United States Federal Court Rules Females are Free to Display Their Breasts in Public

A United States federal court has ruled that females can expose their breasts in public because there is no difference between male and female breasts.

146

Evolution of the human species started from nakedness. The concept of indecency didn’t exist. As we developed into complex beings, we found reason to cover ourselves – to protect ourselves from the weather.

But in this so-called modern era, morality and ethics have become a highly contested issue among academics, governments and society as a whole; some people are of the opinion that a person should be granted an unlimited right, including allowing nudity in public places.

breasts

For some, this argument is considered profane and injurious to the social fabric of modern society. In conservative societies such as Africa and the Muslim world, certain dresses are considered indecent. Wearing them can be considered offensive, and the culprit, mostly women, can face punishment. There is no room for the debate of nudity in such societies.

This sharply contrasts with the Western world. People in the West are permitted to wear what they like. In Europe, for example, there are selected places where nudity is allowed. There has been a significant surge in places such as beaches and hotels where people can take all their clothes off without the worry of repercussion.

In the United States though, the issue of sex and the body is not that lax. Some municipalities have their own laws on how people should cover their bodies in public. Although there has been rising pressure from activists to get rid of these laws, towns and cities officials are determined to protect them.

The Municipality of Fort Collins in the state of Colorado passed an ordinance (No. 134) in November 2015, banning girls and women older than nine from exposing their breasts in public unless they were breastfeeding. City officials argued that allowing females to publicly expose their breasts would likely cause distraction among drivers and pedestrians. This, they believe, has a tendency to disrupt public order.

breasts

The law was quickly challenged in court in May 2016 by the activist group Free the Nipple. Free the Nipple is a movement that started from a 2012 film of the same name. The group staged protests throughout the city in the past, gathering topless in public spots. Commentators even suspect the activities of the group made city officials pass the law that banned them from exposing their breasts in public. Free the Nipple went to court demanding an injunction on the law.

The gender equality group said the ordinance was restrictive and discriminatory against women in the city. The group explained that if the law was fair, it should have banned both genders from exposing their breasts in public. But city officials countered this by saying the law did not discriminate because male and female breasts are different.

When the facts of the case were presented before the court, District Judge R. Brooke Jackson granted a preliminary injunction on ordinance No. 134. Jackson ruled that the law is discriminatory against women, as well as perpetuating stereotypes that sexualized female breasts.

breasts

The court stated that the primary difference between male and female breasts is the ability to breastfeed.  Although the court noted the physical differences between the two, it stipulated that it was not enough to warrant different treatment from the government.

“I find that the ordinance discriminates against women based on the generalized notion that, regardless of a woman’s intent, the exposure of her breasts in public (or even in her private home if viewable by the public) is necessarily a sexualized act. Thus, it perpetuates a stereotype engrained in our society that female breasts are primarily objects of sexual desire whereas male breasts are not,” Jackson wrote in his ruling.

Although this is not the final ruling of the case, Jackson wrote that he granted the injunction in part because he believes he will ultimately find that the ordinance passed by the city violated the Equal Protection Clause.

breasts

He stated: “The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment bars state governmental entities from discriminating between the sexes unless they have an ‘exceedingly persuasive justification’ for doing so. In this case, Fort Collins has on the books an ordinance that on its face discriminates against women.”

City attorney, Carrie Daggett said in a statement after the ruling that the city will review the judge’s decision and consider the next steps. It now looks as though the city is reluctant to give up on the case.


This article (United States Federal Court Rules Females are Free to Display their Breasts in Public) is a free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to the author and AnonHQ.com.


Supporting Anonymous’ Independent & Investigative News is important to us. Please, follow us on Twitter:

146 COMMENTS

  1. SO WHY ARE ALL THE TITIES CENSORED ON THIS PAGE? IF MEN CAN POST TOPLESS PICS AND THEY AREN’T CENSORED THEN WHY ARE THESE WOMEN WHO JUST GOT THE RIGHT TO WALK AROUND TOPLESS AND BE EQUAL TO MEN THEN AGAIN WHY THE CENSORSHIP I ASK?

