I didn't realize it but apparently there was an international "Go Topless" day a couple of days ago. I was topless while I slept during the night and I was topless while I showered that day so I guess I was an unwilling and unwitting participant in the event. The day was celebrated locally with a parade in downtown Denver in which men and women walked down public streets wearing nothing from the waist up. It seems like a pretty stupid thing to do to me but it was important enough to make the news. Here is some of what the Denver Post reported about the parade:
"Hundreds of topless women and men paraded down Denver's central mall and rallied in Civic Center on Sunday afternoon...as part of international Go Topless Day to promote gender equality. 'We are protesting for equal rights for women. We want for women to not be objectified,' Connie Fitzgerald of Boulder said in the park with a sign. 'We want to be able to take our tops off just like men. On a deeper level, we would like to see this bring in equality for women at all levels,' she said....'To still define women's bodies as inherently sexual is wrong, ' Wilson (Matthew Wilson, the organizer of the local parade, ed) said, making his case that nudity is not necessarily sexual. 'Americans sometimes forget that,' he said. 'Confusing the two is the foundation of objectification and rape culture.'" Well that is a fine kettle of fish, is it not? Let's consider what is being said here for a moment.
Let me begin with a question. What planet did these people beam in from? Connie is from Boulder so we know what planet she came from. I don't know where Wilson came from....Mars perhaps? So let me get this straight. Connie is tired of women being objectified by men and she believes the best way to keep objectification of women from transpiring is for women to walk around in public topless? Umm....Connie.....I have something to tell you that you are apparently completely unaware of. Men are sexually aroused by the appearance of naked women in public. Maybe you haven't noticed but there is an entire industry that exists for the purpose of producing naked images of women for men to look at for the purpose of sexual arousal. And maybe you are also not aware but when men become sexually aroused by looking at naked women they are not seeing those naked women as wives, co-workers, mothers and daughters. In other words, they are not seeing naked women as subjects. They are seeing them as objects. If I am not mistaken it therefore follows that what you are doing when you parade around naked brings about the exact opposite condition from the one you are attempting to create.
Connie from Boulder believes that running around naked in public is going to somehow magically and mystically "bring about equality for women at all levels." What a quaint concept! Does that mean women will be equal to men when it comes to the ability to inseminate women? Does that mean that all sports records that are currently segregated between men and women can be integrated into one book, thus dropping women from the sports record books forever? Does that mean that Connie's god of civil government will be invoked to force profit seeking businessmen to pay her more than the free market would bear simply because she has XX chromosomes? At least on one level Connie has already achieved her goal. The military forces of the Socialist Democracy of Amerika see men and women as equal when it comes to kidnapping them, moving them to the front lines and forcing them to be canon fodder in wars of imperial expansion. Good for Connie. Taking off her top has given her the ability to senselessly die in an immoral war for her immoral country.
Matt Wilson believes that defining women's bodies as "inherently sexual is wrong." Ummm.....Matt....isn't calling a woman a woman rather than a man inherently sexual? In fact, isn't the fact that there are two sexes populating this earth inherently sexual? I know the trannies want us all to believe that we are born as neuts and we choose which sex we want to be at some later date but those folks are kooks and best ignored. For those of us who live in the real world, all human beings are inherently sexual. That is one of the things that makes life so interesting, and also so sinful.
Matt believes that nudity is not sexual. That belief is nuts. Nudity is inherently sexual. There is a reason people take clothes off, rather than putting clothes on, before engaging in sexual relations. There is a reason men become sexually aroused when looking at a woman who is not wearing clothing. I know, I know....the feminists believe all men are perverts because we become sexually aroused around naked women. They refuse to acknowledge a fact they all know and exploit every single day of their lives. Women have the ability to arouse the sexual interests of men by what they wear. Hypocrites, all of them.
Matt is a kook. He believes that a woman walking naked in public is not in some way responsible for the fact that men who see her will view her as a sex object and then become sexually aroused. He believes that men who see naked women are sinning because they see those women as objects worthy of raping. Indeed, Matt believes women should be permitted to run around naked in public and that their doing so has nothing to do with the sexual response of men to them. Matt is a typical feminist. No matter what women do it is good. No matter what men do it is bad.
Shall we admit the obvious and come in from the delusional world created by the feminists? Why do almost all women's tops show cleavage whereas almost all men's tops are close around the neck? Is it not abundantly obvious to anyone without a feminist ax to grind that a woman's breasts are the object of sexual attention by men? Is it not also equally obvious that women know this fact and use it to their advantage whenever possible? Come on folks, quit lying to me by trying to convince me that women can walk around naked in public and it has nothing whatsoever to do with sex. We all know that is untrue.
The article concluded by saying that "organizers encourage people in cities worldwide to stand up for women's rights by going topless in public." I can't think of a more meaningless, more ridiculous, more stupid, more ineffective, more delusional and more crazy program for social change than that one. Can you?