Discussions

Nordberg said "    GreenDragon said "    Nordberg said "    GreenDragon said "After I posted that I wondered if this is the manner in which you would respond. I'm disheartened to see it.     Children's rights are made by an advocate(s) for children that speak on their behalf for the benefit and safety of them all.     It is (or should be) a child's right to be appropriately clothed for today's society to safeguard their person from ridicule, shame and the potential for abuse until such a time when she/he can make an informed decision.       The evidence is common sense. " Yes, how dare I have an enlightened opinion that differs from yours.     The only reason that a child would need to be sheltered from ridicule and shame would be because of attitudes such as yours. You are the problem.     And you still haven't demonstrated how a young girl going top-free is inherently dangerous. " A young girl going top-free is inherently dangerous because she would be an easy and likely target for sexual abuse from a peer or adult that is viewing her displayed sexual parts. Even if she hasn't hit puberty yet. " The fact that you keep saying it doesn't make it true. "

Do we really want to put kids at risk to test that theory?  
 
If there's even a chance that my thoughts have merit, whyyyy oh why would you think it's okay to take a chance with an innocent child?  
 
Can we just let the adults be guinea pigs in the equality issue and leave the kids out of it for now until society matures and becomes a safer place for our children?

Are boy's nipples not the same? And if you think a child, where there is NO ISSUE at all due to there being NO CHEST DIFFERENCE from gender to gender, I wonder what you think about matured women that chooses to go topless?  
 
Very sad that you want the rights to do everything a man can yet you try limiting you're gender.  
 
It's all about equality, and freedom of choice. A sexual predator does not care if there is a top on or off, they are sick individuals that prey on the weak, and i'm sure many abductions have occurred when they were wearing a shirt male or female.  
 
I'm going to go walk around town shirtless because it's comfortable and hot out, i'm done with this mulberry bush conversation, you parent you're children how you will and there is nothing wrong with that, just don't make a spectacle when you see something that is completely natural.  
 
Edited by 4thepeople, 2015-06-25 16:22:00

I notoriously hate ebrandon discussions and avoid them like the plague, however I find it hard to ignore the posted comments I have been hearing from my partner. Female empowerment doesn't just start at eighteen. It is a lifelong process of affirmation and encouragement of freedom of expression, to exclude children from it is nonsensical. To exclude children from empowerment because you fear sexual predators is irrational, everything I have ever read or experienced as a female fails to support this. As adults we hold the key to freedom, our chests/breasts are not sexual objects, and yet they are treated as such. As women in this society we are shamed into covering ourselves, told it is pornographic, sexually explicit, immoral, encouraging of rape (or pedophilia for female children)... Men and women tell men that they are animals that cannot control themselves around women and children, that we are 'asking for it'. How can our society ever progress if we tell female children to cover up because of the big bad men who will rape you and possibly murder you, to hey yo girl you're 18 now show some female empowerment! How can we ever learn to love our bodies and feel proud and comfortable if we don't start learning it in some of our most impressionable and formative years of life. How can we ever teach children and some adults that breasts are not purely sexual objects if a vast amount of women don't start protesting and baring their chests, consequently making it a natural part of our society. In many cultures females baring their chests is a non-issue, and many more used to view it as a non- issue until various religions told them they were immoral and banned it. Purporting propaganda that female bodies are sexually explicit separates us from equality, it separates male and females from birth and gives them different moral codes to live by.  
Sexual predators are going to be sexual predators no matter what they see or don't see. I have had encounters with them throughout my life and have heard of firsthand accounts of them; clothing or lack of clothing or nudity is not the issue. Blaming the victim is not the answer, blaming females for being a female is not the answer. Female children are part of society, they see it, they experience it, they see the sexualisation of women, they hear the conversations of blaming the female... How can they have any power to tell us they are getting bad vibes or have been hurt by someone if society is constantly telling/showing them that they are an object that is used and abused. Children are not idiots they can see that there is a double standard at a very young age in that males can have bare chests while they cannot. As they age they internalize society’s verbal diarrhea that they have to hide their chests, and they know why, because their chests are sex objects in the eyes of society. Most parents in our society are now so concerned about letting kids have any freedom whatsoever, they are never allowed to roam alone for fear of predators when all the statistics don't and never did support their fear. Micro managing our children and suppressing equality for fear of exploitation by strangers is over hyped and fear mongering. More often than not predators are the people you know who betray yours and their trust. Arm your children with trust to confide in you, confidence and freedom; not fear, shame and captivity.  

