This argument has always seemed logically sound to me, and since I hate masks that tends to irk me. As a result I've spent some time thinking about this.
-
Clothes, unlike masks, are not physically dangerous. Masks are proven to cause illness and even death in some cases.
-
In Western Civilization we protect childrens innocence by covering our private areas.
Frankly, that's the best I've got. I find the other arguments that come to mind somewhat weak.
What say you, should clothes be mandatory in public, and why? How is forcing mandatory clothes different than mandatory masks?
If anything, clothes prevent pneumonia in cold weather.
I think that's the best response. Of course a lefty will ask you for a sauce on that claim, then call your sauce biased and deboonked.
My 7th sinus infection since these masks have been around is my only necessary source.
All I have to do is breath near a lefty and the smell of death will assure them masks are worse than covid.
I like this. I will rephrase as "I don't breathe through my nipples"
A cut and dry logical argument that goes in detail for those who have no common sense or no words to express it:
Coverings should never hinder essential biological functions. Otherwise, it is a matter of pros versus cons. In total privacy, choosing which benefits are more important is the sole discretion of the individual. In the noticeable presence of others, then the priorities of the other parties involved factor in & there must be compromise. If there are several parties, the majority has more sway insofar as they do not overreach the rights of the individual.
Thus, we cover our privates until we need to perform the biological functions of reproduction, emptying our bowels, or hygienic washing. These functions are not done in public because they are voluntary (with the exception of some bowel movements/accidents) & can be done in private. It is more beneficial to do them privately as opposed to publicly because they are generally unhygienic, extremely distracting, uncomfortable personal behaviors, & an overall nuisance when visible or audible to a non-willing party. A person has a right to not be forcibly subject to other people's voluntary behaviors while in a private space or in transit. Forcing someone to endure a voluntary behavior is harassment & against their right to privacy.
Otherwise, watch people get sick on a regular basis because they aren't protecting themselves from the elements & their immune systems suffer, watch car accidents & critical mistakes go up as attention spans plummet, watch rapes & sexual assaults increase & watch more children be aborted or born out of wedlock as people who already have trouble controlling their urges with clothes on control them even less with clothes off, watch pedophiles stare at your kids imagining horrendous things 24/7, and watch infectious diseases spike as somebody's sweat, ass germs, & pussy/dick juice all over the chair they nakedly sat in mixes with yours & enters your orifices as you also nakedly sit in it because there is no barrier to reduce transfer from those places which are not being actively used.
There's a reason people generally view public bathrooms as filthy places to be avoided if possible. That's where all the changing, washing, pooping, & fucking of who knows who else (or what else) happens.
Therefore, you cannot force someone to wear a mask while they perform the essential biological function of breathing. Otherwise, you will be restricting their most essential & involuntary biological function. Feel free to enforce masks when they no longer need to do so.
I would just simply say, 'Well, I am certainly no animal, but I am also not going to cover my face like some Muslim woman either though.'
It’s legal and has been forever in Austin to go topless. Girls at Zilker used to do it all the time.
Masks are dangerous to your health and they do absolutely nothing to stop a virus. All other arguments are irrelevant.
God gave you holes in your face to breath, not suffocate
This is a great response, thank you. The cultural argument is something I couldn't quite put to words. Your examples of Africa and the Middle East covered it well.
I would add: Our faces are designed to express emotion We need clear communication Smiling promotes bonding Freedom of expression
Clothing provides protection from the elements, sun, thorns, bugs. Clothing can be a creative expression. Pockets.
That's a reason why clothes are useful, but that doesn't mean they should be mandatory. Why shouldn't you have free choice to not wear clothes if you don't want to? If you think the government has the right to force clothes on you, why don't they have the same right to force a mask on you.
I think 'masks are unhealthy and can cause illness and death' is the proper response. But just pointing out where I disagree with your reasoning.
Right - so why should the government have the right to force ANY clothes on you - underwear included? Where does it say in the constitution that clothing is required? Or that 'Christian values' should be upheld?
Covering our face INCREASES criminal activity. You cannot identify a criminal act with someone's face covered. It causes a new SAFETY risk. See New York. Crime has SKYROCKETED and people are getting hurt. The criminal can blend in.
A person's facial expression is KEY to communication in life. Most communication is NON VERBAL.
For Example: If you approached someone and they made a frown. That will signal to you to go somewhere else.
IF you cannot see each other's faces. You will not be able to pick up on important NON VERBAL COMMUNICATION.
3.We are suppose to EXPEL baterial from our body. Wearing a face mask traps baterial and interferes with Oxygen to CO2 exchange.
IF a woman is smiling at a man. If she is masked. He will miss the none verbal hint on to approach.
