I think it's probably because female breasts are considered a more sexual part of the body than the average male chest. I'm not sure why...
Poll: Semi-nudity and different genders
- Thread starter MisterM2402
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Haven't read all responses but here's mine.MisterM2402 said:
Because female breasts are seen as a sexual thing as part of the female body, it is inherently a lot more taboo for them to be shown. Male nipples are simply a by-product of being in the womb and initially being female, providing you have enough testosterone in you, they'll never amount to breasts. It's probably an evolutionary thing, I'm guessing the size and shape of breasts would be one of the metrics used by males to determine the health of a potential female mating partner and her ability to raise your offspring. Maybe we've never really gotten past it, or there's still something in the male brain that see's breasts and thinks "yeah, my penis wouldn't be wasted spending some time in her".
But this is really only in civilised societies, if you look at some tribes in Africa, the women go around bare-chested as if it's no problem. So it's also to do with social conventions. I'm guessing that due to the need for women to cover their breasts being so pervasive across both western and eastern civilised worlds, it was a very very early formed taboo in the first civilisations, possibly in line with early religion that probably commanded against sexual immorality of sorts..
I suppose if you want to get extreme liberal, you could argue that 'oh it's a really outdated taboo and in modern civilisation we can deal with it'. But I think that we have clothes for a reason. All I'm saying is, I'm glad really hot girls wear clothes because if they didn't, id' have a constant boner walking down the street. So I guess it's to do with discretion too.
Women don't hate breasts. I think a lot of women get jealous because they're not confident enough to go topless themselves.manythings said:
I hate jealousy.
Actually, the entire female body is viewed as a "Sexual Thing" by every male in existence. If I wear shorts and a tank out in public I get the "I want to F*** you" look from just about every male who sees me. OK, I usually don't wear a bra (don't need one), but some of these males get really childish about it.
I don't hate boobs, I don't worry about size, and Yes, I do like to go topless at home.
I think the males should be a little more mature about all this and not get all excited so often. But I really like it when they do .. *grin*
I don't hate boobs, I don't worry about size, and Yes, I do like to go topless at home.
I think the males should be a little more mature about all this and not get all excited so often. But I really like it when they do .. *grin*
mercifulwrath said:
Funny thing. Nipples are erogenous zones for both men and women. If you have a partner, have them try to stimulate them sometime. A lot of men actually enjoy it - it's arousing.
And I would say the chest area is attractive, nipples included.
Instead of women taking their shirts off, why don't you ban men from going topless.
That has less to do with political correctness and more to do with how funding for diseases works in general. Feminism allowed women to talk about breast cancer, and cancer as a whole became less of a cultural taboo. Before people talking openly about breast cancer there was a major taboo, obituaries still use the line "died of a long illness" instead of saying cancer. There was a popular myth that cancer was a physical manifestation of a bad attitude. Also, funding for breast cancer research really spiked in the 90's, after people stopped donating to AIDS research because "ew, gays". Which is less about feminism and more about homophobia. This is particularly prevalent in corporate funding for medical research. Big corporations want the least offensive, most broadly applicable donation. And who can fight with "save the boobies"?BGH122 said:
In terms of funding dollars per death caused, prostate and breast cancer are actually pretty close. They're also hugely ahead of most other cancers.
That´s alot harder then it sounds, mate.steph01a said:
OT: I don´t see why not. They shouldn´t be forced, but they should have the option.
So yeah. That was brief.
Well if you are heterosexual and they were male then I am confused why you were staring.Dags90 said:
If you are heterosexual and they were a woman then my point is proven.
If you are homosexual and this was a woman then I can still understand why you were staring because it would be an unusual sight.
If you are homosexual and this was a male then my point is proven still, as I was referring to the majority of people, and while I have absolutely nothing against homosexuals, it isn't as much of an issue, as seen by the fact that we don't have homosexual/bisexual locker/changing rooms. All it means is that men are more distracted than women. ;]
The third option. Still, there's all sorts of environmental distractions that are possible but we don't go legislating against them because "might cause someone to crash". Hell, the big ones (that're legal) are probably sound systems... and children.Legion said:
It's not exactly a compelling argument because, a.) as mentioned above, there are innumerable things that can distract drivers of both sexes we don't legisltate and b.) banning altogether would be needlessly broad, and the same purpose could be served by banning "sexy roadside jogging". And those cyclists in spandex.
It's somewhat balanced out by the fact that no one can ever really get away with showing male genetals. Maybe a womans. Maybe. But never a man's.MisterM2402 said:
All valid points, but the difference is that breasts are considered a 'secondary sex organ' in the same way that our behinds are. The male chest isn't because it is merely muscle. Women have chest muscles as well, and nobody objects to them, but their breasts happen to be in front of them.Dags90 said:
If it was okay for men to walk around with their arses out but it wasn't for women then sure, it'd be sexist, but breasts and chests are different.
As has been mentioned ad nauseum in this thread, nipples are an erogenous zone in a fair share of men (Just over 50% according to The Journal of Sexual Medicine) and both share similar anatomy. The main differences in the actual tissue are the amount of fat/muscle, and that men usually don't lactate as often as women.Legion said:
Or as Darwin said
Darwin said:
The problem with shirtless women, as I see it, is that the breasts are sexual organs. Partners will often incorporate the breasts into foreplay, and they are as much a part of providing for a baby as the crotch area is. Men on the other hand don't have any distinctly sexual 'bits' on their upper body, so they aren't really exposing anything.
A woman taking off her shirt is essentially the same as taking off her pants. And I speak on this issue as a girl, mostly based on why being shirtless in public is an embarrassing thought for me.
A woman taking off her shirt is essentially the same as taking off her pants. And I speak on this issue as a girl, mostly based on why being shirtless in public is an embarrassing thought for me.