Nordberg said "    GreenDragon said "    Nordberg said "    GreenDragon said "    Nordberg said "    GreenDragon said "After I posted that I wondered if this is the manner in which you would respond. I'm disheartened to see it.     Children's rights are made by an advocate(s) for children that speak on their behalf for the benefit and safety of them all.     It is (or should be) a child's right to be appropriately clothed for today's society to safeguard their person from ridicule, shame and the potential for abuse until such a time when she/he can make an informed decision.       The evidence is common sense. " Yes, how dare I have an enlightened opinion that differs from yours.     The only reason that a child would need to be sheltered from ridicule and shame would be because of attitudes such as yours. You are the problem.     And you still haven't demonstrated how a young girl going top-free is inherently dangerous. " A young girl going top-free is inherently dangerous because she would be an easy and likely target for sexual abuse from a peer or adult that is viewing her displayed sexual parts. Even if she hasn't hit puberty yet. " The fact that you keep saying it doesn't make it true. " Do we really want to put kids at risk to test that theory?     If there's even a chance that my thoughts have merit, whyyyy oh why would you think it's okay to take a chance with an innocent child?     Can we just let the adults be guinea pigs in the equality issue and leave the kids out of it for now until society matures and becomes a safer place for our children? " My argument is that your theory has no merit, and I'm not willing to do real psychological damage to girls because you have an unsubstantiated theory.     This is a real girl, with real thoughts, that has been bullied and made a spectacle because of an attitude like yours.     Her pain is real, your theory may not even exist.     Edited by Nordberg, 2015-06-25 16:25:02"

Funny, I haven't ever heard of any girls dealing with psychological trauma due to wearing a bathing suit top. Girls have been wearing bathing suit tops for hundreds of years, you'd think the psyche ward and councillor's would be full up with girls and women fraught with distraught over having to wear a bathing suit top.

I would never grant permission for any daughter of mine at the age of 8 to go topless at a public pool. She's not 2.  
 
Furthermore, if I lost my senses and did:  
 
- I would have read and followed the rules and policies of the public pool. Rules are rules.  
 
- More importantly I wouldn't have taken the story to the media to further embarrass the child and put them in that situation.  
 
Edited by Kellye, 2015-06-25 16:45:32

PuddleJumper said "I notoriously hate ebrandon discussions and avoid them like the plague, however I find it hard to ignore the posted comments I have been hearing from my partner. Female empowerment doesn't just start at eighteen. It is a lifelong process of affirmation and encouragement of freedom of expression, to exclude children from it is nonsensical. To exclude children from empowerment because you fear sexual predators is irrational, everything I have ever read or experienced as a female fails to support this. As adults we hold the key to freedom, our chests/breasts are not sexual objects, and yet they are treated as such. As women in this society we are shamed into covering ourselves, told it is pornographic, sexually explicit, immoral, encouraging of rape (or pedophilia for female children)... Men and women tell men that they are animals that cannot control themselves around women and children, that we are 'asking for it'. How can our society ever progress if we tell female children to cover up because of the big bad men who will rape you and possibly murder you, to hey yo girl you're 18 now show some female empowerment! How can we ever learn to love our bodies and feel proud and comfortable if we don't start learning it in some of our most impressionable and formative years of life. How can we ever teach children and some adults that breasts are not purely sexual objects if a vast amount of women don't start protesting and baring their chests, consequently making it a natural part of our society. In many cultures females baring their chests is a non-issue, and many more used to view it as a non- issue until various religions told them they were immoral and banned it. Purporting propaganda that female bodies are sexually explicit separates us from equality, it separates male and females from birth and gives them different moral codes to live by.   Sexual predators are going to be sexual predators no matter what they see or don't see. I have had encounters with them throughout my life and have heard of firsthand accounts of them; clothing or lack of clothing or nudity is not the issue. Blaming the victim is not the answer, blaming females for being a female is not the answer. Female children are part of society, they see it, they experience it, they see the sexualisation of women, they hear the conversations of blaming the female... How can they have any power to tell us they are getting bad vibes or have been hurt by someone if society is constantly telling/showing them that they are an object that is used and abused. Children are not idiots they can see that there is a double standard at a very young age in that males can have bare chests while they cannot. As they age they internalize society’s verbal diarrhea that they have to hide their chests, and they know why, because their chests are sex objects in the eyes of society. Most parents in our society are now so concerned about letting kids have any freedom whatsoever, they are never allowed to roam alone for fear of predators when all the statistics don't and never did support their fear. Micro managing our children and suppressing equality for fear of exploitation by strangers is over hyped and fear mongering. More often than not predators are the people you know who betray yours and their trust. Arm your children with trust to confide in you, confidence and freedom; not fear, shame and captivity.   "

