I am unsure of this.

I completely agree. Of course if someone was to say and enforce a rule saying "You're not allowed to be free with your body, not if the men can see!" wouldn't that imply, in some manner, that a woman's body only has only one aspect/use (sex) in regards to interacting with men?

A good point.

It's a difficult balance to strike, ideally of course you shouldn't be dismissive of either parties claims and only challenge those claims when evidence suggests otherwise.

I assume some feminists may have an alternative interpretation, that goes along the lines of that they are in fact playing to a partriarchal tune by going topless. I wouldn't necessarily agree with that interpretation but perhaps it is worth considering.

The issue is that many people automatically assume that a naked body (male or female) is sexual, even if it is not the intention of the person(s) concerned to be sexual.

It may very well be a stereotype but what your professor said seems to be a typical response in Latin America to this kind of thing.

On a similar vein of though perhaps a code of etiquette should be established to handle compliments in society and initial interactions with the intentions of romantic/sexual intimacy, with emphasis on politeness and the acceptance of refusals.

I'm doubtful just going up to someone in the street would be more effective.

Oh crap, I forgot to get a girlfriend again.

These Christian groups have been getting quite vocal under Cameron.

Strangely enough your probably reflecting some peoples actual attitudes. More often than not the people that get angry about the depiction of sex (from a corrupting aspect anyway) are the first to defend actions that result in death without reservation, from the death penalty to wars.

I agree with on the point that women are just as capable of being visually aroused as men from what I have observed and read.

Oh for crying out loud. This is insulting for almost everyone concerned.

Perhaps I'm looking for it but photos look particularly airbrushed.

Interestingly that practice stands to become illegal in most LA made porn (along with facials) because of the condom requirement they past is, in more detail, a requirement that persons be separated from other peoples body fluids, including those of the female genitals.

From what I have seen I agree.

Part of me wonders if this is a test/joke on us all to see how far they can push this hyper sexualised situation involving (allegedly) an under-18 before someone seriously questioned them.

Even if she was older, part of me would still feel troubled given how passive she seems.

Given her age I think this is quite inappropriate.