If they did it all the time men wouldn’t get aroused by boobs anymore… they are only more arousing then the nose (for example) because they are hidden and thus diamond-ized
same goes for both of ours other junk too…
take off the leaf…
Women can walk around topless, if they want. And men can walk around bottomless if they want. They don’t because there are social rules that have been turned into laws that can get you arrested for ‘indecent exposure.’ What’s ‘indecent’ about breasts and penises?
yeah i guess i am asking is why don’t the people who made those laws…
If by all the time you mean, in those instances when men are topless -like at the beach- I think tits would still turn men on. Women seem to get turned on by male chests, even though they get to see them in public in some places. But there is an extra razzmatazz charge on anything we don’t get to see. Some cultures do not hide women’s breasts and in Europe they hide them less than in the US.
Christian conservatism that has fixed itself into secular law.
Nudity is perfectly natural especially in warmer climates.
No by all the time I mean whenever it is not relevant… A woman’s face is different then a man’s … that she has boobs is a difference… we are attracted to these difference… but they do not have to be some remarkable turn on… and that boobs are primarily IMO a stigmatic social thing that evolved out of us wearing clothes…
It is rather Ironic considering that it is in the bible that it mentions the beginning of sin around when adam and eve began hiding their sexual organs…
Leave it to homosapiens to create a bunch of unusual rules or laws to enslave and repress themselves with.
I think it’s a bit more than that. Breasts also feed babies. IOW they release a bodily fluid. Excretion and sex have been tabooized. They should be hidden and anything that releases liquids has at least some rules applied to it - the nose - and is generally covered if this does not made it hard for the person - as covering the nose does, though burkas do this. I would guess that it is not just that only women have them - which is in fact not really the case - men have them also, just they tend not to jut out as much - but also their function. But in much of Africa, it seems like breasts were fine to have on display. Of course the warmth makes this, well, kind.
I have to laugh–The area where I live recently had its 3rd annual no pants day on the rapid transit trains. Here are these people all bundled up against the cold, but with no trousers! At least when we have our naked bike riders parade, it’s in the summer! 
I think feet should always remain covered. And if people have much toe hair, they should shave it or wax. Genitals I can live with. But strangely formed, hairy feet on either sex must be covered. This is my Sharia law.
I have spoken.
And I have listened–And I will disagree. Under no circumstances should sunlight on the human body be disallowed. Do not put socks on under your sandals until at least December and then only if it snows. If you’ve maintained your really ugly and disgusting toe hair until winter–remember–what other people think of as ugly, you think of as natural, organic protection. I think.
You’ve answered the question yourself.
Personally, I like the mystery, and the arousal that um, arises from it.
Way back when, women were fully clothed from head to toe all the time. Everything was always covered up. Elbows, knees, ankles, the whole deal.
Think how exciting being with a naked woman must have been way back when!
The pendulum will swing back someday.
Interest in the opposite sex begins with an appraisal of the body. Men are attracted to females with ample breasts and wide hips. Why? Because both indicate successful progeneration. Women look for the 6 pack abs and the generous bulge. The abs indicate a physically strong male capable of successful hunting and a huge role as protector. The bulge needs no explanation. We are evolutionarily programmed to see desirable patterns in the opposite sex. It ain’t for arousal, it’s for finding the best possible representative of successful progeneration. Clothing or covering the “junk” began as protection of vital parts. You don’t want sunburn or frostbite. Sheltering and insulating the vital bits and pieces is just common sense. That the common sensical has been pushed to extremes is nothing new. Once humans realized that coverings generated curiosity and then arousal, it was off to the races.
Please, tell me what State/Country you live in so that I never visit that place. No offense.
I personally advocate for women to be permitted to go topless, but that is simply because it seems fair that if a man can walk around with no shirt on a woman should be allowed to, as well, for comfort reasons if nothing else.
I also tend to enjoy breasts.
Anyway, the entire state of affiars arises from the fact that societal mores are typically based upon some Religious text, or another, even while said societies will occasionally specifically deny same. (Seperation of Church and State)
In any case, nudity, which includes exposure of the breasts, is deemed as inherently sexual in many of these societies, and therefore, laws are created prohibiting that sort of behaviour. In the United States, however, there is no Federal law against nudity, or if there is, I have never seen it, and the laws concerning nudity are typically left in the jurisdiction of the States or Municipalities.
For instance, there was a town in Vermont (forget the name, could find it if someone wants me to) where public nudity was 100% legal until last year or the year before last…but then everyone started doing it! Anyway, the town did not want to become known for that, exclusively, so they outlawed it as a result. There are many States in which nudist colonies and nudist camps are legal, and I don’t believe it is illegal to practice nudism within your own home, as long as anyone entering the home (and the parents of any children who may enter the home) are advised and consent to same.
I also believe that nobody can restrict one from being naked on one’s own property, in general, provided there is a fence that…blah…blah…blah…keeps it from being considered in the view of the general public.
To that extent, then, we see that nudity is restricted basically just to common public areas, or areas that are generally considered viewable by the public. Even then, it is not necessarily so, as there are probably still some municipalities out there (but maybe not) where there is no law specifically prohibiting public nudity and there either:
A. Is no law in that State concerning same.
or
B. There is a law in that State concerning same, but the law specifically leaves it up to the Municipality whether or not they want to enact/enforce such a law.
I do not know whether or not I consider nudity inherently sexual, personally, I guess it really just depends on who it is that is naked!
Well, my dear, it ain’t Ohio–No offense.
Well if you could actually prove this then you could counter the very justification for burkas and such in islam… they wear them because they believe it reduces chances of being raped by means of arousing men… but if they were to be more open it would lead to less arousal over time more effectively perhaps…
i must be gay because I think big hips are ugly on a woman… and i prefer smaller boobs over gigantuine ones… about hand size…I’m actually fine with none…
Or shocking and confusing. Not what one expected, at all. Shocked there was so little hair, by the shapes, who knows.