NationStates Jolt Archive

A Florida town is facing the divisive issue of whether or not a mermaid statue should have nipples. I don't envy them this difficult decision.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/opinion/content/local_news/epaper/2006/03/22/s1b_bino_col_0322.html

It's a difficult problem. If you go to the sculpture gallery at chatsworth you'll clearly see that women have no genitalia, yet men do.

I imagine the confusion stems from that.

It should have them...its natural and its not erotic.

Nipples in public???

Think of the children, somebody please think of the children!!!

Yes, the original mermaid statue has them.

It should have them...its natural and its not erotic.
Well merkids hatch from eggs and don't need milk, so are mermaid nipples really natural?

" Gitzen is reluctant to "de-nipple her," as he puts it.

"I'd rather put a bathing suit on her than take the nipples off," the artist said.

He feels that now his statue is complete. Meanwhile, he started a Save The Nipples petition, and in one day at its temporary site, he collected about 400 signatures. "

Oh no, this is tricky toss-up.

Nipples in public???

Think of the children, somebody please think of the children!!!
Thinking of the children's nipples is wrong.

Thinking of the children's nipples is wrong.

Lolicon. XD

Though the Little Mermaid wore a bra...and the tales suggest woman is on top, fish on bottom....so yes.

Well, if you're unsure about that - just put on a couple of sea shells and all is fine!

http://www.shira.net/art/hawes4-mermaid.jpg

(Although I would definitely vote for nipples - boobies simply need nipples to look good!)
This statue has'em - just imagine it without and the choice ought to be clear:
http://www.artmetallic.com/images/Garden%20Art/Mermaid%20with%20conch%2082%20x%20104%20x%2086%20P219.jpg

A mermaid could do perfectly well without nipples. Of course if the statue is supposed to be a somewhat realistic (in as far as possible) half fish-half woman chimera, then depending on which half is woman, it should have nipples.

Nipples in public???

Think of the children, somebody please think of the children!!!

Are you serious? Not more of that 'oh horror, kids seeing someone not wearing a starched chin-high collar' bullshit. They spent their first two years SUCKING on them, and by the age of 12 or so they're fantasizing about sucking on them for an entirely different reason (well, ~56% of them at least), so what's the big deal? It's like saying noses are indecent - it's just a part of anatomy. This is no better than PC - instead of political correctness, its TC, traditional correctness. The parents are more shocked and offended than the kids are, by a wide margin.

I think so; I mean, there's a pretty clear demarcation between the "fish" part and the human part...although that begs the question of how they reproduce?

It's about an already finished statue. With bare breasts larger than its head... And they're worried about the nipples..

http://img.coxnewsweb.com/B/01/21/54/image_1754211.jpg

Arielesque.

It's about an already finished statue. With bare breasts larger than its head... And they're worried about the nipples..

http://img.coxnewsweb.com/B/01/21/54/image_1754211.jpg
Well, yeah. The nipples are the naughty bits. The rest of the breast is wholesome family entertainment.

It's about an already finished statue. With bare breasts larger than its head... And they're worried about the nipples..

http://img.coxnewsweb.com/B/01/21/54/image_1754211.jpg

Jeeze....crybabys!

It's about an already finished statue. With bare breasts larger than its head... And they're worried about the nipples..

http://img.coxnewsweb.com/B/01/21/54/image_1754211.jpg

Wow. I'm gay, and I can respect breasts that ginormous.

She's got huge....tracts of land!

It's about an already finished statue. With bare breasts larger than its head... And they're worried about the nipples..

http://img.coxnewsweb.com/B/01/21/54/image_1754211.jpg

They're a pair of tits. Everyone has nipples. Almost everyone has them, its not a big deal. I say that they should leave them on and stop trying to censor anything.


EDIT.

WELL APPARENTLY I DIDNT CLICK THE PICTURE....THOSE ARE SOME GAT's...(GIANT ASS TITTIES.)

Wow. I'm gay, and I can respect breasts that ginormous.

