Active Now

Slartibartfast
my2cents
Discussion » Questions » Legal » Going topless in Ft Collins Colorado, just made legal. Your thoughts?

Going topless in Ft Collins Colorado, just made legal. Your thoughts?





Is this a step forward, or a step back?
Will it make a difference at all, on anything?

Is it legal to go topless where you live?

Do you think this is a matter of human rights? If men are able to walk around topless, shouldn't women have the same prerogative?

Are these nothing but a bunch of women with nothing better to do than to fight for their right to show their nipples?
If so, why did the courts indulge them on their bouncy shenanigans?

What do you think?

Posted - February 23, 2017

Responses


  • I think you make the right decision.
      February 24, 2017 8:43 AM MST
    1

  • 17260
    Response my previous comment was made for has been edited afterwards. It is no longer the original which the comment was made for. 
      February 24, 2017 9:31 AM MST
    0

  • 5451
    I was trying to be a little humorous with my reply but no just because you guys do it is only part of the reason.  Just because you do it?  That's called treating people equally under the law and having a law that applies to one sex but not the other isn't treating people equally under the law.

    I don't see why it should be illegal in the first place.  Asking why we shouldn't have the law is asking me to prove a negative.  You should have to prove the positive which means it's on you to make the case for having the law.

    Your argument about demanding urinals in our bathrooms doesn't hold water because it's a slippery slope.

    If you can tell me why we need the law I can have more of a discussion about with you but I just don't see why it should be illegal in the first place.


      February 24, 2017 2:49 AM MST
    4

  • Great answer.
    My point, if the.reason for women to.want to.go. bare free....if the ONLY reason is to do it JUST because men do it. 
    Don't you think that's silly?
    Then anything could be.argued based solely on that. I want to do this or that because that guy over there does it.
    Then women could demand urinals in their bathrooms because they also should have the.right to upright peeage.
    So the argument of, just because men do it, is just plain silly.
    Now.
    If you say to me, as you do, that there's a law that applies to women that doesn't apply to men, and that's unfair....then I can accept that. 
    I can debate it...but I can accept it as discrimination. 
    I agree with you on that.
    And this is the first I see the point brought up here, btw.
    But that's very far from saying, just cause the men do it.
    Do you see what I mean?
      February 24, 2017 9:02 AM MST
    0

  • 17260
    Really? It's what I have been saying all the time. Equal rights. No discrimination based on sex. Smh.
      February 24, 2017 9:22 AM MST
    0

  • Well there you go. Aren't you happy you understand now?
      February 24, 2017 9:30 AM MST
    1

  • 17260
    I've understood it all the time. Seems more someone else has tried to pull my replies in another direction by picking up single words and taking them out of context, although having had all replies at hand all the time as the OP. Btw, I don't see what happy has to do with this. 
      February 24, 2017 9:35 AM MST
    0

  • We're just talking Sapphic, 
    Just talking.
    Be happy.
      February 24, 2017 9:42 AM MST
    0

  • 17260
    Talking isn't by any means ridiculing someone else. Bye. This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at February 24, 2017 9:46 AM MST
      February 24, 2017 9:46 AM MST
    0

  • Relax Sapphic, you shouldn't give me that much importance. Im just some guy. 
      February 24, 2017 9:52 AM MST
    0

  • 17260
    Nothing further to add.
      February 24, 2017 9:58 AM MST
    0

  • )
      February 24, 2017 9:59 AM MST
    0

  • 7280
    This is something I copied from the internet today....Fashion shows are apparently going with "see through" tops for women recently....(Obviously I don't know the proper nomenclature for that.)...

    "What the fashion industry has inherently done is desexualize female chests—displaying them not as objects of desire, but symbols of raw beauty. At least during Fashion Week, bearing all is no longer radical—it’s natural."...


    I like the concept of that, although I don't know how long it will take for males in Colorado to changes their thinking on the matter....

    I remember seeing a special on TV / cable years ago about some tribe wherein the females were considered modestly dressed if they wore a narrow belt around their waists (which of course covered nothing that we in the West associate with primary and secondary sexual characteristics)....

