Court decision allows women to go topless in public

[gabosaurus]

In what could be a hint of things to come, a higher court has refused to hear a challenge to a ruling that allows women to go topless in Fort Collins, Colorado.

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/02/22/topless-fort-collins-free-the-nipple-regulation/

I have always thought the whole thing was sexist. Men with larger breasts than some women can go outside without a shirt, forcing everyone to witness their grotesque moobs and beer bellies. Yet women are not allowed to do the same. There is nothing sexual about breasts. They are merely deposits of fat. The U.S. is one of the few countries that sexualizes women's breast.

Not that the law would help me any. :rolleyes:

[jimnyc]

Figures, Colorado first allows for recreational marijuana. And is it a coincidence that they vote to allow for boobies in public? I think not! :)

[aboutime]

Figures, Colorado first allows for recreational marijuana. And is it a coincidence that they vote to allow for boobies in public? I think not! :)


WOW jim. This is what I have been waiting for, for years. I may move to Colorado, and finally open my business, doing DOOR TO DOOR BREAST EXAMS. $5.00 a PAIR!:laugh:

If it's legal to sell POT in Col. Maybe they can trade their POT for my services???:laugh:

[Gunny]

In what could be a hint of things to come, a higher court has refused to hear a challenge to a ruling that allows women to go topless in Fort Collins, Colorado.

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/02/22/topless-fort-collins-free-the-nipple-regulation/

I have always thought the whole thing was sexist. Men with larger breasts than some women can go outside without a shirt, forcing everyone to witness their grotesque moobs and beer bellies. Yet women are not allowed to do the same. There is nothing sexual about breasts. They are merely deposits of fat. The U.S. is one of the few countries that sexualizes women's breast.

Not that the law would help me any. :rolleyes:I partly agree. Only from the opposite end. I don't think ANYONE should be running around topless unless in an appropriate place. Disgusting fatbodies are offensive as Hell to me. I don't want to see that nasty-a$$ sh*t.

Regardless what you think ... women running around showing their boobs in front of men is just dumb. It gives the predators an excuse. In some foreign countries women go topless. I'd watch my adolescent little jarheads drool walking by the pool. How you THINK people should act and how they DO act are 2 different things.

[sear]

"There is nothing sexual about breasts." g #1

I find this assertion misleading.

There's some explanation for our cultural dimorphism, men can go topless, women can't.

It is not purely biological. Some cultures aren't so fussy, in the Amazon, and in Africa for examples.

I've wondered whether our culture's prudish attitude promotes the sexual appeal of the female bosom for men: the allure of the forbidden ...

BUT !!

There's also a biological component.

Men generally are attracted to women that are "good breeders" and women generally are attracted to "good providers". tralphaz
Men are very quick to assess a women's suitability for breeding.
And a man can glean useful information by examining a woman's breasts.

"There is nothing sexual about breasts." g #1

Not perhaps as much as genitalia, but I wouldn't say "nothing".

[gabosaurus]

"There is nothing sexual about breasts." g #1[/B]

Not perhaps as much as genitalia, but I wouldn't say "nothing".

Are you tailfins' brother? :rolleyes:

[gabosaurus]

I partly agree. Only from the opposite end. I don't think ANYONE should be running around topless unless in an appropriate place. Disgusting fatbodies are offensive as Hell to me. I don't want to see that nasty-a$$ sh*t.

Regardless what you think ... women running around showing their boobs in front of men is just dumb. It gives the predators an excuse. In some foreign countries women go topless. I'd watch my adolescent little jarheads drool walking by the pool. How you THINK people should act and how they DO act are 2 different things.

I agree that NO ONE should be allowed to run around without a shirt.
But are you suggesting that women need to cover up because men are unable to control themselves?

[sear]

Are you tailfins' brother? :rolleyes:
[b]"All men are brothers." Mohandas Gandhi


Do not post nudity here. It can get the board sideways with Google.

[Gunny]

"There is nothing sexual about breasts." g #1

I find this assertion misleading.

There's some explanation for our cultural dimorphism, men can go topless, women can't.

It is not purely biological. Some cultures aren't so fussy, in the Amazon, and in Africa for examples.

I've wondered whether our culture's prudish attitude promotes the sexual appeal of the female bosom for men: the allure of the forbidden ...

BUT !!

