Out and About -- In the World at Large

[Grok]

In terms of clothing, womens wear can be summarized in a very broad generalization.

For women, it is permissible to wear nearly anything you can conceive of.

1. For men, we would be writing out short lists for variations on trousers, shirts, shoes, socks, jackets, etc. A separate list of allowed colors would be rather short, and would be mainly a dull palette.

2. List of jewelry deemed appropriate for men-quite short. Mainly items worn on suits.

3. Other modes of expression-almost entirely forbidden. Even long hair is barely within the limits of the tolerable.

With 1, 2, and 3 we quickly see the outlines of the man box/man coffin.

[Mouse]

This is the list for the early years of my life, but the list has been consigned to the trash for my life now.
If however the powers at be managed to craft laws to put me back in the box, I guess J would revert to dressing in private as I did for most of my life.

[Jim]

In terms of clothing, womens wear can be summarized in a very broad generalization.

For women, it is permissible to wear nearly anything you can conceive of.

Not quite. It is much more acceptable for men to be topfree than women. In most states in the US, it's legal, but a topfree woman would expect more social trouble than a man in a dress.

I'm speaking from the experience of myself and my wife.

The green colored states are those where top freedom is in effect.
The orange colored ones have ambiguous state laws on the matter.
The red colored ones are the ones where the mere showing of the female breast in public is illegal according to state law.

Though the majority of states are top free, some cities in those states have passed (unconstitutional) ordinances that annul the state’s top free statute.
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index. ... nal-right/

In hot weather, I think that having to cover one's chest is more oppressive than being frowned upon by a few for wearing a dress.

[Barleymower]

Hey there BM: I suppose you need to hear the tone, perhaps other clues, but I'd not assume a "Woohoo" to be heckling -- the guy may have been inspired!

I expect FG we have different memories of the past. I lived most of my life in Torquay. The Costa Del Dole it was often called. The "dole" is unemployment benefit for those who don't know the term.
Needless to say Torquay can be a bit rough around the edges and very conservative to boot.

[Barleymower]

This is out and about in the raw.
Local shopping mall yesterday, and I spotted a lone man wearing a dress.
I had to talk to him, even if it was only to find out if he knew about or was a cafe patron.
Turned out he hadn't heard of us and we had quite a chat.
Cut to the chase, he is straight, celibate and it was his very first time out in such clothing.
Seventy years old and his story would resonate well around here, big time.
A perfect example of a very lonely guy, created by a culture of ignorance, prejudice and superstition.
There but for the grace of the god of your choice, go you or I.
Perhaps, in that very short time, I can think, maybe, just maybe, I presented him with hope.
Salutary reminder Ladies and Gents, for every one of us here with support and fellowship, there is an unknown number in this world with none.
Steve.

A touching story Steve. I hope he finds the Cafe who's patrons are ready and willing to provide support.

[CamperGuy]

Hey there BM: I suppose you need to hear the tone, perhaps other clues, but I'd not assume a "Woohoo" to be heckling -- the guy may have been inspired! But, hardly a put-down or sign of impending doom! Mostly, I consider any conversational opening/gambit to be an opportunity to explain and promote MIS. I don't always tumble to precisely the right gambit or make the most of the opportunity, but I've not found myself worried about well-being. I have avoided an opportunity or two as my assessment was it was not likely to be productive, or the timing simply was not right -- at a restaurant with others.... Anyway, good going CG. Your outfits are striking, and will likely generate more response than some of the more benign stuff others of us wear -- although I wear a lot of colors, and items that may be deemed more 'feminine', we aren't all peacocks with style like Mouse -- and I've not heard him express much fret from the heathen!

Thanks Faldaguy.

The "woohoo" was definitely not "inspired" more of a macho response for the benefit of whoever else was in the cab of that truck - form of mickey taking to show they are "one of the lads". Undoubtedly someone who would in the past have cat-called women from their construction site (but likely dare not any more). They would have said nothing if on foot and next to me, but from the safety of a moving truck, can call out to show their machismo. I likely made his day, since he would have had a story to tell all the other lads, along with likely "what is the world coming to" statements and others ribbing them with "yeh, but I bet you dress like that when you're not with us" mickey taking.

