Women feel oppressed by bathing suit law

On 19 Sep 2005 13:34:07 -0700, wrote:

Is this the land of the free, or the land of oppression?

Both.

"'Drop Your Top' Idea Receives Cold Shoulder after Opposition from
Pro-Family Citizens. A radical proposal to allow women and girls to go
topless at California's public beaches and parks has failed to
materialize after loud outcry from pro-family citizens."

Let me see if I understand this. The Pro-Family group doesn't endorse
nudism.

LOL LOL

I guess they are Anti-Birth then.

"The "drop your top" proposal made headlines in January when liberal
lawyer Lianna Johnsson's radical idea was endorsed by the Conference of
Delegates of California Bar Associations. Yet the proposal never became
a bill because no state legislator would introduce it by the
legislative deadline in late February."

When the day comes you can't get a California politician to endorse topless
nudity, the pendulum of conservative uptightness is truly stuck in place.

Those supporting the 'Drop Your Top' idea made a mistake in encouraging
topless sunbathing. The California Legislature should neither seek to
encourage nor discourage topless sunbathing, yet they should merely set
the state law in line with natural law, appellate law, and the
principle of freedom, and make topless sunbathing legal.

They should endorse toplessness and bottomlessness for more simple reasons
than that.

Like, what the **** is the big deal anyway?

No one has to go topless unless they prefer it, and there is no reason
for the State Legislature to encourage a dress code in this case. But
wherever a man may go topless, it should be legal for a woman to go
topless as well.

I would support a bill that would make it illegal for a male with
gynecomastia or a male with no nipples to go topless. Fair is fair, yes?

http://www.plasticsurgery4u.com/male...e_nipples.html

Under regimes where women were required to wear burkas, an uncovered
face would seem naked. In all other places, an uncovered face is
considered normal. Once breasts are uncovered, bare breasts will not
seem like a big deal anymore. It's all in our minds, and anyone who
thinks that nudity is something, should consider the already exposed
parts of our bodies which give no one pause.

I have ugly toes. Yech.


Topless sunbathing legal in Central Park:
http://www.timeoutny.com/features/35...e.topless.html

Conference of Delegates of California Bar Associations endorses topless
sunbathing:
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics....20050128a.html

Campaign for Children and Families (CCF) imposes their Taliban like
morality on Californians:
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/...l?storyid=3507
The Campaign for Children and Families contends: A drop your top
proposal would "ruin family outings at public parks and beaches, harm
basic family values and public decency, and would result in very
inappropriate treatment of women and girls."
Let's examine this statement:
A drop your top proposal would:

A. "ruin family outings at public parks and beaches,"
This is not true. As we can see women sunbathe topless in Central park
all the time without ruining anything.
B."harm basic family values"
Impossible. Perhaps they would like to state what these basic family
values are. Are they values which make someone ashamed of his or her
body??
C. "and public decency,"
A value judgment
D. "and would result in very inappropriate treatment of women and
girls."
A bold faced lie. There is no reason for treatment of women and girls
to change at all. In Europe women go topless and are treated with the
proper respect anyone gives a stranger. Nudity does not change
anything.

Furthermore, clothes are merely titillating. Nudity is a good thing,
it is our natural state. The fact that sex is hidden is more likely to
induce arousal, then if it is exposed. Hiding sex and requiring
clothing makes sex into a bigger deal than it is.

Just check out some of these pictures of topless women on the beach,
and tell me if you don't think it's a good thing:
http://www.nudebeach.ws/main.html

"His disciples said: "When will you appear to us, and when will we see
you?"
Jesus said: "When you undress without being ashamed and take your
clothes and put them under your feet like little children and trample
on them, then you will see the son of the Living One, and you will not
be afraid."

Jesus was a nudist?

I never knew.
--
"A long time ago I decided to limit my emotional baggage to a very small
carry-on = How B

Thus spake Chrissy Cruiser :

On 19 Sep 2005 13:34:07 -0700, wrote:

Is this the land of the free, or the land of oppression?

Both.

"'Drop Your Top' Idea Receives Cold Shoulder after Opposition from
Pro-Family Citizens. A radical proposal to allow women and girls to go
topless at California's public beaches and parks has failed to
materialize after loud outcry from pro-family citizens."

Let me see if I understand this. The Pro-Family group doesn't endorse
nudism.

Actually, a topless ban seems hard to enforce. I can go topless. And
then there's this 14th Amendment thingy.


LOL LOL

I guess they are Anti-Birth then.

--
dillon

Pain is Nature's way of saying "that was stupid"

On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 14:50:42 GMT, Dillon Pyron wrote:

Thus spake Chrissy Cruiser :

On 19 Sep 2005 13:34:07 -0700, wrote:

Is this the land of the free, or the land of oppression?

Both.

"'Drop Your Top' Idea Receives Cold Shoulder after Opposition from
Pro-Family Citizens. A radical proposal to allow women and girls to go
topless at California's public beaches and parks has failed to
materialize after loud outcry from pro-family citizens."

Let me see if I understand this. The Pro-Family group doesn't endorse
nudism.

Actually, a topless ban seems hard to enforce. I can go topless. And
then there's this 14th Amendment thingy.

You would think so but history is full of police actions, beach closings
and other similar enforcements especially in the USA.

Note the quote above "radical". It's radical to want the freedom of
nudism.

What?

This comes from the same, closed minded, absurd thinking that invaded the
Vietnam War protests. it was "radical" then to want that hideous atrocity
to end. it was "radical" to claim that it was a war foisted on and
supported by black teenagers.

So now it is "radical" to propose that, shudder I say it, that women should
be *allowed* to bear their breasts in public.