There's also a biological component.
[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR]
Men are very quick to assess a women's suitability for breeding.
And a man can glean useful information by examining a woman's breasts.

"There is nothing sexual about breasts." g #1

Not perhaps as much as genitalia, but I wouldn't say "nothing".I agree with you it is societal. American society is too immature to handle it. THAT is my problem with the ruling.

But that's one Hell of a sexist comment. If the girls beat your a$$, don't look for any help from me. You're on your own. :laugh: And girls are scary. Why do you want to fight with them? You're the only person I've ever seen piss off Abs. That's in going on 12 years or so. You got a secret Underdog formula? "How to Piss off Abs Formula". There's some brilliance.

[sear]

G #9

Military men are smart enough to know, planning 3 steps ahead can be folly, as even a well designed battle plan is not likely to survive first contact with the enemy.

BUT !!

Good chess tend to plan at least 3 steps ahead.

And in politics, that may not be enough.

If cultural prudishness is a significant factor in men's attraction to that portion of the feminine form,
and we nuke that prudish standard,
what will the downstream consequences be for our culture?

There's more at risk than simply putting a few seedy strip-clubs out of business.

Might it cut the birth rate?

Some Western European nations have already reached NPG, and have to rely on immigration to support the tax base.

I think there's more involved here than just a few boobs at the beach.

[Gunny]

[b]"All men are brothers." Mohandas Gandhi

There's a person behind those. I'd rather have a person that actually loved me than all that junked up shit.

[revelarts]

Men with larger breasts than some women can go outside without a shirt, forcing everyone to witness their grotesque moobs and beer bellies. Yet women are not allowed to do the same. There is nothing sexual about breasts. They are merely deposits of fat. The U.S. is one of the few countries that sexualizes women's breast.
Not that the law would help me any. :rolleyes:

"There is nothing sexual about breasts."
seriously? so if a man pats a woman on her breast it's the same as a pat on the back then?
And when a man caresses a woman's breast before, during and after sex, it's NOT sexual? It's like shaking hands or something?

I've been to other countries and it seems to me the women trying to be sexually appealing often show a little extra breast outside of their clothing too. I think we all know you have to really go looking for places around the world were going topless is the norm. I can't think of airlines have flights into cities where you'd get off go into the airport and see most or any of the women are topless.
But sure some people in the Amazon, a few parts of Africa and south sea Islands wear NOTHING at all. Maybe a head dresses, jewelry, or a string around the waist. So why stop at tops, if we're going to look at other cultures for models? why's "sexuality" the line?

But tell me again why exactly do we have to act like other countries? "Who's to say what right and wrong." I'm not sure what the virtue is in the change here. So now FAT men AND FAT woman can terrorize the public?
I went to art school for college and when i 1st got there I... and many other guys made our way to the nude drawing classes with nude women models to ...study..

C'mon gabby, in our Culture Breast are Sexual. Honestly In every culture they are... if men want to please some women there.
And WHATS WRONG with that?
Anthropologist go to other cultures and like to see the differences from place to place and are often pissed if someone goes in and CHANGES what has been traditions for thousands of years. Why is it OK to overthrow every sexual cultural tradition we have in the west? THAT'S a double standard.

"They are merely deposits of fat."
that provide milk, and pleasure too.

But I guess the penis is merely a tool to dispense urine.


SaveSave

[Little-Acorn]

There is nothing sexual about breasts.
If you were wondering just how far leftist hysterics like little gabby would go to tell flagrant lies and twist the truth completely out of recognition, to achieve whatever her agenda is for this week…

….now you know.

[Black Diamond]

In what could be a hint of things to come, a higher court has refused to hear a challenge to a ruling that allows women to go topless in Fort Collins, Colorado.

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/02/22/topless-fort-collins-free-the-nipple-regulation/

I have always thought the whole thing was sexist. Men with larger breasts than some women can go outside without a shirt, forcing everyone to witness their grotesque moobs and beer bellies. Yet women are not allowed to do the same. There is nothing sexual about breasts. They are merely deposits of fat. The U.S. is one of the few countries that sexualizes women's breast.

Not that the law would help me any. :rolleyes:
Yeah let women go topless. I wanna see it. Nothing sexual about them.