She's got huge....tracts of land!

Even if I was gay, I'd still like it, cause its art. Not cause of the boobs. Are you seriously going to be excited by a statue of the little mermaid!?

Even if I was gay, I'd still like it, cause its art. Not cause of the boobs. Are you seriously going to be excited by a statue of the little mermaid!?

I said respect, not be - excited - by. It was humor, anyway. Geez.

:headbang:

Are you serious? Not more of that 'oh horror, kids seeing someone not wearing a starched chin-high collar' bullshit. They spent their first two years SUCKING on them, and by the age of 12 or so they're fantasizing about sucking on them for an entirely different reason (well, ~56% of them at least), so what's the big deal? It's like saying noses are indecent - it's just a part of anatomy. This is no better than PC - instead of political correctness, its TC, traditional correctness. The parents are more shocked and offended than the kids are, by a wide margin.
He was being sarcastic, dummy.

Are you serious? Not more of that 'oh horror, kids seeing someone not wearing a starched chin-high collar' bullshit. They spent their first two years SUCKING on them, and by the age of 12 or so they're fantasizing about sucking on them for an entirely different reason (well, ~56% of them at least), so what's the big deal? It's like saying noses are indecent - it's just a part of anatomy. This is no better than PC - instead of political correctness, its TC, traditional correctness. The parents are more shocked and offended than the kids are, by a wide margin.
its sarcasm (and a simpsons quote)

Nipples in public???

Think of the children, somebody please think of the children!!!
you know it freaks out my kids that Barbie has breasts but no nipples and that she has a butt crack but no vulva.........

so, I say yeah, put the nipples on the mermaid

think of the children!

This is what's funny to me. Men and women both have nipples, but only women have breasts. You are allowed to see breasts as long as you don't see nipples in the US which is why many prime time shows can get away with tiny bathing suits or just about any kind of dress that obscures the nipple. Here's my curiosity on the issue. If the nipples are the problem, why aren't men's nipples covered or pixelated or something on television and in public?

This is what's funny to me. Men and women both have nipples, but only women have breasts. You are allowed to see breasts as long as you don't see nipples in the US which is why many prime time shows can get away with tiny bathing suits or just about any kind of dress that obscures the nipple. Here's my curiosity on the issue. If the nipples are the problem, why aren't men's nipples covered or pixelated or something on television and in public?
maybe because women's nipples are multi purpose..........okay, probably not.

I never could figure out why men have nipples anyway:confused:

This is what's funny to me. Men and women both have nipples, but only women have breasts. You are allowed to see breasts as long as you don't see nipples in the US which is why many prime time shows can get away with tiny bathing suits or just about any kind of dress that obscures the nipple. Here's my curiosity on the issue. If the nipples are the problem, why aren't men's nipples covered or pixelated or something on television and in public?
Because men make the rules (and rightly so) and men aren't turned on by men's nipples. Male nipples aren't sexual, therefore they can be shown without corrupting the youth.

As long as the area where the "fishiness" begins is clearly below the breasts, there should naturally be nipples, if it is truly half human.

you know it freaks out my kids that Barbie has breasts but no nipples and that she has a butt crack but no vulva.........

so, I say yeah, put the nipples on the mermaid

think of the children!

Exactly! By having things anatomically incorrect, people are just confusing the poor kids.

Besides, it's not like they've never seen them before, and won't see them again.

Nipples won't be the end of the free world. In fact, the only reason there's any fuss at all is because the prudes are making a fuss.

Also, considering the... bust size... of that statue, I really don't think two little nipples are going to matter that much.

Exactly! By having things anatomically incorrect, people are just confusing the poor kids.

Besides, it's not like they've never seen them before, and won't see them again.
heck, they even have a pair of their own, if seeing some freaks them out you gotta worry about what you are doing to your kids (and how exactly they take a bath without a panic attack)

maybe because women's nipples are multi purpose..........okay, probably not.

I never could figure out why men have nipples anyway:confused:

You're homeschooling so I hope you're joking.

