VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1234567[8]910 ]
Subject: Valid reasons for double standard


Author:
Observer
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 06:43:12 04/23/20 Thu
In reply to: Janie 's message, "Re: Girl talk about seeing nude boys!" on 19:43:15 04/22/20 Wed

Very well put,Janie. There was a good reason for the double standard.
Girls could satisfy their curiosity about boys in a safe environment without the risks involved in secret experimenting with boys.
Boys had nothing to lose, girls did not rape or penetrate boys as would be the case with boys with nude girls.
Girls and women always feel threatened and at risk when naked in the presence of males. While males have no such worries or risks.

Unfortunately some people like mad John and others do not realize or understand these differences. Equality cannot exist in such circumstances because of significant differences.

There is also another significant difference, besides those mentioned above, is that girls never swam naked in front of boys because they would be seen as 'loose' or even called whores if they did that. This would never be the case with boys swimming naked or being seen naked in front of girls.
In fact boys frequently skinnydipped casually in front of girls, but girls never did that.

There are other valid reasons as mentioned by other posters. Just to mention one, the fact that boys behaved better when made to swim naked and more easily kept under control, while this was not necessary with girls who usually behaved much better than boys having a more docile nature and not rough like boys.
So there were many good reasons for the double standard. Which is why most parents and other authorities went along with it.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: There is no valid double standard


Author:
Mirage
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 07:24:06 04/23/20 Thu

Either male and female are equal, or they're not. If they're equal, there can be no double standards. If they're not equal, then double standards are fine, but it brings into question what rights, if any, women should have. If women and men are not equal, then by that unequal nature, they should not have equal rights.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: There is no valid double standard


Author:
John to Mirage (Mad)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 15:02:39 04/23/20 Thu

Agree. Thing is you cannot cherry pick which rights should be equal and which not. That is called hypocrisy and should not be supported. Either the genders, races, etc are equal or not. If equal, then the same rights for each subdivision (gender, etc) should be the same. Otherwise, to heck with it - might makes right.


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Valid reasons for double standard


Author:
spelvin
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 11:09:33 04/23/20 Thu

I hear what Observer is saying, but does covering girls up really protect their virginity?

Probably not, if what AKR47 is saying is true:

"Sexual assault rate drops significantly in many countries when they introduce clothing optional beaches. So if you want to reduce sexual attacks of girls make them swim naked and be naked. Look at Scandinavian countries where women routinely change clothes in public places and are seen naked in public more often and they have the lowest violence rates."

http://www.frank-answers.com/frank-answers-about-swimming-naked-commentary/
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Valid reasons for double standard


Author:
Observer to Spelvin
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 12:50:45 04/24/20 Fri

"I hear what Observer is saying, but does covering girls up really protect their virginity?"

I know that you are an open-minded person and can hear all sides, but that quote from another poster about Scandinavian countries is ridiculous.
Scandinavian people are open minded and disciplined by nature, so whether there are clothing optional beaches or not does not make any difference regarding violence rates or rape.
And no, Scandinavian women do not show themselves naked in public as the poster states. So his whole argument is ridiculous.

About your question, yes, a woman or girl showing herself naked in public is an invitation to rape and would be vulnerable, while there is no such threat to a man showing himself naked in public or to a boy unless he is going to be raped by a man.
So naked men and boys are safe in the presence of girls and women, but not the other way round.

I fact girls and women even when clothed would feel threatened and uncomfortable in the presence of naked men. But certainly most men would not feel that way in the presence of a naked woman, quite the contrary.
These are the differences that posters like John and Mirage ignore.

Concerning the main theme of this forum about boys swimming naked in front of girls and women, it is different for females seeing boys naked rather than adult males for the same reasons above. Which is why it was considered as harmless and non-sexual for boys to swim naked in front of girls and women, but not for older teen boys or adult males in front of females which would have been considered as sexual, as also would be females of any age swimming naked in front of males.