But I'm not concerned, just slightly amused. Plus it goes to show that whenever I have been around people on foot who you think might react negatively, and probably would from a safe distance / in private, they are clearly too afraid to say anything within your earshot (don't know what the repercussions might be). Plus, this is the scenario I would most expect some heckling from - not an honest objection to what I am wearing, e.g. driven by beliefs that it is sinful or otherwise wrong, but from a need to "fit in" with the group around you and demonstrate you are "manly", much in the way groups of young men will talk tough or try to impress each other through talk of their escapades with women or drinking ability.

Cheers,
Camper Guy

[mr seamstress]

Not quite. It is much more acceptable for men to be topfree than women. In most states in the US, it's legal, but a topfree woman would expect more social trouble than a man in a dress.

I'm speaking from the experience of myself and my wife.
The green colored states are those where top freedom is in effect.
The orange colored ones have ambiguous state laws on the matter.
The red colored ones are the ones where the mere showing of the female breast in public is illegal according to state law.

Though the majority of states are top free, some cities in those states have passed (unconstitutional) ordinances that annul the state’s top free statute.
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index. ... nal-right/

In hot weather, I think that having to cover one's chest is more oppressive than being frowned upon by a few for wearing a dress.

The map is not accurate. A woman in Kentucky cannot go outside topless and sunbathe as indicated. She would be arrested for indecent exposer. But she is allow in public to pull out her breast and breast feed an infant. Women here in Kentucky have been arrested and charge with indecent exposer in the last year and been found guilty. Most states allows women breast feed infant only, but not topless for sunbathing or any other reasons. That map is trash. A woman in New York or California can go total topless any time she wants, but not true for most states. Breast feeding laws doesn't mean total nudity as that map indicated. Be aware majority of states only allows breast feeding only in public. { be more clear here, a woman can go out in public without a shirt or bra, but her nipples must be covered. This is true state law. Women's nipples is only considered as indecent, not the whole breast.

[familyman34]

This is out and about in the raw.
Local shopping mall yesterday, and I spotted a lone man wearing a dress.
I had to talk to him, even if it was only to find out if he knew about or was a cafe patron.
Turned out he hadn't heard of us and we had quite a chat.
Cut to the chase, he is straight, celibate and it was his very first time out in such clothing.
Seventy years old and his story would resonate well around here, big time.
A perfect example of a very lonely guy, created by a culture of ignorance, prejudice and superstition.
There but for the grace of the god of your choice, go you or I.
Perhaps, in that very short time, I can think, maybe, just maybe, I presented him with hope.
Salutary reminder Ladies and Gents, for every one of us here with support and fellowship, there is an unknown number in this world with none.
Steve.

And I am sure that this chance encounter with you has liberated him from 70 years of fear and prejudice, showing him that he is just one more (like us) who can seize the freedom to dress as he pleases. I hope that he will now get out more often in a skirt or dress, and even meet you again!

[Faldaguy]

The map is not accurate. A woman in Kentucky cannot go outside topless and sunbathe as indicated. She would be arrested for indecent exposer. But she is allow in public to pull out her breast and breast feed an infant. Women here in Kentucky have been arrested and charge with indecent exposer in the last year and been found guilty. Most states allows women breast feed infant only, but not topless for sunbathing or any other reasons. That map is trash. A woman in New York or California can go total topless any time she wants, but not true for most states. Breast feeding laws doesn't mean total nudity as that map indicated. Be aware majority of states only allows breast feeding only in public. { be more clear here, a woman can go out in public without a shirt or bra, but her nipples must be covered. This is true state law. Women's nipples is only considered as indecent, not the whole breast.

Mr Seamstress;

I do not believe there was anything in map presentation referring to full nudity. It did refer to "States" and State law & for the most part I suspect it is accurate, not "trash". Kentucky does not appear to have any State laws on the matter; but there are, as in many places, local or city ordinances about such things. Some, even provide specifically for granting topless, or nudity in public settings! (If I recall correctly, Ashland, OR was one of those, but may have later rescinded that provision.) It would be helpful if you would cite your sources or link to the laws in those replies where you report local or limited instances and assume generalization from there.

I did find the annexation of Ontario as one of the States a bit amusing -- and erroneous, despite the intent to simply add that Ontario has long allowed women to be topless in public.

[Jim]

The map is not accurate. A woman in Kentucky cannot go outside topless and sunbathe as indicated. She would be arrested for indecent exposer. But she is allow in public to pull out her breast and breast feed an infant. Women here in Kentucky have been arrested and charge with indecent exposer in the last year and been found guilty.

It appears that women being topfree is not a state crime in Kentucky, but that it is not protected from local ordinances. From WKYT News:

There are two degrees of indecent exposure in Kentucky, and the difference between them is how old the victim is.

