This seems backwards - we should allow more people to be topless, not less. And I say that as someone that thinks it's goofy when buff guys decide their pecs just can't fit into a shirt anymore.
This seems backwards - we should allow more people to be topless, not less. And I say that as someone that thinks it's goofy when buff guys decide their pecs just can't fit into a shirt anymore.
Agreed. It's technically legal here in Canada for any woman to go topless as they see fit. Socially, it's effectively 0% except on nude beaches, or tanning in a sunny spot. I think people in that...
Agreed. It's technically legal here in Canada for any woman to go topless as they see fit. Socially, it's effectively 0% except on nude beaches, or tanning in a sunny spot.
I think people in that poll are confusing what they deem is socially something they want, and what should be illegal. It should not be illegal to be topless.
If you can't stand the sight of some bare skin, maybe you need to stay in your hovel.
In Germany there is quite the interesting cultural "divide". In the former eastern germany counties you see quite often topless women at lakes (with often I mean, it is likely to spot at least one...
In Germany there is quite the interesting cultural "divide". In the former eastern germany counties you see quite often topless women at lakes (with often I mean, it is likely to spot at least one or two people at the lake).
It would be interesting to know if this number is dwindling since the reunification.
As a side note, in my hometown in northern germany there was a judge ruling a few years ago that being topless in a public pool can not be prohibited. As you said, due to societal pressure you will almost never see someone go topless.
I'm not sure if that's the main reason. I suspect the fact that near 100% of the population is carrying a camera in their pocket at all times has more to do with it. Take off your bikini top at...
As you said, due to societal pressure you will almost never see someone go topless.
I'm not sure if that's the main reason. I suspect the fact that near 100% of the population is carrying a camera in their pocket at all times has more to do with it. Take off your bikini top at the beach, and you'll probably hear a dozen camera clicks around you.
Certainly not in Germany, as the laws around taking pictures of strangers, even in public, is very strict. In any case, the idea that someone with breasts going topless is noteworthy or lewd...
Certainly not in Germany, as the laws around taking pictures of strangers, even in public, is very strict.
In any case, the idea that someone with breasts going topless is noteworthy or lewd enough to be worth photographing is part of the societal pressure.
Personally for me it's that they will run into things and get in the way more often than not. Even at home it's often safer to keep a layer on. Also I sunburn as it is. But the societal...
Personally for me it's that they will run into things and get in the way more often than not. Even at home it's often safer to keep a layer on.
Also I sunburn as it is.
But the societal consequences of having those pictures taken I think just highlights the cause. Even with no cameras and no sunburn risk, I'd not want to deal with society and being topless in it.
I do find it funny that the beach is the quintessential example of when men go topless, but I prefer long board shorts with compression liner and long sleeve Dri-fit surf shirts to minimize areas...
I do find it funny that the beach is the quintessential example of when men go topless, but I prefer long board shorts with compression liner and long sleeve Dri-fit surf shirts to minimize areas that need sunscreen and reduce rash from surfing.
I've spent far more time walking in the forest and mountains without a shirt than I ever have at the beach, but no one is around in the back country to be judgey.
Ugh I'm now imagining a humid walk in the woods with bugs and being poked by sticks and stuff. I'm already sticky just thinking about it. (It's August, everything is humid here) I don't mind lying...
Ugh I'm now imagining a humid walk in the woods with bugs and being poked by sticks and stuff. I'm already sticky just thinking about it. (It's August, everything is humid here)
I don't mind lying around the house nude but I've never really wanted to wander around topless or naked or whatever. Clothing protects the skin.
It's a very different experience depending on the forest. In the Western US where the air is dry and you get hot summer days with shade from pine forest and bitingly could mountain springs, there...
It's a very different experience depending on the forest. In the Western US where the air is dry and you get hot summer days with shade from pine forest and bitingly could mountain springs, there is something pretty special about the experience. Likewise, glaciated mountains, sunscreen aside, can be pleasant without shirts, especially in the later afternoon as the day cools but before the cold of the evening settles in.
Also, comparatively free mosquitoes up high or where the days are dry and hot. Now, the Eastern US is a different story.
Eh, I'd burn, run into something poisonous and scrape a nipple on a branch. Better to keep things strapped down. I have exercised in just a sports bra so I get the broad appeal but nah I'm good...
Eh, I'd burn, run into something poisonous and scrape a nipple on a branch. Better to keep things strapped down.
I have exercised in just a sports bra so I get the broad appeal but nah I'm good now lol
We also don't have a lot of forest around here, and nil on the mountains. I'm ok experiencing those things with clothes on when I get there.
It's interesting to me even how the current cultural standards or even laws are so backwards or inane. I don't remember what I was watching, some cartoon or something that was probably poking fun...
It's interesting to me even how the current cultural standards or even laws are so backwards or inane. I don't remember what I was watching, some cartoon or something that was probably poking fun at it, but its just kinda pathetically funny in that context how they can have a character that is presented and canonically male and show bare chested with nipples, but another character that appears as a woman and has the chest that appears that way cannot be shown, but the moment you start to mix different elements of these, the rules literally don't make sense anymore. Like they can have the male character drawn with a chest that resembles a woman's and it's somehow fine to show even though it's literally the same visuals as if it were on a female character. Obviously man boobs are not an unfamiliar sight these days in the real world if a man goes topless, so even outside of cartoon world those lines get blurred.
At some point you'd think people just realize the rules are silly and stop applying them, rather than taking them the other way and saying people need to cover up. I get it, some bodies aren't exactly pleasant to see more of, but I'm sure there's plenty of people who would rather not see my face but it wouldn't be right of them to demand I cover it up at the expense of my own autonomy and freedom. I mean there's definitely some possibly hygienic arguments for bottoms so I won't wade into that argument, but that never seems to be the basis for why people argue for restricting toplessness.
