend sees another woman's chest? If he's going to be tempted to stray from your (mutually agreed upon) monogamous relationship because of a pair of tits then it doesn't seem like he's much of a keeper anyways.

Also, body shaming? Not cool. Y'know why people get all up in arms over wrinkly and saggy boobs and think they're gross? Because ya'll think boobs are just for sexual gratification and saggy and wrinkly boobs are the boobs of mothers and the old who aren't allowed to be sexual beings or have any kind of sexual agency. OMG!

Bottom line is: legal discrimination against women is wrong in all its forms full stop. No exceptions.

By not allowing women the agency to determine if they're going to go topless today when they mow their yard, you pave the way to not allow women the agency to decide if they want to use birth control or not. Let alone give birth.

Duh! [headdesk]

I'm totally uncomfortable without a top on, but it has nothing to do with modesty. I just don't like my chest bouncing around!

As far as being covered goes, I think it's a necessity, but only because of modern culture. Because breasts are seen as sexual objects, they aren't really appropriate to be exposed.

However, if we stopped making such a big deal about them (50% of the population has them!), then we could be topless!

I wouldn't go so far as to call it discrimination, though. It's more of a reaction to society's view.