Here's how I see it...
How does being topless protest what a Pope says about gay marriage? Wouldn't it be more appropriate for gay couples that're properly dressed to
protest with signs? People would then look at the signs rather than the boobs. It's the message that's important. They're missing the message.
As for whether woman should be able to be topless in public, I think it depends on the person. If you're not sexually attracted to breasts and they
don't make you feel uncomfortable then you'll be all for it. For example, I'm a guy and I see nothing wrong with a buff man in briefs. I'm not
sexually attracted to it and it doesn't make me uncomfortable. It's like seeing anything else that doesn't grab my attention. However, if i was
attracted to a buff man in briefs then it might grab my attention and thus either cause me to stare or to be embarrassed or something similar.
Similarly, while I am attracted to breasts, I'd say that a fair number of them are "normal" looking and not as attractive to me. In those cases, it
doesn't bother me as much and I could probably be ok with that. It's only when hte breasts start to look good that it causes me discomfort, since it's
too sexual in nature. Just like I'd feel uncomfortable if somebody was peeing in public, but for a different reason. It grabs my attention because
they should pee in the proper places and have some manners around others. However, if I was a dog, I'd probably see nothing wrong with it, since dogs
do that routinely.
I'll admit that any good looking female can grab attention whether she's dressed or not, so to some extent my argument is deficient. However, there's
a limit to what people will accept. You can't push that limit too far. For example, if a woman dresses too slutty and shows up at work that way, the
employer understands that she'll likely interrupt the other employees from doing their work at a decent clip. Thus, the employer will walk up to her
and tell her to go home and get into some less sleazy clothing, since he thinks it would cause too much hassle. I think this is reasonable. However,
if you're not a person that's attracted to woman in this way then you might not understand me. You may say "Woman should be able to dress in whatever
they want!" It may be easy for you to say, but as a guy and I can tell you without hesitation that a woman dressed in provocative clothing would -not-
be something I'd want to see at work and it'd make it a lot harder for me to work effectively.
Let me put it this way... Lets say there's a woman causing a "display" on the highway. She's essentially stripping and putting on a show for the
passing cars. Now lets say that someone calls the police and says "I almost got in an accident because of a lady stripping on the side of the highway.
I think it's not safe for her to be where she's at. There're already too many accidents on a normal day. And you never know what kind of deviant
pervert will see her and pick her up and rape her. So just warning you about it. She's etc etc etc." Freedom is a responsibility
, you get
And what about all the religious prudents that will not like it?
We don't live in a world where everybody is the same. And we don't live in a world where every action always has the same results. We live in a very
complicated world with many different results. This is why when we craft common laws we have to cooperate together to ensure agreement. This means we
won't agree on everything and we'll have to cut that out. For example, it's not normally legal for a person to be naked in public. However, in certain
private businesses or across all residential homes, it's legal. It works this way because it's not public and thus doesn't demand a common
edit on 14-1-2013 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)