People are so fucking insane and weird about nudity. A while ago there was a topic on Tildes where what felt like the overwhelming consensus was "It is immoral and should be illegal to be naked in...
People are so fucking insane and weird about nudity. A while ago there was a topic on Tildes where what felt like the overwhelming consensus was "It is immoral and should be illegal to be naked in your own home if you don't have blinds on all of your windows"
What was wrong with that take? I'm not wanting to see any genitals on my walk around the neighborhood. Many homes these days are built with floor to ceiling windows. Many homes are across from...
What was wrong with that take? I'm not wanting to see any genitals on my walk around the neighborhood. Many homes these days are built with floor to ceiling windows. Many homes are across from elementary schools. It's also not an undue burden on someone to put up blinds.
If you don't want to potentially see someone's genitals while walking around your neighborhood, then don't look in random people's windows. You are choosing to look into my private, personal...
If you don't want to potentially see someone's genitals while walking around your neighborhood, then don't look in random people's windows. You are choosing to look into my private, personal space. You can simply choose to not look. If you do look and see a naked person, make a mental note that the person in apartment XYZ is sometimes naked and don't look in that window on future walks and the problem is solved. Every room in my apartment has windows. If I wanted to have art with a nude person on it, does it have to be in the closet so no passers-by can see it? The room with my TV in it is the one closest to the road, do I need to have the blinds down every time I watch any show that might have nudity or a sex scene in case someone walking by decides to look into my living room and see what I am watching? Should my blinds be down when I read Berserk? Is nudity the only thing that we need to worry about children seeing through someone's windows? Should my blinds be down any time I am drinking or smoking weed inside my apartment? Those are also things we don't allow "in public" and don't want kids to see. Do my blinds need to be closed any time I watch a movie with extreme hyper violence and gore? What are the things that are unacceptable to do in public that I can do while in my home with the blinds down where people can see? How much of my personal private life needs to be dictated by what someone may or may not want to see while they are invading my privacy by peering into my windows? Is this limited to sight, or should people who live nearby an elementary school be required to keep their windows closed if they use profanities to make sure hypothetical children walking by don't hear?
Many homes are across from elementary schools.
A child is not going to be permanently traumatized by seeing a naked body. Children all across Europe and Asia see naked adults in non-sexual settings without it destroying their innocence or scarring them forever. The difference is that those countries take the time to teach children the difference between sexual and non-sexual nudity, rather than demonize the concept of existing while naked.
Edit: Who defines what is "too close" to an elementary school? Across the street? Within a mile? A residential neighborhood where children live but it isn't close to a school? In the same apartment building as a child?
It's also not an undue burden on someone to put up blinds
It is not an undue burden to avoid looking into someone's window. I have managed to do it nearly every single day for the last 10 years living in a major city.
You mention apartments a few times so I'm going to make the assumption the buildings in our neighborhoods are different. Where I live is a neighborhood with many homes densely packed together but...
You mention apartments a few times so I'm going to make the assumption the buildings in our neighborhoods are different. Where I live is a neighborhood with many homes densely packed together but still single-family-homes, many of which have gigantic floor to ceiling windows in the front. It is simply impossible to not look into a window unless you're walking with your head down the entire time.
I can understand where you'd be coming from if live in an apartment building especially since most units will be above ground level.
There's also the edge case of "man exposes penis in front of window during school hours across the street from an elementary school" that I'm not sure the majority of people would feel comfortable with.
This is one of those things where everyone can just be respectful of each other and not try to criminalize common behavior or intentionally try to flash all the windows to make a point. Yes...
This is one of those things where everyone can just be respectful of each other and not try to criminalize common behavior or intentionally try to flash all the windows to make a point.
Yes someone standing up in the front window while the kids get picked up by the bus across the street, in flagrante delicto would probably cross a line. More so if it's obvious it's for sexual gratification. But also, walking from bedroom to kitchen to make some coffee in the morning and potentially being glimpsed through the screen door isn't and shouldn't be a crime.
That's the thing that really gets me about all of this; I don't even like being naked. If I am running around my apartment naked, 99% chance it is because I forgot to grab a towel before getting...
That's the thing that really gets me about all of this; I don't even like being naked. If I am running around my apartment naked, 99% chance it is because I forgot to grab a towel before getting in the shower. This isn't some "oh I love being naked" thing. I just do not agree that a person doing something harmless in their place of residence should be penalized because a random person was made uncomfortable by what they saw while invading that person's privacy.
As I said, I think there are circumstances where being nude in your house and visible to the outside might cross the line, but it's about how much you're trying to be seen and the context of that....
As I said, I think there are circumstances where being nude in your house and visible to the outside might cross the line, but it's about how much you're trying to be seen and the context of that.
It's reasonable not to want the bus stop having full frontal every day. It's also in reasonable to want to not worry about your state of dress and windows at all times.
For clarification, would an alternative wording of this be "It is perfectly reasonable to punish someone for being nude in their home, if they live within eyeshot of a place people gather"? Or...
It's reasonable not to want the bus stop having full frontal every day
For clarification, would an alternative wording of this be "It is perfectly reasonable to punish someone for being nude in their home, if they live within eyeshot of a place people gather"? Or would "it is perfectly reasonable for an individual person to prefer not seeing naked people while doing something in public" be closer?
I am assuming in either case that we are talking about non-sexual nudity and not someone jerking off while making eye contact people.
I don't know how you get from "it's reasonable not to want the bus stop (specifically the school bus stop as that was the previous conversation) having full frontal every day" to your alternative...
I don't know how you get from "it's reasonable not to want the bus stop (specifically the school bus stop as that was the previous conversation) having full frontal every day" to your alternative sentence. Please don't do that.
Can we acknowledge that intent matters? As it does in many laws? The intent of the individual makes a big difference in how society would/should handle it.
