Another hypothetical question

Great comment Muttley!

Emmy_bug wrote (see)

 For me - if i'm going out where others will see me  -i'll not wear a bikini but if it's in the privacy of my garden - i would....

is that not the wrong way round?

i would have thought you would prefer to cover up by wearing a bikini when going out.

Dark Vader wrote (see)

This has come up before...  along the same lines as why women are comfortable about wearing a skimpy bikini yet scream if someone catches them in their bra and pants...

 

It's the context - I'll wear a bikini at a beach or swimming pool, but not at the shops.

If I was at home in my underwear, I would put some clothes on if someone knocked at the door.

If one of my male friends saw me in my underwear I wouldn't scream (nor would I if it were a stranger), but I would probably feel a bit uncomfortable because underwear is normally kept out of sight.

Most blokes wouldn't walk around the shops in their swimming trunks, and I think most would put some clothes on to answer the front door rather than do so in just their underpants.

Sadly not all of them Wilkie.  I popped round to drop off some stuff for a client a few years ago and he answered the door in his undercrackers.  They were greying white saggy boxers.  He is a large sort of chap with ample boobage.  It was not a very pleasant end to the day .  I find it hard to erase that image when he comes into the office now, the brain bleach doesn't seem to work.

This has got me to thinking, I will happily wear a pair of shorts and lycra vest when out running but I would not wear them to go shopping in. At the same tip, the co op is close enough to the prom that I'd happily pop in for a bottle of water after a run. So whose to say that it's not wrong to pop in in my bikini for a bottle of water if I'm spending the day on the beach. ( I don't think I would)

Do we set the same standards foe children? There are plenty of young ones to be seen walking around in their swimsuit going to and from the beach while the adults are fully clothed.

Not that that has anything to do with moobs.

Personally, I think it's the sexualisation issue. Female boobs generate a different reaction to male boobs. Typically phwoar! versus 

And just as an aside - male + boobs = moobs

So why doesn't female + boobs = foobs?

"Boob" is a 1950's shortening of "booby", which in the 1930's came from "bubby". Linguists aren't sure, but "bubby" may derive from the German "Bübbi" which means 'teat'.

Apprently accoring to some expert on Yahoo Answers

Actaully just found another 'expert' sourse thatr says the same thing

I googled it too - some of the results were not quite what I was looking for!

This is what I found:

"breasts," 1929, U.S. slang, probably from much older term boobies (late 17c.), related to 17c. bubby, perhaps ultimately from L. puppa, lit. "little girl," hence, in child-talk, "breast," or a natural formation in English (cf. Fr. poupe "teat," Ger. dial. Bubbi, etc.).

I'm guessing that 'puppies' has a similar root?

I prefer puppies 

So much for the serious discussion then!

 I think Man Melons is a far better term than moobs. 

Or gentleman jugs.

Boy balloons?

Once I read somewhere of how in cultures where being naked or semi-naked is or was the norm, what is appropiate interms of sexual or non-sexual behaviour is purely contextual and more openly discussed. After all if she is alway topless and he only ever wears a loin cloth how do you know if the other wants sex, the washing done, or dinner?. I would even go as far as to suggest the reasons for wearing clothes is in part to reduce such confusion.

We all know though that clearly this has not worked.

Thats why it could to talk.

Ask its only polite

A nice pair of tits

 A couple of bangers. 

Googling "hooters" wasn't such a good idea!