Bud, you can’t post a map showing that, if everyone voted, would-be nonvoters would have the power to change over half of the states’ electoral college results, then pair it with the statement “Potential voters feel their vote literally doesn’t matter and statistically and practically speaking they are not wrong.” You’re literally providing the statistical proof that they are wrong.

I’m the opposite. No matter how hot it is, I’m wearing full-length jeans. It’s never bothered me, and I’ve had significantly fewer instances of finding ticks on my body compared to my friends.

The only thing a gun will do for you during a swat raid is get you killed faster. Some guy with a pistol doesn’t stand a chance against a team of trained gunmen. They’ll see the weapon, kill you immediately, and use the fact that you were armed as justification that you were guilty.

I’ve been using it for a couple of weeks now, and I’ve absolutely loved it. I’ve tried learning Japanese many times in my life, but this is the first time where I feel like I’m really beginning to understand it. I’m using the pro version, though, so maybe it’s less annoying than the free version.

I don’t have a dog in the fight either, but what difference does that make? I’m a human with compassion for other humans - I care as much about their issues as I care about my own, and I don’t want them to be tied down by prohibitions that don’t make sense. A change can always be undone if found to be problematic; the apathy toward change is what really needs to be overcome.

Every generation looks at the next one and thinks it’s weird and inferior - humans as a whole tend to believe their own experiences are the best, most logical way of doing things, which is something we need to keep in mind; the status quo is almost certainly not currently optimal, and we should be looking for ways to change it even as our own preferences nag at us to keep it the same.

You’re saying we don’t know what such a change will cause - that’s called a narrative. Not a good or a bad thing - just the opinion you’ve chosen to defend. The bad thing is when the arguments you use to defend it don’t hold up to scrutiny.

It’s possible, sure, but nobody’s playing scientist. There are plenty of people around the world that allow exposed breasts and still function. There is no epidemic of sexual deviancy from exposed breasts in any of those societies. France can have nude beaches where woman are free to walk around topless and there aren’t scores of men hiding in the bushes. You’re acting like this is all hypothetical, but we already know what society looks like without a meaningless ban on exposed breasts - it just doesn’t fit your narrative.

Jesus, dude - my whole point is that exposed breasts shouldn’t be equated to porn, and the fact that they are is only a stronger reason to allow them to be free right now, to undo that association as soon as possible. A woman choosing to go out to get her mail without a top on shouldn’t be equated to a peep show. A woman choosing to play video games on twitch without a bra shouldn’t be equated to a strip show. Yes, the current generation of kids will view it as porn, because they haven’t seen it outside of porn, which they have already seen, no doubt. It was so easily accessible on the internet that I’d seen my fair share of it before I was out of elementary school in 2002, and it’s only gotten even more prevalent. It’s an issue, sure, but to let it be the reason not to allow something that shouldn’t be equated to porn in the first place is ridiculous.

If breasts are allowed freely in public spaces, it won’t be very long before they stop attracting horny boys any more than well-fitting clothing already does. Again, the effect that breasts currently have on boys is already too much - they shouldn’t be making men salivate by simply being exposed - they’re just breasts, and those in other cultures that have breasts exposed on a regular basis don’t have that issue.

As do you, insinuating hormones making people want to do things is reason enough to expect them to do it. Society relies upon people having the self control to not behave based solely on the way their body tells them to, and instead to behave as society deems appropriate. People want to take things, to hurt others when they feel hurt, and to have sex with people they’re attracted to, but for us to live together, people need to have control over that. If they don’t, they need to be taught, and if society deems something inappropriate that shouldn’t be, we need to change society to allow for that act.

A horny teenage boy better learn to keep his hands to himself. I don’t give a shit what he feels compelled to do, and neither should any woman who happened to set him off.

By using her body sexually. Are you really so unfamiliar with seeing people naked that you think it’s the nakedness itself that’s supposed to be sexual? Have you never seen the difference between a woman taking off her bra because it’s stuffy and a woman taking off her bra because she wants sex? There’s “Yup, it’s her naked body.” and then there’s “Hell yeah, her naked body!” You just go ravenous any time your SO is naked around you, ever?