Do you and others now understand why it was only acceptable for boys up to a certain age to swim naked in front of females?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Valid reasons for double standard


Author:
Mirage
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 02:44:05 04/25/20 Sat

Scandinavian people are open minded and disciplined by nature, so whether there are clothing optional beaches or not does not make any difference regarding violence rates or rape.

Yes, it''s all about culture. Scandinavians are not "disciplined by nature". They learned to be.

About your question, yes, a woman or girl showing herself naked in public is an invitation to rape and would be vulnerable

Only in savage cultures like the middle east. The objective fact is, in western society, no one other than rapists view a naked woman as an invitation to rape. There's always going to be sick people like that in society, but thankfully, they're a minority.

So naked men and boys are safe in the presence of girls and women, but not the other way round.

Wrong again. Is rape rampant in nudist communities? Your opinions are based on the idea that we live in a society where women are nothing but sex objects to be used by men any way they please. That may be middle eastern society, but it's not western society.

I fact girls and women even when clothed would feel threatened and uncomfortable in the presence of naked men.

Because they're TAUGHT to be. If they weren't taught to be, they wouldn't be.

But certainly most men would not feel that way in the presence of a naked woman, quite the contrary.

They would if they were taught to be.

Concerning the main theme of this forum about boys swimming naked in front of girls and women, it is different for females seeing boys naked rather than adult males for the same reasons above.

It's not different. It's just what people have been taught, and it's rooted in religion.

Do you and others now understand why it was only acceptable for boys up to a certain age to swim naked in front of females?

I understand your line of reasoning, but your line of reasoning is wrong. It's illogical. It ignores the fact that different cultures have different attitudes. It also ignores the fact that culture can and does change. Your opinions may be what people thought in the past, but that's not the case anymore. Your claim that a woman naked in public is an invitation to rape would reign down hatred upon you by most of western society if you stated that publicly.. They would call you a bigot, misogynist, and will say you're probably a rapist yourself. I'm not saying that you are any of these things. I'm just pointing out that your views are archaic. Our society isn't what it once was.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Valid reasons for double standard


Author:
Jaquard
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 14:52:22 04/26/20 Sun

"Which is why it was considered as harmless and non-sexual for boys to swim naked in front of girls and women"

Not entirely, if at all. It was considered non-sexual because "society" propagated the myth that girls (at least) and even women were not sexual creatures and did not react erotically to the sight of naked boys. I have also found sites where the women and their erotic arousal at the sight of naked men is admitted.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Valid reasons for double standard


Author:
Observer to Jaquard
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 15:43:32 04/26/20 Sun

How do you explain the fact that most women are offended by the sight of a naked man?

I have heard women saying that a smartly dressed man is more attractive and 'sexy' to them than would be a naked man.

The total failure of Playgirl showing naked men is also proof of this.

Also the fact that only young boys were allowed to swim naked in front of girls and women, but not older teenage boys or adult men, further proves this.
Nude boys were seen as cute and yes harmless and non-sexual, but adult naked men would have been seen as offensive, ridiculous and inappropriate in front of women and girls.


So no, equality between sexes concerning nudity, which the likes of you and others like John are trying to bring up, does not exist. You are out of touch of reality.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Valid reasons for double standard


Author:
John to Observer (Mad)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 18:16:28 04/26/20 Sun

I think way too much power is given to women in this situation.

In cases of forced nudity of males in front of females, I don’t care what the woman’s preference is. She should have no right to compel any male to be naked in front of her and her friends/younger girls. As stated before, while those situations have reduced, women and girls still are given this power in batheing, punishing or babysitting boys.

In cases of consent between both the boy and the women, then both groups standards are important. For the boy, he would have to consent to each situation; he would be free to accept some situations and reject others. The females should also be comfortable. In the context of this post, that could mean she is comfortable as long as the male does not exceed a certain age.