This post is the most valid post of the entire discussion, thank you for sharing.

..should have been handled much differently. The lifeguard should have asked the child to direct her to her guardian and explain the pool policies to the adult and let the adult rectify the situation as they see fit. But I also think the guardian should not have allowed the child to go topless in the first place then none of this would have happened.  
 
If the top was on in the first place none of this would have happened. ..but then I wouldn't have had the privilege to have this stimulating debate with Nordberg.

You really are missing the point, read what the woman wrote that I just quoted, take time to understand it, then you should stop posting you're nonsense, just because you want to have a debate with Nordberg.

Nordberg said "    GreenDragon said "..should have been handled much differently. The lifeguard should have asked the child to direct her to her guardian and explain the pool policies to the adult and let the adult rectify the situation as they see fit. But I also think the guardian should not have allowed the child to go topless in the first place then none of this would have happened.     If the top was on in the first place none of this would have happened. ..but then I wouldn't have had the privilege to have this stimulating debate with Nordberg. " What I am saying is that had the City of Guelph obeyed the law and properly educated their staff, they would not have the [b]illegal[/b] rule and the staff member would not have approached the parents in the first place.     There may be a rule written down, but it doesn't actually exist because the City of Guelph overstepped its authority.     If the city had followed the law, this whole thing wouldn't have happened. "

Does the law specify an age or does it state all females? What is the exact wording?  
 
Now let's say the law isn't specific to age, then is it all encompassing? Does it state that the law exists everywhere? Or just every public location? Can me and my daughter sit down at sushi hut and dribble wasabi on our bare breasts? What are the limitations? Does this law stand in a public pool or just at the beach? I'd like to read this and see what the exact wording is.  
 
But regardless, even if it's all legit, I still wholly disagree with it.  
 

The law states that topless is not indecent exposure, now businesses have the right to turn down service to topless individuals, but say the business serves topless males, they would legally have to serve topless females as well or a equality law suite could ensue.  
 
Ps. I laughed at the wasabi tidbit haha.  
 
Edited by 4thepeople, 2015-06-25 17:15:08

4thepeople said "The law states that topless is not indecent exposure, now businesses have the right to turn down service to topless individuals, but say the business serves topless males, they would legally have to serve topless females as well or a equality law suite could ensue.     Ps. I laughed at the wasabi tidbit haha.     Edited by 4thepeople, 2015-06-25 17:15:08"

Does anyone have a link to the actual written law?

https://www.fcn.ca/about-naturism/legal-issues/naturism-and-canadian-law  
 
is the criminal code, for a easier understanding of what it means tho because it doesn't define, follow this link:  
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topfreedom_in_Canada#Law

When they refer to nude in the first link, after the trial in Guelph, they are referring to you're downstairs.

GreenDragon said "    Nordberg said "    GreenDragon said "..should have been handled much differently. The lifeguard should have asked the child to direct her to her guardian and explain the pool policies to the adult and let the adult rectify the situation as they see fit. But I also think the guardian should not have allowed the child to go topless in the first place then none of this would have happened.     If the top was on in the first place none of this would have happened. ..but then I wouldn't have had the privilege to have this stimulating debate with Nordberg. " What I am saying is that had the City of Guelph obeyed the law and properly educated their staff, they would not have the [b]illegal[/b] rule and the staff member would not have approached the parents in the first place.     There may be a rule written down, but it doesn't actually exist because the City of Guelph overstepped its authority.     If the city had followed the law, this whole thing wouldn't have happened. " Does the law specify an age or does it state all females? What is the exact wording?     Now let's say the law isn't specific to age, then is it all encompassing? Does it state that the law exists everywhere? Or just every public location? Can me and my daughter sit down at sushi hut and dribble wasabi on our bare breasts? What are the limitations? Does this law stand in a public pool or just at the beach? I'd like to read this and see what the exact wording is.     But regardless, even if it's all legit, I still wholly disagree with it.     "