          • You’re making the assumption that balls and dick are comparable to breasts. The whole point of the court saying it’s okay for them to wear their breasts out was to tell you there’s no difference between male and female nipples, dude…Using the “well I can’t pull my dick out” argument like that.
            Breasts aren’t a sexual organ, stop using what I assume you see in pornography as an excuse for how you see breasts in general. No child is going to see a breast and freak out, so please stop. Lol.

      • So male breasts are okay for children to see but female breasts are not? Its one or the other and you don’t get to choose when its appropriate and when its not. Equal rights is equal all the way down the board.

      • But isn’t that just (as per the article) perpetuating stereotypes that sexualize female breasts?

        I mean, I am not trying to be snarky, but if the gist of the ruling is that it’s ok for women to be topless because breasts aren’t inherently sexual, then censoring them in photos seems pointless. Sounds like the kids will be seeing them in person soon enough, anyway.

      • Doh! Wasn’t that the whole point of the article. What difference does the age of the viewer make?
        By this sort of action we are perpetuating the myth that nkedness is soehow wrong

      • Ok so if this is actually​ real then kids are going to start seeing female breast in real life out walking the streets. What’s the difference in that and seeing them uncensored in this article.

      • Can kids see male nipples without being harmed? I thought the point of the article is that female breasts don’t pose a danger to society and that it is discriminatory to censor women differently than men. So based on that, why should they be censored on this page, but not in public?

      • Yes, of course. But, have we no kids in public? The veracity of your support of this outcome is called into question by your choice to censor.

        If it is NOT pornographic, why the choice to censor?

      • But your page is public. According to YOUR article and the United States Supreme Court, “Females are free to display their breasts in public.” Censoring them from a public page seems rather contradictory. Maybe it’s your idea that kids should be banned from public.(?) But if your article is true, then maybe we’d be better off desensitizing children early.(?)

        • NOT according to the US Supreme Court. The district courts are simply the first level. This is not a law that has been passed, it is a challenge to a law. There is a lot of ground to cover yet.

      • Breasts are the first thing most children see. Censoring nipples contributes to the same notion of sexualization the judge was ruling against.

        Your censorship contributes to the problem and perpetuates the paradigm that women’s breasts (and nipples) are sexual objects.

        • “Your censorship contributes to the problem and perpetuates the paradigm that women’s breasts (and nipples) are sexual objects.” Well PM, it seems to me that playing ‘Hide-the-Nipple’ is, and has been for centuries, the accepted “paradigm” established by CIVILIZED societies around the world. And a great pair of perky young tits is incredibly sexual for ALL straight men and many women; saggy baggy pendulums hanging down to your waist … NOT SO MUCH! Are you saying that seeing, caressing and tasting a ‘PERFECT’ pair of breasts, should not cause me to have a rock-hard erection ready to get frisky? So, you are saying that I am still living in an ‘Old-World-Paradigm” and that I must be required to go back to one of your ‘New-World-Order’ institutions of higher enlightenment for both mental and physiological reprogramming on modern CULTURAL MARXISM? GREAT IDEA! I hope you have arranged a whole bunch of Professors and classrooms for this endeavor. You do understand that almost half of the world’s population will have to attend; less, of course, the gender fluid, transexuals, transgenders, manginas, homos, gays and faggots … well, you get my drift. Will there be a Final Exam; one where they parade gorgeous young blondes with perfect bodies, TAN AND TOPLESS in front of us, brushing their nipples ever so lightly against us, to test if we have been sufficiently de-sexualized and emasculated? GET A CHUBBY AND YOU FAIL! Ruh-Roh.

          BTW, best of luck with your crusade. Let me know how it works out for you folks.

          • Titties make you frisky precisely because you’re not accustomed to seeing them. Frankly, SHAPELY breasts (and buttocks!) excite me too. However, for years I found myself staring at women’s chests, even if they were unremarkable or even ugly. We, as a culture, are breast-obsessed. IMHO, we would benefit from a dose of exposure. Once it became the norm, our obsession would disappear. Sure, SHAPELY boobs would still excite us. However, run-of-the-mill boobs would not. We’d adopt a more “you seen one boob, you seen ’em all” sort of attitude, and be the better for it.

