SideBoob?

Nudism raises lots of questions about body care. It is a healthy way of life in many ways, but it also presents certain concerns that we don't face when clothed. Here you can ask all your questions, and post about the health benefits of nudism / naturism.<P>Only Residents and higher may post here.

Moderators: jochanaan, MatthewNeal, jimmy, natman, Senior Moderator, Moderators

SideBoob?

Postby bn2bnude » Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:34 pm

Has anyone noticed that while "nipples" still are worthy of shock, awe and plenty of press, the new shock and awe term of distain for women's (especially celebrities) dress appears to be "Sideboob".

So much so that Huffington Post has a tagged section.

I'm a little perplexed by this... I think it's sort of odd.
So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus. (Rom 8:1 NLT)



If I speak with the tongues of men and angels but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. (1 Cor 13:1)
User avatar
bn2bnude
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2712
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:09 am
Location: Denver

Re: SideBoob?

Postby jochanaan » Sun Feb 03, 2013 6:55 pm

bn2bnude wrote:Has anyone noticed that while "nipples" still are worthy of shock, awe and plenty of press, the new shock and awe term of distain for women's (especially celebrities) dress appears to be "Sideboob".

So much so that Huffington Post has a tagged section.

I'm a little perplexed by this... I think it's sort of odd.
"You delight in making laws. Yet you delight more in breaking them." --Kahlil Gibran, The Prophet
You can live your life in fear--or you can live your life.
User avatar
jochanaan
Councillor
 
Posts: 6342
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 11:58 pm
Location: Denver

Re: SideBoob?

Postby Petros » Mon Feb 04, 2013 12:07 am

Hey, I do languages. I had to drop in and find out what the word was intended to represent.


Ah, well, I remain unenlightened. My own fault - I need more incentive that a quaint neologism to delve into the Huffington Post.
The truth, the stark naked truth, the truth without so much as a loincloth on, should surely be the investigator's sole aim - Basil Chamberlain
User avatar
Petros
Native Resident
 
Posts: 5279
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 2:01 am
Location: Wisconsin

Re: SideBoob?

Postby bn2bnude » Mon Feb 04, 2013 12:09 am

Petros wrote:Hey, I do languages. I had to drop in and find out what the word was intended to represent.


Ah, well, I remain unenlightened. My own fault - I need more incentive that a quaint neologism to delve into the Huffington Post.


Boob is slang (and honestly, borderline offensive to me) for breasts. The idiocy revolves around women who wear shirts that allow one to see the breast from the side.
So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus. (Rom 8:1 NLT)



If I speak with the tongues of men and angels but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. (1 Cor 13:1)
User avatar
bn2bnude
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2712
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:09 am
Location: Denver

Re: SideBoob?

Postby JimShedd112 » Mon Feb 04, 2013 10:41 am

Perhaps the effort is to return us to a time where the body MUST be completely sheathed, like the late 18th/early 19th century. Or, is there an effort to require all women to wear burkhas so as not to incite men into sexual freenzies at the sight of bare skin?

It seems very strange how the more society "evolves" the more repressive it becomes.

Jim
Last edited by JimShedd112 on Thu Feb 07, 2013 10:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
Jim Shedd
NudistGrandpa
User avatar
JimShedd112
Native Resident
 
Posts: 1767
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 12:44 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada

Re: SideBoob?

Postby jochanaan » Tue Feb 05, 2013 1:03 am

JimShedd112 wrote:Perhaps the effort is to return us to a time where the body MUST be completely sheathe, like the late 18th/early 19th century. Or, is there an effort to require all women to wear burkhas so as not to incite men into sexual freenzies at the sight of bare skin?...
Oh, it's worse still, Jim. The "conspiracy" seems to seek to forbid bodies to be shown--unless they're "glamorous" or "conventionally beautiful"! :roll:
You can live your life in fear--or you can live your life.
User avatar
jochanaan
Councillor
 
Posts: 6342
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 11:58 pm
Location: Denver

Re: SideBoob?