Walking around a mask based society causes people to become skeptical of each other. Causes people to have a state of anxitey.
Which can cause people to fight or even kill each other.
A security guard got shot in Detriot for trying to enforce the mask policy.
So to sum it up.
The mask is a HUGE social disruption to life. Where as general clothing are not.
If the mask was not a social disruption like a SEAT BELT law. No one would care.
Human beings are not animals who care about "Food, Shelter and Security".
Human beings are SOCIAL CREATURES who seek to turn their dreams into reality.
A mask depresses those dreams.
We have to stop calling it a mask. We have to start calling it a SYMBOL of SICKNESS and UNHEALTH.
I like this line of reasoning that humans are social beings that rely on facial expressions to communicate. I think this is another great response.
Masks are DEHUMANIZING.
Yes..
It someone ask this question.
You have to say.
Whenever you implement a solution to a problem. You have to account for "human cost" as well.
Wearing clothes is acceptable to humans. It does not cause a major social disruption to our well being.
The mask causes a major social disruption.
Tell this person.
A good "solution" is one that doesn't cause major social issues like the mask. It would be invisible like the Seat Belt.
Scarves, hats, gloves, spats, ties, suspenders, balaclava, and 2 pairs of socks are now mandatory... because why the fuck not. They're clothes. And clothing is mandatory.
I read a while back that clothes actually aren't mandatory in most places, meaning, there is no law against walking around naked in many cities and states. Maybe the politicians never thought to make it a law since so few people would actually do it.
Wearing clothing does not tend to aid in the trafficking of human beings in the same way mask-wearing mandates might/do.
Clothes are to the benefit of the wearer. Most modern cities are in cold regions where clothes prevent illness and environmental hazards.
They also don't obstruct social cues in conversation, whereas masks completely remove mouth features further retarding our ability to communicate effectively.
Finally, fashion is a form of self-expression. I'm convinced the push away from standard dress apparel and towards athelti-wear and leggings is a DeepState ploy to belittle, humiliate, over-sexualize, and promote laziness. Leggings 40 years ago were considered underwear. Think on that for a moment.
Clothes can be dangerous, mind you. I've seen some dresses that are accidents waiting to happen. High-heel shoes are one of the primary causes of anterior pelvic tilt in women, which leads to a lifetime of pain and agony especially if you have large breasts. The majority of hazardous clothes are designed for women, by women, come to think of it.
Clothes protect my eyes from being singed by the sight of huge FUPAs, Sasquatch coochies & man titties. Masks on the other hand, don’t protect me from shit
Masks weaken the immune system (assuming they stop germs) and interfere with herd immunity. Clothes do not.
your post headline and finale question don't align. why wearing a mask is different than wearing clothes is obvious to anyone that researches efficacy and harms of a mask not to mention legitimacy of the "virus"
as for clothes, i don't think they should necessarily be mandatory in public and by mandatory you mean having to cover just ones man or lady parts. I've seen plenty of thong bikinis that hardly qualify as "clothes"....not that im complaining :)
Clothes don’t obstruct my breathing.
We wear clothes to cover breasts and genitals. Not sure about your analogy here. Masks are about control.
Just looking for logical reasoning. I agree that masks are about control and I hate them like I hate Satan himself. But from a logical standpoint, if you're forced to wear clothes, why is a mask any different?
They don’t make you put a mask on your dog.
Clothes also protect our bodies from the elements, especially up here in the north. Masks aren't going to protect you from the elements, and in fact will probably smother you if they get wet from rain.
Honestly this doesn't even deserve a response
There's value in using logic and reason for its own sake. For some, it is important to break down the logic and reasoning behind the most simple things that we all take for granted.
The masks are discriminatory against the deaf, who need to read lips to function in society and feel connected and “heard” amongst their fellow citizens. Initially it might have been acceptable to discriminate against the deaf, but now that we know the threat from Covid is so minimal - the death rate is only 0.03% - this society-wide discrimination against the deaf cannot continue to stand. And anyone who disagrees is probably not deaf, thus reframing them as the selfish ones.
Go live in the woods.
I point out that the government doesn’t have any authority to mandate which garments we wear, and while cloth mandates are definitely unconstitutional, I wear clothes to make a fashion statement in the same way I do not wear a mask.
I choose not to wear a mask to make a statement that the science and data on mask wearing is inconclusive on stopping the spread.
They usually retort with Fauci or public health guidelines and I point out that Florida is doing better than NY and CA.
Seriously though it’s a false equivalency to say that masks are the same as clothes.
I am not a tree...is why masks should be voluntary not mandated..there is only one time I expect to see masks, Oct 31 then masks are acceptable.