[Gunny]

I agree that NO ONE should be allowed to run around without a shirt.
But are you suggesting that women need to cover up because men are unable to control themselves?It means nothing to me. I'm suggesting why give an idiot an opportunity? Face facts. They're out there. Inviting them is stupid. You want to run around topless? There are consequences. Why you girls think flashing your asses is cool beats the hell out of me. You flash your ass then wonder why creeps come after you.

[sear]

"Do not post nudity here. It can get the board sideways with Google.
Last edited by NightTrain; Yesterday at 11:11 PM. Reason: Nudity is a no-no." #8
Right.

I didn't.

Standards and Practices have determined that décolletage does not violate nudity standards if it does not expose nipples.
The image I posted does not, and upon request I will post it again and prove it.

You've censored me once without legitimate cause.
I don't advise doing so again.
I take the First Amendment seriously.

If I break ANY rule, I DEMAND to be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
I have broken no FCC rule here. And if you doubt Google's comfort level on that specific image, I suggest you contact Eric Schmidt and ask him.

[Black Diamond]

"Do not post nudity here. It can get the board sideways with Google.
Last edited by NightTrain; Yesterday at 11:11 PM. Reason: Nudity is a no-no." #8



Right.

I didn't.

Standards and Practices have determined that décolletage does not violate nudity standards if it does not expose nipples.
The image I posted does not, and upon request I will post it again and prove it.

You've censored me once without legitimate cause.
I don't advise doing so again.
I take the First Amendment seriously.

If I break ANY rule, I DEMAND to be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
I have broken no FCC rule here. And if you doubt Google's comfort level on that specific image, I suggest you contact Eric Schmidt and ask him.
:popcorn:

[darin]

Good ruling.

But that's the thing with the USA. The country is free in large regard, but restrictive over seriously stupid shit.

If the USA adopted most of the German traffic laws and limits the US would actually save lives......eventually. After the initial idiocy of "OMG NO SPEED LIMIT!!" thinning of the herd, the highway systems would run better.

If the USA allowed Kinder Eggs, after the onslaught of "My bad parenting lead my stupid kid to swallow the toy inside" lawsuits, the USA would have better chocolate

If the USA allowed toplessness where it's appropriate, after the onslaught of perverts, people would care less and less over titties except where they are most-fun - within a sexual setting - but NOT just walking around on a woman.

[Gunny]

"Do not post nudity here. It can get the board sideways with Google.
Last edited by NightTrain; Yesterday at 11:11 PM. Reason: Nudity is a no-no." #8



Right.

I didn't.

Standards and Practices have determined that décolletage does not violate nudity standards if it does not expose nipples.
The image I posted does not, and upon request I will post it again and prove it.

You've censored me once without legitimate cause.
I don't advise doing so again.
I take the First Amendment seriously.

If I break ANY rule, I DEMAND to be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
I have broken no FCC rule here. And if you doubt Google's comfort level on that specific image, I suggest you contact Eric Schmidt and ask him.He clipped my quote of your post as well. Wah. Not sure but I think I'm going to live.:rolleyes:

Here's where you screwed the pooch .... You questioned a moderator's decision in public. Again. You like your "Rights"? Use them. If you have a problem with a moderator's decision take it to an admin. IN PRIVATE.

This is a privately owned board and you have the "Right" to do whatever Jim says you can. Go read the disclosure you agreed to. Then the rules. This board is open to the public. That means no porn. Jim would have to restrict membership for you to post that crap.

Personally, I think it's disgusting and demeaning.

You're stepping on the wrong-ass toes around here. Let's review ... you've pissed off Abbey. That's epic. Now you're going after NT? Good luck. Not. Just stick an "owned" sticker on your ass. He's as mean as I am.

You're f-ng up a-hole. I'm laughing about it. Dude, you pissed off Abbey. Nobody can piss off Abbey. And now you want to start crap with Rick. Why don't you pick a fight with kathianne too? I got a better plan. You want a Gunny up your ass? You go right the head on and screw with Kath.

Here's a plan ... There are MEN sitting out there waiting on you. Quit picking on the girls. Mr Martial artist. Come and get some.

[Elessar]

"Do not post nudity here. It can get the board sideways with Google.
Last edited by NightTrain; Yesterday at 11:11 PM. Reason: Nudity is a no-no." #8
Right.

I didn't.

Standards and Practices have determined that décolletage does not violate nudity standards if it does not expose nipples.
The image I posted does not, and upon request I will post it again and prove it.

