"Women have a right to be topless"

Grayson

Deleted User wrote: »

What one wants to see or not see should have little or nothing to do with what the laws or social norms are however. I do not want to see morbidly obese people poured into tight Lycra either - especially on bikes sweating profusely - but when I do see it - which is often - I realise the problem is mine - not theirs - and I simply look the other way and get over it - and get over myself.

I agree with you 100% but at the same time I hate you for putting that image into my head.

meeeeh

As someone who was topless on beaches plenty of times in absence and presence of children, I still think she is more or less just attention seeker.

BTW regardless how liberal people are, most that I know leave their kit on at non nudist festivals. That includes some friends who would every year holiday on nudist beaches and stay in nudist camps.

Estrellita

She was attention seeking, just looking for something to protest about. Freeing the boobs is unlikely to ever happen here. Women are still fighting for their right to feed their babies in public, and are still being shamed for it.

If I went to cross the main road here with my bongos out then there would be cars upside down (not saying anything about them specifically), its just not seen as something that is accepted. Apply that to women across Ireland and the A&E departments would be bursting at the seams.

So, boobs can't be out for breast feeding but they should be allowed to just hang out? Its the sexual connection with them that will keep them under tops, nothing equal about it.

darkpagandeath

So where would stare rape fall into this ? Will there be a cooling of period so we can adjust or ?

Jayop

Estrellita wrote: »

She was attention seeking, just looking for something to protest about. Freeing the boobs is unlikely to ever happen here. Women are still fighting for their right to feed their babies in public, and are still being shamed for it.

If I went to cross the main road here with my bongos out then there would be cars upside down (not saying anything about them specifically), its just not seen as something that is accepted. Apply that to women across Ireland and the A&E departments would be bursting at the seams.

So, boobs can't be out for breast feeding but they should be allowed to just hang out? Its the sexual connection with them that will keep them under tops, nothing equal about it.

And don't you think that part of her protest could help with the breast feeding issue?

Estrellita

Jayop wrote: »

And don't you think that part of her protest could help with the breast feeding issue?

No.

Scarinae

eviltwin wrote: »

Is it illegal for a woman to be topless in public?

According to the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill 2015:

Section 39: Exposure, offensive conduct of a sexual nature

Following a number of judgments of the High Court which struck out offences relating to public indecency and exposure, this section replaces section 18 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1935 and provides for new offences to address certain behaviour. There are essentially two types of behaviour to be addressed. The first is exposure of genitalia and the second is inappropriate sexual behaviour which may not involve actual exposure.

Subsection (1) provides for an offence of “exposure” where a person exposes his or her genitals and intends to cause fear, distress or alarm to another person.

Subsection (2) addresses inappropriate sexual behaviour which does not have to involve exposure. This section provides for an offence of engaging in (i) sexual intercourse, (ii) an act of buggery, or (iii) an act of masturbation in a public place.

Subsection (3) provides for an offence of engaging in offensive conduct of a sexual nature which gives rise to distress or alarm and which does not fall within either subsection (1) or (2).

For the purposes of this section, “offensive conduct of a sexual nature” is defined as any behaviour of a sexual nature which, having regard to all the circumstances, is likely to cause fear, distress or alarm to any person, who is, or might reasonably be expected to be, aware of any such behaviour.

A person found guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on conviction on indictment to up to two years imprisonment and / or a class C fine (a fine not exceeding €2,500).

She wasn't engaging in any sexual behaviour, just not wearing a top, so I don't think hat she did was illegal.

Jim_Hall

Well essentially it's a bit of a catch 22. You've got the people like myself who would be a complete liberal and would like nothing more than to see women being allowed to be Topless wherever a man is. This is the law in almost every other Liberal country pioneered by the US.
On the flip side you've got women saying that they're not allowed to be topless because they are sexualised by this and objectified. Alongside that you've got women who sexualise themselves with their toplessness and use their breasts as a sexual organ to attract men. Occasionally this does come together in the Venn Diagram of women.
Most men would probably be happy enough to see women get their kit off day in day out and be able to see boobies left right and centre.

