Women, Men, and Shirts

[pensmama87]

My wife has forbidden me from appearing shirtless anywhere except for the pool or the beach. There is no way I will ever, ever be allowed to mow the lawn while shirtless. Several of the men in our neighborhood do it, and as she said, “The last thing I want to see when I drive into my neighborhood is THAT.”

I wouldn’t go so far as to say that I’ve forbidden it, but I have requested that my husband always wear a shirt when visible by the public, even at the pool or beach. I recently started pushing it more because we require our sons to wear swim shirts, so I think it’s consistent if he does as well, and because during our last vacation I noticed more than once that he was being…ahem…“studied” by other women - ever notice in the trashy paperback sections of stores that there’s a a few covers featuring well-built shirtless men holding adorable babies and young children? Yeah, women dig that stuff. Of course, he had no idea it was happening p), but I saw it and frankly, I didn’t like it. I don’t think the answer is the male equivalent of a burka, but if he can throw on a swim shirt, makes sense to me.

(The first time he wore one he said, "Oh wow, this is pretty nice, and I don’t feel all greasy from sunscreen. )

 

[Lost_Found]

No it’s because they know a bunch of pearl-clutchers will write in and they simply can’t be bothered with it. “Think of the children!!!”

…more or less all of whom of course have seen breasts since the day they were born, but that’s never recalled in this kind of hand-wringing; it’s not children who innately start to see breasts as sexual - it is forced upon them by adults who make social and cultural rules.

but in the post i said the LIBERAL publications

 

[Murmurs]

but in the post i said the LIBERAL publications

Ooh! So you did!

While maybe MSNBC doesn’t care much what Fox News says about them (and vice versa) they have to be aware that not all of their viewing public has a homogenous attitude (you can be conservative and watch MSNBC just as a raving liberal can watch Fox, etc) towards things. And also Americans even liberal ones are in general a lot more prudish (rightly or wrongly) about things in general than many others (which is why this thread is going round in circles a bit!!)

God bless

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

but in the post i said the LIBERAL publications

Remember Nipplegate?

 

[pensmama87]

Ooh! So you did!

While maybe MSNBC doesn’t care much what Fox News says about them (and vice versa) they have to be aware that not all of their viewing public has a homogenous attitude (you can be conservative and watch MSNBC just as a raving liberal can watch Fox, etc) towards things. And also Americans even liberal ones are in general a lot more prudish (rightly or wrongly) about things in general than many others (which is why this thread is going round in circles a bit!!)

God bless

But what are you defining as “prudish”?

(The term usually carries a negative connotation today, but comes from the term “prudence,” which is a virtue. As I’ve mentioned previously, in most Western cultures, there are relevant practical considerations that go into the development of cultural norms regarding clothing. It is, frankly, not prudent for light-skinned people to go around topless, and in all but the hottest and most humid climates more clothing is required for warmth. So yes, it would be jarring to see someone, in the context of those cultures, ignore those norms. That’s not a sign of repression - it’s just that in most situations if you see someone other than a child wearing less clothing, it’s probably in a sexual context. It makes sense that that connection exists.

My children see me breastfeed. I have no issue with their naked bodies and it’s true that they have no problem being naked. But I also teach them to wear clothes, and it’s not that I’m teaching them to be ashamed. It’s just how we are polite and get along around here, and avoid sunburn and excessive exposure to the elements. )

 

[Oneofthewomen]

I think that this whole debate is a little silly. If a woman wants to go topless at a beach or in her own back yard while sunbathing, I have no problem. Don’t care if men do it either. Just have some common sense and put your shirt on if you want to go into a restaurant, store or walk around.

What bothers me about this is the thinking that women are always held to a different standard than men are.

Topless-ness is not really an issue where I live, but I will tell you that the many young men (the under 30 crowd) wear their pants hanging off their behinds.

This really ticks me off- I don’t want to see your underwear, and I certainly don’t want to see your butt or your “family jewels”

If this is going to be “culturally acceptable”, then me going topless should be too.

 

[mikekle]

In Europe there were multiple times where bared breasts were fashionable

Also, at one time, it was common for men to go into battle completely naked too…very interesting!

