Macfistowannabe said:
There are times when they are appropriate, and there are times when they are not. If it's Playboy, that's strictly your business how you choose to behave. If it's the Super Bowl halftime show where there are children in the audience - not to mention plain old folks who just want a decent means of entertainment, I won't cry for you if you get fined.
And it was for a split second, and it was something that everybody in the audience has seen at some point and time (yes, even the children have seen them in some way, shape, or form), and nobody got hurt or died...so where's the problem? By making a big deal out of it, that's gonna draw more attention to the incident than if it hadn't been mentioned (and broadcast on the news 20 trillion times). I didn't even see the incident occur, and wouldn't have known that anything happened if nobody'd made a big deal out of it. But they did, and all that does is make kids
more curious, especially if they didn't see it originally.
Besides that, I don't know what adults were so afraid of in regards to kids seeing it-I heard stories that there were kids who saw it and thought it was gross, and there were kids who saw it and perhaps laughed about it for, like, a minute, then they moved on with their lives and wished the adults would do the same. You didn't see some big outbreak of kids going around flashing every person they saw afterwards, so I don't really understand why people freaked out so much, and I really wish kids were given more credit in regards to dealing with this kind of thing-most of them will be pretty mature about it all.
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
A women's breast is considered the closest thing to a sex organ, and as a matter of fact, our society has treated them as sex organs. They are used in foreplay in our society more often than not. Therefore, laws have been made to suit the condition of our society. Men's breasts? They're not that attractive, and they are in no way treated as sex organs. I'd laugh at any man who tries to use his mosquito bites for foreplay.
Men's breasts aren't attractive? Tell that to a great deal of women in this world...they'd certainly beg to differ with you.
And women's breasts aren't just sex organs, they're also a means of providing nourishment for babies, too. Besides that, they're only seen as a sexual thing to those who
want to see them that way...like I said earlier, there was a guy I talked to one time who didn't find women's breasts the sexiest part of the body. And there's some other guys in this world who feel the same way.
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
Maybe so, but don't forget - you have admitted that reversing the law would not exactly result in desexualizing them. Certainly would not have that effect immediately.
I know...I never said it would. I understand that if this were legalized, there'd always be people out there who'd be bothered by it, and that's fine, they can be bothered by it all they wish. I just have an issue with them trying to ban women from showing off whatever part of
their own body they want to show off.
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
It would take many years, we would be OLD or DEAD by the time it happens.
We might, we might not. And even if we are old or dead by that time, well, hey, at least there'll be a new generation of women who'll feel comfortable dressing however they want without worrying that somebody is going to try and stop them from doing so because they personally found it offensive or obscene (yeah, your comment about breasts still being seen as "obscene"-correction, they're obscene to
you and to certain other people. Not everybody in this country sees them as obscene).
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
Me too. The House of Representatives passed the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act in a 389-38 vote. 36 of the minority vote were democrats, if anyone cares to know. With that kind of support on your side, nothing much will happen for 'the revolution' any time soon.
Well, it never hurts to try anyway. Besides that, that bugs me about the government thing-it's not their job to regulate what we can and can't see on TV, that's
our personal choice to make. I don't appreciate somebody sitting there and telling me what they think I should and shouldn't be allowed to see on TV (especially considering that our very same government apparently has no problem supporting war footage being broadcast on TV...that personally bothers
me, but if they can still show that...). I have a mind of my own, I should be able to decide what I'm comfortable seeing on TV. If there's anything I don't feel like watching...well, the remote control
was invented for a reason, after all.
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
And that's understandable to ask those questions. They should be asked and discussed in order to recognize the problems and obsessions in our society. Life/death issue? No, simply a test of passion. I suppose I have a different take on the 'be willing to die for what you believe in' concept than most people. I see honor in that, I think it makes a very strong statement if someone would give their life to make a difference in society, whatever their views are.
I agree, I can see honor in the whole "dying for your beliefs" thing, too...shows how passionate you are about them and everything. But if people don't die for their beliefs, well, that's their choice-it doesn't mean they're any less passionate about them, they just want to find a different means of fighting for what they believe in. Nothing wrong with that, either.
Angela