In both cases, they only apply if someone exposes their genitals. Kentucky law doesn’t say anything about exposed breasts.
[...]
Now, just because there are no state laws against going topless doesn’t mean your local ordinances will allow it. For example, Nicholasville has an ordinance against nudity in a public place that includes fully exposed breasts.

https://www.wkyt.com/2025/07/15/good-qu ... -kentucky/

The Federal Tenth Circuit Court ruling in 2019 gave women equal protection in Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma. This applied to local ordinances in these states. See https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... s-ban.html

Anyway, my point is that it is harder for women to have the freedom to dress as men do than for men to have the freedom to dress as women do. If the map shows more permissive laws than is correct, it supports my main point more.

[mr seamstress]

Anyway, my point is that it is harder for women to have the freedom to dress as men do than for men to have the freedom to dress as women do. If the map shows more permissive laws than is correct, it supports my main point more.

Jim, I understand from all practical purpose you are coming from. I total agree women should go topless just like men, but there are still a lot to overcome according to different laws on book. Females baring their breast is still called soft porn. There are laws banning soft porn especially if the female is under 18. There are cameras every where. How do one protect themselves from young teens girls going topless and keep camera from picking it up and still try to protect your own property? These breast feeding laws has open the door put every American in jail for production or receiving soft porn of young females, even though it's their breast and states says they can go topless.
Nudist's community has been an advocate to be able to take photo's of their own children in the nudist's community while playing, just without any clothes on.
It is still a criminal offense if a teenage boy receive a girly mag depicting women just topless, but that same boy can go to a theatre and watch women topless. It is also a criminal offense if a woman bare her breast in front of teenage boy. Yet that same has a right to breast feed an infant even when a teenage boy is present. Go figure.
A man can go to prison from receiving a picture from a teenage girl showing herself being topless he didn't ask for. That is the law. These breast feeding laws allows all females go topless and still have other laws that contradict it is wrong. These laws that contradict needs to be clean on the books before women can truly go topless.

Just ask the nudist's blog why the women aren't taken the advantage of going semi nude while not visiting nudist colony if state allows them go topless? Consider all the women that loves in getting a suntan in the nude should take advantage of topless law.

I agree it is harder for women can go topless. But I still see it as illegal. Not even AI really list how complicated it is for a women can legally go topless.

[STEVIE]

Just so we can get this thread back on track, this is me this afternoon having had my flowing locks given some much needed grooming.

20260314_152453(1).jpg

This evening Susie and I had a rather nice dinner and attended a live performance of Top Hat by Irving Berlin.
Most enjoyable.
Steve.

[mr seamstress]

If women start going topless tomorrow and would have teenage girls doing the same. Even though the the 10th circuit granted women in that district to go topless including teenage girls, what it didn't do it left a law on the books that put every person has a security camera in for violating Child Pornography Laws (18 U.S.C. § 2252. A security camera that capture young girl topless would that owner in hot water for breaking this law. The security camera owner would be paying the price of females going topless.

If you own a pair of smart glasses and capture a teenage girl topless training for track meet, you just earn 10 years in the pen. FBI and federal prosecutors has a track record of putting people behind bars claiming you exploitation of child, even though there was zero exploitation on your part. Even parents could be charge as accessories for allowing their daughter being photograph going topless.

FBI doesn't consider any photograph of any teenage girl topless as being total innocent, but a lot are. Just read all the stories where parents was harass over such photograph and still fighting to get their photos back, even though they are not being charge for a crime. Understand how Child Pornography Laws (18 U.S.C. § 2252 is being used and abuse by federal government that harms women equal rights to be topless same as man.

[Faldaguy]

Just so we can get this thread back on track, this is me this afternoon having had my flowing locks given some much needed grooming.20260314_152453(1).jpg
This evening Susie and I had a rather nice dinner and attended a live performance of Top Hat by Irving Berlin.
Most enjoyable.
Steve.

Thanks Steve, we needed the kick in the butt -- the side-trip should be in another category and thread. My out and about today was the annual assemble of our local Community Foundation to support local organizations and sustainable growth -- a broad cross section of the community and we all got along great -- as we usually do! (Fully skirted as usual, mid-calf today in UPS brown but with some nice trim; even pockets and wild-patterned shirt. Where were the rest of you?

[Ozdelights]

Steve, thanks for getting us back on track. I hope you had a wonderful night out.

Barry