Rewind about 100 years ago we have the same discussion with ankles and in the 60s we had knees. Now this is a little different as breasts have always been considered sexual even way back in ancient times.
The lady in question mentioned on her FB feed that a lot of young women were coming up to her and saying that if they had the body like hers they would do the same. A little bit counterproductive on that point seeing as it's to desexualise them but they're afraid people won't find it sexy?
The main opposition is women who are not ready to get it off, and don't want their husbands to be distracted by another pair of jigglies, and the church for obvious reasons, and some of the older conservatives, who are very likely dirty auld fellas anyway.

In conclusion it just needs everyone to realise that in 2016 men and women are equal, and so anyplace a man should be topless should be complemented by the same treatment to women. Soon enough however breasts will be desexualised if that happens and who knows what will happen with fashion and sexual behaviour.

Arcade_Tryer

Lux23 wrote: »

I don't want to see topless men or topless women apart from at the beach or what have you.

I don't want to see people forced to stare at topless men or topless women by the state.

meeeeh wrote: »

As someone who was topless on beaches plenty of times in absence and presence of children, I still think she is more or less just attention seeker.

BTW regardless how liberal people are, most that I know leave their kit on at non nudist festivals. That includes some friends who would every year holiday on nudist beaches and stay in nudist camps.

This is entirely besides the point. The attention seeking argument could be applied to absolutely anything. Girl wears skinny jeans - "She's attention seeking". Girl wears a pair of work boots - "She's attention seeking". Man wears a pink tshirt - "He's attention seeking". And so on and so forth. Her motivations behind being topless matter not a damn. And attempts to divert the discussion that way, as done so by Boucher Hayes on the radio and others here, is illogical, and as said, besides the point.

Estrellita wrote: »

She was attention seeking, just looking for something to protest about. Freeing the boobs is unlikely to ever happen here. Women are still fighting for their right to feed their babies in public, and are still being shamed for it.

If I went to cross the main road here with my bongos out then there would be cars upside down (not saying anything about them specifically), its just not seen as something that is accepted. Apply that to women across Ireland and the A&E departments would be bursting at the seams.

So, boobs can't be out for breast feeding but they should be allowed to just hang out? Its the sexual connection with them that will keep them under tops, nothing equal about it.

Again with the attention seeking argument. Nonsense. As for the rest of your post, utterly depressing. if people can't open their minds to something as simple as a woman being allowed to be topless in public at a place where it is perfectly acceptable for men to be, then I really do despair for our society. And of course, it is women who suffer in the end. As with nearly every puritanical, Catholic inspired belief in Ireland.

Jayop

Estrellita wrote: »

No.

How so?

Surely the issue with breast feeding is the puritan attitude of a large section of society in Ireland. If she challenges that then she's challenging the issues breast feeding mothers face.

meeeeh

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

I don't want to see people forced to stare at topless men or topless women by the state.

This is entirely besides the point. The attention seeking argument could be applied to absolutely anything. Girl wears skinny jeans - "She's attention seeking". Girl wears a pair of work boots - "She's attention seeking". Man wears a pink tshirt - "He's attention seeking". And so on and so forth. Her motivations behind being topless matter not a damn. And attempts to divert the discussion that way, as done so by Boucher Hayes on the radio and others here, is illogical, and as said, besides the point.

Oh give me a break. How many women did you come across in less catholic countries that were topless outside beaches and dedicated events? She was probably a bit hammered, in an argument and now she is lapping up attention she got because some morons complained. Her message is all over the place about some mumbo jumbo women's rights thought up on the spot.

Whatever Femen background motives are, they are well thought up and created to have maximum impact and clear message. This is just someone who took her top off and now she is lapping up the attention.

Estrellita

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

IAs for the rest of your post, utterly depressing.

Oh I'm sorry, I had to stop there, your post was utterly depressing. Kill the drama ffs.

