• tetris11@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      For real, this is such a great move. Oh sure, the government could just ban nipples in general, but good luck enforcing that when it gets mildly warm and every scottish man rips their shirt off

  • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Another example of the Scots fighting for freedom … they’ve been doing it successfully for thousands of years and they’re still doing it!

    I will never in my life ever understand the fight against gay, lesbian, bi, queer, LGBTQ+

    They are a fraction of the population yet the majority causes them immeasurable harm simply because they exist. The louder they persecute, the more prominent LGBTQ+ movement becomes … it’s contradictory. If conservatives had just left them alone, there would almost be no issue about any of this at all.

    There are far more important debates and fights to be had in our society … namely the fight to preserve the survivability of our species in the coming centuries … yet here we are fighting about who gets to show or not show their tits!!!

    • Lucky_777@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Conservatives need a demographic to hate. This one is perfect because they will never be Conservatives, and most hardcore Conservatives can’t stand to see homosexual PDA.

      • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I just had a look at the global demographics

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_sexual_orientation

        Those identifying as a different sexual identity from heterosexuality averages less than 10% of the overall population … it could be argued that LGBTQ+ people who are stigmatized would be less likely to report their actual identities in these surveys … but in progressive countries like Canada, Australia and most developed European countries who are supposedly more progressive and open still show a minority of the population identifying as such.

        It will forever be a stupid reason to fight over identity of any gender or identity in anyone … especially at this point in our history when so much more should be more important to all of us … we’re facing an existential crisis right now as a species and instead we are spending a lot of time and energy debating our sexual morals and preferences?

      • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        they will never be Conservatives

        I wish that were true, but I have family that is deeply conservative and so is her wife.

        • Wugmeister@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Same. I used to work with a lesbian who was a born-again Christian who thinks gay people shouldn’t kiss or hold hands in public becuase it could indoctrinate children (she literally used the word indoctrinate when talking about this with me). They do exist.

  • vala@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    The fact they just censored the nipples still 🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂

  • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    It would have been icing on the cake if trans men would have been in the same protest, also topless, but they weren’t censored lol

        • 13igTyme@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Whenever there is an issue with anything relating to genders it’s always about trans women, not trans men.

          They talk about trans women in women’s bathrooms, but never trans men in men’s bathroom. If they wanted your original gender, then you’d have trans men in women’s bathrooms. Basically someone that looks like a guy in the women’s bathroom.

          They talk about trans women dominating women’s sports, even though there are literally none. But what about a sport where being a women, i.e. smaller and more flexible, is a benefit. Something like gymnastics.

          Women are also on average a better shot, yet we don’t see discussions around trans men dominating gun or bow related sports.

          There are many other examples, but generally the right always tries to attack trans women. It has to do with macho “manosphere” and equating anything less manly as a weak liberal thing.

  • Rob T Firefly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’ll always remember this one time in the 1990s when my family and I were watching some medical documentary on cable TV. There was footage of a trans woman getting top surgery, and they showed the medical details and cutting of her uncovered chest with no problem, but the instant the breast implant was slipped beneath the patient’s skin they blurred out the nipple because it became unsuitable for unedited broadcast at that moment.

    i think about that moment a lot.

  • Zacryon@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    What do they mean by “biological” women? There are different characteristics to biological markers: gonodal, genetic / chromosomal, anatomical, hormonal. All can be manifested differently.

    • kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      They have three categories: “biological woman,” which is a fertile cis woman with XX chromosomes and a vulva; “biological man,” which is a fertile or formerly fertile cis man with XY chromosomes; and undesirables, who are everyone else and are referred to by whichever terminology is convenient for them at any given point.

    • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      That’s part of what their protest is getting at — as you highlight, even “biological sex” is pretty complex (In science, I have heard that the “three G’s” (Gonads, genetics, genitals) model is the standard definition, but scientists who research biological sex seem to consider this an extreme oversimplification). Fuzzy definitions like this are fine in science, but things get much messier when we try to write these things into law. One of my problems with the recent Supreme Court ruling on transgender rights is how they use the phrase “biological woman”, as if it is a simple matter.

      I find this especially striking because I’m a cis woman who has plenty of experience of being treated poorly due to being a woman, and I feel like my “biological sex” (as in gonads, genetics and genitals) don’t factor into it much; far more significant is whether I am perceived as a woman, and this is why “gender” can be far more useful than “biological sex” in these discussions.

  • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Trust me when I say this: none of the right-wing media/politicians, will understand that they’ve made any points on behalf of the protestors by blurring the “men’s” nipples.