      • But if your argument is “we have kids visiting this page” as to why the nipples are censored aren’t you just teaching kids that nipples and female breasts are in fact parts that need to be censored? Why is it “Oh think of the children” when it comes to a women displaying her baby feeding bits? This is especially to be asked on an article discussing how those parts aren’t inherently sexual and how censoring them helps give that impression.

        • It’s reasonable to “think of the children”. I wouldn’t want my young son, who’s at an age where his hormones are raging to view women’s breasts and become titillated until he’s at an age where he’s able to understand it. It has nothing to do with nudity per se but the fact that I would rather my son was a bit more mature where I can school him on sexuality and the anatomy of the female. Is that so wrong to feel that way? Is that so wrong to ask people to stop for a moment and think of the bigger picture instead of being so self involved. I want a few more years for my son to be ready. Why can’t people consider how other people.

          • Exactly !!! “Why can’t people consider HOW OTHER people feel !!! YOU may not want your son seeing breast (probably already has in school !!!) BUT OTHER people don’t mind as it is NATURE !!! OTHER people might feel it is OK so WHY must you try and force YOUR point of view when OTHER people have THEIR views ??? Why can’t YOU consider how others feel ???

          • The reason is really simple : your son is titillated about women’s breasts because you taught him it was a taboo.
            If you had breastfeed him, and continue to let him see your breasts, he’d think it’s natural and he wouldn’t be titillated by your sexual attraction, because your breasts would be just the same as his father’s breasts , not sexual. They are not, but in your mind… and it’s what you’re teaching to your son.

          • ^ Pat is right

            don’t ever bring children into this subject like as if they’re going to be victim of naked people, because they cannot!

            children needs sexual lifestyle since they’re 5 and you’re depriving them precisely same way people can food/language deprive you: it’ll wreck their sanity and health if you don’t let them grow with sexual life. (They’re not fucking babies-factory nor they are marry-factory, get your volunteer virgin elsewhere!).

            Believe it or not: the whole world has this rating standards that children can watch nude/pornograph long before they’re allow to watch anything violence. US and UK(and other religious country), however has exactly opposite guideline that they’re allow to violence for a decade long before they’re allow to see tit! *sigh* it sound like we’re awful more muslim than ever if you still wants to censor how kids run their natural life.

          • Then start explaining what breasts are for, dad, instead of preventing your children from seeing what they already see when they take off their clothes and will eventually see more of in the future, especially when they search the internet. Tell them that breasts are just part of the mammalian anatomy, that everyone has them, and when mommies have babies, they make milk for them to drink. Is that so hard?

      • so you believe women should be able to walk around topless (which they should) but are worried about kids seeing boobs on the internet? hoping this was a joke…

      • Again in Europe breasts are sexually sensationalized. Open breast and nipples shown on their national advertising tv ads. Kids don’t make a big deal out of it if you all don’t lol the USA needs to get with the idea a natural body is a wonderful creation. Too much church influence trying keep masses in their belief of orders.

      • it doesnt matter if kids are visiting the page…. the point of this article is that nipples/breasts should not be seen as inherently sexual. if you’re barring kids from seeing it, you’re going against that. because why else would you censor them from kids? just like we as adults shouldnt see women’s breasts as inherently sexual, kids shouldnt either.

      • But the censorship goes against what the law has ruled. So what if there are kids,they can go outside and see bare breasts. Would you censor men’s nipples ? I don’t think so.

      • Kids have breasts..both boys and girls..so if they just ruled as breasts being non sexual, having minors visit the page should have no bearing on weather or not it should be censored because it is the same body structure they already have or will have.

      • Then you missed the point of the article. To treat women’s nipples differently is wrong, whether it’s an anti nudity law or censoring a webpage. Nipples are nipples, not sex organs. By “protecting” these kids you are sxexualizing nipples, the very act this article decries.