To me it is radical that we have laws in the first place that make it
illegal to do so. Let's not even get started on, you know, that thingy down
there. Best keep it under chastity lock.

Idiots.
--
"A long time ago I decided to limit my emotional baggage to a very small
carry-on = How B

Chrissy Cruiser wrote:
On 19 Sep 2005 13:34:07 -0700, wrote:

Is this the land of the free, or the land of oppression?

Both.

"'Drop Your Top' Idea Receives Cold Shoulder after Opposition from
Pro-Family Citizens. A radical proposal to allow women and girls to go
topless at California's public beaches and parks has failed to
materialize after loud outcry from pro-family citizens."

Let me see if I understand this. The Pro-Family group doesn't endorse
nudism.

LOL LOL

I guess they are Anti-Birth then.

"The "drop your top" proposal made headlines in January when liberal
lawyer Lianna Johnsson's radical idea was endorsed by the Conference of
Delegates of California Bar Associations. Yet the proposal never became
a bill because no state legislator would introduce it by the
legislative deadline in late February."

When the day comes you can't get a California politician to endorse topless
nudity, the pendulum of conservative uptightness is truly stuck in place.

Those supporting the 'Drop Your Top' idea made a mistake in encouraging
topless sunbathing. The California Legislature should neither seek to
encourage nor discourage topless sunbathing, yet they should merely set
the state law in line with natural law, appellate law, and the
principle of freedom, and make topless sunbathing legal.

They should endorse toplessness and bottomlessness for more simple reasons
than that.

Like, what the **** is the big deal anyway?

No one has to go topless unless they prefer it, and there is no reason
for the State Legislature to encourage a dress code in this case. But
wherever a man may go topless, it should be legal for a woman to go
topless as well.

I would support a bill that would make it illegal for a male with
gynecomastia or a male with no nipples to go topless. Fair is fair, yes?

http://www.plasticsurgery4u.com/male...e_nipples.html

Under regimes where women were required to wear burkas, an uncovered
face would seem naked. In all other places, an uncovered face is
considered normal. Once breasts are uncovered, bare breasts will not
seem like a big deal anymore. It's all in our minds, and anyone who
thinks that nudity is something, should consider the already exposed
parts of our bodies which give no one pause.

I have ugly toes. Yech.


Topless sunbathing legal in Central Park:
http://www.timeoutny.com/features/35...e.topless.html

Conference of Delegates of California Bar Associations endorses topless
sunbathing:
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics....20050128a.html

Campaign for Children and Families (CCF) imposes their Taliban like
morality on Californians:
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/...l?storyid=3507
The Campaign for Children and Families contends: A drop your top
proposal would "ruin family outings at public parks and beaches, harm
basic family values and public decency, and would result in very
inappropriate treatment of women and girls."
Let's examine this statement:
A drop your top proposal would:

A. "ruin family outings at public parks and beaches,"
This is not true. As we can see women sunbathe topless in Central park
all the time without ruining anything.
B."harm basic family values"
Impossible. Perhaps they would like to state what these basic family
values are. Are they values which make someone ashamed of his or her
body??
C. "and public decency,"
A value judgment
D. "and would result in very inappropriate treatment of women and
girls."
A bold faced lie. There is no reason for treatment of women and girls
to change at all. In Europe women go topless and are treated with the
proper respect anyone gives a stranger. Nudity does not change
anything.

Furthermore, clothes are merely titillating. Nudity is a good thing,
it is our natural state. The fact that sex is hidden is more likely to
induce arousal, then if it is exposed. Hiding sex and requiring
clothing makes sex into a bigger deal than it is.

Just check out some of these pictures of topless women on the beach,
and tell me if you don't think it's a good thing:
http://www.nudebeach.ws/main.html

"His disciples said: "When will you appear to us, and when will we see
you?"
Jesus said: "When you undress without being ashamed and take your
clothes and put them under your feet like little children and trample
on them, then you will see the son of the Living One, and you will not
be afraid."

Jesus was a nudist?

I never knew.
--
"A long time ago I decided to limit my emotional baggage to a very small
carry-on = How B

THIS QUOTE ISN'T IN THE BIBLE!

On 22 Sep 2005 19:23:44 -0700, Jeff Jenson wrote:

Jesus was a nudist?

I never knew.
--
"A long time ago I decided to limit my emotional baggage to a very small
carry-on = How B

THIS QUOTE ISN'T IN THE BIBLE!

NEITHER IS YOURS!
--

"There's Nothing Quite Like A McDonalds... .Except maybe the contents of my
toilet"

Chrissy,

Why do you have to use big words like gynecomastia. I had to go look it
up. Why could you not have written big hooters on a guy. I guess that
big isn't always better, at least not in the wrong places.

John

wrote:

Chrissy,

Why do you have to use big words like gynecomastia. I had to go look it
up.

So now you'll know what it means next time. What's the problem?

Sylvia.

Because your vocabulary obviously needs improving
Marsketa

On 24 Sep 2005 04:00:47 -0700, wrote:

Chrissy,

Why do you have to use big words like gynecomastia. I had to go look it
up. Why could you not have written big hooters on a guy.

Too much typing LOL

I guess that
big isn't always better, at least not in the wrong places.

John

Think about heads, John, a big head can be awful or magnificent.
--

"There's Nothing Quite Like A McDonalds... .Except maybe the contents of my
toilet"

"Jeff Jenson" wrote in message
ups.com...

THIS QUOTE ISN'T IN THE BIBLE!


No but it is in the Gospel of Thomas, a collection of sayings of Jesus
preserved by the Coptic Christian church for about 2000 years. Some bible
scholars think that this collection of bible sayings pre-dates anything we
have in the "approved" canon of the Bible.

David