![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
conuly
Go read.
"At some point, men's breasts became liberated and women's didn't," the Los Angeles Times quoted Liana Johnsson as saying. "This is the only thing left that men are legally allowed to do and, for women, they have to register as a sex offender. The real issue is there should be equal protection under the law," Johnsson told the newspaper.
Perfectly true. *gives Johnsson a cookie*
"We already have too many sexual assaults in society. If the state encourages women to show their breasts to men and boys at public beaches and parks, inappropriate treatment of women and girls will only worsen."
Allowing something isn't the same as encouraging it. Furthermore, I doubt that demystifying the breast would increase assult. Even if it did, so what? The solution isn't to ask women to go out in burqas (which is where this creepy troll logic eventually leads), it's to deal with people who sexually assult women.
There are good reasons for modesty laws, Thomasson said -- "to protect the innocence of women and girls and to promote a decent society supportive of children and families."
1. What innocence?
2. Come to think of it, what could be more innocent than the human form?
3. WTF? Nothing here goes against my ideas of a decent society. In fact, it seems more supportive of children and families since it'd lessen legal complaints against breastfeeding.
Thomasson said he would not be surprised to "see this crazy bill introduced by a Democrat politician and supported by many Democrat colleagues" -- and he is urging Californians to "call your state legislators right away to flood them with opposition.""
I've got friends in California. PLEASE, call your state legislators.
Allowing nude [sic] sunbathing at public parks and beaches will ruin family outings and promote a terrible role model for children," he concluded.
Okay, this calls for a poll.
[Poll #427407]
"At some point, men's breasts became liberated and women's didn't," the Los Angeles Times quoted Liana Johnsson as saying. "This is the only thing left that men are legally allowed to do and, for women, they have to register as a sex offender. The real issue is there should be equal protection under the law," Johnsson told the newspaper.
Perfectly true. *gives Johnsson a cookie*
"We already have too many sexual assaults in society. If the state encourages women to show their breasts to men and boys at public beaches and parks, inappropriate treatment of women and girls will only worsen."
Allowing something isn't the same as encouraging it. Furthermore, I doubt that demystifying the breast would increase assult. Even if it did, so what? The solution isn't to ask women to go out in burqas (which is where this creepy troll logic eventually leads), it's to deal with people who sexually assult women.
There are good reasons for modesty laws, Thomasson said -- "to protect the innocence of women and girls and to promote a decent society supportive of children and families."
1. What innocence?
2. Come to think of it, what could be more innocent than the human form?
3. WTF? Nothing here goes against my ideas of a decent society. In fact, it seems more supportive of children and families since it'd lessen legal complaints against breastfeeding.
Thomasson said he would not be surprised to "see this crazy bill introduced by a Democrat politician and supported by many Democrat colleagues" -- and he is urging Californians to "call your state legislators right away to flood them with opposition.""
I've got friends in California. PLEASE, call your state legislators.
Allowing nude [sic] sunbathing at public parks and beaches will ruin family outings and promote a terrible role model for children," he concluded.
Okay, this calls for a poll.
[Poll #427407]
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-01-29 03:04 pm (UTC)by "environmentally appropriate" I meant that stripping is best kept to appropriate locations such as specified above. not in urban streets, restaurants, shops or buses. ugh.
(in fact, some of the shopping malls here started enforcing it recently by displaying notices requesting that customers wear a shirt during their visit. however, the desire to bare all is very restricted socially.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-29 03:07 pm (UTC)2. Okay, I'm actually *trying* not to be argumentative, but I'm curious as to how you decide what's appropriate and what's not. I know the obvious such as "the office is almost certainly not appropriate" and "your home almost certainly is" but otherwise...?
the short answer would be...
Date: 2005-01-29 03:13 pm (UTC)Re: the short answer would be...
Date: 2005-01-29 03:31 pm (UTC)2. What I meant, though, is "is there some sort of underlying logic, or is it all kinda random and you just have to deal?"
Re: the short answer would be...
Date: 2005-01-29 04:23 pm (UTC)2. I believe the underlying logic is to avoid possible public contact with a naked sweaty body, for hygiene and squeamishness reasons. The rest stands to tradition, which probably isn't very logical in itself, but we've come to live with it.