To conclude, I still have some trouble with this because it opens the door to women asking a minor boy to get naked so they can enjoy his nudity. As a proponent of equality, I know such a request, if the genders were reversed, would likely be considered sexual assault by the asking adult male.

So ultimately, I think kids of both genders should be left alone regarding their clothes. There is really no legitimate reason for stripping minors for the pleasure of the other gender. An exception would be for nudist families. My opinion.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Valid reasons for double standard


Author:
Mirage
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 22:43:30 04/27/20 Mon

"How do you explain the fact that most women are offended by the sight of a naked man?"

Because they are taught to be. It's learned behavior.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Forgot to add that comment above is to Observer


Author:
Mirage to Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 22:45:16 04/27/20 Mon

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Valid reasons for double standard


Author:
Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 13:35:34 04/28/20 Tue

"How do you explain the fact that most women are offended by the sight of a naked man?"

"Because they are taught to be. It's learned behavior."

No, it is not, it is a natural instinct for women.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: There's nothing natural about it


Author:
Mirage to Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 00:18:26 04/29/20 Wed

Nudity is the natural state of humans, and finding it offensive is learned behavior. Children have no qualms about nudity (unless they're taught otherwise). The culture they grow up in determines what their attitude towards nudity will be. This is why attitudes to nudity vary between cultures.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Valid reasons for double standard


Author:
Observer to Mirage and John
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 11:55:07 04/24/20 Fri

Your generic and sweeping statements about equality do not apply to all circumstances, especially the subject we are discussing here, and I have given the reasons with clear examples why this is so which none of you have denied.

The gender difference is further proved by the fact that on clothing optional beaches and Oblation runs and similar shows of nudity are almost always exclusively male and very few, if any, are females.

I do not have to repeat the examples I have already given in my other post, which you both ignored.
Another clear example is that women do not rape men or boys, while women and girls being raped by men is a very common crime that happens all the time.
Your cries of equality just do not hold in many circumstances. I could go on giving other examples, so please take your heads out of the sand and face the facts instead of having rigid opinions which do not apply in many circumstances.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Valid reasons for double standard


Author:
Willy to Observer&Co
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 21:07:31 04/24/20 Fri

Observer you are 100% correct spelvins post was rather silly and while Mad and Mirage can crap on about equally all they what the fact is Males and Females are different we experience the world differently.Women and girls are the ones who get raped,sexually harassed cat called etc yes some boys get abused but it's men doing all this bad shit.A bit of logic says girls would see and experience being nude in front of men&boys quite differently than boys being nude in front of females and again logic says society would see it differently to.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Valid reasons for double standard


Author:
spelvin
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 01:37:05 04/25/20 Sat

Willy, I have always appreciated your posts,
and Observer, I have appreciated yours.
But whether I'm right or wrong,
I hope you realize that denouncing another person's opinions as "silly" or "ridiculous" is no way to win friends and influence people.
I try to treat other people on this forum with respect,
so I think I am entitled to respect in return.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Valid reasons for double standard


Author:
Manuel
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 14:56:29 04/25/20 Sat

I am siding with Spelvin on his posts.

there is something missing in these posts. i wish i knew how to express them. and i know this. that you can't please everybody. you can't make everybody happy.

but what you can do - is make everybody mad. HAHAHAHA!

you posters that disagree with Spelvin, there seems to be no room for forgiveness. you're so busy trying to prove equality with men and women, I will show you mine if you show me yours.

its not about you. it's not about her.

maybe we should consider about having eaten the fruit from that tree we were not supposed to have eaten from, the forbidden fruit. also what is being missed is the end result. what happens after you have eaten that fruit.

you and I are going to have to answer for every decision we have made, every action we have taken, every thought we have ever had. you alone will stand on that Judgment Day.

none of you is a qualified lawyer to stand before this particular Judge. and the only way in to that Just Reward is through that one and only Qualified Lawyer.

