5 ms·
It's the same thing. It's fighting against the stupid view that two lumps under your flesh are somehow evil and must be hidden away or punished somehow (but on
by kstenerud 5y ago
It's the same thing.
It's fighting against the stupid view that two lumps under your flesh are somehow evil and must be hidden away or punished somehow (but only if you're a woman), or that touching your crotch on television is an arrestable offence, or any other thing in that long list of stupidity.
It's about having rights over your own body, such that you can say "You don't like what you see? Well too bad, because it's my body and my right and you can't do a damn thing about it, nor do I have any obligation to explain myself."
It's primarily women who fight this battle because the rules are tilted far more against them. Most men can't even see the problem.
Here's an interesting thought experiment: A man gets breast implants and then goes around topless like he did before. Can you imagine the chaos that ensues? The legal questions? The social commentary about "decency"? The traumatized children? Can you see the hypocracy?
- jb1991 5y ago> Here's an interesting thought experiment: A man gets breast implants and then goes around topless like he did before. Can you imagine the chaos that ensues? The legal questions? The social commentary about "decency"? The traumatized children? Can you see the hypocracy? I’m curious if you are suggesting that is perfectly acceptable that, in a society that prohibits topless women from walking around, it would be perfectly acceptable for a man to implant breasts on himself and then walk around topless.
- dsr_ 5y agoThat's what Facebook enforces, yes. "Male" chests are fine, "Female" chests are not.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]