As SOME chests are caved in. In other words, flattened.
A few women, egged on by those feminists who want to continue undermining any chance the younger crowd of women might have of finding a mate, have forced the city to abolish their ordinance against bare female chests. It all came down to money, which the city was bleeding in their effort to have SOME standards.
So, is this a victory?
Not bloody likely, as the Brits used to say. I can foresee a robust benefit to pimps looking to promote their "stable", by having them parade on the street, sans tops (it would be brutal in the winter). They don't have to SAY anything, which would complicate the matter of "busting" them for prostitution.
If the "Normals" want to - uh - NIP this in the bud, the easy thing to do is to use cell phone cameras, being sure to include the face of the flasher, and post to social media - WITHOUT COMMENT.That last part is important - by not commenting, you are not the offender - why, you just snapped a quick pic of someone being "natural". Evil to him who thinks it, as Henry's Order of the Garter took as their motto!The resulting shaming (too small, too flabby, not worth looking at), as well as the PERMANENCE of the picture, should discourage almost all women, at least those not "in the trade".Mission accomplished.
As I've said before, I am fiercely pro-boob. But this is a badly considered step. I can't imagine what the Fort Collins city government was thinking. The lawsuits are likely to put the city into receivership. And they won't be over "indecency," but over the assaults women who "test the milk" by baring themselves will suffer.
ReplyDeleteI expect that the bosoms most likely to be exposed will be among the least photogenic in Colorado -- their owners will figure they have nothing to lose -- but men, being visually oriented and attracted, will take exposed jugs as a come-on. (This goes double for those with "their high beams on") What will follow can easily be foreseen.
I say bring it on. Lenin was right. The worse the better. Abortion and sodomy as sacrament. Traffic in live children and women and dead baby parts. Pointless war. Complete corruption of the voting system. Reckless fiscal policies. Monetary policies devised by witch doctors in suits. Groveling before foreigners and primitives. Abandonment of Christian civilization. Plutocracy. Ridicule of and attacks on patriotism and normality. Abandoment of law to whim.
ReplyDeleteI guess this all has to play out until Solzhenitsyn's "pitiless crowbar of events" crashed through the windshield.
I agree, Col. Bunny. The Left is fast embracing Kamikaze Politics - They cant win, they can only 'win' by destroying the civilization they oppose. It's a religious cult.
ReplyDelete@Col. Bunny and @Linda:
ReplyDeleteI keep saying it. The Left consists of MISSIONARIES, bent on creating a one-world Socialist Utopia. They believe this is possible despite it never having happened, evah. But first, all that was must be torn down - razed to the ground to clear the way for the paradise to be.
They have replaced Hashem with themselves, filling the need for something greater not with Him, but with Marx and their own puffed-up sense of divinity. People who believe they are superior beings, with greater and noble aspirations to - seriously - eliminate war, and poverty, and hatred, etc., which is precisely what their literature says they believe will happen, will inevitably see those of us who oppose as evil. And "good people" need to eliminate evil, riiiiight?
Being a tad snarky... look, I appreciate a good set of as much as the next guy. Where would it end? The edge moves. Once this is done and present for long enough, someone will insist on being bottomless (do you remember the infamous "naked guy" on some CA college campus>) and thus openly nude.
We already have p*ssy flashes on the Hollyweird red carpet. At some point, to maintain the dopamine rush from being edgy it will devolve to open rutting. Assuming things haven't already crashed by then. (And speaking of crashes, one wonders how many car crashes happen now because a normal guy saw a hot tush and held eye-contact a little long - what's going to happen when he sees a "perfect" pair walking down the street? Could he then testify that had they been covered up, he wouldn't have hit the mother and stroller - and therefore the local municipality that allowed it is at fault?)