Having had some exposure to the field of health, what exactly is the
supposed health issue involved with being shirtless? Germs are most
generally spread from either the mouth/nose or the hands, not the torso.
As an extreme example, if you were asked to lick either someone’s finger
or someone’s shoulder, which would you pick? I would have to assume the
shoulder would be cleaner. In a grocery store, people handle produce
without any concern for health issues. Who knows where those hands have
been?
It seems the “health” aspect is being exploited by those who have
prudery issues.
From a fashion standpoint, that would be debatable, as I doubt a woman
wearing the most immodest of bikini tops would be asked to leave a store
as quickly as a man with no shirt on – and the difference between the
two being less than a square foot of cloth.
From a sexual standpoint, however, I believe you would be hitting closer
to home. A man with no shirt lends sexual overtone (from subtle to
overt, depending on your viewpoint) in an environment where torso
coverage is otherwise the norm. Society, despite all its seeming
open-mindedness, does not cope well when confronted with anything which
forces it to recognize sexuality outside of certain predefined
situations — the bedroom, R and X rated movies, certain magazines and
clothing catalogs, etc. And, interestingly enough, it is the visibility
of the man’s nipples that create that sexual overtone.
Generally speaking, no one wants to deal with their feelings of animal
arousal (if they will even admit that) while deciding if they want to
buy spaghetti or linguini.
A shirtless man in a grocery store is an isolated man — except there’s
a heck of a lot more surreptitious attention being paid to him than
anyone else. Most everyone else will build a mental wall around him to
keep him at a safe distance. Interestingly enough, when a person makes
contact with a shirtless man in a grocery store one of two things
happens: (1) that person becomes an outcast (everyone else will build a
mental wall around that person because he/she has left the properly
clothed group — and they’re jealous); or (2) that person puts everyone
else at ease, by acting as a surrogate for the group and neutralizing
the sexuality of the shirtless man.
As for me, I prefer no words be spoken and to let the sexual tension
linger.
Does everybody here agree with that last bold statement? Especially you
str8 guys?
Because I wouldn’t have said so, despite having two pieces of evidence
that could be read in its favor.
1. My gym used to have no problem with me wearing a MalePower shirt
I bought a while ago (and several knock-offs I’d had made) that amounted
to an I-back in front AND back. But some of the women finally
complained to mgt about the bodybuilder types in show-it-all-off string
tanks, specifically mentioning their nipples. And mgt told me —
diffidently but firmly — that the BBs had (fairly) pointed out that
the rule would apply to me, and I’d have to wear more shirt from then
on. (First time in my life I was ever lumped with the bodies beautiful,
I can tell you!)
The actual enforcement situation now, however, seems to be that if a
guy’s shirt skims his nipples that’s close enough. In other words,
flashing is okay, but not flaunting!
2. Some while ago I saw a gay gag greeting card with a gorgeous
shirtles guy on the front (so far we’ve narrowed down the field by
perhaps 10%) and wording something like “Nice nipples!” (They looked OK
to me, although despite my shirtlessness fetish, I’m not a nipple man.)
Inside, it read something like, “Dimples! I meant dimples! Dimples!”
Now, I though that was pretty stupid, on the grounds that once a guy
comments on another guy’s looks at all, he’s pretty well “dropped a
hairpin” with a loud clang! But if nipples are seen by str8 guys TOO as
visual (as well as physical) erogenous zones, whereas dimples are just
good looks, then the card’s joke makes a lot more sense.
I think you may have something in this nipple thing. I have another
example to share.
I work at a large public library that has no dress code other than bland
“professional appearance” or “attire appropriate for the job” type
guidelines.
Some of the younger student types (male and female) like to push this to see
just how much they can get away with. I have seen all manner and color of
hair styles, the shortest skirts imagineable, piercings everywhere, tattoos,
shorts, female belly shirts and male tank tops.
One memorable young man wore a mohawk that reached 2 feet in the air with a
Dennis Rodman color scheme. Nothing was said until his tank tops got to the
point where a side view revealed his nipple rings. This seemed to be the
last straw and the poor lad was “counseled” and we were never again to see
his jewelry. Another young man showed up with just a vest, no shirt with a
hint of nipple showing from the side. He too was “counseled.” I, of
course, would never counsel a young man to wear more clothing, but then
again, I don’t supervise any of them either.
Apparently, new hires are also “counseled” about approriate attire, because
there has not been even a hint of exposed male nipple in a long time…
believe me I watch for this!
I had always equated the male nipple at about the same level of sexuality as
the female navel. Of course now we are seeing all kinds of female navels on
all kinds of bellies everywhere while the male nipple remains taboo. Is
this the result of female clothing liberation or the fact the st8 male
power structure enjoys provocative female attire but suppresses similar
male exposure? Trying to suppress latent homosexual feelings perhaps?
(How’s that for provocative?)