      • making women’s nipples a taboo just makes them more enticing. if they are normalized then kids won’t find it a big deal

      • So women can walk around in public with their nipples on display for everyone, including children, to see but God forbid a child seeing their nipples online?? Whats the difference?? Stop censoring nipples.

      • Still no reason for censorship. Your comment simply continues to perpetuate the sexualization of women’s breasts. Nothing will happen to a kid by them seeing a woman topless.

      • “…but we have kids visiting this page.”

        So…it’s different from them seeing exposed breasts in public that aren’t being used for sexual purposes? It’s not like you’re selling pornography on this site. I mean…I appreciate the thought, but isn’t that just a perpetuation of the original hypersexualization problem? 😉

      • So you’re saying in an article praising this decision you’re buying into the notion that exposed female breasts are nudity and possibly harmful to children?

      • And there are kids in public where women have just had their right to bare breasts without moderators ironically imposing their outdated prudery or, by there concern for the kiddies, sexualize women’s breasts by implication.

      • but by that same token then, if its acceptable on the streets then you shouldn’t need to censor online. Unless we plan on covering our children’s eyes when they leave the house…. And frankly, I can’t really argue with much of that ruling. The women have a point. There’s guys walking around out there with larger moobs than some ladies. But as a society, we’re still a ways away from this being an accepted social norm.

      • Praise Jesus. The children! They are so going to sexualize those female breasts. Such perverse children. Can someone explain to the me what is wrong with that?

      • But you have kids walking around Fort Collins. Also if we stopped making a big deal out of it kids won’t know the difference. Remember most kids spend the first few years of their life feeding from breast and than suddenly they are offensive to see them? what message are you actually sending to kids?

        • @all whats our next step ladies, pussy display in public, because kids don’t understand what that means right?, because you people have never been 5 years old (yet)? I think they need a few breast pictures at the federal court, maybe put some in the judges office (could be a public place?), but this is AnonHQ and we’re anonymous and we don’t need your breasts on our walls (private property?), now live with it.

          • @AnonVoid why would that be the next step? Do you see dicks out in public? The point here is gender equality, and if “children visit this site,” censoring the nipples sends them the message of quite the opposite

          • gender equality? who are you mocking exactly? men and women are supposed to complete one another not compete one another over equality or who’s better, that’s a very sick understanding of their purpose in life, if you got some self esteem issues then respectfully go to a doctor, respectfully!

          • Why do you presume that there will be a next step? This ruling is about breasts.
            I’m allowed to walk around with my wrists, ankles and omg, my neck showing. What’s next? My vagina showing?
            BTW, look up the Santorelli decision in NY.

      • so? kids see boobs more than adults. they still sucking on them. Why is it that from 3-16 we cant see boobs? what is the magic about those years?

          • Oh yeah.. don’t like the fact you were called out on your hypocrisy and so you lash out by labeling those pointing it out as “child molesters”…. EPIC FAIL!!! You have just lost most (if not all) of your credibility… you would have been better off citing ISP restrictions… at least that has a shadow of legitimacy… but NO… you stoop to the political bullshitters mainstay “It’s for the ‘children'”….

          • we all are wired to be pervert

            are you fucking pervert bashing us? are you demonized the pervert so you can just hide away from society for doing same things?

            why don’t you just fucking call out on religion who perverted the kids and tell them they can’t have fun for 3-16 years until they’re married?

          • I use wifi, therefore I’m not wired rofl, and I think you got the wrong religion or maybe talking about another religion other than the one I mentioned lol.

    • There’s NO IRONY here! The preliminary ruling simply states that the city of Ft. Collins, CO can’t make a law prohibiting only women from being bare-breasted, and not men. That’s it.
      What images a website chooses to show is up to the website owner (with perhaps some limitations of extreme stuff imposed by the web hosting services provider). There is no governmental regulation pertaining to what images a website can display; there wasn’t before, and there still isn’t.
      But I suspect sites that want to avoid being blocked by parental security measures activated in their browsers may choose to self-censor for that reason.