Postby bn2bnude » Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:58 am

jochanaan wrote:
JimShedd112 wrote:Perhaps the effort is to return us to a time where the body MUST be completely sheathe, like the late 18th/early 19th century. Or, is there an effort to require all women to wear burkhas so as not to incite men into sexual freenzies at the sight of bare skin?...
Oh, it's worse still, Jim. The "conspiracy" seems to seek to forbid bodies to be shown--unless they're "glamorous" or "conventionally beautiful"! :roll:


Or third world. A discussion from years ago but our censors appear to be racist.
So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus. (Rom 8:1 NLT)



If I speak with the tongues of men and angels but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. (1 Cor 13:1)
User avatar
bn2bnude
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2712
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:09 am
Location: Denver

Re: SideBoob?

Postby natman » Tue Feb 05, 2013 3:55 pm

It cracks me up (or should I say, "It disturbs me") that every TV show and movie currently has a "gay" or "lesbian" couple or character, that even "cartoons" have characters having sex, implied sex, homosexual sex, interspecial sex (beastiality), commercials feature women with hardly a stitch of clothing on pitching hamburgers or internet services, and that is all "okay". But the news services, including Fox News, get all excited when a celebrity is caught nude, partially nude or in an outfit that exposes a momentary glimps of a cleavage, a partial areola, a nipple or a side of a breast, which has nothing to do with sex and everything to do with nursing young children.

SAD! :(
SON-cerely,
Nathan Powers

Get exposed to the sun, and get exposed to the Son.
User avatar
natman
Mayor (Site Admin)
 
Posts: 7264
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 3:48 pm
Location: Houston, Texas

Re: SideBoob?

Postby Larryk1052 » Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:03 pm

Well if side boob exposure is going to be taboo, then why not top cleavage?? How is the side of the breast more arousing than the top??


Personally, if a woman or a man is to be dressed, then I think the clothing ought to not be distracting in a sexual manner. A woman's breasts do create sexual excitement in most men. Therefore, if clothing is to be worn it shouldn't tease.
Larry in Kentucky

"Nude" just means barefoot all over.
User avatar
Larryk1052
Native Resident
 
Posts: 859
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:15 pm
Location: Kentucky

Re: SideBoob?

Postby jochanaan » Wed Feb 06, 2013 8:23 pm

Larryk1052 wrote:Well if side boob exposure is going to be taboo, then why not top cleavage?? How is the side of the breast more arousing than the top??


Personally, if a woman or a man is to be dressed, then I think the clothing ought to not be distracting in a sexual manner. A woman's breasts do create sexual excitement in most men. Therefore, if clothing is to be worn it shouldn't tease.
Hmmm...But since I have embraced naturism, I do not find cleavage, decolletage, or "sideboobs" particularly stimulating. I confess to looking more than once--mostly just to ascertain just how much the lady in question is actually showing. But since I see "the whole thing" on a more-or-less regular basis, half-exposure isn't that exciting to me. 8)
You can live your life in fear--or you can live your life.
User avatar
jochanaan
Councillor
 
Posts: 6342
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 11:58 pm
Location: Denver

Re: SideBoob?

Postby Petros » Thu Feb 07, 2013 2:38 am

Conformist States [I think "society" will not work with conformity, given its original meaning] probably autmatically tend toward the puritanical. Not that the rules match those of my Puritan ancestors by the Bay, but that conformity cannot comfortably coexist with impulse. Men and women need uniforms, not garb or its absence that emphasizes difference [vive la difference!].
The truth, the stark naked truth, the truth without so much as a loincloth on, should surely be the investigator's sole aim - Basil Chamberlain
User avatar
Petros
Native Resident
 
Posts: 5279
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 2:01 am
Location: Wisconsin


Return to Nudism and Health Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron