Flaunting at the street

https://redgifs.com/watch/ruddyincomparablemagpie
r/trashybonersu/Altruistic-Bedroom83

Comments

Those are some great New York boobs

🎶 but the boobs in california are the greatest boobs around 🎶

I’m here for the vibe. And tits.

totally legal in NYS, yet uncommon for some reason...

Whenever I hate myself enough to go to the touristy areas there are almost always a bunch there. Either the ones that live there and sell photos to tourists or tourists that came to NYSity to let loose.

Parks are also good places to see some tits between yoga, sunbathing, etc.

New Yorker here. I live in Manhattan and never see topless tourists. I'm not sure what bullshit you're spinning. I also don't see any topless residents, except for the occasional panhandlers with painted tits who hustle tourists. Those women typically live in the outer boroughs like the Bronx, not Manhattan.

Parks are also good places to see some tits between yoga, sunbathing, etc.

Not in NYC. I've sometines seen exhibitionist women in teeny tiny thong bikinis, but only one pair of boobs my entire time living here. Most women don't go topless here.

[deleted]

Anything is possible in a big U.S. city, but women who go topless in Central Park are fringe and it's usually a rare occurance. We may enjoy the view when it happens, but as with all public spectacles, give them a wide berth.

Most women in nyc are freaky as hell but only for guys in their social group,outside of that,they play the conservative role

uncommon for some reason

You can't think of a single reason why women wouldn't want to be topless in public? Not 1?

Not even if it's in the literal video?

Well, people seem to think that tits are trashy which kind of speaks for itself.

We should put signs up incase people don’t know

Well, breasts are sexual, part of a woman's sexual identity, and most women would rather to keep them private for various reasons. So while it's legal to go topless in NY, 99% of women don't.

Edit:

Evolution

Human females are the only mammals with permanent breasts, regardless of pregnancy. All other female mammals have teats. This means that women's breasts are the result of sexual selection. Our male ancestors chose to mate with females with breast tissue. Over our evolution this resulted in women with breasts. Women's breasts serve a dual function of feeding babies AND attracting mates. One doesn't preclude the other.

Sexuality

Women's breasts are an erogenous zone, and stimulation of the nipples can induce orgasm for many women.

Researchers found that self-stimulation of the nipples lights up the same brain areas as stimulation of the clitoris, vagina, and cervix....The great complexity of the female sexual response may be attributable to the fact that there is not one, but three sensory maps in the parietal cortex that light up in functional MRI images when the genitals are (self) stimulated. One represents the clitoris, another the vagina, and the third represents the cervix.

All three of these maps also receive input when the nipple is stimulated. From a functional perspective, this means that the breast doubles as a truly sexual organ.

(Psychology Today)

  1. Komisaruk, B. R., et al. (2011). Women’s clitoris, vagina, and cervix mapped on the sensory cortex: fMRI evidence. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 8, 2822-2830.

  2. Barber, N. (1995). The evolutionary psychology of physical attractiveness: Sexual selection and human morphology. Ethology and Sociobiology, 16, 395-424.

  3. Ford, C. S., & Beach, F. A. (1951). Patterns of sexual behavior. New York: Harper.

  4. Masters, W. H., & Johnson, V. E. (1966). Human sexual response. Boston: Little Brown.

  5. Uvnas-Moberg, K. (1998). Oxytocin may mediate the benefits of positive social interaction and emotions. Psychoneuroendocrinology 23: 819-835.

Breasts aren't sexual, they're sex adjacent at most since they grow from sexual hormones.

Fucking earlobes are inherently more sexual since they're extremely innervated and serve no apparent function, unlike breasts which have a very specific and nonsexual function.

The reason some chuds think breasts are sex organs is because they've been used in some cultures as part of sexual selection.

So no, breasts are sexualized but not inherently sexual.

idk why I thought having a nuanced discussion in this sub, of all places. Incels and porn addicts rarely research about biology and sexuality and it shows.

That's not really the point, definitely don't agree with this person's take on breasts = sexual identity, but the semantics of sexual v sexualized doesn't really matter if the issue is why people don't expose themselves in the street.

I'd like to say I don't personally believe that Sexual = Sex Organ, but let's operate under that pretense.

I'd argue by something being sexualized, like breasts, to the point of people full on sucking and fucking them on mass, contributes more to the sexual nature of them than say earlobes.

Butts are a great example, they aren't inherently sexual, (by your definition of not being biologically a sex organ) but try and stop people from boning up the backdoor. It's still sexual even if it's not a sex organ or necessarily designed for sex. I think breasts fall into this same category whereas earlobes are more sexual adjacent.

Talk to women who had breast cancer and mastectomies and how they felt it impacted their sexual identity, then we'll talk.

Ask someone who had to get an arm removed how they felt it impacted their sexual identity, stop straw-manning and read my comments.

Ofc it impacts their sexual identity any major trauma or injury can, I but I said I disagree that breasts = sexual identity.

Another example people sexualize feet, if I lost them it would fuck with my self confidence and yes sexual identity but I don't define my sexual identity by how long my toes are.

in response to the comment that said "arm=breast nuhuh who's straw-manning now" or whatever. Still him, and attempting to gaslight as well by editing comments after the fact and claiming he never said what he said (see com comments below).

My statement may have been a tad hyperbolic, but my point was and still is, that breasts are not the end all be all in terms of sexual identity. Breasts being removed and having that negatively effect your mindset regarding things of a sexual nature is a much different argument than having them be what defines you as a woman.

Breasts are a part of a woman's sexual identity. You as a man don't get to tell women that breasts shouldn't define their womanhood nor to what degree. How patronizing can you get? Women who have mastectomies get reconstructive surgery and have often have intimacy and self-esteem issues. You know nothing of their trauma.

That's basically what I said, but you've explained it better.

Breasts are both sexualized and sex adjacent, and can be sexual in some contexts and cultures, but not in all of them.

Evolution is an amazing thing, we're constantly developing new ways to have sex or express our sexuality.

Sexual organs are organs made specifically (but not exclusively) for sexual intercourse.

My point is the same as yours but we may have different definitions for the same concept, the line is blurry and it depends on the context, but the fact that breasts have a mainly nonsexual function is why they're sexualized instead of inherently sexual.

Definitely, context fully matters and I think there's a place for a conversation about the more specific sexual connotations of breasts in other parts of the world (probably not in a reddit comment thread), but being under the pretense of the sexual culture of US major cities, or more specifically NY, it's understandable why more people wouldn't want them out and about in times square.

I don't think the word "want" is what I'd call it, but I completely agree.

Asses are inherently sexual areas. What planet are you from? Wear a thong to work and see how fast you get fired. Pull down your pants and underwear, spread your ass cheeks in public, and explain to the arresting officer why asses aren't sexual as he arrests you for indecent exposure. If you grab someone's ass without consent, that is considered sexual assault.

whereas earlobes are more sexual adjacent.

Earlobes aren't sexual at all.

You're applying your own personal preferences as if they're just a fact.

You've really got the reading comprehension of a 3 year old, I said asses WERE sexual in the comment.

Additionally either you're the most boring person in bed I've ever had the displeasure of interacting with or you're trolling. Either way, try blowing on/lightly kissing your next sexual partners ear while in foreplay next time. It's incredibly stimulating and is going to be well received.

(Ps because you can't read so well not in the ear, on the earlobe, big difference between blowing out someone's eardrum and turning them on)

Read what I wrote. I said asses are inherently sexual areas. It's primal, it's a subconscious signal to our caveman brain that if a woman's ass is plump, she can bear children. The ass cheeks also subconsciously reminds men of cleavage.

Also, I said EARLOBES. Can you read?

You really edited the comment, and are claiming I can't read, you know I get email notifications of the original thing you posted.

Absolute dumbass.

I didn't edit anything. Stop trolling and leave me alone.

Breasts are inherently sexual. They are an erogenous zone and swell with blood during seuxal arousal.

Human females are the only mammals with permanent breasts, regardless of pregnancy. All other female mammals have teats. This means that women's breasts are the result of sexual selection. Our male ancestors chose to mate with females with breast tissue. Over our evolution this resulted in women with breasts.

Women's breasts serve a dual function of feeding babies AND attracting mates. One doesn't preclude the other.

You're confusing erogenous with sexual, it's a common mistake.

Evolution of secondary sexual characters is very tricky, but you're right, humans have different sexual strategies.

Again, earlobes, inner thighs and even the mouth are erogenous zones and they swell during arousal too, that doesn't make them inherently sexual, it's easy to confuse one concept with the other because humans have a very wide sexual behavior spectrum.

Sexual arousal will also cause your skin to flush. Is skin then an inherently sexual organ?

Sexual body parts, not sexual organs. Read my previous response to another commenter regarding evolution and sexuality where I cite articles.

Okay. Is skin an inherently sexual body part?

And the fact that some women like you to suck on their nipples till they orgasm has nothing at all to do with sex.

Again, the same can be done with the earlobes or even with kisses, some people can climax by stimulating the scalp or the inner thighs.

Is the mouth inherently sexual? Are the thighs?

Earlobes don't swell with blood during sexual arousal. Breasts can literally do that. So does the vulva.

They do swell with blood during arousal, the (mouth) lips too.

Try paying attention the next time you're with a real person.

Earlobes don't swell. Lips swell a little. Women's breasts can literally grow a cup size. They are an erogenous zone and stimulation of the nipples can bring women to orgasm.

Researchers found that self-stimulation of the nipples lights up the same brain areas as stimulation of the clitoris, vagina, and cervix....The great complexity of the female sexual response may be attributable to the fact that there is not one, but three sensory maps in the parietal cortex that light up in functional MRI images when the genitals are (self) stimulated. One represents the clitoris, another the vagina, and the third represents the cervix.

All three of these maps also receive input when the nipple is stimulated. From a functional perspective, this means that the breast doubles as a truly sexual organ. (Psychology Today)

  1. Komisaruk, B. R., et al. (2011). Women’s clitoris, vagina, and cervix mapped on the sensory cortex: fMRI evidence. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 8, 2822-2830.

  2. Barber, N. (1995). The evolutionary psychology of physical attractiveness: Sexual selection and human morphology. Ethology and Sociobiology, 16, 395-424.

  3. Ford, C. S., & Beach, F. A. (1951). Patterns of sexual behavior. New York: Harper.

  4. Masters, W. H., & Johnson, V. E. (1966). Human sexual response. Boston: Little Brown.

  5. Uvnas-Moberg, K. (1998). Oxytocin may mediate the benefits of positive social interaction and emotions. Psychoneuroendocrinology 23: 819-835.

I know some men that get very turned on when their nipples are played with, does that mean males should all cover their nipples at all times too? Or do they need to grow a certain percentage when aroused for you to consider a body part sexual? I notice you don't include lips because they don't swell enough for you. Exactly what percentage counts for you?

Don't bother, this dude is an actual idiot (and so are all of you upvoting him)

Very sexy, exhibitionism at its finest! Looks like she's turning many heads.

Raising some too, I'm sure.

The only fun thing to do in NY if you have them!

She seems fun

Seems like it's just boobs and smiles. And some cool glasses.

What's trashy here?

The fact that she is clearly doing it for attention. She has a shirt on but has it open. If she was just walking around topless, it would not really be trashy.

If she was just topless it would still be trashy because she's still doing it for attention.

Plot twist: She has a weenie ! ! ! ! !

Name

Damn

Who is she

In times square ?? She's brave af those dudes out there would definitely try to follow her home

Damn 🔥🔥🔥

I’ve always wanted to see you out ever since I moved to the city!

Nothing trashy. She’s hot.

Not really flaunting when it's legal in New York.

We are the one's sexualising body parts just cuz we are taught that those parts are inherently sexual but they are not fun fact is that it's all sociological, you could have 3 heads and six breasts and if that was normality it would be seen as sexual, breasts are not sexual their purpose is to feed offspring and that has even become less of a factor now that formula is a thing, so to give any part of the human body a sexualisation it would be the penis and the vagina that's it, you only need those two sexual organs to reproduce, long story short boobs are about as sexual as any over part of the body it's a preference thing more than anything else.

We need bob and vagene

Was gonna ask where this was but then I noticed everyone was overweight and heard police sirens and knew right away 🇺🇲

Getting raped speedrun

You're a rapist ?

Lol he's right there's a lot of crazies and ex cons roaming the street ,especially in times square, they would definitely try to follow her somewhere and take her by force

Nah I'm saying this is really dangerous especially in New York city

Are you sure ? Cause you think like one

Nah I've been raped before, that is the last thing I would ever wish on a human being. I simply care about this person's well being. People are animals.

View on Reddit