  2. Kids visiting this page ?! Would you censor men nipples the same way because of those “kids” ? You are just ridiculous, and YOU sexualize women nipples (kids don’t do like you do).

  3. Please when speaking of Africa be precise as to what country and area you are referring to, remember Africa is a CONTINENT.

  4. If the breasts aren’t exposed in a sexual manner, then it shouldn’t matter if there are kids visiting the page or not. Children under the age of 18 are prohibited from viewing pornography, but this federal judge just declared that the simple sight of a female breast isn’t pornography. Why share the decision if you’re not going to uphold by it?

  5. Guys get ready for a major increase in sexual harrassment cases. Its natural for a man to look at boobs but this is going to go badly.

  6. There are kids in public too and theyll see them uncensored, whats the difference between that and them seeing them on this page?

  7. Congrats.you idiots got permission to be whores. You wanna be a woman? Be a woman and have some damn respect for yourself and other people around you. if your tits are the only way you can express yourself and get attention . You’ve got bigger issues.

    • Mansplaining once again? (Alicia? mouhahaha) You know better than women what and how they have to do what they have to do? And what is a whore in your mind? Explain that too. Every woman has nipples: primary task, breastfeeding. Women are not there to feed your ill thoughts and their bodies are their, not yours. What makes you think they want to know what you think they can do with them?
      And oh, please, shut the porn tabs you’ve opened just before coming here…

      • “Their” bodies don’t belong to them, “their” souls don’t belong to them, “their” everything don’t belong to them! they belong to god and god asked them to cover their bodies out of decency, and yes there is a “public porn” tab which makes even true, it’s public pornography!

        • *shrug* exodus 21:7 made it clear that all female belong to God

          who knew the God is a slave-driving pervert. Good things I’m not religious as you

    • “Congrats, you idiots.” Oh, the irony.

      I take it men, then, are also whoring themselves out whenever they walk about shirtless? Rather than, for some reason, thinking that female breasts = sexuality you should consider the inane double standard between the acceptability of the two sexes being topless. On a hot summer day one of the fastest ways for blokes to cool down is to remove their shirt after all, and if you can insinuate any sexual meaning from that, well, “Congrats, you idiot.”

  8. No one wants to see man-boobs but we’re subjected to it on a regular (vacation or not) basis. And don’t even get me started on man-kinis! ;P

  9. Wait just one minute. The article refers to two genders and I’m certain we now have three. I know this because I saw a third stick picture on the bathroom door at my local Target store. How is it possible this Judge overlooked this critically important component of our society.

  10. It’s really not hard to just let them free the nipple, guys. Just control your boner. I’m a guy, I can do so. You can too, you just have to not look at it in a sexual way, since it’s not even a sexual organ anyway.

  11. lol wow, the mod defending the censorship is a freaking moron, literally does not understand the irony and stupidity of it. wow. just wow. go away stupid. nobody needs your dumbassery.

  12. I am much more concerned about children’s exposure to violence than I am nipples. One is natural, the other is hopefully NOT.

  13. This is absolutely fucking ridiculous! Female breasts are sexual. End of story! They are used as a large source of stimulation during sex. Male breast arent. Ive made exes orgasm just from stimulating her nipples. The female breast is made to be sexual. This whole article is fucking ridiculous

    • I’m a dude and my tits stimulated when somebody licked my tits

      and I’m 100% certainly that girls/women already sexualized our topless tits. They’re just not telling you anything cuz you slut shamed them out of their own desire existance

      and last, only people who are against exposed tits (even male) was religious people who believed they’re going to hell for seeing somebody else’s anatomy, last I check US constitution require the state and church to be forever separate for good!

      *sigh* sorry, but the more you protect the notion that female breast are inhert sexual, you’re no fucking different than muslim people who get fucking horny over NOSE or ANKLE because they’ve been covered forever. THEY FUCKING SEXUALZED NOSE AND ANKLE and here we are, predicting that people like you are going to be this in no less than 20 years. (nah, no muslim invasion. Just christian being what muslim do cuz the books are fucking same side!)