Nordberg already posed a clip from the law and i believe it said women (which includes girls) can go topless anywhere boys can, so at a restaurant no, because boys are not allowed either but at the pool boys are allowed and encouraged too so YES regardless of what the pool rules say it is illegal for them to discriminate  
 
as for putting this girl at risk to predators i would say likely she has the confidence and trust in her parents and herself that would help protect her against predators, something girls who have been body shamed wont  
 
oh and i always wondered how things will change if everyone is scared to be the one to make a spectial lol

traveller said "    GreenDragon said "    Nordberg said "    GreenDragon said "..should have been handled much differently. The lifeguard should have asked the child to direct her to her guardian and explain the pool policies to the adult and let the adult rectify the situation as they see fit. But I also think the guardian should not have allowed the child to go topless in the first place then none of this would have happened.     If the top was on in the first place none of this would have happened. ..but then I wouldn't have had the privilege to have this stimulating debate with Nordberg. " What I am saying is that had the City of Guelph obeyed the law and properly educated their staff, they would not have the [b]illegal[/b] rule and the staff member would not have approached the parents in the first place.     There may be a rule written down, but it doesn't actually exist because the City of Guelph overstepped its authority.     If the city had followed the law, this whole thing wouldn't have happened. " Does the law specify an age or does it state all females? What is the exact wording?     Now let's say the law isn't specific to age, then is it all encompassing? Does it state that the law exists everywhere? Or just every public location? Can me and my daughter sit down at sushi hut and dribble wasabi on our bare breasts? What are the limitations? Does this law stand in a public pool or just at the beach? I'd like to read this and see what the exact wording is.     But regardless, even if it's all legit, I still wholly disagree with it.     " Nordberg already posed a clip from the law and i believe it said women (which includes girls) can go topless anywhere boys can, so at a restaurant no, because boys are not allowed either but at the pool boys are allowed and encouraged too so YES regardless of what the pool rules say it is illegal for them to discriminate     as for putting this girl at risk to predators i would say likely she has the confidence and trust in her parents and herself that would help protect her against predators, something girls who have been body shamed wont     oh and i always wondered how things will change if everyone is scared to be the one to make a spectial lol "

Well maybe he can repost that piece because everything I just read is incredibly vague and states that you can be charged for indecent exposure, though many, but not all, charges are eventually dropped.  
 
As for having trusting that this girl has the confidence and trust in her parents and herself that would protect against predators, don't count on it. Most girls aren't given a choice, but forced to succumb to abuse without their consent.  
 
Lastly, you're right, the only way to make a change like this is for someone to be the one to make a spectacle. BUT.. let the spectacle be made of an adult, NOT a child! If adult women all swam topless, and did so for a number of years, it would be old hat, then the kids could join in and it would just be the norm, society would be accustomed to it, and all would be well! ..I just have an issue with parents encouraging kids to do this when it is NOT the norm and they will be made a spectacle of, and endangered!!!

where do you get that most girls are forced? i dont think thats the case i think most girls are coursed or groomed into doing things with people they trust and then end up believing they should keep it a secret where it has been studied that if a girl has a good relationship with her family and confidence she will not be as prone to be groomed, she will have the CONFIDENCE to say NO i dont want to this is wrong and also if it does happen go immediately to her family and tell, not be abused for years believing the abuser  
 
i would agree with you that adults could be the ones to change society's attitudes but more people would have an issue with an 18 year old girl going to the pool topless where as except the pool segregated the girl not many would have even noticed since she was 8 and acting just like her brothers  
 
I do wonder if the girl actually knew what she was getting into tho, the parents acted like it is normal for her but i remember at 9 making a stand at my school about equality much to my parents dismay, and i certainly knew the risks, talked them over with my parents and decided to go for it anyway, if this girl choose to do that i would fully support my 8 or 18 year old

Well done OP! I completely agree with you, most children, boys and girls really are coursed into sexual situations with people that they trust. Great parenting, informing a child on what to do in these situations and like you said, above all, confidence would definitely go a long ways to ensuring an abusive situation either didn't occur or at least wasn't prolonged.  
 
