Time magazine cover - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-31-2012, 02:07 PM   #61
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 09:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladyfreckles View Post

The fact is that in America toplessness was fine and dandy until the Christians arrived. Religion is the reason it has become a forbidden fruit, not actual modesty or sexuality.
Well, if you're talking about native americans, then I guess you'd be right, but our culture isn't based off of native culture. I doubt you could find a 'western' culture in the last 3000 years where walking around topless was the norm. Again, I've got no problem with women walking around topless (quite the opposite, actually), but it's a little insincere to imply that concealing the breasts in a new phenomenon
__________________

Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 02:08 PM   #62
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 09:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by trojanchick99 View Post
Most of the time, if women are breastfeeding in public, they are being very discreet.
That's totally cool.

I should've said not flopped out in a restaurant
__________________

Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 02:20 PM   #63
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,600
Local Time: 05:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AchtungBono View Post
breastfeeding is beautiful and natural......and so is having sex
when you are right, you are right
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 02:26 PM   #64
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,728
Local Time: 08:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jive Turkey View Post
This always comes up with this topic. I guess it's difficult for women to understand, but breasts most certainly are sexual to a man. They might not be primary sexual organs, but they are definitely secondary. A man's testicles aren't sexual in the same sense, but we wouldn't expect to see them hanging out all over the place either
I'm a woman and I understand what you mean. Furthermore I don't disagree.

Female breasts do have a sexual aspect to them because of the way that we have been socialized. It's of little relevance what tribes in Africa do - we are not them, nor are our culture and social norms the same.

Furthermore, if we insist that breasts are NOT sexual, then by logical extension, a man who gropes me by grabbing and squeezing my breasts is neither sexually harassing nor sexually assaulting me. That is why you will see a pretty expansive body of law on the topic of whether breasts are indeed sexual organs or whether they are mere mammary glands.

That's to say nothing of breast feeding in public - I've always seen women covered up and it doesn't bother me in the slightest. Baby's gotta eat and we can't expect these women to be prisoners in their home lest they offend somebody's sensibilities.
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 02:30 PM   #65
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 09:17 AM
Nice points, anitram. We're definitely on the same page
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 02:49 PM   #66
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 64,498
Local Time: 06:17 AM
I love it when people who don't want women to breastfeed in a restaurant suggest that they do it in the bathroom.

Yes, because who doesn't love to have their meals in a public restroom?
corianderstem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 04:25 PM   #67
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 09:17 AM
I think we should setup separate establishments for breastfeeding. Bed and Breastfeeds. We could make a killing on this idea, you guys.
PhilsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 04:25 PM   #68
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 20,567
Local Time: 07:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Furthermore, if we insist that breasts are NOT sexual, then by logical extension, a man who gropes me by grabbing and squeezing my breasts is neither sexually harassing nor sexually assaulting me. That is why you will see a pretty expansive body of law on the topic of whether breasts are indeed sexual organs or whether they are mere mammary glands.
Very good point (and the rest of your post was spot on, too).

I do agree with ladyfreckles that the way people freak out over breasts sometimes in our culture is stupid and nuts, though.
Moonlit_Angel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 04:25 PM   #69
Acrobat
 
ladyfreckles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Seattle
Posts: 402
Local Time: 06:17 AM
Should also add, "grabbing" anyone where they do not want to be grabbed is assault, period. Being topless wouldn't change that, and the location of where you are grabbed should not change that either. I don't really think having a guy grab your breasts counts as sexual assault, it's more of an unwarranted advance (and yes, this has actually happened to me before). If the guy keeps bothering you after you tell him to bug off, it's harassment. There are plenty of people that have fetishes for non-sexual body parts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jive Turkey View Post
And our culture, which we base every other aspect of our lives on, deems breasts to be sexual. There's no point bringing up other cultures. We are our own culture. It doesn't make one right and the other wrong. They're just different. Breasts are absolutely sexual in our culture. And that's ok. Other cultures walk around with their dicks hanging out, but I don't see anyone fighting for that
This exact argument has been used to defend racism and slavery. Banning women from being topless in public, or breast feeding in public, is a sexist issue. As for the past 3,000 years thing in your other post, you are again wrong. Toplessness was actually a form of fashion back in the 1600s-1700s. Dresses were designed as such (this was regional, but it was in western culture). It wasn't until the 1800s that it started to be really looked down upon.
ladyfreckles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 04:33 PM   #70
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 09:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladyfreckles View Post