      • Where in the Constitution does it say seperation of state and Church. By saying the last you checked the US Constitution requires the state and church to be forever separate for good, proves you have never read nor checked the Constitution because those words are not there nor are they implied.

  14. Europeans don’t care. Africans don’t care. Asians don’t care. Russians don’t care. Native Americans didn’t care. Only cultures who have been exposed to prudish, concervative Christianity care. Stop forcing your religious values on everyone else. Not everyone is an ultra concervative Christian. Leave your small pond, open your mind, and explore the world. Keeping boobs taboo is only boosting the porn industries profits. And they are laughing all the way to the bank grateful to the religious leaders of America because they are in bed together getting rich.

    • how did you know they were in bed together getting rich? is that a conspiracy? and those religious values are the ones that keeps us from becoming animal, you disregarded the solution, by offering everyone a dead end or no solution, nice try but you ain’t gone brainwash anyone here, we’re the one laughing at you, the porn industry doesn’t have religious values but we do, that’s the solution, that’s how we stop them!

    • believe it or not. Major of the porn industral are led by christianity

      they’re purely the reason why the straight porn are crap, like abusive spouse/partner is an fetish over there o_O

      they probably are already in same bed together, thinking they’ve solved their future

  15. As others had said, there’s obviously the irony of the censorship and the issue with the kids. I also want to point out the line that says “there’s no difference between male and female beasts” is false. 1. Male breasts don’t pump out milk. 2. Females can achieve orgasm solely by stimulation of the breasts, which makes them a sex organ.

  16. Men can orgasm from having their nipples stimulated as well. Sorry that you guys are ignoring part of your body that feels good to be touched.
    Sadly, some of the responses here show exactly how little some men know about a womans body.
    Not all women enjoy having their breasts stimulated for sexual reasons and the great majority will never orgasm that way. Our breasts serve a biological function. Other than that, they are no more sexual than a foot or collarbone, both parts of a womans body not typically considered sexual, but still commonly fetishized.
    I’m perfectly ok being required to wear a shirt in public if the same goes for men. Has nobody considered that idea for a minute? Not one man has made that suggestion that I’ve seen. Are we not concerned for the salacious thoughts people who are attracted to men might be having every time some guy bares his chest like a wanton slut? Or worried that the cases of sexual assault against men might be caused by them wandering around in such a provocative state?
    And for the guy that asked if men get to choose which women get to go topless, yes sir, you certainly can. Just as soon as you’ve taken care of all the dirty, fat, ugly, man tittied troglodytes that have been roaming the world topless as long as I’ve been alive.

  17. Hugely misleading headling: A US District Court in Colorado is not quite the same as US Federal Court. Authors need to check their sources and verify their wording before the pass along misleading information. Quite irresponsible!

  18. I have never understood what the big hang up is about being nude. All I can come up with is a religion angle and of course to protect ourselves from the elements.

  19. For all the people thinking AnonVoid (Moderator) is really a moderator you have to be really gullible. Anyoe can add (Moderator) to their name.

    • Well Bob, you’re not a moderator, is that enough? and I have the right to express myself, whats on the article, doesn’t affect/reflect my opinion!

  20. Anonvoid I can’t believe they let you “mediate” anything. Not to mention this website is full of “alternative facts”. Who really cares if women let them fly. We will take a while as society not to specialize them but we must start somewhere. And anonvoid you’re a piece of crap for every inappropriate post you’ve put up on this thread.

  21. Are you fucking kidding me!? It’s not equal because you have a pair of titties..you want to go shirtless get them removed. Like all of you fucking hoes can’t put a shirt on? Is that so hard? Men do not have breasts women do therefore cover them. It is not womens rights, it’s just the fact you stupid ass bitches think that it’s such a problem men don’t have to wear shirts. Get over yourselves.

