I don’t know which comment chain would be most appropriate to post this as a reply to, but I’d like to believe that for both genders, topless pretty much requires all of the breast tissue, including the nipples, to be exposed.
There was a time in this country when men were required to cover their chests in public. Should it ever come to pass that the prudes among us get that going again, male topless registration might mean something. As it is, nude and bottomless are almost the same thing for a man. Can a man who is registered nude wear a shirt? All his bits are showing.
No, permanently naked men can’t wear a shirt, at least not for a regular registration. With a “relaxed” registration, it could perhaps get into some complicated territory like with topless men. But since the in-world justification for bottomless is to have something distinct from permanent nudity so it can readily be identified as a punishment, presumably they would make sure that even with a relaxed registration, no one could dress the same as someone bottomless.
My thinking is that topless only requiring that “the important bits are showing” is the rule, not the exception, but of course some places could be stricter.
Both good questions. For the first one, I’d say probably so. This is one reason sometimes given for the strict registration, to make sure you can stay completely naked. I’m not sure if I’ve ever had a caption mentioning a strict topless registration, but presumably it would be an option in some places.
On the second one, I think I’ve done only a single caption about a permanently topless man, and it pointed out that it was unusual, so this is probably something obscure enough that the laws aren’t very consistent. It might be that some places don’t allow men to register topless, since obviously they can generally speaking, go topless anyway. Where it is allowed, important bits would probably either by just the nipples (or nipples and areola), or some vaguely defined “breast area” that doesn’t really make a whole lot of sense on a man since they law written with women in mind.
If someone did write a permanently topless law specifically with including men in mind, what do you think it should count?
I don’t know which comment chain would be most appropriate to post this as a reply to, but I’d like to believe that for both genders, topless pretty much requires all of the breast tissue, including the nipples, to be exposed.
There was a time in this country when men were required to cover their chests in public. Should it ever come to pass that the prudes among us get that going again, male topless registration might mean something. As it is, nude and bottomless are almost the same thing for a man. Can a man who is registered nude wear a shirt? All his bits are showing.
No, permanently naked men can’t wear a shirt, at least not for a regular registration. With a “relaxed” registration, it could perhaps get into some complicated territory like with topless men. But since the in-world justification for bottomless is to have something distinct from permanent nudity so it can readily be identified as a punishment, presumably they would make sure that even with a relaxed registration, no one could dress the same as someone bottomless.
I don’t see a problem here. She’s got all of the nice curves and pink bits out for everyone to enjoy. She can bring me a refilled beer stein anytime.
My thinking is that topless only requiring that “the important bits are showing” is the rule, not the exception, but of course some places could be stricter.
Would that mean that a business could require employees to wear tops, just not cover their bits?
They can enforce uniforms on clothed people, so…
Also, what does “important bits” mean for a topless guy?
Both good questions. For the first one, I’d say probably so. This is one reason sometimes given for the strict registration, to make sure you can stay completely naked. I’m not sure if I’ve ever had a caption mentioning a strict topless registration, but presumably it would be an option in some places.
On the second one, I think I’ve done only a single caption about a permanently topless man, and it pointed out that it was unusual, so this is probably something obscure enough that the laws aren’t very consistent. It might be that some places don’t allow men to register topless, since obviously they can generally speaking, go topless anyway. Where it is allowed, important bits would probably either by just the nipples (or nipples and areola), or some vaguely defined “breast area” that doesn’t really make a whole lot of sense on a man since they law written with women in mind.
If someone did write a permanently topless law specifically with including men in mind, what do you think it should count?