That’s why I asked the question, because I could tell I didn’t understand what you were saying and didn’t want to assume what you meant. I was thinking about public transit bus, not an elementary...
That’s why I asked the question, because I could tell I didn’t understand what you were saying and didn’t want to assume what you meant. I was thinking about public transit bus, not an elementary school. And yes, I agree intent matters.
I agree with your take, but if all people were respectful we'd have way fewer laws on the books. Said another way, too many people are not respectful and laws are written because of them.
I agree with your take, but if all people were respectful we'd have way fewer laws on the books. Said another way, too many people are not respectful and laws are written because of them.
I believe we do have laws on the books about this. I mean respectful in a conversation as much as in life. There's a lot of ground between never naked unless blinds are present and closed and full...
I believe we do have laws on the books about this. I mean respectful in a conversation as much as in life.
There's a lot of ground between never naked unless blinds are present and closed and full glass house always nude.
It's weird to criminalize nudity in someone's house if there's not something particularly provocative or it's being done for sexual gratification. It's also weird to insist you can be naked whenever and wherever with zero consequences.
We can be reasonable and generally the laws seem to be.
It might be weird, but so long as they're not actively harming someone (ala sexual assault or spreading disease), the consequence should be "gets some weird looks," not fines or jail time. I have...
It might be weird, but so long as they're not actively harming someone (ala sexual assault or spreading disease), the consequence should be "gets some weird looks," not fines or jail time.
I have an outdoor shower that I use between April and October (weather permitting). The town laws ban me having a privacy fence in the part of my yard that would preclude sidewalk-passers from looking down my yard and seeing me naked from 80 ft away.
And if I happen to walk to the garden while naked in the sun, I'll get as close as 30 ft away. If they don't like it, they can petition the town to give me a free privacy fence.
Intent matters in the law. Once again I feel like everyone's trying to take an all or nothing stance that makes no logical sense to me. I'm not here to police your shower. I personally don't...
Intent matters in the law. Once again I feel like everyone's trying to take an all or nothing stance that makes no logical sense to me. I'm not here to police your shower.
I personally don't understand not having some sort of privacy curtain around your shower, but if someone takes a picture of me and spreads it around, I'm the one impacted by that even when it's technically a crime and I don't want to deal with it.
I currently live on the ground floor of a duplex in a densely-packed neighborhood of all houses that have at most 10ft between the front door and the sidewalk. Some of the houses in the...
I currently live on the ground floor of a duplex in a densely-packed neighborhood of all houses that have at most 10ft between the front door and the sidewalk. Some of the houses in the neighborhood are single family, some are multi-family. Before that I lived for 5 years in various apartments and condos. Before that I lived with my parents in the suburbs. I feel the same way about all of them. I go for extended walks around my neighborhood for exercise every day. I walk past a bunch of houses walking to and from the bus stop every day. I'm sorry but it really is not difficult to avoid looking into people's windows. [edit: I originally phrased this like I have never glanced in someone's window before, which is not accurate. Rephrasing to better represent that] And when I glance into someone's window and don't like what I see, I don't think "man, that person shouldn't do that in their house because I don't like it." I think "man, I wish I hadn't seen that. Guess I will make sure not to look in that window anymore."
Edit: I also want to add that in the last decade of living in the city, in all the times I have accidentally looked in someone's window, I have never seen a naked person. I would be fascinated to find out how many people have actually had this happen to them.
Welcome to social norms. Pretty much everything about them is silly when viewed purely logically. Why is it rude to call someone an asshole? They are obviously not an anus, yet the offender...
Welcome to social norms. Pretty much everything about them is silly when viewed purely logically. Why is it rude to call someone an asshole? They are obviously not an anus, yet the offender doesn't get pitty because their perception of reality is so heavily impaired, they will face anger or worse. Doesn't make any sense either.
Social norms are supposed to keep societies functional. I can't explain why being topless helps with that, but if it's something most people can agree on, that's huge because there is very little most people can agree on, and that makes social life much harder.
But progress always takes time, and changing social norms takes multiple generations. And I can't explain general relativity either, so maybe it's wrong?
But progress always takes time, and changing social norms takes multiple generations.
And I can't explain general relativity either, so maybe it's wrong?
You can't, but other people can. Physics professors, specifically. If you need a name, I can probably find one for you. Can you direct me to a group of people, or a specific person, who can...
You can't, but other people can. Physics professors, specifically. If you need a name, I can probably find one for you. Can you direct me to a group of people, or a specific person, who can explain why rules around being topless keeps society functional?
I mean, they probably can, given the existence of the guy insisting men are incapable of not leering at uncovered tits because they're "horny monkeys" elsewhere in this topic. Which is more or...
I mean, they probably can, given the existence of the guy insisting men are incapable of not leering at uncovered tits because they're "horny monkeys" elsewhere in this topic. Which is more or less equivalent to the nonsense about modesty that my religious mother would say, albeit differently worded. That explanation is dogshit, but unfortunately there's no shortage of dogshit explanations for stuff like this.
Well, it keeps society functional in a short-term way, in the same way that Niqabs keep society function elsewhere, but they aren't necessary everywhere. There are plenty of functioning societies...
Well, it keeps society functional in a short-term way, in the same way that Niqabs keep society function elsewhere, but they aren't necessary everywhere. There are plenty of functioning societies where "female presenting nipples" are a commonplace sight. You can't make that change in a society overnight, but it's very possible. That means that what's keeping society functional isn't the lack of tiddies, it's social conformity. And social conformity around arbitrary norms is only an acceptable price to pay for social cohesion when it doesn't oppress anyone. Otherwise, the norms are already arbitrary. No reason not to shift them and socially conform around the new, less restrictive (or at least equally restrictive to everyone), social norm.
Since it’s often only enforced that nipples are forbidden, and the rest of the boob is fine actually (see: micro bikini), there was a time when people would post pictures of ostensibly topless...