  22. As one of the named plaintiffs in this case I’d like to make some corrections to this article and address a few things. Firstly, there were no feminine nipples exposed during any of our protests and we recieved support from several men who attended the events who covering their nipples to show the double standard. Fort collins police can corroborate that. Secondly, our expert witness gave a testimony regarding the “female breast exposure to kids” bullshit. Being exposed to a woman’s breast as she walks by in a park or seeing a topless woman at a beach doesn’t negatively impact children. *This is backed by research and science* It’s the societal standards that remain untested within the parent that turns the experience into something indecent. Parents can either teach their kids that bodies are just that,intent is what makes a body sexual. The entire city council made the unanimous decision to lower the age at which girls could be charged as an adult for this ordinance, to 10 years old. The entire city council voted to sexualize female children before those children had grown adult bodies. Gerry Horak(pro tem) stated at the last city council meeting we attended as a plea to keep children away from forced sexualization, that if we wanted change we would have to sue. End of story. So we did exactly that,gave them what they asked for. We fought for equal protection under the law, we fought to keep children out of forced sexualization. I’d also like to add that the city attorney’s FIRST recommendation to the city council was to remove the gender based language from the ordinance. Combining our speeches,emails with links to scientific research, and examples of damages done by laws that discriminate, the city council STILL chose to make children owners of adult bodies. Lastly, I’m so deeply disappointed that an ANON site would choose to censor images that are not pornographic in any nature and give an excuse equivalent to “but think of the children!” Which is counterproductive to the very story you’re reporting on. I thought ANON was more progressive and intelligent than that.

  23. So … read your own article and stop pixilating only the female nipples. Either pixilate them all or pixilate none.

  24. Yeah, OK, I’d have read this article but your title is a misogynist turn-off. It’s “women” not “females.” Anytime a dude uses “female” as a standin for “woman” he not only sounds like a cop, he outs himself as a sexist.

  25. I was in the military and I traveled to Europe. All the beaches over there are topless. A few were all nude. The people of Europe didn’t pay any attention to the nude people of both sexes. And yes there were children there. Americans on the other hand were breaking their necks trying to take it all in. I didn’t see s single European male with an erection. The same cannot be said of the Americans. We all had erections. Oh I also believe that they have way less sex crimes than we do. This occurred in the middle 70’s. Exposure lessens desire and removes the mystery.

    • But you also didn’t have porn sites with 24/7 access that there is absolutely no way you can control who’s watching it. The desire will be there regardless, it worked in the 70’s because that was a different time. It doesn’t mean that it will work now.

  26. The problem with women going topless hence the last picture. They better get in shape because there was a whole lot of sagging going on …boobs and stomach I don’t think once in my life did I ever care that a man could go topless and I couldn’t. If I heard of a woman doing this I didnt care. I just thought she had no self respect or dignity and she only looking for attention…the wrong attention!!

    • Your proving the point of the campaign you do understand that right. Your shaming a women for her body… A women who is unashamed enough to fight for something she believes is important, and something that in fact relates to gender equality. Who cares what you think, and who cares what i think, but why are you judging someone who is actually doing something they feel is important. When… your doing what exactly?

  27. This to me is ridiculous. I’m a girl. I have boobs. And I do not want to show them to the world. Since forever they have been known as a “sexual” part of your body. Just like breast feeding. I understand it is a natural thing for a woman to use her breasts to feed her child, but your vagina is a natural thing you used to create that child and give birth to that child. Just because it is a natural thing, doesn’t make it right to show it off to everyone. Showing your breasts to everyone will not make people think they are any less sexy. Men like boobs. It is a proven fact and an obvious one. Since it is so natural, why not let your 13 year old daughter go to school without a shirt or a bra. It’s natural right? So where do you draw the line on places where your boobs can be showing. It most likely will still be inappropriate to show them at school, at work, at the bar, so where will you go to do this??

    • I get your point; but I think it would be more along the lines of if a women wanted to cool of after playing basketball or something. Boobs aren’t inherently sexual we’ve just attached sexual significance to them because of innate primal urges that go back centuries. Also it would help with the whole breastfeeding in public stigma which is actually illegal in several places in the US. Lastly the reason you wouldn’t let your daughter go to school without a shirt on is the same reason you wouldn’t let your son go to school without a shirt on, rules in that capacity still apply.

