Mechanized
Member
Just hire a bunch of skeevy dudes to stare at them. Won't take long to put an end to it. Lol
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Ocean City, MD beach patrol won't scold women who sunbathe topless
- Thread starter KSweeley
- Start date
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
I've never heard the argument that forbids it on Gaf. Could be pragmatism of some sort or idk I wasn't even aware of it.
I'd call them religious nutters if they actually banned someone over it in a non pornographic matter.
Say pictures of a boob job or some such.
excelsiorlef
Member
Yes.
I never understanded this. Pretty ridiculous.
Boobs are like the rage virus from 28 Days Later but you don't need to get bitten, you just see them and go absolutely berserk.
Pretty funny. Violence is ok but boobs are not.
GoldenEye 007
Member
The US by default is a puritan society with sexist tendencies. It says a lot that black Americans technically had voting rights enshrined in the Constitution before women did.
Boobs = bad. Violence = good. Women must cover their tops, men, no big deal. At least the bottoms are consistent in enforcement I guess.
Soapbox Killer
Grand Nagus
FinaruDensetsu
Member
Here in America many of the men have the biggest boobs too. Lewd to the extreme.
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
That'd fall under pragmatism.
FinaruDensetsu
Member
We've actually got plenty of nude beaches here in Cali already. So you can still come here. But of course understand it's equal opportunity so lots of penises too.
Wafflecakes
Member
...and it isn't pragmatic for the city to want to appeal to as wide of an audience as possible?
Like it or not, the vast majority of Americans don't want women shirtless at public beaches.
Right, because they're sexist, puritanical bellends.
Ideally they should be ignored.
Wafflecakes
Member
I agree. The point is that Neogaf has essentially the same policy... ironically.
Fine Ham Abounds
Member
I was so disappointed this wasn't the first reply, you have no idea
PabloBolivar
Banned
Good point.
Chmpocalypse
Blizzard
They're not doing it for creeps to leer at them.
excelsiorlef
Member
Tyranny of the majority is not how one should determine rights
Men's bare chests are wholesome fun for the whole family.
came across a few interesting advertisements during my travels. That thing below was practically everywhere in Vienna in early 2014
http://oekastatic.orf.at/static/images/site/oeka/20140520/lifeball3.5252829.jpg (nsfw I guess?)
the "girl" on the left side had a dick btw... some idiot appaerently wasn't happy about that I guess.
should've gone to an "fkk" beach for the real deal
(nsfw warning in case you wanna google that)
I've read that historically, there are 2 big societal taboos - death and sex. They alternate every once in a while but never exist at the same time in any given society. I think I should look that up again, as the concept seems compelling
Chmpocalypse
Blizzard
Honestly, a lot of the responses are sexist and creepy as fuck.
Hickbilly Deluxe
Banned
Because if they dont, they risk losing ad revenue. Lose ad revenue, lose the site. Lose the site, evilore loses his income. So you can see the problem.
Then they should be ready to be stared at and have no avenue to complain. Are people ready for that?
When it has gone to court, the courts have sided against sexist laws such as this.
NY vs Santorelli is one of the landmark cases.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/nyctap/I92_0160.htm
Granted, it was decided in NY and not MD, but the judicial reasoning is solid.
Ocean City will be enforcing this law at its own risk.
I personally don't see how anyone can reasonably argue objectively. Clearly some people find it arousing, and others find a topless woman in her bikini on the beach baring her breasts sexual in nature. Thus to them, it makes sense to create regulation that favours their view.
To counter that, others have the more 'european' cultural view, that it's just breasts; they're not there to parade their nudity, they just want to sunbathe nude and get a tan.
So how are lawmakers to balance opposing views?
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
There's a vast difference between a private website and a public beach. The latter shouldn't discriminate for profit.
Amen. Rehoboth (and close by beaches) are great, but I may be biased as it was my family's vacation spot for most my life.
highrider
Banned
Same here man. I guess if you want to party with loads of people it's cool, but I'm all about chilling at the beach.
That's the Ocean City in NJ.
excelsiorlef
Member
Time for men to put their shirts on then.
veloxStrix
Banned
The saltwater taffy alone brings me to Ocean City whenever I'm down in Maryland. We have a little vacation house in Rock Hall and they have a surprising amount of nice beaches as well.
They need to realize there isn't a need to balance opposing views. That is the secret to politics, both views are almost never equal and they shouldn't be treated as such.
I have some sympathy for the spirit of this sexism argument. Take the knee for example. There was a time in western society where a woman showing the knee was considered taboo e.g. wear a short skirt was a no no. But if men are allowed to show the knee, women too should be, so the argument goes. And as society went on, the taboo went away and it became common enough now that it seems absurd to think otherwise.
So perhaps given time social attitudes will catch up to more equality under the law. But with female breast enhancement jobs being far more common than males, I doubt, exposed breasts in the West can achieve that non-sexualised status anytime soon.
