It's because female breasts have been sexualized to such a great extent. Female nipples are thought to be equal to her genitals.
WE WANT NIPPLES
I've also wondered this when people freak out about "nip slips."
In France, their magazines have completely topless women & that's just the norm
They're the exact same thing, only one is functional and the other is not.
A lot of stuff like this in human society seems really strange when you think about.
Yeah, you're right! YEAH!!! REBELLION!!!
rips off shirt and bra goes to school gets arrested
I've always wondered about this
the c in 'obscene' is blocking off the guys nipples.
Okay, if they aren't different, why don't girls show them around to guys? Ours are showing when we have our shirts off.
I don't think you understand- Women and girls are taught from a young age that they should cover up their chest/nipples because they're indecent. Girls don't 'show them around to guys' because society dictates that's 'bad'. If we stopped supporting this double standard, changed the public indecency laws, and stopped treating female nipples and breasts like they're something obscene, women would be more inclined to be comfortable topless in public. They aren't different- we've just been taught to think they are.
Well (maybe this is because of what we've been taught) when I went on a vacation where women could go topless on the beach, I felt very awkward doing it. And it was just uncomfortable that i didn't have any boob support like i do when I wear a bra/ bathing suit
Haha I totally get it- I'm actually a bit uncomfortable being topless myself- partly because I'm so used to the thinking that it's wrong and partly because there's no support. But I definitely think it's a matter of personal choice- those who have smaller breasts wouldn't need as much support so they would be perfectly comfortable topless. I'm an upper B cup and it's not so bad. My point is that we should be given that option.
Yeah, well,here in lovely NY we do have the choice. But as 1) I'm underage and 2)i feel awkward about it, it doesn't really matter to me. It's one of those things where, if its not hurting anyone else, why does everyone else care? You know?
Who gives a shit.
212 nudists. Welp, I'm throwin a party. 1900 Ocean, Long Beach Ca. Top of the building. Nude party. 199 openings for women, and 2 left for men.
I'm so down. Message me for RSVP.
It's not weird it's moral decay, is anything not sacred anymore, everyone put their clothes on we don't want to see you boob, or moobs. Hollywood has demoralized respectful behavior.
You're right! Silly me. Rather than trying to stop a double standard and live life freely wherever I want, I'll just move across the country. I mean, with my way we're squashing a social stigma, but your way seems so much more logical.
You're a dumbass -_-
Yeah, you've got your facts right
You are being ignorant by posting this. you dont know enough about what you are saying to talk about it. womens breast are covered because they are mad for breast feeding and sexuality. when people are having sex the breast emits a sexual hormone so no matter what our "society" says its a scientific fact that breasts will always be in some way associated with sex. mens breast do not give off this hormone thus are not seen as something to cover. also whats done is done and even if you wanted to a major change in society such as making female breasts an ok everyday non sexual thing would take at least a decade to actually notice a difference.
(Cont) I also understand that breasts will almost always be associated with sex- with breasts mates can establish health, as well as a sense of comfort. But just because something can be associated with sex it doesn't make it obscene- the male torso is usually connected with sex (abs, anyone?) but we don't view that as inappropriate. It, just like breasts, can be seen as sexual- but we have also recognized that it is a natural part of the human body that is not exclusively a sexual thing. Lastly, for someone who called me ignorant you sure are quick to use an illogical argument- "whats done is done and even if you wanted to a major change in society ... [it] would take at least a decade to actually notice a difference." What's done is done? Really? Excuse my french but that's a completely shit argument. That could have and almost certainly was said before any revolution throughout history. You cannot expect the world to change if you yourself aren't willing to change. And yes, I realize it would take a long time for this to become acceptable, but it's definitely possible- many countries are eons ahead in how they regard the human body. And besides, I've got time.
I fail to see how I'm being ignorant. I'm making a simple observation, and a valid one at that. I'm not sure what you're referring to when you say "breasts were made for sexuality". Sex as in coitus? Because if that's what you're implying then you're mistaken- they're pretty unnecessary for sex itself- they only become important if one is nursing a child. Please elaborate on what sexuality you're referring to. "when people are having sex the breast emits a sexual hormone so ... breasts will always be in some way associated with sex." I assume you're referring to the hormone Oxytocin? If so, this hormone is produced largely during breastfeeding. It can often be produced during sexual arousal, yes, but by both men and women , NOT just women. And it only occurs during great moments of arousal- not when going about daily activities. Also- just to clarify- Oxytocin is not a hormone that induces horniness or something- the exact opposite, in fact; sexual stimulation increases Oxytocin. The hormone itself is actually one that makes one want to be close to someone else- not necessarily have sex with them. That's why it's known as the 'cuddle hormone'.
Because women's nipples have to do with breastfeeding, something private.
1.) Mouths have to do with kissing, also something usually done in private- does that mean they should now be seen as 'obscene'? 2.) Breastfeeding is often done in public without any problems, so it's not like it's considered a particularly provocative thing. 3.) If this were the case wouldn't the only nipples censored be the ones of lactating women? Not every female is a mother who has breastfed.
Yes but mouths are also used for eating, something that's always been communal. And I don't know where you live, but if I walked down the street and saw some woman breastfeeding her child it would not be normal. And it's not like we only censor erect penises >_>.
That was my point, though. Just because something can be linked to an 'inappropriate' act, it doesn't mean the thing itself is inherently bad as well. I remember when I was about 11 I wanted to go swimming with my brother - I saw that he was shirtless so I took off my shirt too and suddenly all hell broke loose with my parents trying to cover me up. It doesn't make sense- they're just nipples. Mine pretty much look identical to that of a male's, the only difference being that I have a breast underneath (but again, society does not consider the breast to be 'obscene', so I don't see the problem)./ I don't know where you live but I don't know any women who breastfeed while walking down a street. I have, however, seen women do it while at restaurants, parks, malls, on TV, etc. and there's no problem- it's widely accepted as natural./ You're right, we don't only censor erect penises- we censor all genitalia regardless of gender, because most believe it's obscene. My point here is it's a stupid double standard that people only freak out over female nipples, because they see males topless all the time, so it shouldn't be a particularly shocking thing.
Yes but male nipples don't have a purpose. Also, "because most believe it's obscene," well the same is true for female nipples. And I've never seen a woman breastfeeding in public anywhere - something being natural doesn't make it something you do in public.
How does something having a purpose make it inappropriate?/ Yes, they think genitalia is obscene- it doesn't make them right. My point was that at least there's some reasoning with that (hygiene factors, as well as increased risk of rape occurring)- where this is just a huge double standard with no logical argument. There is genuinely nothing offensive about them- it's not like it would scar kids or they're unsanitary./ Well, I don't know what to tell you about not having seen a woman publicly breastfeed- that's your problem. I can tell you with certainty though, that it's a widely acceptable thing socially and legally; 45 states have laws that specifically allow women to breastfeed in any public or private location, and 28 states exempt breastfeeding from public indecency laws.
By law genetalia used in the process of reproduction has to be covered in public. Girls breastfeed, so nipples become a part of reproduction. For guys the nipples have no reproductive value and have become the equivalent of little colored growths. This makes them irrelevant.
I know the decency laws- I'm saying that they should change. If I, or any other woman wants to be topless, she should be able to be without being treated like a deviant. Especially when men can go an entire day being topless and no one has any qualms.
'Yay freedom yay equality!!!' yes I see what you're saying but fundamentally I think it would be worse of women. They'd be even more objectified, very few women would and the ones that did would be treated like whores and have their self esteem steam rolled. Also, for the most part any guy who spends a day topless not at a beach or pool is a total jack ass that everyone judges and treats poorly, it's really not THAT easy for guys to go topless socially acceptably.
Actually, I think it would help stop objectification. The only reason breasts are glorified so much is because they're seen as something specifically linked to sex and something to be considered provoking. If women were topless more often it would become less of an issue because people would be used to it, and there wouldn't be a social stigma that 'Girls' nipples are bad or only for sex'. The argument you're using is the exact same one that was used ages ago when women were still expected to cover everything from the ankles up- and it's a mentality that's common in some parts of the world; "In order for a women to maintain her dignity she should cover up" is not a philosophy that works- it's been proven it's more damaging than anything, and it's oppressive. However, in countries where the human body is regarded as a more natural thing and not something only for sex, people are allowed to be free and it's not a big deal, and it's a generally more comfortable environment.
Not exactly. In the long run (15-20 years) it would help a bit with the objectification, after a solid decade of making it much worse. It would be so difficult for women that for most it would be destructive and wouldn't go anywhere. I think your view is right but the steps towards your view would be widely damaging long before helpful.
Rowanne at first I thought you were ok but now you sound like a bitchy 'me me me, I want I want, fake equality in the form of double standards, I'm irrational and stereotypical' femanazi.
.... You do realize that the exact point of this idea is to provide equality for others? I fail to see how stopping a double standard only benefits me, or how it's 'fake equality', or how it promotes a double standard. What double standard am I creating? And I don't see how you think I'm being irrational- I've provided genuine facts for all my comments on this post.. elaborate or fuck off, please.