 

[mikekle]

What is interesting is that the liberal media institutions which advocate freedom of expression and topless women, are…yes, blurring out their photos of topless women in their reports.

This of course is because they know it is inappropriate to show this. They know that their advertisers think so, as do their readers. Case closed.

I dont know about anyone else, but I find this highly strange, especially in the modern world…I thought everyone was so open minded nowadays, hated any kind of censorship? If you watch regular tv, seems like they still have the old rules from the 1950s in place, NO NUDITY at all, only on pay cable channels is this accepted, just look back to the recent 90s cop show, NYPD Blue, everyone was up in arms about them showing mens rear ends…?? LOL and this is modern times?

Ive even heard a few networks censor out the 3 letter word for a donkey!!! and this is 2015?

I dont think any of us should ever call the naked human body dirty, nasty, etc. It was created as a beautiful thing, and to be admired. It is Satans influence that has made so many people shun their kids away from such things, makes them see it as dirty/ nasty.

 

[exnihilo]

Women enhance their breasts (with clothes, cosmetics, or surgery) because men see their breasts as sexual objects. In exactly the same way that men work on their abs or peacocks their tail fans or any example from nature you care to pick. Don’t blame women for responding to the signals given by men about what they find attractive.

Yes in a way women enhance their breasts for other women it’s true - but it’s not to impress so much as to ward off competition (like men with cap sleeve tshirts). I can promise you that if men lost all sexual interest in breasts tomorrow and replaced it with a love of women’s wrists, you will see wrist enhancement competition taking place by the weekend.

It is a fact of life that almost always whenever the behavior of women is considered the cause of it is always proclaimed to be men. Men are responsible for everything. I don’t have a problem with that. I believe properly understood that is true. But as a consequence our society should look nothing like it does today.

 

[Deo_Gratias42]

Women are visual too. I remember drooling watching boys play sports. Shirts vs. Skins drool Especially the cute ones, the fat guy was just…gross. There’s a reason that there are now TWO Magic Mike movies…and it isn’t because of gay men.
Maybe we should teach boys that you don’t sexual ly assault a women, no matter what she has on. Crazy idea, I suppose, not blaming the victim and holding men accountable…

I know. This idea that women aren’t visual, etc is nonsense. How many firemen calendar fundraisers are directed at women? How many women here used to go to the gym “to look at the eye candy”, or got interested in watching men’s rugby despite not actually liking rugby? I think women are Just more hushed about it.

 

[Wesrock]

As I was reading both sides of this debate, I felt myself drawn to Romans 14. I’m not sure I’m ready to articulate an opinion, but I’ll let Paul speak on the matter.
Saint Paul; Romans 14:

14 As for the man who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not for disputes over opinions. 2 One believes he may eat anything, while the weak man eats only vegetables. 3 Let not him who eats despise him who abstains, and let not him who abstains pass judgment on him who eats; for God has welcomed him. 4 Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Master is able to make him stand.

5 One man esteems one day as better than another, while another man esteems all days alike. Let every one be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. He also who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God; while he who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7 None of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. 8 If we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord; so then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord’s. 9 For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.

10 Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God; 11 for it is written,

“As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me,
and every tongue shall give praise to God.”
12 So each of us shall give account of himself to God.

13 Then let us no more pass judgment on one another, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother. 14 I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but it is unclean for any one who thinks it unclean. 15 If your brother is being injured by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love. Do not let what you eat cause the ruin of one for whom Christ died. 16 So do not let what is good to you be spoken of as evil. 17 For the kingdom of God does not mean food and drink but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit; 18 he who thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. 19 Let us then pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding. 20 Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for any one to make others fall by what he eats; 21 it is right not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that makes your brother stumble. 22 The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God; happy is he who has no reason to judge himself for what he approves. 23 But he who has doubts is condemned, if he eats, because he does not act from faith; for whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.

 

[on_the_hill]

As I was reading both sides of this debate, I felt myself drawn to Romans 14. I’m not sure I’m ready to articulate an opinion, but I’ll let Paul speak on the matter.

I think I have another favorite bible passage to add to the list.