Exclamation-One
Member
As someone who grew up near/in Ocean City, this honestly isn't that big of a deal. There's an unofficially sanctioned 'nude beach' on Assateague Island, just a short drive away.
The beaches in Ocean City are lined with hotels, resorts, and a boardwalk.
GAF gonna GAF.
The beaches in Ocean City are lined with hotels, resorts, and a boardwalk.
GAF gonna GAF.
Monocle
Member
My position is, women should be free to go topless if they want. Maybe there could be caveats that consider overt instances of sexual aggression, but just existing outside topless should not be a big deal. If we can display nude statues and paintings that celebrate the human form, and study nude bodies in anatomy and life drawing class, and see pictures of celebrities with outfits that expose everything but the nipples, we shouldn't draw an arbitrary line that says women can't take out their boobs.
If the argument is, "we don't want people getting aroused by sexual displays in public," let me just say that as a gay man, fit shirtless men are close to the top of my list of turn-ons, and I'm sure plenty of straight women would agree. So maybe this is another double standard we can do without.
European countries don't have the same nudity taboo we have in the US, and they seem better off for it. Puritanism benefits no one but prudes who demand the world to conform to their pinched and constipated worldview.
And I'm the pervert for telling this obviously underage little skeever, "scoot over so I can get in on that." Whatever!
If the argument is, "we don't want people getting aroused by sexual displays in public," let me just say that as a gay man, fit shirtless men are close to the top of my list of turn-ons, and I'm sure plenty of straight women would agree. So maybe this is another double standard we can do without.
European countries don't have the same nudity taboo we have in the US, and they seem better off for it. Puritanism benefits no one but prudes who demand the world to conform to their pinched and constipated worldview.
Think of the children. I once witnessed the absolutely scandalous scene of a tiny baby sucking on its mother's titty. A baby!
And I'm the pervert for telling this obviously underage little skeever, "scoot over so I can get in on that." Whatever!
I'm not sure what you're trying to get at here. There's nothing illegal about staring, and there won't be if equality prevails here either. You can go stare at all the topless men and women in bikinis at the beach that you want right now.
What do you mean by avenue to complain? Staring at someone is widely considered to be impolite, and anyone is well within their rights to complain about it. Sunbathing topless doesn't cede this ability in any way.
SkeptiMism
Member
You can be aroused all you want. But that doesn't mean you should stare or act rude or anything like that.
Like, if I see a beautiful, sexy woman walking downtown, I might well get aroused. But that doesn't mean I'll stare and it certainly doesn't mean she shouldn't be there looking so sexy.
Nobody is arguing this. Believe we're all rational adults here so that goes without saying.
What I understood from Chelsea's statement is that female breasts aren't supposed to be arousing regardless of how you react to their sight, and I wonder if I'm reading that wrong because it doesn't make sense.
D
Deleted member 10571
Unconfirmed Member
"didn't change much" isn't the point though. They are allowed to do so, which is great. It doesn't matter if they want to go topless or not, at least not for this particular problem.
It's simply sexism to not let a woman decide for herself, but allow men to go topless wherever they want. It's not even about beaches only, it's about every place men are allowed to throw away their shirt. If women aren't allowed to do so at a place men are, it's sexism. Reasoning with "but men might get aroused!" isn't helping this, really.
Posting topless pics on GAF of male people is allowed, but it's not allowed to post boobies. This, on first glance, also sounds sexist, but then you also have the issue of (most likely) men posting these pics for objectification, arousal or to joke about the female body. The point here seems to me like it should be an issue of "Why is GAF allowing this on male pics in the first place" rather than "why not boobs too".
But but, then you'll eventually arrive at a 'Post pics of yourself' thread, where we're much closer to the beach situation again - 'cause everyone chooses for him- or herself which pic is shown. Male posters can post shirtless pics, but women probably get into admin trouble if they even post a bra only pic.
It's a lot of issues here, really, and most come down to various male fears and issues. I have no idea what would be best, but saying the GAF ruling isn't sexist at all is kinda being obtuse.
(And also not really the point of the thread anymore lol)
SkeptiMism
Member
Fair enough, I apologize. I interpreted your statement as the "go ahead but there will be men staring at you" type of response.
But anyway, I don't think that by "forced sexualisation" she means that people can't or shouldn't find breasts arousing. I guess she means more like sexualising them so much that it's literally indecent exposure if you're topless on a beach. Like, men being topless can be very arousing to a lot of people too, but they're not sexualised nearly like that.
Oppo
Member
Sorry; i was being too flip. you are right of course. what i meant was, all the hand wringing about women being stalked or think of the children or whatever came to naught. Not many avail themselves of this freedom but when they do people go "oh right that's a thing now" and that's pretty much the end of it. as it should be.
D
Deleted member 20920
Unconfirmed Member
Maybe we should blindfold babies and tie their hands when they breastfeed to minimise exposure! All these nipples will surely overwrite the benefits of being breastfed!
Similar threads
- Locked