Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Go Topless Day: Is America Ready For Topless Sunbathing?


  • Please log in to reply
301 replies to this topic

Poll: Topless Beaches (28 member(s) have cast votes)

Cities and states set aside land for special interest groups like municipal golf courses. Should parts of beaches be set aside for topless sunbathing?

  1. Yes, I believe in freedom and special topless sunbathing areas should be marked with signs and created. (7 votes [25.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 25.00%

  2. No, I don't feel special areas should be set aside for topless sunbathing even if clearly marked. (2 votes [7.14%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 7.14%

  3. I believe in equality. Anywhere men can go topless, women should be allowed to go topless too. (18 votes [64.29%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 64.29%

  4. No, keep topless women behind closed doors. (1 votes [3.57%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 3.57%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#91 Darth Biscuit

Darth Biscuit

    Dark Lord

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,736 posts
  • LocationWilmington, NC

Posted 28 August 2012 - 04:43 PM

ah yes i'm the one cornered here

i had humiliated you several times in the past and i believe your exact words were something along the lines of "come out to (wherever) and we'll see if you'll call me stupid to my face"

and what exactly did you mean by the following:



because it reads as if you're a fuging pig


And as usual you believe wrongly, that's not what I said, but you don't care about the truth only what you've made up in your mind... Keep calling me a pig and whatever else and you're still wrong. You're quick to quote someone until it suits your agenda not to... "Uhh, I believe you said...". Right.

#92 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,072 posts

Posted 28 August 2012 - 04:44 PM

you are literally ignoring the misogynistic poo you spewed that i have repeatedly quoted and rambling on about how i'm twisting it by simply quoting it so here you go again:

The only negative side with that for men that like women is that not all breasts, and in fact most of them, aren't the perky nice ones... so you gotta take the bad with the good.



#93 MadHatter

MadHatter

    The Only Voice of Reason

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,263 posts
  • LocationDark Side of the Moon

Posted 28 August 2012 - 04:44 PM

ah yes i'm the one cornered here

i had humiliated you several times in the past and i believe your exact words were something along the lines of "come out to (wherever) and we'll see if you'll call me stupid to my face"

and what exactly did you mean by the following:



because it reads as if you're a fuging pig


So let's get down to the REAL important question that we are all thinking......Are your a real life douche? Or just an internet douche?

Inquiring minds want to know.

#94 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,072 posts

Posted 28 August 2012 - 04:45 PM

hey look i'm about to twist what you said again. ready for it? here it goes!

The only negative side with that for men that like women is that not all breasts, and in fact most of them, aren't the perky nice ones... so you gotta take the bad with the good.



#95 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,072 posts

Posted 28 August 2012 - 04:45 PM

So let's get down to the REAL important question that we are all thinking......Are your a real life douche? Or just an internet douche?

Inquiring minds want to know.


i don't know, are your?

#96 MadHatter

MadHatter

    The Only Voice of Reason

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,263 posts
  • LocationDark Side of the Moon

Posted 28 August 2012 - 04:46 PM

i don't know, are your?


Nice response there PeeWee Herman.

#97 Darth Biscuit

Darth Biscuit

    Dark Lord

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,736 posts
  • LocationWilmington, NC

Posted 28 August 2012 - 04:48 PM

hey look i'm about to twist what you said again. ready for it? here it goes!


Keep quoting it, it says the same thing... And not what you interpret it to say... Moron.

#98 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,072 posts

Posted 28 August 2012 - 04:48 PM

The only negative side with that for men that like women is that not all breasts, and in fact most of them, aren't the perky nice ones... so you gotta take the bad with the good.


please interpret this correctly then tia

#99 Darth Biscuit

Darth Biscuit

    Dark Lord

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,736 posts
  • LocationWilmington, NC

Posted 28 August 2012 - 04:57 PM

For men that enjoy looking at women, not all women are attractive or appealing... Same goes for men, not all men are attractive to women... There are some things I don't necessarily want to see, but that doesn't change the fact that women should be allowed to go topless if they want. Which is what I've said all along. It would have been misogynistic had I said "only women with nice breasts should be allowed to go topless" which is what u interpreted my words to mean and is totally incorrect.

#100 lightsout

lightsout

    Doin' stuff...thaaaangs

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,623 posts

Posted 28 August 2012 - 04:59 PM

Keep quoting it, it says the same thing... And not what you interpret it to say... Moron.



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.

#101 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,072 posts

Posted 28 August 2012 - 05:00 PM

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

#102 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,072 posts

Posted 28 August 2012 - 05:01 PM

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.


but then he would have to admit that HE made a mistake so lol good luck with that

#103 Darth Biscuit

Darth Biscuit

    Dark Lord

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,736 posts
  • LocationWilmington, NC

Posted 28 August 2012 - 05:45 PM

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".

He posted...

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.

#104 MCP

MCP

    Peace, Love, Uke

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,135 posts

Posted 28 August 2012 - 06:00 PM

that's not the argument and i can't tell if you're being dumb or disingenuous so if you could just clear that up for me that would be ever so helpful

the argument is whether or not it belongs in the discussion. full stop.



if you think this is relevant in a discussion on equality, you might be a pig




This is what you said, and this is what I responded to. If you now want to change your story, that is fine with me.


.. whether or not women should be able to take their tops off at the beach has absolutely fuging nothing to do with how attractive their breasts are you weird, weird man


Again, he never said it shouldn't be allowed. He said he can see a dodwn side. Sorry if you didn't get the memo about people being allwed to have their own opinions on things.


You really need to work your way out of the name calling as well, it just makes you look so juvenile.

#105 CCS

CCS

    Glutton for heart break and punishment

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,331 posts

Posted 28 August 2012 - 06:07 PM

The problem is that most of the people who do go topless are girls that no one wants to see.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.