Jayop wrote: »

How so?

Surely the issue with breast feeding is the puritan attitude of a large section of society in Ireland. If she challenges that then she's challenging the issues breast feeding mothers face.

I'm not entirely disagreeing with you firstly. You asked me if I thought she was helping the issue, and I said no. If it was something that was organised, placards the works, hell Id stand up there with her. But the fact of the matter is, it wasn't. I believe that show was more for her than it was for the benefit of all women.

Arcade_Tryer

meeeeh wrote: »

Oh give me a break. How many women did you come across in less catholic countries that were topless outside beaches and dedicated events? She was probably a bit hammered, in an argument and now she is lapping up attention she got because some morons complained. Her message is all over the place about some mumbo jumbo women's rights thought up on the spot.

Whatever Femen background motives are, they are well thought up and created to have maximum impact and clear message. This is just someone who took her top off and now she is lapping up the attention.

Again, you simply do not understand. It doesn't matter if she makes the cover of Time magazine. The attention seeking argument bears absolutely no relation to the underlying point, which is, that there is nothing, absolutely nothing, objectively wrong with a woman being topless in a public place where it is also acceptable for men to be topless. Her motivations do not matter a damn. Nor does the attention she is either seeking or receiving.

Estrellita wrote: »

Oh I'm sorry, I had to stop there, your post was utterly depressing. Kill the drama ffs.

Ironic considering the only "drama" was and still is being caused by those who can't get their head or eyes around the idea of a woman being topless.

Arcade_Tryer

The "attention seeking" argument being spouted here in an attempt to discredit the girl in question and her motivations is really beyond contempt and serves only to show the true intentions and beliefs of those making it. Why not just be honest and say you don't find a woman being topless in public acceptable? Or that it makes you uncomfortable? The intellectual dishonesty is grating.

Estrellita

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

Ironic considering the only "drama" was and still is being caused by those who can't get their head or eyes around the idea of a woman being topless.

Hows the view up on that little soapbox of yours?

I've said that I've no issue with the agenda. Its the so-called protester I have the issue with, and have said so even in my last post. I'm not answering you again.

Discodog

I remember women complaining about the dangling breasts on the Sky Whale at Galway Arts Festival. I heard a mum say that she didn't want her children to see it.

http://www.thejournal.ie/skywhale-mammaries-balloon-galway-2218843-Jul2015/

smurgen

I think she's right.as someone who loves boobs and loves a gawk seeing them at the beach becomes a non event after awhile.the only reason it's something provocative is because we make a big deal of covering up all the time.if women were topless more often we wouldn't give as much of a ****e.

Arcade_Tryer

Estrellita wrote: »

Hows the view up on that little soapbox of yours?

I've said that I've no issue with the agenda. Its the so-called protester I have the issue with, and have said so even in my last post. I'm not answering you again.

Sopabox? Nah. It just all sounds extremely bitter from where I'm sitting. And for no real rational reason other than some far fetched argument about how she should have organised a better protest. Pathetic truth be told.

Estrellita

smurgen wrote: »

.if women were topless more often we wouldn't give as much of a ****e.

Undoubtedly, it would just become the norm. Though realistically with the weather we have here it's a non-runner. Women would be covered up throughout the year with the exception of a month or two during the summer.

Pac1Man

Every bloody 'I have the right' thread is like that Monty Python sketch.

There is literally nothing for humans to worry about anymore. No need to hunt. No need to defend the hut from neighbouring tribes.

We have become lumbering empty sacks who spend the day curtain twitching on the internet and making up bullsh!t words like left wing, right wing, feminazi (whatever that is), enabling us to argue with fellow pixelated strangers on forums to inflate our own egos. Pathetic.

Ted111

Estrellita wrote: »

Undoubtedly, it would just become the norm. Though realistically with the weather we have here it's a non-runner. Women would be covered up throughout the year with the exception of a month or two during the summer.