You've censored me once without legitimate cause.
I don't advise doing so again.
I take the First Amendment seriously.

If I break ANY rule, I DEMAND to be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
I have broken no FCC rule here. And if you doubt Google's comfort level on that specific image, I suggest you contact Eric Schmidt and ask him.

The forum is NOT publicly owned, and YOU do not pay the bills.

Take your First Amendment reference and shove it. Now if that statement regarding the 1st is not
a veiled threat, then I have never seen one.

If you do not like the way this place is run, just remember the door swings both ways and
nobody is forcing you to remain here beyond your own will.

Screwing with Abbey and NT is not the smartest thing to do. Now you have painted a bulls-eye on
your egotistical ass.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

"Do not post nudity here. It can get the board sideways with Google.
Last edited by NightTrain; Yesterday at 11:11 PM. Reason: Nudity is a no-no." #8
Right.

I didn't.

Standards and Practices have determined that décolletage does not violate nudity standards if it does not expose nipples.
The image I posted does not, and upon request I will post it again and prove it.

You've censored me once without legitimate cause.
I don't advise doing so again.
I take the First Amendment seriously.

If I break ANY rule, I DEMAND to be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
I have broken no FCC rule here. And if you doubt Google's comfort level on that specific image, I suggest you contact Eric Schmidt and ask him.

This post now convinces me that you are tailfins using an alias..

1. First --you are arrogant beyond belief-same as he
2. You attack the ladies- same as he
3. Never admit you are not a perfect god- same as he
4. The biggie-- you threaten lawsuit-- same as he..
5. You use one truly and massively screwed up logic --same as he
6. You have zero respect for others-exactly same as he!

So if you are not tailfins, then I suggest that you may have a long lost twin, given away at birth.. :laugh:

Regardless, you are one truly ffkked up duck, IMHO.-Tyr

[NightTrain]

"Do not post nudity here. It can get the board sideways with Google.
Last edited by NightTrain; Yesterday at 11:11 PM. Reason: Nudity is a no-no." #8



Right.

I didn't.

Standards and Practices have determined that décolletage does not violate nudity standards if it does not expose nipples.
The image I posted does not, and upon request I will post it again and prove it.

You've censored me once without legitimate cause.
I don't advise doing so again.
I take the First Amendment seriously.

If I break ANY rule, I DEMAND to be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
I have broken no FCC rule here. And if you doubt Google's comfort level on that specific image, I suggest you contact Eric Schmidt and ask him.


I've noticed that you like to run your mouth with no regard as to if you have a leg to stand on. In most cases, you are free to do so and you'll just make yourself look foolish.

There are very few rules around here, and moderating actions are rare.

You've broken two rules in this thread : Posted a picture containing nudity and publicly questioned my actions as a mod. The first infraction was minor and I corrected your post with an explanation as to why I did so. Google Ads does not allow any pornography to be affiliated with their network, and when something is questionable, they err on the side of caution. My brief explanation should have served to clue you in and that should have been the end of it for any reasonable person, but you somehow think that you get a vote here. You don't.

Your second mistake of publicly questioning my decision to remove your picture is much more severe and you will find zero tolerance for it.

You're getting this warning because you're new around here. Do yourself a favor and don't mistake kindness for weakness.

I encourage you to read the rules posted at the top of this board : http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?3487-Debate-Policy-Rules

Should you have any issues with a Staff member's actions, you are always free to PM another member of Staff indicated by either green or red text in their usernames, or go straight to the top and PM the sole owner of this board : Jimnyc.


The image I posted does not, and upon request I will post it again and prove it.

You've censored me once without legitimate cause.
I don't advise doing so again.

You'll receive my digital boot in your insolent ass if you do it again. Capiche?

[jimnyc]

You've censored me once without legitimate cause.
I don't advise doing so again.
I take the First Amendment seriously.

There will be no nudity here and we will not take any chances. And we WILL do it again if deemed necessary. Google can and will disable or terminate my relationship with them, if they are delivering their ads on such pages. I've received endless emails from them over the years, with links to pages that were in violation.

But honestly, and more importantly, we never went for nudity here in order to keep it more of a mature and family oriented board, to the best we can anyway.

Removing nudity has NOTHING to do with the first amendment. We give folks here room to post as much as possible with as little rules as possible with as little intervention as possible. But the 1st is about the government, not a private website like this. But even then we allow for more freedoms, with responsibility of course.