    I'm 71, and I fear I would have to live to be 400+ before I could look at a woman so dressed and have nothing but her "beauty" cross my mind.
      February 23, 2017 5:22 PM MST
    4

  • See you make the point very well ... and I don't think it's even just in the west that we see breasts as sexual... the fact is they ARE sexual.. even in those tribes with women who don't wear a bra.. do we really know WHY? Maybe keeping them unclothed is a way of marking them out as sexual beings.. as in kept that way so men can freely enjoy the sight? We don't know enough, and we don't think deeply enough but this is not a simple matter.
      February 24, 2017 3:30 AM MST
    1

  • 7280
    I agree, it's not simple....

    I would be interested in the actual real reasons why various women who so dress in Fort Collins would choose to do so.
      February 26, 2017 1:31 PM MST
    0

  • 3907
    Hello Lago:

    We were going topless at the Boulder Reservoir 40 years ago.  Ft. Collins ain't got nothin on us.

    excon
      February 23, 2017 6:25 PM MST
    3

  • Btw, and just as a side line, I asked my daughter about this, she said and I quote,
    "...instead of equal pay, or other real important stuff, WTF?"
    Go figure.
      February 23, 2017 8:14 PM MST
    2

  • Your daughter's cool!
      February 24, 2017 3:31 AM MST
    0

  • 17260
    Who says the one excludes the other, we can only have the one of them? Go figure.
      February 24, 2017 3:38 AM MST
    2

  • Another question: would you endorse or actively lobby for the right of women in India, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia et al - countries which are openly aggressive towards women sexually - to be topless too. If it it a feminist cause that carries such weight should it not be a global one? And what might the women who suffer significantly more oppression than you feel about that, if getting your tits out is deemed on a par with human rights issues that have a little more gravitas, shall we say, in places that don't incline themselves so liberally towards these things. How would it benefit them.
    Education is an elusive if desirable solution. If only it were that simple.
    This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at February 24, 2017 4:37 AM MST
      February 24, 2017 4:34 AM MST
    0

  • 17260
    Let me start with the latter. Education might be an illusion but the only hope if we want to get anywhere in any progress, and not just for the subject of equal rights. In my world education is not only about the one we get on the school bench, you might as well say becoming enlightened. 

    Of course there should be equal rights within any subject, and wherever we are in the world. The same goes for any sexuality that differs from heterosexuality. We all know, or should at least be aware of the world isn't a homogeneous place. That however, shouldn't stop progress in one place before the other is at the same stage. It just means we got a long road ahead of us. Let me ask you this back, is it a problem/an issue to have equal rights within this area? Does it prevent or hold back other progressions? I have a hard time following your arguments/objections to what I have said. Might be on my side though.
      February 24, 2017 4:45 AM MST
    1

  • So you would actively encourage women in such places as I cited to demand such a right, and that getting their breasts out is indeed a worthy leveller - progress, as you put it.
    And as for the equality of right in this area, I am still undecided.
      February 24, 2017 4:54 AM MST
    0

  • 17260
    I think you read something in to my reply that isn't there. Undecided. Hmm. So we should tolerate sex specific laws. Interesting.
      February 24, 2017 5:13 AM MST
    0

  • On the contrary. I am, as we speak, lobbying in favour for the right for penises in public. Good news, eh. This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at February 24, 2017 5:45 AM MST
      February 24, 2017 5:21 AM MST
    0

  • 17260
    So you're undecided on how to feel about equal rights on the rights to walk topless, however a free willy will be your thing. The penis is a reproductive organ just like the vagina is. As far as I am aware there are no laws discriminating on wearing our reproductive organs uncovered in public spaces. Have me corrected if so.

    I'm curious. Is Tim Robards appearance in the photo below a matter of sexually exposure of his upper body, or not? Is it okay, it is by law? Should laws be enforced by how sexually we are, what is ugly, and how ugly, or sexually unattractive should we be to be allowed walking around topless? Oh, and this question isn't meant personally for you but it popped into my mind reading the threads here, and by the comments I have met. I am truly curious about this.

      February 24, 2017 5:46 AM MST
    0