I don't see any actual law in place though that states that females may go topless, all I see is a lot of charges that were dropped because the girls/women didn't expose themselves in a sexual manner.  
 
The pool lifeguard was perfectly within their right to request that the child cover up, though I think they could have gone about it differently so as not to cause embarrassment to the child.  
 
Supporting an adult to take a stance on equality is one thing, I'd do the same actually. However, supporting (encouraging) a minor child to take her top off in public could be a case for CFS. I just don't think society is ready for this just yet, and not all children are very confident, nor do they know what to do if they find themselves prey to a sexually abusive person. I could see children getting hurt this way. I'd really much rather have adults be the first ones to change societies viewpoint on public nudity.

Nordberg said "    GreenDragon said "Well done OP! I completely agree with you, most children, boys and girls really are coursed into sexual situations with people that they trust. Great parenting, informing a child on what to do in these situations and like you said, above all, confidence would definitely go a long ways to ensuring an abusive situation either didn't occur or at least wasn't prolonged.     I don't see any actual law in place though that states that females may go topless, all I see is a lot of charges that were dropped because the girls/women didn't expose themselves in a sexual manner.     The pool lifeguard was perfectly within their right to request that the child cover up, though I think they could have gone about it differently so as not to cause embarrassment to the child.     Supporting an adult to take a stance on equality is one thing, I'd do the same actually. However, supporting (encouraging) a minor child to take her top off in public could be a case for CFS. I just don't think society is ready for this just yet, and not all children are very confident, nor do they know what to do if they find themselves prey to a sexually abusive person. I could see children getting hurt this way. I'd really much rather have adults be the first ones to change societies viewpoint on public nudity. "   You say: [i]The pool lifeguard was perfectly within their right to request that the child cover up, though I think they could have gone about it differently so as not to cause embarrassment to the child. [/i]     No they were not. Again, the law says they were not. The lifeguard overstepped. "

There is no law in place for public nudity.

GreenDragon said "Well done OP! I completely agree with you, most children, boys and girls really are coursed into sexual situations with people that they trust. Great parenting, informing a child on what to do in these situations and like you said, above all, confidence would definitely go a long ways to ensuring an abusive situation either didn't occur or at least wasn't prolonged.     I don't see any actual law in place though that states that females may go topless, all I see is a lot of charges that were dropped because the girls/women didn't expose themselves in a sexual manner.     The pool lifeguard was perfectly within their right to request that the child cover up, though I think they could have gone about it differently so as not to cause embarrassment to the child.     Supporting an adult to take a stance on equality is one thing, I'd do the same actually. However, supporting (encouraging) a minor child to take her top off in public could be a case for CFS. I just don't think society is ready for this just yet, and not all children are very confident, nor do they know what to do if they find themselves prey to a sexually abusive person. I could see children getting hurt this way. I'd really much rather have adults be the first ones to change societies viewpoint on public nudity. "

there does not have to be a law stating that women can do something men can do just no law against it, and topless charges has gone to the courts and the courts dropped the charges because a woman going topless is not sexual in itself which has been said already  
 
 
i also see no issue with children being part of the change in society, i dont believe it puts them at greater risk, that notion is in everyones head and imo its time to challange our own sexist thinking and look at it the way it really is, just a child playing at the pool, if we do that then soon enough we wont even notice, just like all the other clothing changes women have pushed for

Let's put your money where your mouth is.  
 
Saturday, 2:00pm at the East end outdoor public swimming pool, all those who agree with exposing children's breasts to the public, bring your daughter's, bring your nieces, bring your female prepubescent cousins, remove their tops and let 'em go. If you're right, all will be well, if I'm right, children will pay for it with their innocence for the rest of their lives.  
 
Who's with me?!  
 
Personally I see nothing wrong with modesty.

Anyone living in our society who continues to argue that women's breasts are not sexualized is either willfully naive or so blinded by their own political agenda that they aren't actually living among realists.  
 
