byPJ Lifestyle Humor
Related at PJ Lifestyle:
– for redheads, shirtless or not.
As long as those who want to go topless want none of the blame that comes from their actions – their actions communicate self-centredness, more than a pure desire to liberate.
Since “The Movement” is essentially a bottomless pit, I can’t wait to see what the next frontier of “rights” will be.
Obviously bottomless will follow topless, but what then? Breaking free of the bourgeois restriction of using toilet facilities? Equal rights for headhunters? Cannibal liberation?
whatever it is, 50 bucks says it starts in California.
It’s pretty obvious why the men were there.
“Oh, yes, we’re absolutely favor of women going topless. Equal rights and all that stuff, whatever.”
Since they don’t seem to know why it is OK for men to go topless but not women, I’ll explain.
Breasts are what Darwin describes as a sexual display, the male torso is not. Our culture considers blatant sexual displays in public to be inappropriate.
Attractive women who blatantly display their breasts gain an advantage in everyday life. Guys deffer to them, give them freebies, and it gives them a leg up when competing for the attention of the small fraction of guys women value. The right to go topless maximizes that advantage.
Like everything else, Feminists only want to adhere to those parts of the old cultural rules that benefit them. Those that disadvantage them or advantage men are Patriarchal oppression and must be discarded forthwith.
You can bet that the same women who want to walk around with their breasts on full public view also want to be able to have men punished for looking at them unless those men are the high value ones whose attention they desire.
It’s just skin, people, come on. We never needed to legislate cultural mores such as hemlines or beachwear — and there were plenty like Martin Owens who bemoaned more skin shown and warned that it’s a slippery slope to murder and filth.
Remember it was Berkeley, Ca that in an uproar (“male nudity=sexual assault”) outlawed public nudity a few years ago to prevent a few middle-aged mixed-gender nudists from playing banjo and doing their song-and-dance in the park.
It’s just skin, really. It’s all good.
No it’s NOT good! What you are advocating is the destruction of our society, which has a strong Puritan component.
What will replace it? Blowback?
What you socialists (libertians, liberals, marxists, etc.) don’t seem to understand is that society evolved to support the family, which in turn evolved to support children, who are the future. The purpose of society is NOT to take money from the workers so the non-workers can not work.
Life is about more life, not what feels good.
Charlie don’t surf.
I’m all in favor of topless women.
Just make sure there is some QC involved.
I really wish that men with beer bellies and man boobs would refrain from going topless. Gross!
IMHO, it depends on the Woman.
Can you imagine Nancy Pelosi topless?
I have it on rumor that she has Dirty Harry Reid hold hers so she doesn’t kneel on them when dropping to her knees.
I don’t believe it myself. After all it would be so much simpler for her to just tuck them into one of the wrinkles were her abdomen used to be.
I expect CNN to be the first to go topless on camera. Ratings would go up.
Then FOX would follow and own CNN.
Julie Huddy topless would get Nielson’s first 100% market share.
I would rather shower @Penn State then vote Democrat.
Only if they are easy on the eyes. I call judge!
Not only should they be allowed to do so, but we need to go further. To make up for centuries of oppression, all women under 30 should be legally compelled to go topless.
It’s the right thing to do.
Equal rights? No one who isn’t doing hard physical labor or on a beach should ever walk around shirtless.
Comments are closed.
Copyright © 2005-2012 PJ Media All Rights Reserved. v1.70