Since it’s often only enforced that nipples are forbidden, and the rest of the boob is fine actually (see: micro bikini), there was a time when people would post pictures of ostensibly topless women but photoshop mens nipples over the women’s’ nipples on Facebook in protest of the ridiculousness of the enforcement
Link within link Seems like a particularly judgy crowd. I couldn't find the original source with methods. If they're asking a buncha questions like that, would interviewees get the impression that...
Link within link
The national poll of 2,000 people by insights and research agency Perspectus Global also found a majority disapproval factor for socks worn with sandals (56 per cent), flip flops with hairy toes (62 per cent) and skimpy 'budgie smuggler' swimming trunks (52 per cent).
Seems like a particularly judgy crowd. I couldn't find the original source with methods. If they're asking a buncha questions like that, would interviewees get the impression that they're supposed to be extra up-tight? I've seen a lot of socks with sandals in very recent years, so much so I'm assuming that's the proper thing to do now and it's my bare toes that are inappropriate. ("Birkenstocks with socks",Vogue, 2023)
I can't imagine living life where I'm anything but neutral towards what people wear on their feet. Like, I may not think something is practical, but that registers 0 sense of disapproval or...
I can't imagine living life where I'm anything but neutral towards what people wear on their feet. Like, I may not think something is practical, but that registers 0 sense of disapproval or approval. People are so strange.
Not even if....someone has toe fungus but insists on letting them bake in polyester socks inside a rubber boot? :) i jest. Maybe for foot safety at job sites, or kitchens. But. Yes, let people...
Not even if....someone has toe fungus but insists on letting them bake in polyester socks inside a rubber boot? :) i jest. Maybe for foot safety at job sites, or kitchens.
But. Yes, let people wear what they want on their feet, goodness.
This just seems like "what attire things do you hate enough to want banned" and not a serious "no literally ban socks and sandals, it should be a crime." It's weird to highlight one as if it were...
This just seems like "what attire things do you hate enough to want banned" and not a serious "no literally ban socks and sandals, it should be a crime." It's weird to highlight one as if it were serious when "hairy toes" are on the list
Right? Probably makes a difference whether it's a light hearted informal street side poll, or part of their census form. What do they want toe hair people to do, shave toe hairs before leaving the...
Right? Probably makes a difference whether it's a light hearted informal street side poll, or part of their census form.
What do they want toe hair people to do, shave toe hairs before leaving the house? :)
The only reasonable laws for clothing should be for health and safety. So that more or less means PPE for relevant work, shoes where appropriate, and some sort of butthole cover to prevent...
The only reasonable laws for clothing should be for health and safety. So that more or less means PPE for relevant work, shoes where appropriate, and some sort of butthole cover to prevent spreading poop particles everywhere.
Everything else should be more of a social convention than an enforcable law. Children aren't gonna be scarred for life from seeing a flaccid penis or a hairy vulva as long as nobody is trying to rub it on them. We can have other rules about respecting people's personal space and bodily autonomy without the fashion police.
I think genital coverings is a pretty straightforward way to avoid endless edge cases. Like, should you have to cover up your junk if you have a seeping STI and other fun questions regulators...
I think genital coverings is a pretty straightforward way to avoid endless edge cases. Like, should you have to cover up your junk if you have a seeping STI and other fun questions regulators don't want to deal with. Likewise, what is appropriate attire for crowded public transit. I'm not psyched at the idea of being packed in with topless people on the subway, and no underwear would be a solid no from me.
The genital covering requirement just solves a bunch of problems and prevents every single place you go from needing bespoke rules.
The phrase "just because you can, doesn't mean you should" comes to mind. There's few things better than walking around in the woods naked (provided the bugs aren't too bad). But I agree that I'd...
The phrase "just because you can, doesn't mean you should" comes to mind.
There's few things better than walking around in the woods naked (provided the bugs aren't too bad).
But I agree that I'd rather not be rubbing up against a bunch of naked people on the bus. The percentage of your body that should be covered with clothes is roughly proportional to the number of people within 5 feet of your person.
I get it. I've spent a lot of time in the back country and have skinny dipped plenty. Unfortunately, enough people lack common sense/courtesy to require rules.
I get it. I've spent a lot of time in the back country and have skinny dipped plenty. Unfortunately, enough people lack common sense/courtesy to require rules.
I'm convinced 90% of laws come into being because 1 smart/dumb ass ruins it for everyone. "We didn't think we needed a rule about not pooping in the pool but Kevin proved us wrong."
I'm convinced 90% of laws come into being because 1 smart/dumb ass ruins it for everyone.
"We didn't think we needed a rule about not pooping in the pool but Kevin proved us wrong."
I don't have a strong opinion about if people should be allowed or disallowed to be topless in public. However, if I am being honest, I do associate them with various negative things. Mostly the...
I don't have a strong opinion about if people should be allowed or disallowed to be topless in public. However, if I am being honest, I do associate them with various negative things. Mostly the association with the same group of drunk people in a park nearby, who often walk around topless. Because those are the men I most often see walking around topless, it is apparently also become the default classification my brain uses when seeing someone walking around topless elsewhere.
This makes me wonder if part of the respondent's answers are based on similar associations?
The implication seems to be that "Topless men are often the young, ego-driven young men who are generally rude (to put it mildly) to others, so a topless man= rude bastard" As a side note that...
The implication seems to be that "Topless men are often the young, ego-driven young men who are generally rude (to put it mildly) to others, so a topless man= rude bastard"
As a side note that many might disagree with: IMO, the reason why women are often "strongly suggested" (i.e. all but demanded to) wear something... men are horny monkeys. I say this as a guy myself, and any man who disagrees... you're lying to yourself. Or to put it another way: if women go topless, you KNOW that guys are going to stare are their chests. Then that gets the ladies all upset, the guys respond with "Well, if you don't want us looking, then put something on" (I'm well aware this is victim-blaming territory), and generally just having clothes prevents that whole cycle. Because to re-iterate: men are horny monkeys who WILL stare at women's chests should the opportunity arise.