So yeah, it was in fact legitimate, even if you don't see it, I do as owner and the one who can lose something. I have advised staff members to do exactly that, so they will in fact do it again, even against your advisement.

[Abbey Marie]

I have nothing to add to these excellent replies, except, as I've said before, it makes sense to get a feel for a board before charging straight into trouble. Oh, and reading the rules doesn't hurt either. Unless of course you are an arrogant butthead who thinks they can do whatever they please. Then stuff happens.

[Kathianne]

I have nothing to add to these excellent replies, except, as I've said before, it makes sense to get a feel for a board before charging straight into trouble. Oh, and reading the rules doesn't hurt either. Unless of course you are an arrogant butthead who thinks they can do whatever they please. Then stuff happens.
:laugh2:

[jimnyc]

I have nothing to add to these excellent replies, except, as I've said before, it makes sense to get a feel for a board before charging straight into trouble. Oh, and reading the rules doesn't hurt either. Unless of course you are an arrogant butthead who thinks they can do whatever they please. Then stuff happens.

I sent him a notification in a thread a few weeks back, about quoting and multiquoting, he never clicked the link and even looked at what I linked him to. Also, regarding the rules, he has never even opened the rules page/thread. And YES, it's very easy to track/check that. Odd how anyone can be aware of what to do and what not to do when they never even bothered with the rules. :dunno:

[Elessar]

I sent him a notification in a thread a few weeks back, about quoting and multiquoting, he never clicked the link and even looked at what I linked him to. Also, regarding the rules, he has never even opened the rules page/thread. And YES, it's very easy to track/check that. Odd how anyone can be aware of what to do and what not to do when they never even bothered with the rules. :dunno:

Then I will sum it up for you in two words, jimnyc: "Extreme Arrogance"

[Gunny]

I sent him a notification in a thread a few weeks back, about quoting and multiquoting, he never clicked the link and even looked at what I linked him to. Also, regarding the rules, he has never even opened the rules page/thread. And YES, it's very easy to track/check that. Odd how anyone can be aware of what to do and what not to do when they never even bothered with the rules. :dunno:

Here's today's "riddle me this riddle me that" (because I was asked) .... I noticed in one thread he claims to be a Brit. Did the UK adopt the US Constitution? Since we're talking about "Rights".

[jimnyc]

Here's today's "riddle me this riddle me that" (because I was asked) .... I noticed in one thread he claims to be a Brit. Did the UK adopt the US Constitution? Since we're talking about "Rights".

I didn't see that, but I rarely go beyond the first few sentences of his. I know he's apparently a New Yorker now. Don't know if he was from the UK or not.

Now, I DARE YOU to ask me if I care!!

[Abbey Marie]

I didn't see that, but I rarely go beyond the first few sentences of his. I know he's apparently a New Yorker now. Don't know if he was from the UK or not.

Now, I DARE YOU to ask me if I care!!

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rayzU4EOvSo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[aboutime]

"Do not post nudity here. It can get the board sideways with Google.
Last edited by NightTrain; Yesterday at 11:11 PM. Reason: Nudity is a no-no." #8
Right.

I didn't.

Standards and Practices have determined that décolletage does not violate nudity standards if it does not expose nipples.
The image I posted does not, and upon request I will post it again and prove it.

You've censored me once without legitimate cause.
I don't advise doing so again.
I take the First Amendment seriously.

If I break ANY rule, I DEMAND to be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
I have broken no FCC rule here. And if you doubt Google's comfort level on that specific image, I suggest you contact Eric Schmidt and ask him.



sear. Most all of us also take the FIRST Amendment seriously...IN PUBLIC. But here, on DP, YOU only have the RIGHTS to follow the rules.
If you doubt that. Show all of us WHERE, in the CONSTITUTION...the right to IGNORE is mentioned???

[darin]

what the hell is this thread about?

[Gunny]

what the hell is this thread about?I think it went from whatever it was to Sear questioning NT's authority. From the looks of it, Sear didn't make any new buddies.

[darin]

I think it went from whatever it was to Sear questioning NT's authority. From the looks of it, Sear didn't make any new buddies.

That guy quotes replies like an asshole. I hope he fixes that shit.

[Black Diamond]

That guy quotes replies like an asshole. I hope he fixes that shit.
I wouldn't count on it.