>>531193597
I get your points, and you may choose to not believe me, but when guys frame male nipples as non-sexual, they're not simply saying they're not sexual for no reason, it's just that they straight-up do not read as sexual for the vast majority. And this has less to do with society itself and more to do with the fact that men and women display attractiveness in different ways, a female nipple is not just a hard nub, it sits on a mound of fat and flesh that specifically evolved to attract male (and female too, surprisingly often) attraction. Not only that, the sinuous nature of a woman's body emphasizes those deposits which makes their role as features meant for attraction very obvious.
On the other hand, a muscular male chest plays a different role than just being a focal point for attraction, it serves a wider function in broadening the male figure, it doesn't specifically draw attraction to itself but plays a larger role in a whole, in that way a male nipple is brought to a much lower level of detail in the hierarchy of eye-candy to the point where most people can safely ignore it. Hell, I barely notice men have nipples, but I do notice a well-developed male chest.
Now, do I agree that both play a role in sexual attraction? Yeah, I'm with you on that. However there are key differences in how men and women are attractive which makes the female breast a bit more obscene, this is because women are generally really good at looking good. Do I fully agree with the standards? Not really. I don't think women should be walking with their tits out but people are oversensitive about nipples.