May 16, 2008
-
Ogling Moobs
In a story that is sure to rock all of xanga tonight, the courts have once again turned a blind eye to the ogling of moobs (man boobs).
It is like there is a double standard in the world. It is considered perfectly fine for a man’s naked breasts to be watched or video taped without the man’s permission.
In the UK, a court ruled that moobs were not given the same protection as their counterpart boobs. Moobs are not protected under “peeping Tom” rules.
A man secretly taped another man topless. He was arrested and convicted of voyeurism. But the court overturned the conviction. The court ruled that a man’s bare torso was not “private parts.”
A law had been passed saying that “‘private parts’ must be exposed for voyeurism to have taken place.” The article pointed out that “Only women, it seems, have breasts that can be seen in a sexual light.” Here is the link: Link
Do you think moobs should be given the same protection under the law as boobs?
Comments (92)
VOMIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
PROJECTILE VOMIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Absolutely not. This is because I want to look at moobs.
Men with moobs should wear bras, too.
OMG…he needs to go to Victoria’s Secret….
i think that protection for breasts should be revoked as soon as we as a society move on from boobs. seriously, there’s nothing especially sexual about breasts except what we make of them.
thanks, I was just about to sit down for dinner.
“Do you think moobs should be given the same protection under the law as boobs?”
No. For something like this, we’d have to look at the societal standard. In fundamentalist Muslim countries, the “private part” extends to the woman’s face. In Victorian England, exposing a woman’s ankles was considered scandalous (I think).
I think they should both be under the same–basically, nothing. There’s nothing sexual about either other than what we make ourselves.
How does that not hurt that guy’s back? XD
CONTROVERSY!!! Consider Xanga rocked!
Well, I sure don’t see moobs in a sexual way. Bleh!
There are all kinds of bizarro fetishes in the world — I think it’s more about the intent of the guy who was doing the videotaping. Was he being voyeuristic? Then he should be convicted of voyeurism. I wouldn’t want someone sneaking around secretly videotaping my toes because they had a toe fetish… it’s not about which body parts are more private, it’s a matter of whether secretly videotaping other people’s body parts – any of them – is legitimate in our legal system.
@AllMyNamesAreTaken - I agree!
Man boobs aren’t private parts, or whatever. If a guy doesn’t want his moobs to be recorded then he should lose some weight. And he is still left with saggy skin after losing a ton of weight, then too bad so sad aka Deal.
I think any person filmed without his or her consent – no matter which body parts are covered – should be able to seek protection from voyuers in a court of law. People should not be filmed or photographed without permission.
Frank was right…the manziere should have been invented.
No. “Private” parts are generally defined as sexual or quasi-sexual organs. Genitals, anus, female mammary glands. Sorry, that’s it. Now, if a man implanted mammary glands complete with all the tissue found in a standard women’s breast, then yes, that would be “private”.
But I agree with faerieshadow. The act of video taping his private life without his consent is a violation of his rights.
Boob/sandwich combo! Yes! *high five*
Ugh, once wasn’t enough??
I think I just found a new diet…
@beachy64 - They need to make a Victor’s Secret.
they should pass a law to protect the public FROM the moobs, in my opinion.
Nah, but I also think it would be great for everyone to be naked all the time.
are you sure that first picture isn’t a woman with a beard?
I’m gonna go with no.
@k8tthelate - That is so funny Kate!
not want
Yeah, I do, because seriously, if we only viewed those guys from the neck down, waist up, whose to say they’d be identifiable as men? Sounds like a double standard to me. Granted, I don’t view them in a sexual light, but then again, not all women’s breasts are viewed sexually either. Of course, I’m of the mind that everyone should be able to go around naked without fear of repercussion or harassment. Sans our genitals, we’re all the same – people need to stop sexualizing everything, period!
Eww.
Ew.
Silly wabbits. Boobs should have the same ‘freedom’ as moobs. Though I may regret saying that one day when I get exposed to a plethora of unpleasant mammaries.
i don’t think so. men don’t really have “breasts,” they’re just fat deposits. women actually have mammary glands along with the fat.
that was disturbing. and yes it’s not fair to men that their boobs aren’t equal to women’s boobs. if you don’t want to have them taped, stop going topless.
I’m not sure about all that you just said.
But, I’d prefer another name for them. “Moobs” … well … that sort of grosses me out a little.