at this particular time, its not going to matter whether a man is equal to a woman or a woman equal to a man. and you will have no say in who goes in or not go in to that just reward.

how could you possibly go in when there is no forgiveness in your heart.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Valid reasons for double standard


Author:
Willy to Spelvin
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 21:15:50 04/25/20 Sat

Spelvin I enjoy reading your posts to you put a lot of effort in to them but I won't apologize because I believe you are wrong.There's a lot of reasons why Scandinavian countries have less rape and teen pregnancies to.They are quite open and grown up about nudity and sex and they actually have sex education.The USA on the other hand in respect to sex and nudity are a bit like a 5 year old they have a lot of growing up to do.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Valid reasons for double standard


Author:
Mirage
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 02:49:14 04/25/20 Sat

A bit of logic says girls would see and experience being nude in front of men&boys quite differently than boys being nude in front of females and again logic says society would see it differently to.

A bit of logic would also reveal that what you mentioned is learned. No girl would feel weird being naked if she wasn't taught to be, and society wouldn't it differently unless they were taught to. It's not just logic, it's basic common sense.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Valid reasons for double standard


Author:
Willy to Mirage
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 21:44:02 04/25/20 Sat

Mirage I think you answered your question there.It isn't want you or I think its want society thinks rightly or wrongly.Male and Female nudity has always being viewed differently there was a time when boy nudity was considered appropriate but girl nudity for a number of reasons.We can argue over the rights and wrongs but that's the way society was.In today's world it's women who provide the nudity.On tv in movies nudity is very one sided breasts are common full frontal not so much.Penises are very rare regardless if for a sex scene or for no reason.The excuse given for this is society views breasts and penises differently not very equal or fair is it.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: You missed the point


Author:
Mirage
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 23:41:35 04/25/20 Sat

I specifically mentioned society, not just the individual. To quote what I said "society wouldn't see it differently unless they were taught to. You mentioned Scandinavian societies in this post. This goes to my point. Americans learned to be the way they are, and Scandinavians unlearned it. The views and attitudes about nudity had by prude societies are not natural. Everyone is born naked, and despite what people believe, nudity of both genders didn't use to be an issue the farther back in time you go. It's only an issue when you introduce religion and power dynamics.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Valid reasons for double standard


Author:
Mirage to Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 03:05:56 04/25/20 Sat

Another clear example is that women do not rape men or boys

Got to stop you there, because you're absolutely wrong. Women do commit sexual abuse/rape. Women also use cruel and unusual punishment, which can cause long lasting psychological trauma. For example, some of the stories of nude punishments. I know some people might say those stories are made up fantasy, and I don't know what your opinion is on the validity of those stories, but those kinds of punishments do happen. That kind of punishment is considered cruel and unusual even for adult prisoners, and yet it's done to kids, especially by women.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Valid reasons for double standard


Author:
John to Observer (Mad)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 09:52:13 04/25/20 Sat

Those of us who have posted for a while have made arguments that are repeated and not acknowledged by others who do not agree with us. So you should not feel uniquely offended if your points are not specifically addressed and seemingly ignored.

Yes men sometimes rape women. But it has been proven that rape is a crime of violence, not sex. So a nude female is not likely to trigger a violent response from a male. So it is not dangerous for females to be naked in front of males.

And it has been documented repeatedly on this site that some women take great joy in sexually abusing boys. They enjoy forcing them to be naked and enjoying their embarrassment and humiliation.

I think if the genders were treated equally by authorities, sexual abuse of both genders would be greatly reduced, as it should be. No one has a moral right or justification to hurt another. Don’t care if they are doing it because they are curious or just really enjoy their sadism. It is wrong. And just because it was common doesn’t make it right.