This is only because chests are typically covered, though. In cultures where women are frequently topless, it doesn't elicit the same reaction from men, and in cultures where more of the body is...
This is only because chests are typically covered, though. In cultures where women are frequently topless, it doesn't elicit the same reaction from men, and in cultures where more of the body is usually covered, an uncovered shoulder or back will often receive that reaction from men.
I also think you're being extremely unfair to men. It's possible that they can't control their curiosity or urge to look, but that doesn't mean they can't control whether or not they act on those urges.
We know that isn't the case? Women are oogled, harassed, cat-called, groped, and assaulted regardless of what they are wearing. "What was she wearing" is seen as a valid question to people being...
generally just having clothes prevents that whole cycle.
We know that isn't the case? Women are oogled, harassed, cat-called, groped, and assaulted regardless of what they are wearing. "What was she wearing" is seen as a valid question to people being harassed and assaulted. No amount of clothing is going to prevent the whole cycle, because the problem isn't women's bodies or what clothing they are wearing. The issue is that we have needlessly hyper-sexualized the human body and nudity, mixed with men's attitudes and perceived entitlement to women's bodies and attention.
men are horny monkeys. I say this as a guy myself, and any man who disagrees... you're lying to yourself.
This is an extremely unfair, limited, and insulting view of men.
A great point! And I guess by extension, what about queer men? Should we start police how men dress? I mean, men are horny monkeys after all. We can’t expect straight men to control their urges,...
A great point! And I guess by extension, what about queer men? Should we start police how men dress? I mean, men are horny monkeys after all. We can’t expect straight men to control their urges, why should we expect queer men to be able to? Both are men, and so are horny primal beasts that can’t control their urges.
Homophobia is the byproduct of when straight men project their unsavory behaviors towards women onto gay men as a whole. Not to say gay men are above acting that way (I'm sure many of us have...
Homophobia is the byproduct of when straight men project their unsavory behaviors towards women onto gay men as a whole.
Not to say gay men are above acting that way (I'm sure many of us have stories), but it is quite telling.
Women who live in places where it's legal to go topless already make the decision not to do so (even if it would be more comfortable in a given context) based in whole or in part on the fact that...
Women who live in places where it's legal to go topless already make the decision not to do so (even if it would be more comfortable in a given context) based in whole or in part on the fact that men will stare at their chests. That's part of the societal pressure on women in countries where covering your chest is seen as normal for women (though it's not all of it -- disapproval from others is if anything the larger deterrant imo).
Having clothes also absolutely doesn't remotely prevent that whole cycle. Men are perfectly willing to leer at covered breasts. In fact, I'd wager the difference in the number of men willing to stare at a woman's breasts in public varies by a surprisingly small amount if you remove clothing from the equation.
Men are human beings with rational minds and agency, and they are perfectly capable of not leering at whatever body part they find most attractive, regardless of clothing status, and treating the brazen way in which some men do this in public as though it's a law of nature is sexist and harmful. Gay men and straight women are generally able to interact with men showing prominent bulge without staring at it the entire time. Lesbians are able to make it through the day without leering at women's breasts. Straight men are not uniquely unable to control the fact that they're "horny monkeys".
Filed quickly from the headline alone under the Total Nonsense headspace with 'How about we just let people live their lives rather than be judgemental banning tosspots!" added. Also minimal...
Filed quickly from the headline alone under the Total Nonsense headspace with 'How about we just let people live their lives rather than be judgemental banning tosspots!" added.
Also minimal mental effort needed and quickly forgotten.
This seems backwards - we should allow more people to be topless, not less. And I say that as someone that thinks it's goofy when buff guys decide their pecs just can't fit into a shirt anymore.
Agreed. It's technically legal here in Canada for any woman to go topless as they see fit. Socially, it's effectively 0% except on nude beaches, or tanning in a sunny spot.
I think people in that poll are confusing what they deem is socially something they want, and what should be illegal. It should not be illegal to be topless.
If you can't stand the sight of some bare skin, maybe you need to stay in your hovel.
In Germany there is quite the interesting cultural "divide". In the former eastern germany counties you see quite often topless women at lakes (with often I mean, it is likely to spot at least one or two people at the lake).
It would be interesting to know if this number is dwindling since the reunification.
As a side note, in my hometown in northern germany there was a judge ruling a few years ago that being topless in a public pool can not be prohibited. As you said, due to societal pressure you will almost never see someone go topless.
I'm not sure if that's the main reason. I suspect the fact that near 100% of the population is carrying a camera in their pocket at all times has more to do with it. Take off your bikini top at the beach, and you'll probably hear a dozen camera clicks around you.
Certainly not in Germany, as the laws around taking pictures of strangers, even in public, is very strict.
In any case, the idea that someone with breasts going topless is noteworthy or lewd enough to be worth photographing is part of the societal pressure.
Personally for me it's that they will run into things and get in the way more often than not. Even at home it's often safer to keep a layer on.
Also I sunburn as it is.
But the societal consequences of having those pictures taken I think just highlights the cause. Even with no cameras and no sunburn risk, I'd not want to deal with society and being topless in it.
I do find it funny that the beach is the quintessential example of when men go topless, but I prefer long board shorts with compression liner and long sleeve Dri-fit surf shirts to minimize areas that need sunscreen and reduce rash from surfing.
I've spent far more time walking in the forest and mountains without a shirt than I ever have at the beach, but no one is around in the back country to be judgey.
Ugh I'm now imagining a humid walk in the woods with bugs and being poked by sticks and stuff. I'm already sticky just thinking about it. (It's August, everything is humid here)
I don't mind lying around the house nude but I've never really wanted to wander around topless or naked or whatever. Clothing protects the skin.