Exactly! By having things anatomically incorrect, people are just confusing the poor kids.

Besides, it's not like they've never seen them before, and won't see them again.

Nipples won't be the end of the free world. In fact, the only reason there's any fuss at all is because the prudes are making a fuss.

Also, considering the... bust size... of that statue, I really don't think two little nipples are going to matter that much.

LMAO, That reminds me of the quite anatomically correct doll in the movie "Grandma's Boy." Anyone seen that? Yeah.

You're homeschooling so I hope you're joking.
half way........do they serve a purpose though (I mean other than decoration) really, they can't nurse, so why do they have them?

even the penis is multi purpose........

Edit: I just realized that I didn't explain the "half way", I know scientifically why they have them, I just think it's fun to try to figure out why evolution-wise they still have them when they are useless, I guess though the answer is that they aren't harming them so it takes too many resources to get rid of them when they could be improving something else (forgive me for my simple-ness I am dealing with preschoolers when I talk about this stuff though)

Are you serious? Not more of that 'oh horror, kids seeing someone not wearing a starched chin-high collar' bullshit. They spent their first two years SUCKING on them, and by the age of 12 or so they're fantasizing about sucking on them for an entirely different reason (well, ~56% of them at least), so what's the big deal? It's like saying noses are indecent - it's just a part of anatomy. This is no better than PC - instead of political correctness, its TC, traditional correctness. The parents are more shocked and offended than the kids are, by a wide margin.

I think your sarcasm detector is off. Turn it on please. ;)

half way........do they serve a purpose though (I mean other than decoration) really, they can't nurse, so why do they have them?

even the penis is multi purpose........

Edit: I just realized that I didn't explain the "half way", I know scientifically why they have them, I just think it's fun to try to figure out why evolution-wise they still have them when they are useless, I guess though the answer is that they aren't harming them so it takes too many resources to get rid of them when they could be improving something else (forgive me for my simple-ness I am dealing with preschoolers when I talk about this stuff though)

Think of genetics. If men didn't have them, what would be the chances of mating and having a girl that didn't have them?

Never mind that fact there have been cases of men that could produce milk. :eek:

half way........do they serve a purpose though (I mean other than decoration) really, they can't nurse, so why do they have them?

even the penis is multi purpose........

Edit: I just realized that I didn't explain the "half way", I know scientifically why they have them, I just think it's fun to try to figure out why evolution-wise they still have them when they are useless, I guess though the answer is that they aren't harming them so it takes too many resources to get rid of them when they could be improving something else (forgive me for my simple-ness I am dealing with preschoolers when I talk about this stuff though)

Would it be an advantage not to have them? I imagine it'd freak out a few possible sexual partners....

half way........do they serve a purpose though (I mean other than decoration) really, they can't nurse, so why do they have them?

even the penis is multi purpose........

Edit: I just realized that I didn't explain the "half way", I know scientifically why they have them, I just think it's fun to try to figure out why evolution-wise they still have them when they are useless, I guess though the answer is that they aren't harming them so it takes too many resources to get rid of them when they could be improving something else (forgive me for my simple-ness I am dealing with preschoolers when I talk about this stuff though)

That's actually pretty accurate. There's no reason for them to disappear and they occur before sexual differentiation. It's kind of like the fact that the genetalia is the same at one point as well. We technically have all the same parts in that way.

Breasts are way overrated, even more than capitalism and rock music. Hips, butts, and thighs are way better and mermaids don't have those.

Breasts are way overrated, even more than capitalism and rock music. Hips, butts, and thighs are way better and mermaids don't have those.


Butts not so much, but hips... [drools]

Breasts are way overrated, even more than capitalism and rock music. Hips, butts, and thighs are way better and mermaids don't have those.
So now Communists are try to attack, not just American capitalism and culture, but our fetishes as well? Well, I'm not going to have it! You Red Bastards may destroy my property, my country, and my God, but I'll be damned if you make me change the ways in which I objectify the opposite sex.