inherit
Passionate Peruser of Prose
89748
0
Feb 26, 2024 2:23:30 GMT -8
📚 Dianne 📚
"Never Judge A Book By Its Movie"
10,522
September 2006
cats57
|
Post by 📚 Dianne 📚 on Aug 18, 2019 5:18:39 GMT -8
|
|
Meryl
Full Member
Posts: 501
inherit
256326
0
Aug 9, 2019 9:26:31 GMT -8
Meryl
501
September 2018
goth
|
Post by Meryl on Aug 18, 2019 6:16:02 GMT -8
wildmaven Meryl I'm curious what you all would think -would a woman with a tat like this (and obviously no breasts) be arrested for baring herself (like a man) say at the beach or wherever it is appropriate for a man to do so? Fantastic tat BTW. I dunno. That's a tough one. She shouldn't be, of course. Fabulous tat...and really well done...although personally, I would have omitted the shoulder straps. Hmmm, I'm sure a woman can bare her breasts as long as her nipple isn't exposed, so maybe this lady would be 'ok' Bless her though. Good on ya girl!
|
|
inherit
29252
0
Sept 6, 2012 15:46:49 GMT -8
Derek‽
28,652
August 2004
kajiaisu
|
Post by Derek‽ on Aug 18, 2019 20:30:46 GMT -8
wildmaven Meryl I'm curious what you all would think -would a woman with a tat like this (and obviously no breasts) be arrested for baring herself (like a man) say at the beach or wherever it is appropriate for a man to do so? Fantastic tat BTW. It isn’t actually illegal in the majority of US states for women to be topless in public. People often have a hard time believing/accepting that, because it seems so contrary to their assumptions. “Standards of decency” tell us women should hide their breasts, but as long as they aren’t drawing unnecessary attention to their toplessness in such a way to cause a public disturbance, there are relatively few places they can get in legal trouble. As for in a place where women can’t be topless in public, that tattoo might not even matter. Of the three states in which women definitely can’t bare all due to statewide public indecency laws, Indiana and Tennessee both target only exposed nipples, while Utah forbids exposure from the top of the nipple to the bottom of the breast (those poor Mormons can’t even enjoy some underboob). But the woman in the picture doesn’t appear to have nipples at all. Without nipples, there’s technically no crime being committed. But if she did have nipples? A tattoo isn’t technically a covering, it’s really just a coloring and the skin is still exposed. The person doesn’t have clothing covering the area, so it’s still nudity, even if the view is obscured. I don’t think anyone would question a woman walking down the street like that because at first glance it looks like she’s small-chested with a restrictive tank top or sports bra. Eventually the ink will fade and it’ll expose her for being topless unless she has serious restorative work performed.
|
|