This exact argument has been used to defend racism and slavery.
I refuse to engage in such hyperbole. Your argument just jumped off a bridge. I'll expect to see a Hitler reference in your next post
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 04:35 PM   #71
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 09:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladyfreckles View Post
As for the past 3,000 years thing in your other post, you are again wrong. Toplessness was actually a form of fashion back in the 1600s-1700s. Dresses were designed as such (this was regional, but it was in western culture).
Site a source then.
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 04:36 PM   #72
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 09:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladyfreckles View Post
and the location of where you are grabbed should not change that either. I don't really think having a guy grab your breasts counts as sexual assault
So you're not going to distinguish between someone grabbing your arm and someone grabbing your breast for the sake of your argument? Ridiculous
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 04:38 PM   #73
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 09:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladyfreckles View Post
There are plenty of people that have fetishes for non-sexual body parts.
irrelevant. If we were to start catering to every fetish, you'd have to show ID to get into a shoe store
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 04:41 PM   #74
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 09:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladyfreckles View Post
Banning women from being topless in public, or breast feeding in public, is a sexist issue.
There's nothing sexist about what we're talking about. Nobody is asking for a ban. But it doesn't mean we need to see a woman's baby slobbering all over her breasts when we're at the Olive Garden. Be discrete
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 04:52 PM   #75
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,228
Local Time: 07:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AchtungBono

Sure breastfeeding is beautiful and natural......and so is having sex - when will we see couples having sex on the cover of "Field and Stream"? Where will it end?
But it's only beautiful when you CHOOSE the opposite sex right?

So maybe the baby can CHOOSE not to eat?

Otherwise that would be a great analogy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AchtungBono
Where's the modesty? Why can't the mothers drape a towel or blanket over themselves to cover up? It wasn't necessary for them to be vulgar to make a point.
Try eating under a blanket in the summer, and let me know how you enjoy it.
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 04:52 PM   #76
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,728
Local Time: 08:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladyfreckles View Post
Should also add, "grabbing" anyone where they do not want to be grabbed is assault, period. Being topless wouldn't change that, and the location of where you are grabbed should not change that either. I don't really think having a guy grab your breasts counts as sexual assault, it's more of an unwarranted advance.
The location matters because sexual assault and assault can be treated differently under criminal legislation.

And no, having somebody grab your breasts is not harassment, it's battery.
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 04:53 PM   #77
Acrobat
 
ladyfreckles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Seattle
Posts: 402
Local Time: 06:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jive Turkey View Post
There's nothing sexist about what we're talking about. Nobody is asking for a ban. But it doesn't mean we need to see a woman's baby slobbering all over her breasts when we're at the Olive Garden. Be discrete
That is not what I'm saying at all. In a restaurant even men are required to shirt up. However, in a place like a park or a beach I could not care less if a woman is fully exposed and feeding a child. I honestly don't care. From the arguments I've seen about public breast feeding it sounds like it's only modest if the entire infant and the breast is covered in a blanket, which is just ridiculous. Even in the photo of the two air force women, neither of them are really over-exposed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jive Turkey View Post
irrelevant. If we were to start catering to every fetish, you'd have to show ID to get into a shoe store
That's exactly my point. If we require by law women to cover up every body part that can possibly be deemed sexual, we'd all be covered from head to toe.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jive Turkey View Post
Site a source then.
I learned about this in high school/college through textbooks and library mediums (aka not online sources). However there are specific terms for it.

Décolletage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The history of underclothes (Book, 1992) [WorldCat.org] One of the books I've read that discusses this.

An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

http://www.amazon.com/Customs-Cultur.../dp/0060661100 And this is one of the books I've read on it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jive Turkey View Post
I refuse to engage in such hyperbole. Your argument just jumped off a bridge. I'll expect to see a Hitler reference in your next post
It's not hyperbole. "This is what our culture deems acceptable, and it's just not acceptable for blacks to be on a bus, it doesn't matter if that's allowed in other countries" has been used before. Back during the civil war similar arguments were used to defend the idea of slaves by saying it wasn't abusive because they were nice to them/here the slaves are just part of a culture/etc.
ladyfreckles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 05:01 PM   #78
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 09:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladyfreckles View Post

I learned about this in high school/college through textbooks and library mediums (aka not online sources). However there are specific terms for it.

Décolletage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The history of underclothes (Book, 1992) [WorldCat.org] One of the books I've read that discusses this.

An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

Amazon.com: Customs and Cultures: Anthropology for Christian Missions (9780060661106): Eugene A. Nida: Books And this is one of the books I've read on it.
Fair. And good on you for finding some sources. But even then, in the course of history, it was still a somewhat obscure fashion trend (again, I'm not opposed to going back to these styles if you ladies are on board)
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 05:02 PM   #79
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 09:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladyfreckles View Post


That's exactly my point. If we require by law women to cover up every body part that can possibly be deemed sexual, we'd all be covered from head to toe.
But we have to go back to what society deems sexual. I can't hang my ass out and walk around either
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 05:03 PM   #80
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 09:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladyfreckles View Post

It's not hyperbole. "This is what our culture deems acceptable, and it's just not acceptable for blacks to be on a bus, it doesn't matter if that's allowed in other countries" has been used before. Back during the civil war similar arguments were used to defend the idea of slaves by saying it wasn't abusive because they were nice to them/here the slaves are just part of a culture/etc.
You're equating not being able to show your breasts in public (which you are where I live) with an entire race of people being enslaved and treated as 3rd rate human beings. That's hyperbole. It's a disservice to your argument
__________________

Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×