It's a very different experience depending on the forest. In the Western US where the air is dry and you get hot summer days with shade from pine forest and bitingly could mountain springs, there is something pretty special about the experience. Likewise, glaciated mountains, sunscreen aside, can be pleasant without shirts, especially in the later afternoon as the day cools but before the cold of the evening settles in.
Also, comparatively free mosquitoes up high or where the days are dry and hot. Now, the Eastern US is a different story.
Eh, I'd burn, run into something poisonous and scrape a nipple on a branch. Better to keep things strapped down.
I have exercised in just a sports bra so I get the broad appeal but nah I'm good now lol
We also don't have a lot of forest around here, and nil on the mountains. I'm ok experiencing those things with clothes on when I get there.
That was a separate question.
Dang, missed that part.
It's interesting to me even how the current cultural standards or even laws are so backwards or inane. I don't remember what I was watching, some cartoon or something that was probably poking fun at it, but its just kinda pathetically funny in that context how they can have a character that is presented and canonically male and show bare chested with nipples, but another character that appears as a woman and has the chest that appears that way cannot be shown, but the moment you start to mix different elements of these, the rules literally don't make sense anymore. Like they can have the male character drawn with a chest that resembles a woman's and it's somehow fine to show even though it's literally the same visuals as if it were on a female character. Obviously man boobs are not an unfamiliar sight these days in the real world if a man goes topless, so even outside of cartoon world those lines get blurred.
At some point you'd think people just realize the rules are silly and stop applying them, rather than taking them the other way and saying people need to cover up. I get it, some bodies aren't exactly pleasant to see more of, but I'm sure there's plenty of people who would rather not see my face but it wouldn't be right of them to demand I cover it up at the expense of my own autonomy and freedom. I mean there's definitely some possibly hygienic arguments for bottoms so I won't wade into that argument, but that never seems to be the basis for why people argue for restricting toplessness.
People are so fucking insane and weird about nudity. A while ago there was a topic on Tildes where what felt like the overwhelming consensus was "It is immoral and should be illegal to be naked in your own home if you don't have blinds on all of your windows"
What was wrong with that take? I'm not wanting to see any genitals on my walk around the neighborhood. Many homes these days are built with floor to ceiling windows. Many homes are across from elementary schools. It's also not an undue burden on someone to put up blinds.
If you don't want to potentially see someone's genitals while walking around your neighborhood, then don't look in random people's windows. You are choosing to look into my private, personal space. You can simply choose to not look. If you do look and see a naked person, make a mental note that the person in apartment XYZ is sometimes naked and don't look in that window on future walks and the problem is solved. Every room in my apartment has windows. If I wanted to have art with a nude person on it, does it have to be in the closet so no passers-by can see it? The room with my TV in it is the one closest to the road, do I need to have the blinds down every time I watch any show that might have nudity or a sex scene in case someone walking by decides to look into my living room and see what I am watching? Should my blinds be down when I read Berserk? Is nudity the only thing that we need to worry about children seeing through someone's windows? Should my blinds be down any time I am drinking or smoking weed inside my apartment? Those are also things we don't allow "in public" and don't want kids to see. Do my blinds need to be closed any time I watch a movie with extreme hyper violence and gore? What are the things that are unacceptable to do in public that I can do while in my home with the blinds down where people can see? How much of my personal private life needs to be dictated by what someone may or may not want to see while they are invading my privacy by peering into my windows? Is this limited to sight, or should people who live nearby an elementary school be required to keep their windows closed if they use profanities to make sure hypothetical children walking by don't hear?
A child is not going to be permanently traumatized by seeing a naked body. Children all across Europe and Asia see naked adults in non-sexual settings without it destroying their innocence or scarring them forever. The difference is that those countries take the time to teach children the difference between sexual and non-sexual nudity, rather than demonize the concept of existing while naked.
Edit: Who defines what is "too close" to an elementary school? Across the street? Within a mile? A residential neighborhood where children live but it isn't close to a school? In the same apartment building as a child?
It is not an undue burden to avoid looking into someone's window. I have managed to do it nearly every single day for the last 10 years living in a major city.
You mention apartments a few times so I'm going to make the assumption the buildings in our neighborhoods are different. Where I live is a neighborhood with many homes densely packed together but still single-family-homes, many of which have gigantic floor to ceiling windows in the front. It is simply impossible to not look into a window unless you're walking with your head down the entire time.
I can understand where you'd be coming from if live in an apartment building especially since most units will be above ground level.
There's also the edge case of "man exposes penis in front of window during school hours across the street from an elementary school" that I'm not sure the majority of people would feel comfortable with.
This is one of those things where everyone can just be respectful of each other and not try to criminalize common behavior or intentionally try to flash all the windows to make a point.
Yes someone standing up in the front window while the kids get picked up by the bus across the street, in flagrante delicto would probably cross a line. More so if it's obvious it's for sexual gratification. But also, walking from bedroom to kitchen to make some coffee in the morning and potentially being glimpsed through the screen door isn't and shouldn't be a crime.
That's the thing that really gets me about all of this; I don't even like being naked. If I am running around my apartment naked, 99% chance it is because I forgot to grab a towel before getting in the shower. This isn't some "oh I love being naked" thing. I just do not agree that a person doing something harmless in their place of residence should be penalized because a random person was made uncomfortable by what they saw while invading that person's privacy.
As I said, I think there are circumstances where being nude in your house and visible to the outside might cross the line, but it's about how much you're trying to be seen and the context of that.
It's reasonable not to want the bus stop having full frontal every day. It's also in reasonable to want to not worry about your state of dress and windows at all times.
Middle grounds
For clarification, would an alternative wording of this be "It is perfectly reasonable to punish someone for being nude in their home, if they live within eyeshot of a place people gather"? Or would "it is perfectly reasonable for an individual person to prefer not seeing naked people while doing something in public" be closer?
