It's not so much a matter of interpretation as it is how it reads at face value. If you didn't mean it to read that way, you should have clarified it or not posted it at all. You didn't do that. You're just saying, "that's not what I said at all!". It literally reads as follows: "a downside to this would be having to see boobs that boob-lovers may not necessarily enjoy seeing. You have to take the good with the bad." That comes off as misogynistic. I'm not saying you are. I am saying that that is precisely how it reads and those words were YOUR words. So, the honorable thing to do would be to say, "I worded that badly. What I meant was....", if you indeed meant it another way.
The big deal here is that it is irrelevant for you to have mentioned that. That's what makes it look bad.
See, I have no problem discussing a reasonable post like this ^.
When the first reply to my post is this...
sort of like how when women go to the beach they have to deal with the fact that many men are short and fat...so they gotta take the bad with the good
seriously dude women don't want to go topless at the beach for your entertainment and poo like this is actually pretty disgusting but i'm sure you're totally oblivious to how fuging creepy you come across
...it makes it quite difficult to have any meaningful discussion.
whether or not women have nice breasts has no business being a part of a discussion on equality. that's what you're having trouble understanding. if you consider seeing breasts (specifically, in your own words, a majority of them) to be a "downside" to topless beaches, that is in fact misogyny
I disagree that my opinion of what is essentially the ramifications of changing the law in regards to what would amount to partial public nudity has "no business in a discussion of equality".
my only concern is that i'm not sure that every dude would be able to act appropriately
see: every regular contributor in the lovely ladies section
My statement is similar to this in the vein of what peoples reactions to it would be. Some people would consider partial nudity of what they consider unattractive people to be offensive... they are entitled to their opinion... doesn't change the fact that if women want to go topless, they should be allowed to. Sure, I'll concede I could have worded it differently, but it doesn't change my sentiment.
I certainly wasn't espousing, as Cantrell was accusing me of, that only "hot women" should be allowed to go topless... not at all what I said and I've stated that repeatedly. He just can't get it thru his head to stop repeating things over and over.