Now I'll give you in a choice between the two for a movie I'll pick violence over sex just about any day, however that said I don't see why our society is so offended by the female anatomy. There's always a big debate over new mothers breast feeding, in public, in the work place, etc., why? Why is it such a big issue? This IS how mankind survived for thousands of years until the population got old enough to eat solid foods and until baby bottles were invented.

And also, shall we go back to the Janet Jackson incident at the halftime show? I saw it happen live and I didn't think one thing about it, but the next day oooooh that is just SO appalling, why? Our big issue that we don't budge much on is on full frontal nudity, so breasts shouldn't be much of a big deal. I'd also like to point out it is not the breast itself that people have a problem with, most people love breasts, hell, everybody has them, but it is the nipple and the aerola that will draw out the crazy mobs in this is so offensive. Why? You could have your whole titty popping out but as long as the center is covered, then you're good. I don't get it at all. Anyone else?

People have dirty minds and still want to hold onto the image of the pure Virgin Mary-Earth mother image of women. I think people are much less offended by a tramp showing off their sexuality than someone who is basically wholesome and good.

"Nature is our mother, we are sucklings at her breast," The Highwaymen - American Remains

femme fatale wrote:

People have dirty minds and still want to hold onto the image of the pure Virgin Mary-Earth mother image of women. I think people are much less offended by a tramp showing off their sexuality than someone who is basically wholesome and good.

There was a time in Western civilization when natural functions were accepted. Women's breasts were used for what they were meant for.

But then some sick Puritan notion of the sin of the naked body became the cultural standard. The Puritans were mostly run out of Renaissance Europe and you know where they landed.

This is another one of those stupid traditions that will take more effort to get rid of. What you are trying to do is appy logical thot to a tradition of indefensible body negative prejudice. It is always difficult getting ppl to abandon prejudices - just look at the racial bigotry that is still present after a couple hundred years of effort.

The Janet Jackson debackle was the most pressing. I have written articles on this and they have even censored the word nipple on TV. Oh, and why is it OK to show a man's breast and nipple but not a woman's. That question is being brot up in courts now and the rulings when applied logically is that a woman has the same right to go shirt free any where a man can.

And yet, how long do you think this pic will remain up?



Nothing wrong with that pic. It shows my bare breast just like my Av pic does. It also shows my friend Ann's bare breast. Just wait and see if it causes any complaint.

On the other hand, since antiquity, European art has shown nudity. So a real woman can't be seen nude or even a pic of a woman's nipple is considered harmful to children, and yet ... Here is some content from my vacation Webpage when my grandson and I went to DC in 2004.

Wardrobe Malfunction
at The National Gallery


This marble statue is titled A Companion of Diana and was sculpted in 1724 by Jean-Louis Lemoyne. It appears that "Wardrobe Malfunctions" were common before the great Janet Jackson Superbowl event.

As I walked thru the National Gallery, or for that matter down the streets of Washington with my 13-year-old grandson, amid all the sculptures showing women's naked breasts and the occasional penis & scrotum, I couldn't help but think of all that hoopla over a quick glimpse of Janet Jackson's boobie on national TV and how it was supposed to harm all the children of America. Such silly prudes.

I guess there were not many pervs thousands of years ago like there are now.

Tony Marino wrote:

I guess there were not many pervs thousands of years ago like there are now.

I think there've always been perverts, it's just more recently we know what they are.

Supernova wrote:

I think there've always been perverts, it's just more recently we know what they are.

I think thousands of years ago nudity was regarded as just a natural thing as opposed to today and I think mainly because of porn it is regarded more sexual.

Of course then you get into the question of where did that start? But given there are a lot of countries in the world where offense is still not taken to naked people, especially women, I still think it has something to do with when the Puritans came to America and suddenly everything was either a sin or witchcraft.

A woman's bare breasts aren't offensive in and of themselves, but there is still something called privacy and tact.

Yeah. Why does this guy not need no wear a shirt or be arrested?

Exactly, hell this dude's got bigger titties than a lot of women do!

Alan Smithee wrote:

Meat........................