Topless Little Girl: OK?

[janeslogin]

I simply do not understand the proprieties of clothing. It seems to me a lot of people spend a lot of money on things that are completely unnecessary except for proprieties. Like neck ties on men and, to keep it in the context of this thread, tops on little girls.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@BigT

Why wouldn’t it be? What would be the problem of seeing an undeveloped female’s breasts except if you thought they were sexually alluring to some people? The reason women in general don’t go around topless (or, with bigger-breasted women, wear only cut out bras for support) is because they don’t like people gawking at them, right?

And straight men already know what’s under a woman’s clothes. That doesn’t seem to be enough for most women to go around topless (even outside the U.S.).

Furthermore, I’ve done at least a couple papers on pedophiles. And one interview I read mentioned that seeing a kid that doesn’t have the societally normal sense of modesty often indicates permissive or uninvolved parents, which meant the child would likely be an easier target.

If a 7 year old is walking around in a public place unsupervised, then THAT is the problem, and THAT is what will make her a target for pedophiles, not her state of dress. Is a predator more likely to try to snatch an unsupervised child with a bikini top on or a supervised child without one?

[Annie-Xmas]

When, when, when will society stop equating a female’s state of dress with her “asking for it”???

I remember a Montel show when he interviewed a 21 year old guy in prison for impregnanting a 10 year old girl. He stated ranting about how “she had a crush on me and dressed like Brittany Spears and was always sitting in my lap.” Montel’s response was “I don’t care what she did. The only way your pants got unzipped is if you did it.”

Pedophiles always claim their victim “was asking for it.” I don’t care if a six year old (or 26 year old or 66 year old) is walking down the street naked. Nobody has a right to lay one finger on them.

[boytyperanma]

Completely a ridiculous concept created by prudishness to me. This girl is simply going around topless just like any boy or similar age. At some point someone has to come along and explain we live in a sexist society where it is unacceptable for girls to behave as boys do and she needs to cover herself more so then the opposite sex. I’d never want to be that person.

People don’t even think of such restrictions as sexist it’s somehow protecting the girl, those pedophiles or leering men when she’s older are something she needs to compensate for? Fuck that. Really how is requiring tops for girls any different then requiring burkas? Which people do generally regard as sexist and dehumanizing?

[carnut]

@Annie-Xmas

I don’t care if a six year old (or 26 year old or 66 year old) is walking down the street naked. Nobody has a right to lay one finger on them.

The fact that nobody has a right to lay a finger on them (topless or not) doesn’t mean they don’t. To put it differently, nobody has a right to shoot a six-year-old child with a gun but that doesn’t stop it from happening. Parents just try to take precautions to prevent it from happening. Most of us act out of concern for the welfare of the child.

My child would get a full swimsuit, yours might not. Chances are, neither of them are going to grow up twisted because of what they wore when they played in the kiddie pool.

[Norse]

@Nava

What I find offensive is girls young enough to not even have buds wearing bikini tops - there’s nothing that needs to be covered and nothing that needs to be kept in place, so WTF?

QFT.

I mean, a 7-year old girl totally comfortable with the situation, and someone thinks she has to wear a top? Seriously, guys!

[scootergirl]

I ran around topless until much older than that. I didn’t develop at all until I was 12. If there are no sing of boobs, I don’t see what the problem is…especially in her own yard.

[Namkcalb]

I am not a parent, but I really don’t see the point of forcing pre-pubescent kids to cover something that’s not there.

If your mind is conceptualising young children as objects of sexual desire, then it’s your problem.

[iiandyiiii]

Annie Xmas wrote:

Pedophiles always claim their victim “was asking for it.” I don’t care if a six year old (or 26 year old or 66 year old) is walking down the street naked. Nobody has a right to lay one finger on them.

Annie, I commend you for the bold, risky stance you take against pedophilia. I second it. Sincerely.

[AndyLee]

I just saw an episode of Father Knows Best on Antenna TV and the little girl, whatever her name was, was topless and taking a bath. It seemed kind off as she was like 8 or 9 at the time.

[TBG]

If they’re old enough to be out of diapers, they’re old enough to learn society says girls keep their nipples covered in public and boys keep their weenie covered in public.

[handsomeharry]

@iiandyiiii

Annie Xmas wrote:

Annie, I commend you for the bold, risky stance you take against pedophilia. I second it. Sincerely.

Exactly! I’d also like to cast my vote *against *pedophilia-let the chips fall where they may!

hh

[BrotherCadfael]

@lacortadora

If there are no sing of boobs

I would totally sing of boobs.

[SciFiSam]

@TBG

If they’re old enough to be out of diapers, they’re old enough to learn society says girls keep their nipples covered in public and boys keep their weenie covered in public.

Society doesn’t say that, though.

[clairobscur]

@Nava

What I find offensive is girls young enough to not even have buds wearing bikini tops - there’s nothing that needs to be covered and nothing that needs to be kept in place, so WTF? It’s female, therefore it must be covered as much as possible?

Seconded. But like Nava, I’m European, and never could get the concept that breastless female children should wear tops.

That, and the pedophile paranoîa which unfortunately isn’t restricted to the USA (what on earth makes the OP thinks that not wearing a top puts the kid at risk?)