Like you, I have made these points before. So acknowledge them or not.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Good point regarding rape


Author:
Mirage
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 23:51:26 04/25/20 Sat

People often forget that rape isn't about sex per se, but about power and control. Men who rape women tend to feel hatred for women, not love or affection. They want to inflict suffering on the woman, and they use sex to do it. So ultimately, sex is just the tool, not the main objective. The same thing goes for rape/sexual abuse of kids. It's about power and control.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Good point regarding rape


Author:
John (Mad)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 11:29:08 04/28/20 Tue

Agree that rape is about power and control. Also think this is a large part of the forced nudity of boys by their Moms or Aunts or Female authorities. Don’t get me wrong - they love seeing naked boys too.

But that pleasure is magnified for many when they can force it upon the boy and increase his humiliation by displaying him to others, force him to keep his hands to his side and away from covering his penis, and ridicule his desire for modesty.

This is about as close to rape as a female can inflict on a male.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Here's something will find interesting


Author:
Mirage
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 01:03:32 04/29/20 Wed

https://www.salon.com/2011/03/05/manning_6/

This link is regarding Bradley manning and forced nudity. Here's an excerpt:
Is there anyone who doubts that these measures -- and especially this prolonged forced nudity -- are punitive and designed to further erode his mental health, physical health and will? As The Guardian reported last year, forced nudity is almost certainly a breach of the Geneva Conventions; the Conventions do not technically apply to Manning, as he is not a prisoner of war, but they certainly establish the minimal protections to which all detainees -- let alone citizens convicted of nothing -- are entitled.


Here's another link regarding forced nudity:

https://shadowproof.com/2011/03/03/nine-years-of-nudity/

An excerpt:
In addition to degradation of the detainee, stripping can be used to demonstrate the omnipotence of the captor or to debilitate the detainee.


Another: https://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/In_Brief_Torture_by_any_other_name

And an excerpt:
The questions covered more than 40 kinds of abuse, including beatings, forced nudity and standing, isolation, rope bondage, sexual humiliation, and deprivation of sleep, water, and food.

Notice how forced nudity is included as a form of abuse. They didn't ask if they thought it was abusive. It went without saying that it IS abusive.


Another site: https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/assets/files/other/irrc-867-reyes.pdf

Excerpt from page 7:
The US Department of State, in its Country Reports on Human Rights Practices 2004,25quotes a report by the US Committee for Human Rights listing various psychological methods which it describes as torture:Methods of torture included ... prolonged periods of exposure; humiliations such as public nakedness; confinement to small ‘‘punishment cells,’’ in which prisoners were unable to stand upright or lie down, where they could beheld for several weeks; being forced to kneel or sit immobilized for long periods


More: https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11313-psychological-torture-as-bad-as-physical-torture/#ixzz6KxIWMmhj

Interesting excerpt:
In 2005, US president George W Bush signed the bill outlawing the torture of detainees. And officials later revised the Army Field Manual to explicitly ban certain treatments of detainees, such as forced nudity and sex acts, hoods or duct tape on the eyes, and electric shock.


One more: https://www.cvt.org/blog/healing-and-human-rights/why-torture-wrong-0

And the excerpt:
They (and in the case of Rahman, his family) were not forced to revisit, personally and in the global media, the excruciating details of the torture they endured: suspension, stress positions, being slammed into walls, crammed and confined in small locked boxes, dietary manipulation, prolonged sleep deprivation, forced nudity, water dousing in freezing temperatures, being strapped to waterboards, death threats and more.


In all these cases, forced nudity is labeled as cruel and as torture. Some countries have banned it, even for criminals. And yet, there are people who think that something that can cause psychological trauma to adults is totally ok to inflict on kids. If even adults are mentally scarred by forced to the point where it has been banned as a form of punishment for hardened criminals, then what kind of sick person would say it's ok to inflict it on kids? If it screws up adults, imagine what it does to kids.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Here's something will find interesting


Author:
John (Mad)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 13:21:59 12/13/20 Sun

Mirage - excellent rebuttal. Don’t see how anyone can disagree with your post.


[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT+0
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.