807
Minnesota Supreme Court: Female breasts are not lewd or inherently sexual and can be exposed in public
(www.startribune.com)
this post was submitted on 05 May 2025
807 points (99.1% liked)
Minnesota
960 readers
14 users here now
About Us
We are community-driven and dedicated to celebrating the diverse and inclusive spirit of Minnesota. Whether you're a lifelong resident, a recent transplant, or simply fascinated by the Land of 10,000 Lakes, you'll find a warm and welcoming community here. Our goal is to foster meaningful discussions, share local news and events, and create a safe space for everyone to connect and engage.
Rules and Guidelines
Be Kind and Respectful: Treat others with empathy, respect, and understanding. We embrace diversity and encourage civil discourse. Personal attacks, hate speech, discrimination, and harassment will not be tolerated.
Stay on Topic: Keep your posts and comments relevant to Minnesota. Let's focus on discussing local issues, events, news, and culture.
No Spam or Self-Promotion: We love to support local businesses and initiatives, but please refrain from excessive self-promotion or spamming. Posts must provide value to the community.
Avoid Sensationalism: When sharing news articles or stories, please provide accurate and reliable sources. Avoid clickbait titles or exaggerated claims.
No Illegal Activities: Do not promote or encourage illegal activities or engage in any discussions that violate the law.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Men aren’t even referred to as having breasts because they’re so much smaller, but a really long time ago some people dictated that women should keep that shit covered up, ostensibly because giblets started tingling at the sight. Meanwhile, cultures exist that make no distinction between the two, and casually ask the rest of the world, “Fucking… why?”
I think this is a disingenuous take. Different cultures all have their own taboos. Is it all social constructs? Yea, sure, but that doesn't make them invalid within context. By nature they aren't logical.
They're cultural creations. They were created by human beings, and WE have the power to change them. If we want something to stop being a taboo, we can simply will it to be as such.
Quite a bit of hubris you have there...
Better than nihilistic fatalism that the world is doomed and there's nothing we can do to improve it.
Um, sure. If those were the only two options.
History disagrees. It's very hard to go against cultural norms, and in many cases can result in being ostracized, imprisoned, or put to death.
The taboos are pretty logical. They’ve swung back and forth over the years. For example, the Victorian era of prudishness appeared not long after the syphilis epidemic.
I see what you've done there.
Why is it disingenous? It shows just what you said by the end - that it's not logical. Doesn't that make them kind of invalid? What kind of context would make them valid? Just history?
They can be logical... Just not always.