Should women have the right to walk around topless?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/07/29/moira-johnston-goes-topless-in-nyc-to-raise-awareness-of-the-right-to-a-bare-chest.html?obref=obinsite

If they look like her, then I'm all for it. Can't say I like the idea of a bunch of fat cows walking around with no shirt on.

Also: lol @ creepy black guy in back ground.

 

When I see stuff like this I have a knee jerk reaction to say: This is why I can't stand liberals. Then I have to tell myself they aren't all like that, but sometimes it feels as if they won't be content until not one shred of tradition is left.

My mother used to say that traditions were the thread in the family fabric. I'd rather have those traditions become inclusive rather than destroy them entirely.

 

If social mores say no, then no.

 

She is an idiot. And not that attractive. She'll probably be raped on her way home one day. She could use a boob job. Like many liberal leftist idiots, this is her gimmick. Look at me, look at me! You can be sure she is an Obama voter, and like most Obama voters, completely clueless morons.

 

I think it depends on what the tradition is that one is trying to have become inclusive.

 

Without a doubt. Next to the Middle East, we are one of the most sexually-repressed societies on the planet. The difference is we pretend to be free, where they don't B.S. about who they are...

 

I don't think many women just casually stroll around topless, and I can deal with breastfeeding in public so I'm fine with it.

 

I encourage women to demand shirtless equality. Unless you look like Rosie O'Donnell, then never mind.

 

what does that mean exactly, sexually repressed. Does it mean we don't have nudity all over the tv as they do in Europe? Or should there be more rapes on the street? date rapes? more indiscriminate sex, more abortions? more porn shops, legalize alternative sexual styles such as pedophilia, beastiality and whatever??

Perhaps we're confusing sexually repressed with chaste? Modest? Good character? Living like humans rather than animals.

 

I have no problem with nudists, as long as they don't complain if businesses require clothing. They should have the right to express themselves through nudity, but not to force businesses who do not like nudists to serve them.

 

She has the right. She just does't have the chest.

 

I'm a center-weighted Liberal. And personally, I think public places are better/safer when people are covered. It's functionally a better environment when lots of strangers are gathered and their clothes are "on" (for many reasons).

But make no mistake about it... I know scores of "men" (both "Liberal" and "Conservative") who WISH our public places allowed women to be topless. Trust me, libido unshackled... isn't a 'conservative' thing. Some (most) guys like to see nakedness.

In any case, as much as I'd like to see some people naked (top to bottom)... I don't think it is best for the general public. Maybe certain clubs, beaches or other places... but not the general public. I am against allowing public nudity (with few exceptions), for the sake of 'all' citizens.

 

I am an individualist, and a minarchist, so while I am prone to say: do what you want as long as it doesn't hit me where I live, there are times where the line is real fuzzy for me. For example, a nude beach...yes. Walking around NYC...no. In your home, property, or backyard? Yes. Walking around NYC...no.

People who think this is acceptable of awesome probably wouldn't think that if the individual walking around naked was 400lbs or her boobs hung to her knees.

 

Maybe it's no big deal, because I think that MOST people wouldn't want their naked parts hanging out in public anyway.

 

Are you sure? This could be in your future...

 

Be careful what you wish for. It may not be as pleasant as you think

 

I already told you, I don't want nudity in public.

 

Yep; that's very often true.

 

So it was ok 50 years ago for whites and blacks to not be allowed to legally marry in certain places because of social mores?

Traditions and social mores can be used to justify all sorts of evil.

 

And so can an absence of them.

 

No it can't.

 

Were slavery and child labor traditions we should have kept?

I guess women's suffrage was bad too huh?

 

At the very least you could have directly addressed his question.

So it was ok 50 years ago for whites and blacks to not be allowed to legally marry in certain places because of social mores?

Please directly and concisely address the question that will result in your own contradiction.

 

Please, by all means put words in my mouth and straw man me.

 

I am asking you a direct question, I am not insinuating that you said X.

You are making the Appeal to Tradition fallacy. So I am interested to see how relative the need to preserve traditions is, in your mind. Apparently some traditions are worthy and some are not. Thus negating the Appeal to Tradition and rendering it a blatant fallacy.

So what traditions are worth keeping and on what basis are these decisions made?

Please answer the question directly and in a concise manner.