I am assuming in either case that we are talking about non-sexual nudity and not someone jerking off while making eye contact people.
This could reasonably seen as being sexual assault, covered under those laws, which provide much more reasonable punishments.
I don't know how you get from "it's reasonable not to want the bus stop (specifically the school bus stop as that was the previous conversation) having full frontal every day" to your alternative sentence. Please don't do that.
Can we acknowledge that intent matters? As it does in many laws? The intent of the individual makes a big difference in how society would/should handle it.
That’s why I asked the question, because I could tell I didn’t understand what you were saying and didn’t want to assume what you meant. I was thinking about public transit bus, not an elementary school. And yes, I agree intent matters.
I agree with your take, but if all people were respectful we'd have way fewer laws on the books. Said another way, too many people are not respectful and laws are written because of them.
I believe we do have laws on the books about this. I mean respectful in a conversation as much as in life.
There's a lot of ground between never naked unless blinds are present and closed and full glass house always nude.
It's weird to criminalize nudity in someone's house if there's not something particularly provocative or it's being done for sexual gratification. It's also weird to insist you can be naked whenever and wherever with zero consequences.
We can be reasonable and generally the laws seem to be.
It might be weird, but so long as they're not actively harming someone (ala sexual assault or spreading disease), the consequence should be "gets some weird looks," not fines or jail time.
I have an outdoor shower that I use between April and October (weather permitting). The town laws ban me having a privacy fence in the part of my yard that would preclude sidewalk-passers from looking down my yard and seeing me naked from 80 ft away.
And if I happen to walk to the garden while naked in the sun, I'll get as close as 30 ft away. If they don't like it, they can petition the town to give me a free privacy fence.
Intent matters in the law. Once again I feel like everyone's trying to take an all or nothing stance that makes no logical sense to me. I'm not here to police your shower.
I personally don't understand not having some sort of privacy curtain around your shower, but if someone takes a picture of me and spreads it around, I'm the one impacted by that even when it's technically a crime and I don't want to deal with it.
I currently live on the ground floor of a duplex in a densely-packed neighborhood of all houses that have at most 10ft between the front door and the sidewalk. Some of the houses in the neighborhood are single family, some are multi-family. Before that I lived for 5 years in various apartments and condos. Before that I lived with my parents in the suburbs. I feel the same way about all of them. I go for extended walks around my neighborhood for exercise every day. I walk past a bunch of houses walking to and from the bus stop every day. I'm sorry but it really is not difficult to avoid looking into people's windows. [edit: I originally phrased this like I have never glanced in someone's window before, which is not accurate. Rephrasing to better represent that] And when I glance into someone's window and don't like what I see, I don't think "man, that person shouldn't do that in their house because I don't like it." I think "man, I wish I hadn't seen that. Guess I will make sure not to look in that window anymore."
Edit: I also want to add that in the last decade of living in the city, in all the times I have accidentally looked in someone's window, I have never seen a naked person. I would be fascinated to find out how many people have actually had this happen to them.
Woman with A-cups: VERBOTEN
Man with Double-D cups: Amen
Welcome to social norms. Pretty much everything about them is silly when viewed purely logically. Why is it rude to call someone an asshole? They are obviously not an anus, yet the offender doesn't get pitty because their perception of reality is so heavily impaired, they will face anger or worse. Doesn't make any sense either.
Social norms are supposed to keep societies functional. I can't explain why being topless helps with that, but if it's something most people can agree on, that's huge because there is very little most people can agree on, and that makes social life much harder.
Much historical progress has consisted in questioning and tearing down bad social norms.
Then maybe it doesn't, actually?
But progress always takes time, and changing social norms takes multiple generations.
And I can't explain general relativity either, so maybe it's wrong?
You can't, but other people can. Physics professors, specifically. If you need a name, I can probably find one for you. Can you direct me to a group of people, or a specific person, who can explain why rules around being topless keeps society functional?
I mean, they probably can, given the existence of the guy insisting men are incapable of not leering at uncovered tits because they're "horny monkeys" elsewhere in this topic. Which is more or less equivalent to the nonsense about modesty that my religious mother would say, albeit differently worded. That explanation is dogshit, but unfortunately there's no shortage of dogshit explanations for stuff like this.
Well, it keeps society functional in a short-term way, in the same way that Niqabs keep society function elsewhere, but they aren't necessary everywhere. There are plenty of functioning societies where "female presenting nipples" are a commonplace sight. You can't make that change in a society overnight, but it's very possible. That means that what's keeping society functional isn't the lack of tiddies, it's social conformity. And social conformity around arbitrary norms is only an acceptable price to pay for social cohesion when it doesn't oppress anyone. Otherwise, the norms are already arbitrary. No reason not to shift them and socially conform around the new, less restrictive (or at least equally restrictive to everyone), social norm.
Absolutely 100% agree with everything in this comment.
Since it’s often only enforced that nipples are forbidden, and the rest of the boob is fine actually (see: micro bikini), there was a time when people would post pictures of ostensibly topless women but photoshop mens nipples over the women’s’ nipples on Facebook in protest of the ridiculousness of the enforcement
Link within link
Seems like a particularly judgy crowd. I couldn't find the original source with methods. If they're asking a buncha questions like that, would interviewees get the impression that they're supposed to be extra up-tight? I've seen a lot of socks with sandals in very recent years, so much so I'm assuming that's the proper thing to do now and it's my bare toes that are inappropriate. ("Birkenstocks with socks",Vogue, 2023)
I can't imagine living life where I'm anything but neutral towards what people wear on their feet. Like, I may not think something is practical, but that registers 0 sense of disapproval or approval. People are so strange.
Not even if....someone has toe fungus but insists on letting them bake in polyester socks inside a rubber boot? :) i jest. Maybe for foot safety at job sites, or kitchens.