Your “non-sequitur” is trying insinuate that a person’s innate sexual orientation toward certain genders mirrors an innate sexual response to certain body parts, which I don’t disagree with. I find women beautiful, and in the right circumstances, I have a sexual response to that beauty. The difference lies between simple attraction and horniness.

I’m attracted to a beautiful woman wearing clothes that compliment her beauty. Do I immediately get a hard on? No. Do I become unable to function as a result of seeing her? No. Whatever reaction I have toward her beauty is my own circumstance to handle - she is under no obligation to change herself based on my reaction. I’m attracted to her, but seeing women wearing well-fitting clothes is a normal part of my day, so I don’t find it overtly sexual. It can become sexual if the woman starts flirting with me, for example, but just wearing nice clothes doesn’t make me horny, because most women wear nice clothes simply because they want to.

I see my wife topless all the time, and while I think she’s beautiful, I don’t get horny at every sight of her, nor should I. Most of the time she just doesn’t want to deal with putting a shirt on - she’s not trying to turn me on, and I’m not getting tuned on. This is a normal example a woman comfortable with being topless in a non-sexual situation, and a man, used to seeing that woman topless, not having a strong reaction to it. This is how all men, regardless of sexual orientation, would see breasts if women were as comfortable not wearing a shirt around men as my wife is around me. If my wife were to start teasing me and trying to turn me on, I would start getting horny, because that’s the appropriate time for a person to have a sexual response to another person’s body.

No, it’s not. People at nude beaches or at nudist colonies aren’t walking around with erections all day. African communities where women don’t wear tops don’t have guys jerking off whenever they get a chance. The sexualization of breasts in our culture is a product of our association with breasts as a purely sexual object, and the viewing of them as a purely sexual act. The way that stops being a thing is by allowing them to exist in non-sexual contexts, and teaching a new generation that they are just like any other body part.

If a girl nonchalantly takes off her top while going about her day today, it will be viewed as a sexual thing, because anyone who sees will have only seen such an act in sexual contexts. If, for several years, women all around the US are empowered to nonchalantly take off their tops whenever feel like it, it will become a common, non-sexualized act, because it will be associated more with everyday life than with what people do behind closed doors.

Yeah, people don’t realize that people with abusive parents have been raised to believe that abuse is normal - even good for them. The first major hurdle is getting someone to realize that there’s even a problem to fix, or that the problem to fix isn’t themselves.

Honestly, most of the people in places like that are people who already found their way out, and now just want to shoot the shit with other people who understand what they’ve been through. If I hadn’t had my sister to talk to about our insane mom, it would have been a lot harder for both of us to move on from her and become healthy, well-rounded adults - I imagine internet communities like these are a good alternate resource for when people don’t have real-life support from someone who understands what it’s like. But yeah, when you’ve got a parent who thinks all of science is one big scam, you’re never going to be able to see a legitimate therapist.

Yeah, but that difference is specifically rooted in sexism and misogyny. The very fact that we can all see the difference that isn’t much of a difference shows that there’s a divide that needs to be bridged. We only think women’s nipples are inappropriate because we were taught to. Plenty of cultures around the world don’t see breasts as inappropriate, and they’re doing just fine.

Huh, you’re right. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a piece of mail without it - I just figured it was necessary.

Ah, I didn’t realize return addresses weren’t mandatory in other parts of the world. I figured you just put yours elsewhere from ours on your letters when I saw the space where we usually have ours was blank. That certainly makes it difficult to resolve missent mail. I admire your ability to put a positive spin on the scenario, haha! I’m sure the senders are happier just continuing to believe their letters are being accepted and enjoyed.

I had this issue with my last address, so when I moved to my current house and started seeing mail for the previous owner as well as what I assume to be the owner before him, I immediately wrote 'No longer at this address, return to sender" on all mail that wasn’t for me - even spam mail - and made a support ticket on the USPS website. I felt like it was a bit overkill, but I did stop seeing mail for other people pretty quickly.

Dunno how quick Royal Mail would be comparatively, but maybe they’d be just as effective as USPS was for me.

The stripper’s name? Albert Einstein.