We could install outdoor heaters. Similar to pub smoking areas. On all streets and roads. Tax payer funded.

meeeeh

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

Again, you simply do not understand. It doesn't matter if she makes the cover of Time magazine. The attention seeking argument bears absolutely no relation to the underlying point, which is, that there is nothing, absolutely nothing, objectively wrong with a woman being topless in a public place where it is also acceptable for men to be topless. Her motivations do not matter a damn. Nor does the attention she is either seeking or receiving.

Ironic considering the only "drama" was and still is being caused by those who can't get their head or eyes around the idea of a woman being topless.

Actually it's an organized event and organisers can escort her from the event if they think she is disturbing others or not being dressed appropriately.

Renegade Mechanic

Renegade Mechanic wrote: »

Yes, seriously.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BBBXer8CEAEjh4H.jpg:large

Peter Kay's let himself go :eek:

Jayop

meeeeh wrote: »

Actually it's an organized event and organisers can escort her from the event if they think she is disturbing others or not being dressed appropriately.

So if there's dozens of others dressed the same as her and they're OK then surely you must see it as her being singled out??

Maximus Alexander

I've always found it hilarious how 'intelligent' creatures like humans can get so bent out of shape over seeing what their bodies look like. It's actually gas, like. It would be impossible to put into words why it's a problem because it's so irrational.

meeeeh

Jayop wrote: »

So if there's dozens of others dressed the same as her and they're OK then surely you must see it as her being singled out??

And let me guess the dozens will be men? Because no other event, night club or even a company has different dress policy for men and women?

Anyway this type of topic attracts those who are eager to state their liberal credentials at every opportunity. And yet there was no condemnation of the fact that some moron actually grabbed her breasts which is an assault and that was provocation to take off her top.

Breasts on display - women's rights issue
Breasts being grabbed against someone's will - who cares, it's only a bit of harmless fun

Jayop

meeeeh wrote: »

And let me guess the dozens will be men? Because no other event, night club or even a company has different dress policy for men and women?

They shouldn't have though, that's the whole point. :rolleyes:

One rule for men and another rule for woman is wrong.

Maximus Alexander

meeeeh wrote: »

And let me guess the dozens will be men? Because no other event, night club or even a company has different dress policy for men and women?

"But discrimination is widespread" has to be one of the worst defences for discrimination I've yet seen.

meeeeh

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

"But discrimination is widespread" has to be one of the worst defences for discrimination I've yet seen.

Right people who wear uniforms for example or are not allowed wearing runners in the night club, or have to wear skirt for work are discriminated against. Good luck with that argument.

Anyway what's your opinion on actual issue she was raising?

Jayop

meeeeh wrote: »

Right people who wear uniforms for example or are not allowed wearing runners in the night club are discriminated against. Good luck with that argument.

If the rule is that ALL PEOPLE regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation or religion all have the one rule on uniforms then you've no problem.

Do you really not see the difference??

meeeeh

Jayop wrote: »

If the rule is that ALL PEOPLE regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation or religion all have the one rule on uniforms then you've no problem.

Do you really not see the difference??

So women always have to wear ties? Men have to wear heels and skirts? Good to know.

Arcade_Tryer

meeeeh wrote: »

Actually it's an organized event and organisers can escort her from the event if they think she is disturbing others or not being dressed appropriately.

Not if men are allowed to be topless there. And it was Gardai who were called (not necessarily by the organisers), and Gardai who escorted her away from the event.

meeeeh wrote: »

Right people who wear uniforms for example or are not allowed wearing runners in the night club are discriminated against. Good luck with that argument.

The lengths people will go to to justify this is quite extraordinary. Can people not just come out and say "I'm conservative and I don't like change!" rather than this roundabout crap. People are well able to fling around accusations of feminists and lefties on this forum but seem reluctant to describe themselves as ultra conservative.

meeeeh

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

Not if men are allowed to be topless there. And it was Gardai who were called (not necessarily by the organisers), and Gardai who escorted her away from the event.


