• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Women Going Topless In Your Community

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
There's a basic principle in law to the effect that law is put into place to serve practical objectives. Lacking any such objective, a law is undeserving of enactment. And I suggest that restrictive standards follow such a philosophy. If no practical objective is served by setting a restrictive standard, then the standard is undeserving of being put into practice. So I have to ask, what practical objective is served by restricting women from going topless in public?

.
car accidents.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I would support it, provided one caveat.
Women who go out in public topless should have a signed statement on file that they won't get upset when men treat them like a topless woman in public.

Otherwise, I am totally unconcerned about it. Frankly, when the weather is hot I feel bad for chicks who have to wear more than I do.
Tom
FYI, back when I looked like a Greek god (instead
of a weak clod), I used to go out for runs topless.
Never caused me any trouble.
I did get a remark from a woman once. She wondered
how my massive pectorals danced the way they did.
I was amused.
 

Brickjectivity

wind and rain touch not this brain
Staff member
Premium Member
There's a basic principle in law to the effect that law is put into place to serve practical objectives. Lacking any such objective, a law is undeserving of enactment. And I suggest that restrictive standards follow such a philosophy. If no practical objective is served by setting a restrictive standard, then the standard is undeserving of being put into practice. So I have to ask, what practical objective is served by restricting women from going topless in public?
You are asking for a reason to restrict all women from ever going topless in public? I do not put forward such a reason you know. Was that what your topic was about, because I thought it was about something else. I would not support an initiative to support allowing women to go topless in my community currently. It would create havoc here, so no.
There's a basic principle in law to the effect that law is put into place to serve practical objectives.
The Constitution's preamble states it is to insure domestic tranquility and promote the general welfare. There is no reason that there cannot be laws regulating clothing if it is in pursuit of that goal. Law is a practice not a science and can try things.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I would not support an initiative to support allowing women to go topless in my community currently. It would create havoc here, so no.
By this standard we'd all still be dressed as 15th century pilgrims.
A century ago I'm sure people were arguing that short sleeves or dresses above the ankle would create havoc, and women wearing trousers was all out.
The Constitution's preamble states it is to insure domestic tranquility and promote the general welfare. There is no reason that there cannot be laws regulating clothing if it is in pursuit of that goal. Law is a practice not a science and can try things.
They have such laws in Saudi Arabia, I hear.
There are always bluenoses decrying the indecency of this or that. They get used to it.
We always get used to it, and people go on to wear some new fashion to attract public attention.


image

Though green states indicate there is some degree of “topless freedom,” that does not mean it’s legal for women to go shirtless throughout the state. Local ordinances may ban or allow the practice in opposition to state law, and California is listed green despite the fight in Venice Beach. Orange states have “ambiguous laws;” in red states, female toplessness is illegal.
 
Last edited:

Brickjectivity

wind and rain touch not this brain
Staff member
Premium Member
By this standard we'd all still be dressed as 15th century pilgrims.
A century ago I'm sure people were arguing that short sleeves or dresses above the ankle would create havoc, and women wearing trousers was all out.
So because we have rules against women going topless you argue that this holds back change. All I am asking is why a change is needed or important enough to change the way things are -- modify that. Its not what I ask but what the public asks, and it has to be answered to justify changing the law.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
So because we have rules against women going topless you argue that this holds back change. All I am asking is why a change is needed or important enough to change the way things are -- modify that. Its not what I ask but what the public asks, and it has to be answered to justify changing the law.
You do know that sounds like it was excerpted from the Riyadh Times opinion section....
;)
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.

Yesterday I came across the following list.

1) Toplessness is permitted in New Orleans, Louisana during Mardi Gras.

2) Women are allowed to be topless in South Miami, Florida, but only on the beach.

3) New York City is home to lawful toplessness.

4) Toplessness is A-Okay in Austin Texas.

5) To no one's surprise, toplessness is acceptable in Portland, Oregon.

6) Washington D.C. permits women to go topless.

7) An even tan is allowed in Honolulu, Hawaii.

8 It’s legal to be topless in Madison, Wisconsin.

9) Toplessness is totally acceptable in Santa Fe, New Mexico.

10) It’s legal for women to be topless in Columbus, Ohio.
source

Additionally, women can go topless in the following cities.

11) Asheville, NC

12) Boulder, CO

13) Eugene, OR

14) Keene, NH

15) Key West, FL at Fantasy Fest

16) And the whole of Canada
source

And even more additionally, ;) Naked Bike Rides are permitted in:

a) Seattle, WA
b) Portland, OR
c) Eugene, OR
d) San Francisco, CA
e) Los Angeles, CA
f) Missoula, MT
g) Tucson, AZ
h) Denver, CO
i) Boulder, CO
j) Austin, TX
k) New Orleans, LA
l) Saint Louis, MO
m) Madison, Wi
n) Chicago, IL
o) Columbus, OH
p) Asheville, NC
q) Tampa Bay, FL
r) Miami, FL
s) Prince George County, Va
t) Washington, DC
u) Philadelphia, PA
v) New York, NY
w) Northampton, MA
x) Boston, MA
y) Montpelier, VT
z) Burlington, VT
aa) Saint Petersburg, FL
source

QUESTION: If you don't live in any of these cities would you support an initiative to allow females to go topless in your community.

Why?

Why not?

.
What's the point. I drive through all the places like that and have yet to see a topless babe. Even in Canada.
 

Rational Agnostic

Well-Known Member
Not only should women have the right to be topless, full nudity should be allowed by either gender in any setting. I realize that my view may be in a minority, but this whole concept about nudity and privacy is asinine. Humans are animals, and nudity is perfectly natural. The socially constructed idea that people should have to cover their bodies in public is not based upon anything even remotely logical.
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
Not only should women have the right to be topless, full nudity should be allowed by either gender in any setting. I realize that my view may be in a minority, but this whole concept about nudity and privacy is asinine. Humans are animals, and nudity is perfectly natural. The socially constructed idea that people should have to cover their bodies in public is not based upon anything even remotely logical.
Because screw 1000s of years of human civilization. Let's use Amazon tribes as our role model.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I suspect, like any other fashion statement, the novelty would soon wear off.
How long can you stare at something before it becomes boring and you go back to staring at your cellphone/mobile?
 

Brickjectivity

wind and rain touch not this brain
Staff member
Premium Member
You do know that sounds like it was excerpted from the Riyadh Times opinion section....
;)
...and you seem to be saying that the public ought to be told by some strangers what standards it should accept.
 
Top