Everybody concerned with women's right over their own bodies don't seem to give a shit that its illegal for them to not wear clothes in public most places.
78
21
546
Conversation
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Replying to
There's a pretty clear distinction, imo, upon infringing on others autonomy/property vs not.
and why couldn't subjecting someone to a sight be that? I think we'd say that if the sight was really gross for example
5
I don't think it's clear whatsoever, it's deeply not obvious where each other's boundaries are and autonomy is more story than reality
1
5
but what if I don't want to wear pants and sit on the chair? Whos chair is it?
Yeah, but that is usually what is precisely the point of contention. The people who are for laws restricting public nudity argue that public nudity is harmful.
There are some nuances that come up, like specifically as someone else pointed out, privately owned seats and peoples junk.
Also some people think having to see nudity at all is a violation of their right to “not be forced” to see it, but that sounds like a personal problem.
1
1
It's called public property, the public doesn't want you to run around naked.
1
It's not very clear. E.g., by concluding someone shouldn't kill another person with a knife, we're limiting that first person's freedom to place their own knife wherever they feel like. It protects the other person's body, but it's still an infringement on autonomy.
2