The lengths people will go to to justify this is quite extraordinary. Can people not just come out and say "I'm conservative and I don't like change!" rather than this roundabout crap. People are well able to fling around accusations of feminists and lefties on this forum but seem reluctant to describe themselves as ultra conservative.

Oh spare me the clap trap. I've breastfed in public, I've spent plenty of time topless on beaches (also nude) and because I think she is an attention seeker I have problems with nudity. Right.

Arcade_Tryer

meeeeh wrote: »

Anyway what's your opinion on actual issue she was raising?

One doesn't have to have an opinion on any potential issue she was raising to know that what happened to her with the Gardai was objectively reprehensible. And as a society it is something we ought be ashamed of. And I know there are bigger issues. And there are other threads to discuss those.

Arcade_Tryer

meeeeh wrote: »

Oh spare me the clap trap. I've breastfed in public, I've spent plenty of time topless on beaches (also nude) and because I think she is an attention seeker I have problems with nudity. Right.

I'm not sure what your problem is. You change your argument with every post, and seem to be searching for any angle to criticise the girl. My fundamental point remains the same, there is nothing objectively wrong with what she did. Nor ought there be.

Estrellita

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

I've always found it hilarious how 'intelligent' creatures like humans can get so bent out of shape over seeing what their bodies look like. It's actually gas, like. It would be impossible to put into words why it's a problem because it's so irrational.

I would hope that it is something that will fade out as time goes on. From a young age we are taught we must cover up, and it's shameful to show your bare body. Its why it's very conflicting for a new mother to make a choice about breast feeding. I read an article somewhere recently where in a branch of Mother care of all places, a mother was asked to use another room out the back to feed her child.

In fact, the father of my own children wouldn't even sit near me or even look in our direction when I was feeding our own. Needless to say, I didn't stick with it. As a very tired, under slept and generally worn out Mum, the last thing you need is to feel judged. By the way, we were in our twenties (now thirties), so his attitude shouldn't have been down to being of an older school of thought.

I realise I keep reverting back to the breast feeding issue, but its because it comes part and parcel with the attitudes of displaying breasts in this country. I don't wish to be graphic, but a woman post-baby will leak milk. Therefore, it's not feasible to be not wearing something over her breasts until her milk dries out. I suppose you are back to covering up again?

meeeeh

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

One doesn't have to have an opinion on any potential issue she was raising to know that what happened to her with the Gardai was objectively reprehensible. And as a society it is something we ought be ashamed of. And I know there are bigger issues. And there are other threads to discuss those.

Right so sexual assault isn't really reprehensible or something you would need to have an opinion on. Good to know.

edanto

meeeeh wrote: »

Actually it's an organized event and organisers can escort her from the event if they think she is disturbing others or not being dressed appropriately.

It was the Gardaí at the event that decided to arrest her (for not following the instructions of a Garda) and remove her from the event.

I was disgusted at the treatment of her. To my mind, she has every right to show her nipples if she wants; and I don't agree with her being arrested for it.

Apparently, the Gardaí swung into action after a complaint from a parent with child/children at the festival. I do find that a bit hard to believe; given that I know the festival very well and it generally attracts hard working open minded people. But even if it's true, I'd say it was a good deal more distressing for the children to see a well behaved person enjoying a concert to be surrounded by Gardaí, arrested and removed.

For shame on those guards. Any adult bringing a child to a festival knows that the children might see some things that need a bit of explaining....most of which are harmless fun. Guards handled this very poorly. I hope we don't see the same Guards back at KnockanStockan in future.

meeeh; you're wrong she's not an attention seeker, but she is a campaigner for what she views as a human rights issue. Just because you happen to disagree with her on that issue does NOT give you the right to call her names and insult her objectives/methods. Take a break from the keyboard, walk away and get some perspective.

Arcade_Tryer

meeeeh wrote: »

Right so sexual assault isn't really reprehensible or something you would need to have an opinion on. Good to know.

You're letting yourself down now. Where did I say any of that? The answer is nowhere.

