Man who is part of an investment group that buys up Boston dives has a sideline: Trying to open the nation's first topless dispensary

Read the first statement I wrote. That if this pot shop is allowed to have topless women as clerks then they should be allowed to have bottomless men as clerks as well. The reasoning being that for straight men and gay/bi women a woman's breasts can be erotic. Therefore, to avoid discrimination on the basis of sex (specifically sexual desire), the male counterpart to topless women are bottomless men. Emphasis on the bottomless attribute being applied to men, not women.

While I meant the statement with some levity, I do believe that there is a double standard based on sexual objectification if female clerks are required to be topless but no contextual counterpart is required of men. The discrimination is based on the theory that topless women have more erotic charge than topless men.

After all is said and done the idea of topless female clerks is a gimmick. Just like the topless news reporting that came out of Russia, if I remember correctly.

What surprises me is the vehemence behind the disagreement. That is weird to me because the attraction of topless bars is that the women are topless. Nothing else. Or the video trope where a man's eyes are focused on a woman's breasts while he is conversing with the woman. The woman then has to tell the man, "Eyes here," meaning her eyes. For that matter why would a pot shop owner even have the idea? The answer to that question is easy. Sex sells. Women who are naked from the waist up are effectively offered as sex objects for the delectation of customers. I'm thinking particularly of young male customers. The widespread availability of porn does not make the real thing right in front of a young man's nose any less appealing.

To me claiming that a woman bare breasted has no erotic appeal is bs. And the comparison of bare breasted women clerks to bare breasted male clerks is tantamount to a denial of sexism. The sexism being the objectification of women by focusing on their bodies, particularly upon, to use blunt language, a woman's chest as a platform for suspended bouncing boobs.

Or are we, who live in the Boston region, so morally and spiritually superior to the rest of the nation that objectification of women no longer exists here?

As a person responding, let me ask you: If you are a person whose sexual attraction includes women do you consider women's breasts to be erotic in any way? Are they a sexual turn on?