    Also, saying men can go around topless but not women, is sexist. Any such law should be removed. We should all be equal in the eyes of the law. With that said: that shouldn’t imply that women should go around topless. It should just be legally allowed. I’m a guy, but I don’t think I need to explain to anyone the potential complications from going around topless as a woman… Whether trans or not.

    The whole situation is dumb. Society needs to do better. We’re all people. Let’s keep that in mind and treat everyone the same, based on the fact that they are a human person in society. No legal separation of sex, gender, race, religion, or anything else. If you are a human person, you should have the same rights and freedoms as every other human person.

    • Omgpwnies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m a guy, but I don’t think I need to explain to anyone the potential complications from going around topless as a woman… Whether trans or not.

      It’s normal and fairly mundane for men to go topless in virtually all societies, however, there are a good number of cultures where it is also normal for women to be topless. If it is normal and mundane for women to be topless, then it becomes a non-issue eventually. It’s only racy because we’re trained in our culture to find it racy.

      • Jarix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        In the late 90s or early aughts here in Canada women challenged and won the right to go topless as well as men. I can’t recall seeing in person any women exercising that right myself, and it won’t surprise me if the religions conservatives here have managed to overturn that directly or indirectly, but as a teenager/young adult i thought it was cool at the time that Canada fixed that inequality

        Didn’t really have a point here just felt like sharing

        • Fifrok@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          OH! Finally! A chance to use my knowledge acquired from scrolling wikipedia while procrastinating! That law hasn’t been overturned and is still, well, law. Of course every once in a while some clueless cop (because why should somebody enforcing the law, know the law sigh) will ask a topless sunbather to cover up. Here’s the article.

      • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        You won’t find disagreement here.

        The fact of the matter is that the change won’t happen overnight; and there’s already a disproportional number of assaults against women, even if they’re fully dressed when the assault begins.

        While the argument of “she was asking for it” relating to what someone is wearing, is entirely bullshit and without any merit, and the fact that it’s on the male culture to… Idk, not be rapists, and not encourage rapists and rapist tenancies; I know plenty of women that don’t want to risk encouraging such behavior against themselves. Whether they should need to or not isn’t material to the point. They don’t feel safe otherwise.

        I’m not going to tell anyone what to wear. I will say that maybe people just shouldn’t rape other people, regardless of circumstances. No, not maybe. They definitely should not, under any circumstances, ever rape anyone. Just don’t rape people.

        Anyways. It would be a long road to get to the place you propose, and a lot of violence would likely happen before we would see the ideal that you are describing. I wish it was different, but I can’t change the world, I can only change myself.

      • IhaveCrabs111@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Genuine question, how is it sexist? Is their no acknowledgment of biological differences between men and women as a general rule (trans issues being more of an exception to the rule)? We acknowledge differences in general in regards to sports, bathrooms, fitting rooms, the way clothes are made, people’s consumption of pornography, magazines and media. Why on this point are we ignoring that all of those things ls are real and happen and pretending there’s no difference?

        • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Genuine answer: I’m specifically speaking to how men and women are treated as a matter of law.

          Laws should not differentiate between men, women, sexual orientation or identity, sexual preferences, kinks, lifestyles, etc.

          If a thing is illegal, it should be illegal for everyone, or noone. In this case, the law says that it is legal to go topless unless you are a woman. It specifically cites, as a rule of law, that women are to be treated differently on purpose. That, by definition, is sexist.

          Almost all of the other examples you provided are matters of social norms, comforts, and tropes. Nothing else you mentioned has the same weight as the rule of law.

          Women have different clothing and different clothing styles than men, they’re shaped differently so we make clothes that fit the female form better, just like we have clothes that fit the male form better.

          Different washrooms, I disagree with; we should have gender neutral bathrooms and put all this transphobia bullshit about what bathroom people use, to bed. Bluntly: the bathroom isn’t a social gathering, people generally are not walking around unclothed or partially clothed in the common areas of even a gendered bathroom. You go in there to resolve your bodily needs to expel waste. Get in, do what you need to do, and get out. With a little more effort in isolating stalls, an ungendered bathroom is the best option. You don’t have a “men’s” and “women’s” bathroom at home… They don’t pointlessly gender bathrooms in planes or busses, among many other places, so making bathrooms that are meant for larger groups in public spaces, gendered, does not really logically make any sense at all.

          There’s a ton more I could say about this or many other things but simply: I feel like I’ve addressed your question.

          Let me know if you need any further clarifications.

        • LastOneSitting@lemmy.wtf
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Because the sexualization of the female nipple is the only reason it is illegal to bare it in public. There is no universal or biological reason to ban it, just a cultural conditioning.