A girl was topless. So were many men. A girl was escorted away from the event purely because of being topless. None of the men were. Or ever would be. That is objectively wrong regardless of her intentions or motivations for being topless. Do you understand now>?

Arcade_Tryer

Dahnald Trump wrote: »

Am I the only man who is against this because letting girls be topless all the time would be kind of boring? Seeing a chick's tits is supposed to be something that doesn't happened every day.

Probably.

But at least you put forward an honest argument. Which is more than can be said for others here.

meeeeh

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

You're letting yourself down now. Where did I say any of that? The answer is nowhere.

A girl was topless. So were many men. A girl was escorted away from the event purely because of being topless. None of the men were. Or ever would be. That is objectively wrong regardless of her intentions or motivations for being topless. Do you understand now>?

I actually never claimed it was right to arrest her, I am pretty ambivalent about that (it depends of the type of the event, I certainly wouldn't complain), I just think she is an attention seeker.

Arcade_Tryer

meeeeh wrote: »

I actually never claimed it was right to arrest her, I am pretty ambivalent about that, I just think she is an attention seeker.

I don't think she was arrested. Of course you're entitled to think that. And I think the "attention seeker" argument could be applied to anything from skinny jeans to Prada handbags to the way you brush your hair. Therefore a non argument, and merely a distraction from the fundamental issue here.

tonycascarino

Completely agree with meeeeh and Dahnald Trump...It would be boring if you saw a woman's tits everyday...Also the fact the woman making the original point is clearly just an attention seeker desperate for some sort of recognition or else she is one of those liberal dipsticks who thinks she is creating a new 'movement'.

Depp

Dahnald Trump wrote: »

I would agree. She's just looking for excuses so she can claim she's oppressed.

bloody patriarchy at it again

hognef

meeeeh wrote: »

So women always have to wear ties? Men have to wear heels and skirts? Good to know.

A "correct" and unbiases dress code would state "wear a tie or heels and skirts", then everyone can pick the option they prefer. Most men will of course choose the tie, while most women will choose the skirt.

There have indeed been cases (in the UK) of complaints against office dress codes requiring females to wear high heels, cases that have been won by the female wanting to wear flat shoes. In many ways this is similar to the topic of this thread.

edanto

meeeeh wrote: »

I actually never claimed it was right to arrest her, I am pretty ambivalent about that (it depends of the type of the event, I certainly wouldn't complain), I just think she is an attention seeker.

You do realise that anyone could lay the same false charge of 'attention seeking' against you simply because you are posting a few times on the same thread and 'seeking attention'. Yes, it could be said of any of us here. Or anyone that seeks to promote anything anywhere. Essentially, it's an empty charge, some words of nothing and if that's all you have against her then maybe it's time to go to a field with your own nipples hanging out and see what it's like.

Arcade_Tryer

tonycascarino wrote: »

Completely agree with meeeeh and Dahnald Trump...It would be boring if you saw a woman's tits everyday...Also the fact the woman making the original point is clearly just an attention seeker desperate for some sort of recognition or else she is one of those liberal dipsticks who thinks she is creating a new 'movement'.

Probably the single most idiotic argument I've seen on the internet in a long time. Persist with Catholic influenced puritanical social norms because you'd be "bored" otherwise and "attention seeker". There is still hope for the Catholic church in this country yet!

tonycascarino

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

Probably the single most idiotic argument I've seen on the internet in a long time. Persist with Catholic influenced puritanical social norms because you'd be "bored" otherwise and "attention seeker". There is still hope for the Catholic church in this country yet!

I take it that you are one of those liberal dipsticks I spoke of...

Jayop

Well this thread has just descended into a fully fledged wum fest.

Paddy Cow

Irish people are incredibly prudish about women's breasts. I was on holiday with three other girls and the resort we were at had topless women at the pool. I had no problem with it and would've gone topless myself but my three friends were very uncomfortable about it. They are doctors ffs and should have had more sense :rolleyes: