Nice article that mentions Skirtcafe favorably

[Fred in Skirts]

The way I see it, the only time presentation of the body should be legally restricted is when it presents a public health/safety concern. For example, I don't believe it should be legal to be nude in public, because, then there is no barrier between your private parts and public surfaces. Note that I define a private part as "a part of the body used primarily for regular excretion of solid/liquid waste."

In nudist camps and resorts the accepted practice is you carry a towel to sit on when in public spaces. In most nudist resorts etc it is mandatory. At least in all of the ones I have been to. So if it was legal to be nude in public spaces then carry a towel to sit upon and don't worry about who sat there last.

[Jim]

I think nudity and semi-nudity are rather different from fashion options.

I also note that public toplessness for women peaked some years ago and now it's a rarity in Europe, including here in Scandinavia. I am glad it has, frankly.

Maybe where it's cooler, but summers here in the Midwest USA are hot. Being shirtless is the most comfortable way to work or exercise outside. It is completely unfair to my wife to be shamed for being comfortable. Calling it semi-nudity is just a judgemental term. Shorts, sleeveless shirts, or bikinis are also viewed that way by some of my Mennonite brethren.

Acceptance of public nudity is a different question. I'm for it, but it is not an equality issue such as men in skirts or women's topfreedom.

[Dust]

While women may be expected to cover their nipples, they get away with far less total fabric on beaches (never mind other settings), at least in the US. Men are expected to be in shorts, and while technically legal, avoid Speedos, which still cover more than a woman's bikini bottom.

This is just one example of how, even though women are restricted in some ways that men aren't, men are often under as much or greater restrictions, in total.

[Jim]

While women may be expected to cover their nipples, they get away with far less total fabric on beaches (never mind other settings), at least in the US. Men are expected to be in shorts, and while technically legal, avoid Speedos, which still cover more than a woman's bikini bottom.

This is just one example of how, even though women are restricted in some ways that men aren't, men are often under as much or greater restrictions, in total.

My swimsuits are more the speedo style. They're second hand; they may have originally been a woman's bikini bottom. My pastor once asked me if I knew it showed "my shape"? But no problem. We can wear bikini bottoms at least as easily as we wear skirts.

[Coder]

I'm a prude - I'll admit it. I even get disgusted at men who don't wear shirts. IMHO, I believe in equality in the opposite direction than others, and think toplessness should be banned for men as well . But, that's just my opinion. Probably why I haven't gone swimming or to a beach since I was a kid.

[Stu]

Maybe where it's cooler, but summers here in the Midwest USA are hot. Being shirtless is the most comfortable way to work or exercise outside. It is completely unfair to my wife to be shamed for being comfortable. Calling it semi-nudity is just a judgemental term. Shorts, sleeveless shirts, or bikinis are also viewed that way by some of my Mennonite brethren.

Acceptance of public nudity is a different question. I'm for it, but it is not an equality issue such as men in skirts or women's topfreedom.

We are going to have to agree to disagree. I have spent time in hot climates both in the Middle East and Africa and people there don't simply shed all their clothing and expose vast areas of skin to the scorching sun. Adult women's breasts are regarded as deeply intimate in our culture, unlike men's chests and, at least in my opinion, they should stay that way. We had periods of women being topless in public, but that pendulum has swung back here in Europe and it's no longer a common sight in parks or most beaches - a development I welcome.

We are getting a bit off topic again, so maybe we should draw a line under this.

[moonshadow]

Stu, I can respect your opinion, but would you at least agree that men should be prohibited from going topless then?

Because if mandates against topless women is the way it must be, then I personally believe that this should apply to everyone.

[Stu]

Stu, I can respect your opinion, but would you at least agree that men should be prohibited from going topless then?
Because if mandates against topless women is the way it must be, then I personally believe that this should apply to everyone.

