• Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
    If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
    Donations can be made via here

Topless Coffee Shop

irmerk

New Member
arg-fallbackName="irmerk"/>
I saw on digg.com this article about a topless coffee shop in Maine which was burnt down by arson. Apparently it was an eighteen year old and over establishment, and they did not hire by appearance at all.

I saw the same article in U.S. News online and found that a lot of the feedback was either claiming one extreme or the other: "How did we come to this? Such a low degradation to society" and "God created us naturally and we should not be ashamed of what is not taught to be loved as children: Our bodies."

So, I wanted to hear what people here thought about it.
 
arg-fallbackName="Otokogoroshi"/>
You said:
I think there needs to be more such coffee shops! ;)

Agreed!

The fact that people instantly equate "nudity" to "sex" is moronic. It shows a deep lack of respect for people and their bodies to assume this.

America needs to wake the fuck up and stop being to stupidly prudish.
 
arg-fallbackName="irmerk"/>
As a devils advocate, would that not jeopardize our societies morals, or something?

Also, I forgot to mention. In the U.S. News feedback, some bitch actually compared breasts to a penis and testicles: "What kind of society do we live it that thinks it is okay to serve anything in public topless. Why not have men serve scones bottomless! Has anyone heard of the Health Department."

Aside from everything that is wrong with what she said, it is funny for her to say 'in public,' since the establishment is a private business with an eighteen or older age limit.
 
arg-fallbackName="Otokogoroshi"/>
All I have to say is 'lawl' at morals and ethics being bothered by bewbs and nipples.

Europeans have been comfortable with bear chest men and women for a looooooong time and their doing fine :)
 
arg-fallbackName="irmerk"/>
I understand that. What about their slippery slop argument? I will not go so far as to say, "Sooner or later people will have sex everywhere!" However, why should butts and genitals be wrong to expose in public and nipples and breasts okay?
 
arg-fallbackName="Otokogoroshi"/>
irmerk said:
I understand that. What about their slippery slop argument? I will not go so far as to say, "Sooner or later people will have sex everywhere!" However, why should butts and genitals be wrong to expose in public and nipples and breasts okay?

I'm fine with 100% nudity. No problem. It's our natural state so it's hardly harmful.
 
arg-fallbackName="irmerk"/>
Think about the children! THE CHILDREN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You know, it is funny... The Catholic church practically wages a war on sex education and condoms, because it wants as many impressionable babies to indoctrinate. Yet, they are so opposed to sexuality...
 
arg-fallbackName="You"/>
irmerk said:
Think about the children! THE CHILDREN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You know, it is funny... The Catholic church practically wages a war on sex education and condoms, because it wants as many impressionable babies to indoctrinate. Yet, they are so opposed to sexuality...
Silly Irmerk! The only decent way to manage human reproduction is through ignorance and guilt!
 
arg-fallbackName="Th1sWasATriumph"/>
Otokogoroshi said:
I'm fine with 100% nudity. No problem. It's our natural state so it's hardly harmful.

It can cause . . . distraction, though. Like it or not, men are stupid creatures and will walk under a train to see a pair of flourbags.

I don't know if any woman would walk under a train to see my whistle and flute . . . they might walk under a train to avoid them, of course.
 
arg-fallbackName="Squagnut"/>
Th1sWasATriumph said:
[Nudity] can cause . . . distraction, though. Like it or not, men are stupid creatures and will walk under a train to see a pair of flourbags.

I don't know if any woman would walk under a train to see my whistle and flute . . . they might walk under a train to avoid them, of course.

Just recently I spotted a lass whom, clothed, I judged to have a fantastic body. Then when we got to the bedroom, it turned out I was right - she has a fantastic body. So being clothed is fine, but a dressed body can be just as distracting as a nude one. Personally, I think people should wear clothes if they want to and not if they don't. What I cannot stand is attaching guilt and shame to our attitudes to our bodies.
 
arg-fallbackName="Ozymandyus"/>
There is something very unsanitary and unappetizing to me about waiters and waitresses 100% nude. No Thankyou.

I honestly think there is something to be said about clothes. It has nothing to do with me being puritanical, I mean, certain clothes can be just as sexy as nudity in my opinion. Probably most of my favorite waitresses look as good in their tight tip getting outfits as they do in the nude. I just think that sex should be at least a LITTLE bit private, between a couple or maybe a few people. Is the next step after public nudity inevitably public sex acts? Why not? It's just as natural as the human body.

Sometimes I think that we forget that for all the stupid cultural taboos mankind has added to their culture, some are actually practical. We may not remember why, but I have the feeling this is one of those things that makes some sense.
 
arg-fallbackName="Sando"/>
Ozymandyus said:
Probably most of my favorite waitresses look as good in their tight tip getting outfits as they do in the nude.

Before I went back and noticed the "probably", you were my hero.
 
arg-fallbackName="Fordi"/>
irmerk said:
As a devils advocate, would that not jeopardize our societies morals, or something?

No.

Sorry, I don't really have anything to say other than that. Claim submitted with no evidence, so rebuttal is a simple negative.

As a Devil's Advocate, please present something in support of the position to refute.
 
arg-fallbackName="Ozymandyus"/>
Here's my argument then, though I suppose I am actually the devil in this analogy, rather than merely his lawyer.

As animals, we are interested in sex. We are wired to be interested in fertile members of the opposite with desireable traits pretty much anywhere, anytime (presuming we are healthy enough and not distracted by things like food/whatever). We have various cultural taboos in place that at the very least do a little something to dull some of our sexual drive to certain times and places, because at some point in history we decided we had some other stuff we had to take care of. So the question, for me, comes down to something like this - do we continue to progress towards the goals that we have created on top of our biology, or should we, as a general rule. return to our roots, to what is natural?

I'm not saying a topless coffee shop is a definitive step down some road towards the lawless state of nature, I'm just asking generally, if we are going to use the 'boobs are perfectly natural' argument, where do we stop using that argument? Couldn't there be a valid reason to dull some of our sexual urges in certain situations, like at work, and when we are going about our day doing some of the things that we as a society have deemed pretty darn important?
 
arg-fallbackName="Aught3"/>
I have to say I'm not particularly interesting in returning to our roots - I much prefer our modern lifestyle.

I couldn't care less if someone opened a topless coffee-shop, I doubt I would ever go inside though.
 
arg-fallbackName="Canto"/>
The simple answer is, If YOU don't like the idea, DONT GO INTO THE SHOP.

I dont like the shit they spew in churches, so I DONT GO TO CHURCH.

Same idea. Be responsible for YOUR actions, not everyone elses.
 
arg-fallbackName="wafflez205"/>
Canto said:
The simple answer is, If YOU don't like the idea, DONT GO INTO THE SHOP.

I dont like the shit they spew in churches, so I DONT GO TO CHURCH.

Same idea. Be responsible for YOUR actions, not everyone elses.

EXACTLY! if everyone would just mind their own business and not go after someone just trying to make a living the world would be a much better place.
 
arg-fallbackName="Daealis"/>
Sweden legalized topless swimming in public swimming pools just a few weeks ago due to some heavy 'equal rights'-protesting.

I think there was just a clever guy with boob-fetish behind it, but yea. These things might also be a sign that the old taboos about sexuality are breaking down. Boobs are hot, because they've been potrayed as a forbidden fruit for so long. I don't see the primitive tribesmen going apeshit over their topless women all the time. It's just cultural programming.

And if the transition is really coming this way, we(as in everyone who likes the look of breasts) who are still brought up with the "civilized western cultural" taboos of boobs can just enjoy the ride.
 
Back
Top