Sexual Relationships 
Sexual Health 
It’s pretty simple really ...
Women can’t be topless because breasts have been overly sexualised by society and it’s now ingrained in people’s minds that seeing them in public is uncomfortable and women should hide them.
For people that don’t believe this sort of mental manipulation exists , think about this :
You’re at a swimming pool and there are women in bikinis everywhere ( pretend these are the shirtless men in society ) .. there’s nothing wrong in this picture , right ?
Now imagine you’re looking around and you see a woman in laced lingerie sitting by the poolside ! You’d be shocked ! How could she wear something that sexual In public and around children ? ( these are the shirtless women of society )
But then you think , well , actually these two things are exactly the same items of clothing showing exactly the same amount of skin ... however one is sexual and the other is not .
This shows exactly how human minds can be completely manipulated by what is deemed sexual and not sexual . Women’s breast and men’s nipples are the same but have been assigned these two titles by our past a misogynistic world.
We can’t let these ideologies continue and to show that we are beginning to move forward with this new world there should be more public appeal for women to feel empowered by their bodies and not ashamed !
What Girls & Guys Said
25 105No ya ding-a-ling. Ya got rocks for brains or what?
If you can’t argue with an actual point then why did you comment?
Cuz your drivel comes up in the feed. You're an idiot.
Wow for 63 years of life experience you really don’t know how to have a conversation do you?
Yes, I do. But not with dough-heads. Your a fucking twit.
They CAN many places, just choose not to. To hell with what everyone else thinks
I agree that women should be allowed to go topless. In regard to the sexuality of breasts, all I can contribute is that it's true that women's breasts aren't sexual organs, but they are a distinct trait of a sexually developed woman. I can definitely understand the hesitation that people have about saying women should be able to go topless.
If it can be different when a white guy uses the n-word compared to when a black guy uses it, then it can be different when a woman exposes her nipples compared to when a man does.
and before anyone claims that I'm comparing nudity to racism, familiarize yourself with the extended analogy fallacy: just because I say that X and Y are alike in way 1 does not mean I also think they're alike in way 2. That'd be if you said that Stalin and Hitler are alike in that they were evil heads of state responsible for the deaths of millions, and I took it as a comparison of their moustaches.
Um go to Germany, France or Russia... lol
Yes, they have been over-sexualized.
Humans are mammals. Mammals all have some common elements: they are all vertebrates, they all have a means of regulating their body temp (unlike reptiles), they they all bear their young live, and they all nurse their young via their mammaries (their breasts, hence the name, mammals). So the primary function is to feed the mother's young. The secondary functions include providing a visual stimulus to the male to foster reproduction, allowing them to "go forth and multiply".
Technically, only the gonads are "sex organs". The scrotum, testicles, uterus, fallopian tubes, etc. are technically considered "secondary sex organs" in men and women, respectively. Nipples and breasts do NOT make the cut as a "sex organ " of ANY kind - they are simply body parts that have beCOME sexualized. but I digress- - - - -I certainly wouldn't complain if the gals would drop top, but I doubt that this will happen on a wide scale. As a Massage Therapist, I have to deal with total/partial nudity on a consistent basis, and realize that this is NOT an overture for sex, just because someone is naked on a table. This is very much the belief for nudists- they simply have times when they do not want the burdens of clothing, BUT, neither is this an open invitation for sex.
Various court decisions have been made that have given "nipple equality" to specific cities/states/whatever.
Im perfectly ok with them setting the breasts free, as long as they understand that men will look.
It's the opposite: people should be allowed to see nude people more often outside sexual contest. Soon they will realise it's not a big deal.
Where I live it is legal for a woman to go topless if she so chooses to. Most including myself choose not to though.
That’s exactly why I made this mytake , even when it’s legal many women ( obviously I can’t speak for you ) don’t take off their tops because they’re too afraid to be over sexualised ! We need to stop seeing breasts as being in the same sexual context as genitals. Their function is to feed babies not perform sexual acts !
Breasts and genitals are sacred and shouldn't be flaunted unless around her or his lover. breasts for babies, its a natural bond.. and not for society... do you get what I'm saying?, its hard to explain...
Hey if you want to go topless that's on you but you can't get mad if men and little boys are window shopping. Lol
I mean I don't get mad when women are window shopping at me. 😎
"Women can’t be topless because breasts have been overly sexualised by society and it’s now ingrained in people’s minds that seeing them in public is uncomfortable and women should hide them."
Bullshit. Women's tits are as sexy as penis and pussy are.
"Now imagine you’re looking around and you see a woman in laced lingerie sitting by the poolside ! You’d be shocked !"
No. I'd be aroused by her sexy tits! I love looking at women's boobs as do many men. Kids aren't blind to not see nudity. Some of them even watched nudity before in their early teenage years, so this is nothing new.
"But then you think , well , actually these two things are exactly the same items of clothing showing exactly the same amount of skin... however one is sexual and the other is not."
This is the first sentence, that I can agree on with you, that also makes sense.
"Women’s breast and men’s nipples are the same but have been assigned these two titles by our past a misogynistic world."
Oh quit with that victim mentality. You're your own enemy on this one, labeling whatever you don't like as misogynistic. Nobody likes that but those of your kind.
"We can’t let these ideologies continue and to show that we are beginning to move forward with this new world there should be more public appeal for women to feel empowered by their bodies and not ashamed !"
Oh well. Too bad.
---
I expect to be blocked and I won't be surprised.
In my opinion should be allowed to topless or braless whatever called, now a day society is improving and liberating in many beaches can seen.
I really don't know why a woman is responding to a question regarding men instead of men. Boobs do are sexual organs and are part of the feminine reproductive organs. You are just completely idiot. Then man should let the balls outside because balls are not the cock and are just sexualised organs and to be compliant with the medical recommendations need to stay chilly, outside. The men are really excited by boobs, a lot of them being even obsessed with that. For men Butt/boobs/cunt are really sexual things and pretty providing the same excitation. I really would like to see women taking position against these idiot feminists.
Breasts are used for feeding children, there’s nothing sexual about that. Yes , they develop during puberty alongside other sexual characteristics, but their function doesn’t aid in sexual reproduction at all... women can have sex and have children without breasts. This completely contradicts your point that balls are in the same category because they do aid in sexual reproduction. In fact , sperm cells are MADE in the testicles so it makes sense that they are sexualised. If you’re going to call someone else an idiot please know your facts so you don’t make yourself look like the idiot next time.
So you think sexism and double standards are 100% okay? How is it fair for men to be topless in public but not women?
She says “women going topless should be allowed” tho lol
Your problem is women won't allow that. Women dont' want to go to the beach and feel like topless women with nice tits are outshining them.
It’s legal in Canada, but guess what, no one does it anyway.
What a mindless claim. Womens' breasts have been, are, and always will be a sexual part of one's boy. The difference in breasts between men & women is phenomenal. Women have mammary glands that produce milk which is directly linked to giving birth after having SEX! So yes, it is a sexual feature. Stop propagating your nasty feminist ideology. If you have that much of a problem with keeping your top on, go to a nude beach.
Female Breats have nothing to so with sexuality. They have everything to do with bearing children and infatuated little boys who have yet to grow up.
@ButchD wrong. The mammary glands are only a tiny part of the breast. Most of it is useless fat that is only there to signal sexual development.
I would have no qualms with it personally, but you do have to consider the reality of it. Yes, womens boobs are sexualised, and that perception is deeply ingrained within our society. Whilst you can try to normalise it to be seen outside, i just can't believe that men will not get turned on from seeing a womans breasts, due to outside influence, like the porn industry. Issues like increases in sexual harassment would probably occur tbh.
I just don't quite see the need for women to be able to go topless...
I agree that women should be allowed to be topless, as a matter of fact I think it should be mandatory! :)
But I don't agree that mens' nipples and womens' nipples are the same or that breasts "overly sexualised by society." Breasts are a sexual organ that arouse male sexual desires. That's not a societal thing, it's a nature thing. And women's nipples serve a purpose in the sexual/procreation cycle. Men's nipples do not. So they are not the same.
Since women's breasts are a sexual organ, if we are going to permit women to show their breasts in public, then it would only be logical that we also let both men and women be completely naked in public. Either we allow people to bear their sexual organs in public or we don't.
Breasts themselves are not sexual organs as they don't play a role in sexual intercourse. However, they are part of the reproductive system, and as a feature men do not have themselves, one they find attractive.
Had to check your age first because I don't want to have any sexual discussions with minors. "Breasts themselves are not sexual organs as they don't play a role in sexual intercourse." Not true. Anything that provides sexual stimulation for men plays a role in intercourse because it cannot happen without male sexual arousal.
They can be sexually stimulated, yes, but so can other parts of the body. Some people find their feet being played with or neck or ears being touched to be stimulating. But those parts of the body aren't sexual organs.
Breasts are not sexual organs, but they are secondary sex characteristics.
www.thecrimson.com/.../
Despite this, I still don't think women should be topless. I'm not even a fan when men do it.
What is the definition of a sexual organ as you define it?
I think there are more scientific definitions you could find, but I believe it would be an organ directly linked to sexual intercourse, so genitals essentially. If you think about it that way there's no way you put breasts on the same sexual level as genitalia.
Okay, by that definition maybe. But I think when you boil this question down it is about whether or not since men can go topless women should be allowed to go topless too, and of not, why not.
One more comment... if you define sexual organs as being those organs necessary for human reproduction, then female breasts are sexual organs. In nature, human babies would not survive without them so they are necessary for human reproduction.
I defined them by their role in sexual intercourse, not reproduction. That is why they are secondary sex characteristics.
Okay, our definitions are different so our conclusions are also different. But neither definition addresses the central question I posed.