I'm not so much talking about prohibiting on pain of legal sanction - I think that's a different issue. I do think men should generally not be bare-chested in public places, subject to certain exceptions (e.g. beaches, swimming pools) and there should be a strong social taboo against that. I don't believe that there is a fair correlation between men's chests and women's breasts as there are cultural differences - i.e. that male chests are not considered intimate while women's breasts are.

[pelmut]

Breastfeding in public (including shops and cinemas) is protected by law in England and Scotland.  There is no requirement for the mother to cover herself up, although most mums prefer to be discreet about it.  Like many of the things that used to attract unnecessary attention in years gone by, it is now a non-event.

[Yonkas]

Stu, I can respect your opinion, but would you at least agree that men should be prohibited from going topless then?
Because if mandates against topless women is the way it must be, then I personally believe that this should apply to everyone.

I'm not so much talking about prohibiting on pain of legal sanction - I think that's a different issue. I do think men should generally not be bare-chested in public places, subject to certain exceptions (e.g. beaches, swimming pools) and there should be a strong social taboo against that. I don't believe that there is a fair correlation between men's chests and women's breasts as there are cultural differences - i.e. that male chests are not considered intimate while women's breasts are.

But breasts don't have to be considered intimate, and in some cultures, they aren't. Indeed, it used to be that Women's ankles were held with the same regard (thankfully, we're past that nonsense).

So, just as with male skirt wearing, it's just a matter of altering public perception of the practice.

I grew up seeing both my sister and my mother naked, because we all shared a bedroom. Because of this, I believe I grew up to view breasts as no big deal.

Impropriety is determined through the lens of culture. If you have ever seen "My Neighbor Totoro", the essence of a child-friendly movie, you'd have been aware of the scene, where a very naked dad is playing with and washing his very naked young daughters (you don't see private parts). As a westerner, I cringed, but that's only because I have been taught to view naked men juxtaposed with naked prepubescent girls as a sign of perversion.

Unlike, say, wantonly murdering loved ones, public nipple displays are not invariably viewed as an unsavory thing.

Don't get me wrong. Like Stu, I prefer people clothed, and don't care to see either men, or women shirtless in public. But, I don't think my preference should stop them from doing this.

[Stu]

But breasts don't have to be considered intimate, and in some cultures, they aren't.

In our culture they are, and it seems that most of us are fine with that.

So, just as with male skirt wearing, it's just a matter of altering public perception of the practice.

I don't want my perception changing, thanks.

But, I don't think my preference should stop them from doing this.

We make the kind of society we want to live in. In Viking times, it was perfectly normal to engage in sexual activity in public places - my preference is that we don't make that acceptable in our culture. Conversely, there are strict rules on dress and decorum in Saudi Arabia that are far more limiting than ours: that is their culture. The Vikings did things their way according to their cultural norms and the Saudis have their taboos, similarly, we should do things according to our own prevailing cultural norms.

[Dust]

In the US, you sometimes see signs on businesses that read:

No shirt
No shoes
No service

These signs apply to all, but are generally targeted to men, as women simply don't go around topless. I'm not sure if such places would turn away a girl in a bikini top and shorts, but they might.

[PatJ]

No shoes - I have seen a local convenience store shoo people out of their store for not wearing shoes - because it is unsanitary. However that same store lets farmers in with cow manure on their boots and don't seem to mind it at all.

We live in a strange world gentlemen!

[Jim]

No shoes - I have seen a local convenience store shoo people out of their store for not wearing shoes - because it is unsanitary. However that same store lets farmers in with cow manure on their boots and don't seem to mind it at all.

Yes, the "unsanitary" thing is patently absurd. Being barefoot could get one's foot cut on broken glass that wasn't cleaned up well, which could result in a lawsuit. Some places the barefoot rule is about image, but that doesn't make sense in a convenience store.

[pelmut]

No shoes - I have seen a local convenience store shoo people out of their store for not wearing shoes - because it is unsanitary. However that same store lets farmers in with cow manure on their boots and don't seem to mind it at all...

That's perfectly logical: if the floor is covered in cow manure, it is unsanitary for a person who doesn't wear shoes.