But. Yes, let people wear what they want on their feet, goodness.
I cringe when people wear shoes that will give them bunions, though.
This just seems like "what attire things do you hate enough to want banned" and not a serious "no literally ban socks and sandals, it should be a crime." It's weird to highlight one as if it were serious when "hairy toes" are on the list
Right? Probably makes a difference whether it's a light hearted informal street side poll, or part of their census form.
What do they want toe hair people to do, shave toe hairs before leaving the house? :)
The only reasonable laws for clothing should be for health and safety. So that more or less means PPE for relevant work, shoes where appropriate, and some sort of butthole cover to prevent spreading poop particles everywhere.
Everything else should be more of a social convention than an enforcable law. Children aren't gonna be scarred for life from seeing a flaccid penis or a hairy vulva as long as nobody is trying to rub it on them. We can have other rules about respecting people's personal space and bodily autonomy without the fashion police.
I think genital coverings is a pretty straightforward way to avoid endless edge cases. Like, should you have to cover up your junk if you have a seeping STI and other fun questions regulators don't want to deal with. Likewise, what is appropriate attire for crowded public transit. I'm not psyched at the idea of being packed in with topless people on the subway, and no underwear would be a solid no from me.
The genital covering requirement just solves a bunch of problems and prevents every single place you go from needing bespoke rules.
The phrase "just because you can, doesn't mean you should" comes to mind.
There's few things better than walking around in the woods naked (provided the bugs aren't too bad).
But I agree that I'd rather not be rubbing up against a bunch of naked people on the bus. The percentage of your body that should be covered with clothes is roughly proportional to the number of people within 5 feet of your person.
I get it. I've spent a lot of time in the back country and have skinny dipped plenty. Unfortunately, enough people lack common sense/courtesy to require rules.
I'm convinced 90% of laws come into being because 1 smart/dumb ass ruins it for everyone.
"We didn't think we needed a rule about not pooping in the pool but Kevin proved us wrong."
(see above comment re: covers, butthole)
I don't have a strong opinion about if people should be allowed or disallowed to be topless in public. However, if I am being honest, I do associate them with various negative things. Mostly the association with the same group of drunk people in a park nearby, who often walk around topless. Because those are the men I most often see walking around topless, it is apparently also become the default classification my brain uses when seeing someone walking around topless elsewhere.
This makes me wonder if part of the respondent's answers are based on similar associations?
I'm just gonna leave this here: Big guy locked up for no shirt
I'm watching that segment and I'm empathizing with the guy and then, hold up, wait a minute, something ain't right.
I reacted the same as the anchor haha.
The implication seems to be that "Topless men are often the young, ego-driven young men who are generally rude (to put it mildly) to others, so a topless man= rude bastard"
As a side note that many might disagree with: IMO, the reason why women are often "strongly suggested" (i.e. all but demanded to) wear something... men are horny monkeys. I say this as a guy myself, and any man who disagrees... you're lying to yourself. Or to put it another way: if women go topless, you KNOW that guys are going to stare are their chests. Then that gets the ladies all upset, the guys respond with "Well, if you don't want us looking, then put something on" (I'm well aware this is victim-blaming territory), and generally just having clothes prevents that whole cycle. Because to re-iterate: men are horny monkeys who WILL stare at women's chests should the opportunity arise.
This is only because chests are typically covered, though. In cultures where women are frequently topless, it doesn't elicit the same reaction from men, and in cultures where more of the body is usually covered, an uncovered shoulder or back will often receive that reaction from men.
I also think you're being extremely unfair to men. It's possible that they can't control their curiosity or urge to look, but that doesn't mean they can't control whether or not they act on those urges.
We know that isn't the case? Women are oogled, harassed, cat-called, groped, and assaulted regardless of what they are wearing. "What was she wearing" is seen as a valid question to people being harassed and assaulted. No amount of clothing is going to prevent the whole cycle, because the problem isn't women's bodies or what clothing they are wearing. The issue is that we have needlessly hyper-sexualized the human body and nudity, mixed with men's attitudes and perceived entitlement to women's bodies and attention.
This is an extremely unfair, limited, and insulting view of men.
And implies that women don't have these same urges.
A great point! And I guess by extension, what about queer men? Should we start police how men dress? I mean, men are horny monkeys after all. We can’t expect straight men to control their urges, why should we expect queer men to be able to? Both are men, and so are horny primal beasts that can’t control their urges.
This is often framed as the reason for homophobia among straight men, yes.
Homophobia is the byproduct of when straight men project their unsavory behaviors towards women onto gay men as a whole.
Not to say gay men are above acting that way (I'm sure many of us have stories), but it is quite telling.
Women who live in places where it's legal to go topless already make the decision not to do so (even if it would be more comfortable in a given context) based in whole or in part on the fact that men will stare at their chests. That's part of the societal pressure on women in countries where covering your chest is seen as normal for women (though it's not all of it -- disapproval from others is if anything the larger deterrant imo).
Having clothes also absolutely doesn't remotely prevent that whole cycle. Men are perfectly willing to leer at covered breasts. In fact, I'd wager the difference in the number of men willing to stare at a woman's breasts in public varies by a surprisingly small amount if you remove clothing from the equation.
Men are human beings with rational minds and agency, and they are perfectly capable of not leering at whatever body part they find most attractive, regardless of clothing status, and treating the brazen way in which some men do this in public as though it's a law of nature is sexist and harmful. Gay men and straight women are generally able to interact with men showing prominent bulge without staring at it the entire time. Lesbians are able to make it through the day without leering at women's breasts. Straight men are not uniquely unable to control the fact that they're "horny monkeys".
Filed quickly from the headline alone under the Total Nonsense headspace with 'How about we just let people live their lives rather than be judgemental banning tosspots!" added.
Also minimal mental effort needed and quickly forgotten.