  28. Why is it (myself included) people are arguing about the site moderation censoring the nipples on a free the nipple campaign. As a legal child who has had to deal with censorship of content, any parents, or school officials will block this content. Its not about hiding the women. It’s about making the knowledge accessible to children. No, “children” aren’t going to freak out when they see breasts; on the flip side the overtly strict parents and the public officials in schools (Teachers, Administrators) who could potentially lose their jobs over allowing students to view content with nudity, will.
    So kudos to you moderators for actually caring about the spreading of knowledge.

  29. Santa Cruz, CA has a law that women can be topless in public. The law has been around for over 20 yrs. Other than for a few rare topless demonstrations, women don’t walk around that city topless. Woman aren’t fighting for topless equality because they want to start walking around topless in public, they just don’t want the government taking this constitutional right away from them only because of their gender.

  30. We all seem to agree that equal rights are generally if not universally accepted and believed to be right and necessary but with respect to public nudity partially or completely we seem to feel that the mere visual presence of a partially or completely naked man or woman will in itself be traumatic to both adults and children alike, really??? Now I agree that the issue of people of both sexes being raised and socialized by either or both the primary family
    or the larger societal family in which they live from childhood, with minor or highly inappropriate views and beliefs toward appropriate physical interaction with others is a matter that needs to be confronted and changed wether it be a child or an adult who displays such inappropriate social behaviour both physical and verbal as the physical is so often foreshadowed by the verbal and we all I believe dislike receiving inappropriate verbal and most especially inappropriate physical attention from others be we a child or an adult and the inappropriate attention comes from a child or an adult, and yes while a great many in our society believe that children should be held blameless for their inappropriate behaviour, not only is the damage to both a child or an adult receiving this inappropriate attention just as emotionally and socially devastating but this young innocent child we see as blameless for their inappropriate behaviour is very often aware of the damage he, she or they are inflicting but they gain great pleasure from inflicting it and go on to be adults with inappropriate beliefs acted out in their social interaction with others, so often we as a primary family or a larger society damage our members as children and punish them as adults!!!… To get back to my main question that I set out to ask, I am a nudist at heart and have spent a lot of time socially with others of both sexes in our birthday suits in large and small groups from the cradle to the grave, privately and at a local resort and my experience personally and from talking with others is that the partially or completely naked body is actually less sexually stimulating then a provocatively dressed woman or man and even children are actually much safer in the nudist/naturist community where nudity is a common everyday part of life and people actually become very ho hum toward the naked body both of adults and children alike and while we humans are very sexual beings this ho hum attitude toward the naked body actually not only means that the desire for sex is no greater then it is in main stream society it is believed by many to be lower amoung the naturist community although still the desire for sex is hard wired into us, among the naturist community the naked body has lost much of its appeal due to its becoming commonplace. In my experience in the naturist community, children are not traumatized by the mere presence of naked bodies and the breasts, vulvas and penises that are present with them, these things are hardly noticed if they are at all for even children become ho hum about the naked body and just see it as a normal part of life, however, in mainstream society the adults teach the children that the naked body is wrong and bad to be in the presence of that it is evil but as told to us by GOD our Heavenly Father in the Bible was the nakedness of Adam and Eve seen by GOD as evil or was it not the carnal thoughts that Adam and Eve thought about the body after eating from the tree of knowledge that the thoughts they had where themselves evil and the naked body was just a naked body? NOW THE QUESTION, HAVE YOU EVER SEEN OR HEARD OF A CHILD THAT WAS TRAMAUTIZED BY THE PRESENCE OF A NAKED BODY STANDING, SITTING OR LYING BEFORE THEM WITHOUT FIRST HAVING BEEN TAUGHT BY THE ADULTS IN THEIR LIVES AND OR THE SOCIETY IN WHICH THEY LIVE THAT THE NAKED BODY WAS BAD, EVIL AND DANGEROUS JUST BY ITS MERE PRESENCE BEFORE THEM???…

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here