Right or wrong, in North American society, women's breasts are sexualized and anyone willing to place their daughter in a sexualized situation just to make a point should be ashamed of themselves - even if the letter of the law says they can.

Nordberg said "    GreenDragon said "    Nordberg said "    GreenDragon said "Well done OP! I completely agree with you, most children, boys and girls really are coursed into sexual situations with people that they trust. Great parenting, informing a child on what to do in these situations and like you said, above all, confidence would definitely go a long ways to ensuring an abusive situation either didn't occur or at least wasn't prolonged.     I don't see any actual law in place though that states that females may go topless, all I see is a lot of charges that were dropped because the girls/women didn't expose themselves in a sexual manner.     The pool lifeguard was perfectly within their right to request that the child cover up, though I think they could have gone about it differently so as not to cause embarrassment to the child.     Supporting an adult to take a stance on equality is one thing, I'd do the same actually. However, supporting (encouraging) a minor child to take her top off in public could be a case for CFS. I just don't think society is ready for this just yet, and not all children are very confident, nor do they know what to do if they find themselves prey to a sexually abusive person. I could see children getting hurt this way. I'd really much rather have adults be the first ones to change societies viewpoint on public nudity. "   You say: [i]The pool lifeguard was perfectly within their right to request that the child cover up, though I think they could have gone about it differently so as not to cause embarrassment to the child. [/i]     No they were not. Again, the law says they were not. The lifeguard overstepped. " There is no law in place for public nudity. " Because the court has said that you cannot make such a law. They have overturned the law that made a woman going top-free illegal.     You really just don't understand how the law works. "

See you at the pool then.

If ladies breast are not sexy, why they make so much money out of showing it in their movies, in their advertisements and everywhere that they can make money. Almost 90% of movies shows women's upper part as a sexual thing! their talk about sizes and so on. at attract more viewers. Women have been fight for their freedom, but freedom does mean showing all your body to everybody. as a woman I want freedom, respect and equality with men, but equality does not mean I need to free myself out of clothes. I do not respect a woman who show her breast in public. I am sure many men enjoy seeing topless women , but they really respect them? I do not think so. Women's wants to have the same equality at work place, but really do they still have it 100%. No they do not. Women wants respect and equality at home, without domestic violence. Do they have it ? There are still many women that are subject to violence right here in Canada. If you men are so concern about women's equity be concern about women that educated as same as men, in a men field but they still are not considered as equal.  
They say, women's breast are not sexy, but they are the first one looking and try to Guess their size.  
I do not have a daughter but if I had, I never wanted her to show her top to everybody to see and I do not want to see other women's breast in public. It is disgusting. I proud of my body and myself, but does mean I need go around streets topless to know every body know I proud of my body.

For some reason I could not edit my comment, there are spelling error and other errors, but I can not go to edit button and fix it. Sorry folks. Some parts got funny with errors lol

Deb1 said "For some reason I could not edit my comment, there are spelling error and other errors, but I can not go to edit button and fix it. Sorry folks. Some parts got funny with errors lol "

No worries Deb1 you got your message across loud and clear and I completely agree with you. This is not about spelling or grammar or anything in between. This is about kids and nudity and I'm pretty sure there should be laws against it if there aren't already.  
 
I'm also very sure there will be no nudity at the pool this Saturday. haha None of these people would ever actually expose young girl's breasts even though they vehemently argue that it's completely fine to.  
 
hahaha

If you don't like the word "modest" then change it to "professional".... Professional ladies do not go around flashing their boobs. That's a clear fact in our society - if you want to get fired from your job, flash your boobs. Right or wrong IT DOESN"T MATTER because that's just how things work.  
 
Notice, before you jump down my throat, that I did not state my opinion anywhere in this post - I simply stated how the world works right now. It might be different in the future, who knows.

What are the laws regarding kids and nudity?  
 
Gotta be something on this. Anyone know?

GreenDragon said "Let's put your money where your mouth is.     Saturday, 2:00pm at the East end outdoor public swimming pool, all those who agree with exposing children's breasts to the public, bring your daughter's, bring your nieces, bring your female prepubescent cousins, remove their tops and let 'em go. If you're right, all will be well, if I'm right, children will pay for it with their innocence for the rest of their lives.     Who's with me?!     Personally I see nothing wrong with modesty. "

What i am getting from this challenge is to force females to go topless to prove whether being topless is harmful or not....  
 
