• tetris11@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 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

    • TeamAssimilation@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      15 days ago

      Does this mean that men with gynecomastia can be topless in public there without issue? If the original lawmakers had been smart, they would have outlawed developed breast and nipple exposure regardless of sex, so any flat chested, small nippled man/woman wouldn’t have trouble going topless.

      Maybe it’s an old law?

  • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    7 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
          ·
          7 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.

      • null@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Not if the point is to make the government acknowledge their gender.

  • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    7 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
      3
      ·
      7 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.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        If they let up on hating an outside groups for a moment, people might notice that they have no policies that anyone wants.

      • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 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
          2
          ·
          7 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.

    • CosmicTurtle0 [he/him]@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      There’s nothing to understand. It’s about hate and fear. Conservatives, specifically the alt-right, uses pre-existing prejudices to whip fear into their followers so that they get distracted.

      “If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you.”

      You can change this to whatever out-group they have chosen:

      • Trans-people
      • autistic people specifically
      • LGBT people
      • neurodivergent people
      • gay people specifically
      • muslims
      • non-white people
      • black people specifically
      • Catholics (if you’re protestant)
      • Protestant (if your Catholic)
      • left handed people

      The list literally goes on. All so that their followers get distracted from the people who are picking their pockets.

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

        As far as I’m concerned, the only minority group of people we should all actively persecute is the ultra wealthy class of people who represent a small fraction of the global population yet control overwhelmingly all the wealth in our civilization. They would rather watch the world burn than in allowing anyone to create any kind of equitable society to share even a fraction of the wealth in our world.

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

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

  • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 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
      2
      ·
      7 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
        0
        ·
        7 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
          ·
          7 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.

  • Rob T Firefly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 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
    7 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
      ·
      7 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
      ·
      7 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.

  • saltesc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Biological women can do it too if they print and cut out pics of men nipples and stick them on top.

      • IhaveCrabs111@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 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?

        • LastOneSitting@lemmy.wtf
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 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.