This post may contain spoilers, private information, or inappropriate content.
Login to view this post
Login to view this post
Comments
Follow Comments Sorted by time
mali
· 8 years ago
· FIRST
Well said.
6
sirspacedino
· 8 years ago
But why would a woman be almost completely naked around other people
▼
celticrose
· 8 years ago
Ever seen Carnival in Rio, or Las Vegas Strip after 11PM
8
·
Edited 8 years ago
mali
· 8 years ago
The two women are an exaggeration, not all women have everything but their eyes covered, not all women walk around near nude. The point of this is that people should be allowed to wear what they want freely without being shat on by feminist cunts.
11
Show All
chu
· 8 years ago
yeah but there's also public appropriateness. I'd get in trouble if I went around balls out and dick a-swinging and I sure as hell would hope that females would get in AS MUCH trouble if they did the same.
4
celticrose
· 8 years ago
But you won't if you go shirtless. A woman cant even breast feed her child, covered, without being harassed.
6
mali
· 8 years ago
Oh they definitely would, I'm sure being in that state of undress is illegal in most places, so would being forced to wear a hijab.
4
mali
· 8 years ago
@celticrose the reason women don't go shirtless in public is due to the fact that breast are considered sexual organs. And i agree, women should be allowed to breast feed in public without being harassed, the babies head does cover up most of the breast anyway, the only people that get anything out of public breast feeding are perverts or young boys.
2
kurukuruguy
· 8 years ago
Why are female breasts considered sexual, but male pecs aren't? Guys don't even use them for anything, except sometimes as an erogenous zone.
3
garlog
· 8 years ago
People aren't supposed to go around bare-assed either, and that's not a sexual organ. Get a better argument.
▼
kurukuruguy
· 8 years ago
The ass is more generally accepted to be lewd.
dontaskmeidontknow
· 8 years ago
Feminism is like a tree with many branches. Those branches go in different directions and don't always look the same. There are also branches that are dead and unhealthy for the tree as a whole. This post reflects one of those branches; which is a branch that needs to be cut off.
13
mali
· 8 years ago
Christina Hoff Sommers, a prime example of one of those good branches
4
tarotnathers13th
· 8 years ago
At it's best, liberating and empowering for society. At it's worst, hypocritical and self-serving.
2
chu
· 8 years ago
At worst, oppressing the very people it claims to serve.
3
deleted
· 8 years ago
The patriarchy doesn't exist in developed countries. Stop it.
▼
unhappy_medium
· 8 years ago
For some women, it has very little effect. For some women, their fathers refuse to let them go to college because they do not believe in the education of women. It may not happen around you, but the patriarchy very much exists.
2
·
Edited 8 years ago
garlog
· 8 years ago
>one individual sexist = patriarchy
▼
jimcrichton
· 8 years ago
I find it depressing that it has to be specified as "unironically".
5
deleted
· 8 years ago
Wear whatever you want. Do whatever you want with your hair. Get as many tattoos as you want. Cover yourself from head to toe or let it (mostly, there's laws) all hang out. Be fat and happy, be skinny and happy, wear a windbreaker and a mullet. Whatever, it's cool. Long as 1) you're on your own time and not on somebody else's clock and 2) you're not hurting anyone or anything, or infringing on anyone else's personal space, do whatever you want. Men and women both. Life's too short to spend so much energy trying to control everyone else's minutiae.
8
wildbill77
· 8 years ago
Blah blah blah
2