Well the way i see it forcing anyone to do anything that they do not already want to do would be damaging.  
 
The same logic would apply to sexual preference... if you force someone who is heterosexual to perform homosexual acts to prove that they are not psychologically harmful would defeat the point, the damage is done in the forcing.  
 
If a person (young, old, white, black, homosexual, heterosexual, trangender, etc) chooses to do something, and they are self confident enough to to it, who is to complain, as long as what they do is in the scope of the law.  
 
By some peoples logic in this discussion, if I am offended by seeing a homosexual couple kiss each other in public (legal) i can complain about it.... wait a second that's discrimination based on sexual preference (illegal), just like forcing a female to cover up her top in a public place where males are allowed to go topless is illegal especially in Guelph where this happened.  
 
And blaming females for males actions is rape culture.  
 
for fun lets reverse a situation....  
a male is wearing a tank top (aka muscle shirt) isn't he just asking for people to pile heavy objects on him because he is dressed 'that way'?  
 
Just because a female is wearing (or not wearing) certain clothes does not change her status as a human and deserving of equal rights. No one is forcing males to remove their shirts, no one is forcing females to remove their shirts, it is a choice to go topless or not.

anonymous11111 said "    GreenDragon said "Let's put your money where your mouth is.     Saturday, 2:00pm at the East end outdoor public swimming pool, all those who agree with exposing children's breasts to the public, bring your daughter's, bring your nieces, bring your female prepubescent cousins, remove their tops and let 'em go. If you're right, all will be well, if I'm right, children will pay for it with their innocence for the rest of their lives.     Who's with me?!     Personally I see nothing wrong with modesty. " What i am getting from this challenge is to force females to go topless to prove whether being topless is harmful or not....     Well the way i see it forcing anyone to do anything that they do not already want to do would be damaging.     The same logic would apply to sexual preference... if you force someone who is heterosexual to perform homosexual acts to prove that they are not psychologically harmful would defeat the point, the damage is done in the forcing.     If a person (young, old, white, black, homosexual, heterosexual, trangender, etc) chooses to do something, and they are self confident enough to to it, who is to complain, as long as what they do is in the scope of the law.     By some peoples logic in this discussion, if I am offended by seeing a homosexual couple kiss each other in public (legal) i can complain about it.... wait a second that's discrimination based on sexual preference (illegal), just like forcing a female to cover up her top in a public place where males are allowed to go topless is illegal especially in Guelph where this happened.     And blaming females for males actions is rape culture.     for fun lets reverse a situation....   a male is wearing a tank top (aka muscle shirt) isn't he just asking for people to pile heavy objects on him because he is dressed 'that way'?     Just because a female is wearing (or not wearing) certain clothes does not change her status as a human and deserving of equal rights. No one is forcing males to remove their shirts, no one is forcing females to remove their shirts, it is a choice to go topless or not. "

ahhh I wasn't even serious about that dare. Just used it to prove a point. That nobody involved in this conversation would actually remove girl's tops in a public pool. They're just full of hot air. All show and no go.  
 
What is in the scope of the law? What does the law say about children and nudity? I'd sure like to know..

I have a daughter under 10. I would and have allowed her to go topless for the purpose of running through a sprinkler or jumping in a kiddie pool when we didn't have the appropriate clothes because we weren't at home. I would also allow her to go topless at a pool, although she wouldn't want to. She has no breasts, and looks exactly the same as her male cousins when they are running around in just shorts. I wouldn't allow it once she gets breasts, not because I think it's wrong, but because people like you would likely cause a scene. Also, she wouldn't be comfortable going topless once she first gets breasts, because she'll be uncomfortable with her body like all teens are. If she wants to go topless when she's older, that's her decision. At 8 she fully understands that her body will be changing in a few years, and she also understands that currently her "breasts" are nothing but nipples, just like her male cousins. I certainly would never force her to go topless, but if she wants to so she can participate in an unexpected jump in the pool, I'm not going to tell her she can't. Se currently has nothing up there in need of covering.  
 
I think you have an unhealthy and exaggerated idea of perverts and pedophiles in your head.