No, if they make it illegal to take a picture or look at a man’s boob then they should also make it illegal for a man to wear topless in public. I’m sure if a women exposed her bare breast in public the court would say something in line of her being responsible for showing her private parts in public.
@MiaBellaTragedia - I think the hair on the chest would tip me off to the fact that it was a man. I am sorry, but, no man with moobs I have ever seen looks anything like a woman at all. It’s pretty easy to tell the difference, hairy chest or not.
P.S. Jack Nicholson is the man!!!
Nonsense.
ew. and no.
Is that Jack Nicholson?
And to answer your question, no.
@huginn - I agree. It depends on your society’s mores what will be considered private. In ours, moobs are game. And I’ll also check off on your statement on Victorian England ankles. Far as I know, it was considered scandalous, also carrying over into America for the same time period.
Somebody please throw these guys some Jerry beads….and a bra.
@la_faerie_joyeuse - No. “Private” parts are generally defined as sexual or quasi-sexual organs. Genitals, anus, female mammary glands. Sorry, that’s it. Now, if a man implanted mammary glands complete with all the tissue found in a standard women’s breast, then yes, that would be “private”.
Men have mammary glands too. The difference, however, is the innate inability of the guy to produce hormones for lactation.
no… even a woman walking around topless has no expectation of privacy…
@OfElection - Heh, thanks. What becomes interesting is when society holds conflicting conpcetions of what’s sexual in public and what isn’t. I guess in such a case, we’d have to go with lowest common denominator (the least sexual standard).
For a while, Berkeley had a male nudist going to class naked. The school, for obvious reasons, didn’t like this. It took them a while before finding a legitiimate basis to get him to stop: Health standards.
@GlasgowKiss - How does that not hurt that guy’s back? XD
Because the moobs are counterbalanced by a tire and a sandbag for a tummy.
Men with moobs should go through the embarrassment of wearing bras.
That’d give them motivation to actually work out.
“Ugh” says it all.
@the_evil_tamica - I agree with you! *shudder*
YES indeed i do,but not because of sexuality but because they are just grose to look at lol
That first guy’s breasts are bigger than mine.
That’s disgusting.
Will that get them to keep them covered? Then sure, private parts, whatever.
That first dude seems to be pretty proud of his! What’s the word I’m looking for…oh yeah, GROSS!!!!
You just rocked my world, Dan.
*Shivers* oh my. That is just WRONG. My first thought is consider the man’s health. What are the reasons women wear bras? Man, on the other hand, should aslo for the sake of their back and … chest if it bounced so much.
Oi.
That is just wrong. *GAG*
I’m still trying to clear my head of the imagery…..who would really want to see moobs? The two examples shown should be kept from public eyes, not because they are showing thier privates, but what has been shown sould be kept private. And I don’t care if one of the subjects IS Jack Nicholson. Yuck!
not until its socially common for the exposure of a male chest to be considered indecent in public so that the “secret” oogling of moobs is indeed questionable behavior. staring at fully exposed boobs is sexy and contains a removal of the forbidden but staring at moobs does not. if this makes no sense it is because i am currently brain dead due to the excessive studying and writing involved in taking a final!
Okay so if men have boobs to then why do they get to let them free?
They should be forced to wear bars also.
I don’t want to see that shit giggling.
When a woman can walk around topless and bra-less down a public street in broad daylight and not get ogled, harassed, and/or arrested, sure. Then again, that would mean that women’s breasts would not be seen as sexual objects, or that everyone has been numbed to the subject.
Men’s chests are not seen as sexual objects, therefore they do not get the same consideration. Sorry guys. When men cannot expose their chests in public without possibly being ogled, harassed, and/or arrested, then they will be sexual objects and will be given the same consideration as women’s breasts.
@faerieshadow - Though I do agree with you that someone should not be allowed to specifically videotape others without their explicit permission. It’s kinda really freakin’ creepy if some random dude is taping you and not telling/asking you first.
No… haha. that’s ridiculous
*In my best Chris Crocker voice* LEAVE THE MAN BOOBS ALONE!
Like several posters have commented, it’s all about our society’s sexualization of women’s breasts. Moobs are a joke.
I should have been paid to look at those jugs.
There should be a law for that first guy to wear a bra.
Ugh.
If it saves us from that, yes.
Untill they become sexualised, nope. Tough double standard, but then again, thats all we’ve got to work with.
Interesting…I thought Moobs were offensive in themselves..didn’t
know looking at them was…who would oggle moobs?? It’s too late for me
to think or say something smart right now…or understand this post. I
apologize.
The day my glorious moobs are protected under law is the day I start bending over and taking it up the ass.
Um, no, not really. Do you see women gathering around a fat guy shouting “SHOW YOUR MOOBS!” No, you don’t. They don’t need the same protection as women do.
Aahhhhh! Ewwww! JACK! Put some clothes on!
That’s gross.
LOL what the heck
Gynecomastia. It’s a sort of genetic screw up. but any how, they can’t help it. So..
I’m too distracted looking at the pics to think ><
OMG I think I’m scarred @@
people make such a big deal out of sex, sex is a perfictly natural part of life but I find it fare that if a womens boobs private that a mans moobs shoulds be private aswell. but on the flip side I think people make a big deael out of nothing about women or men showing to much skin, our bodys are part of life and it should be ok for anyone to show a little off here and there
@AllMyNamesAreTaken - I agree. They should wear bras.
First, I think I like mits (mam tits) better than moobs and I think the public needs to be protected from mits, especially fuzzy ones.
-shrugs- makes sense if they were.
I think we’re better off doing away with the whole thing, both should be legal to be exposed and people need to get over being self conscious or embarrassed by the human body. Your whole body only becomes sexual when you make it sexual really…
Other than that, it’s just a body that god gave you that you should be proud of.
ילדיכם משחקים בחוץ, הם חשופים לאור השמש, חשבתם לקנות להם <a סוככים > שיספקו להם הגנה ?.
I think the court ruled correctly.
There are people that have foot fetishes, so could we try to argue that feet are private? You could, but I wouldn’t.
of course not, men’s breasts aren’t “private parts.” Plus if men are walking around topless, then they’re putting themselves outthere. Women don’t walk around topless in public because it’s not socially acceptable. If women could walk around topless then “ogling” their breasts would be legal, too. If you don’t want people looking at your boobs, put a shirt on! It’s not difficult.
NOT!
The way I see it, if men get a small taste of their own patriarchy (yeah, myself included) then we’re just paying what we owe. Men don’t deserve much defense under the voyeurism banner so long as we still ogle some cleavage or drool over nipples.
As for whether the individual deserved the privacy: though I am generally against the paparazzi, I personally don’t think that you can coherently argue for any individuals right to his “moobs” without also being at odds with tabloids. When society gives up on celebrity gossip, they’ll also give up on non-celebrity voyeurism (for example: the ogling of “moobs”).
Point being: if you are the type of person who perpetually is waiting for some celebrities breast to fall out of their dress, or whatever other insignificant bs that the tabloids pop out, then you equally don’t deserve your privacy–and I hope your “moobs” or “boobs” are filmed without your consent (like those famous people you love so much).
MOOBS! >.<
I’m not sure about law…
But for me personally, I try not to gawk at men’s chests, despite the fact that it’s socially acceptable for men to be topless in various scenarios– partly because I would not want them to treat me in the same fashion, and partly because I believe the male body is just as sacred as the female body.
*eww* they need bros. (seinfeld) I dunno if moobs should be considered ‘private parts’. For me, they’re way far from being a turn on when they’re fat enough to be called moobs and a guy w/o a shirt can be nice to look at if he’s tan and muscly but it’s really not that big of a deal to me either way. so I guess no. I mean, if a person of either gender is walking around naked (excepting in private, of course, like in their own home) they’re fare game for pictures. not that I’m promoting picture taking of moobs or boobs but you can’t complain if you’ve given such ample opportunity for others to take pictures, can you?
I’m pretty sure that first photo is of a woman transitioning to be a man.
these pictures are gross. cover them up. if i have to cover mine up, they do too. both of them have bigger breasts than i do.
and i’m thinking the first picture is a woman with facial hair or he’s taking female hormones?–those look like real female breasts.
I’m all for women being able to be topless, as well.
sure they should, if women are also allowed to go topless at parks, pools, and beaches like men can.
HAHAHA
No.
I think that at least one of the genders should be allowed to go around bare-chested.
In fact, I think that women should be allowed to be bare-chested in public. If you want to see ‘em sexually, you can.. but I think it’s stupid that we have to cover them just because someone was like, “Oh, you could push these around during sex.” and men in a few cultures followed suit.