Naughty Baristas

In a one-sided poor excuse for journalism article, Herald writer Debra Smith "reports" on the outraged crowd which gathered inside a Washington state church to "talk frankly" about the bikini hut scourge which is plaguing Snohomish County.

(Pastor and organizer Shahram) Hadian, a father of boys ages 5 and 2, said he is embarrassed to drive by the Grab-n-Go Espresso stand with his children. He talked with a 12-year-old neighbor who said the boys on his school bus shift over to one side when they drive by. The baristas have a right to self-expression, but the public also has a right to avoid seeing near-nudity and sexual behavior, he said. “There’s a part of me that said enough is enough.”By week’s end, organizers plan to set up a Web site, www.takeactionsnoco.info, where they want to post videos of baristas who appear to be violating county laws. They said they already have footage...“We sit here for an hour and we see them doing illegal things,” Hadian said Tuesday afternoon. “It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to do some surveillance.”

So, the baristas have a "right to self-expression", but these people want that right revoked. Be careful what you wish for - these knee-jerk dress code ordinances don't stand up to constitutional scrutiny, and it's not likely that the city council will try to outlaw the wearing of bikinis, anyway.

I have a quick and easy fix for people who are offended by the sight of women wearing bikinis - look away. Don't buy coffee at the bikini huts. Pay attention to traffic and stop looking whenever you pass by. Drive down another street. Put away the cameras, or focus them on your own business.

And good luck to these vitriolic vigilantes when they set up their web site accusing people of illegal behavior. Not only are they setting themselves up for a healthy lawsuit, they will be actually promoting the businesses they are attempting to suppress.

I think it's hilarious that the boys on the school bus "shift over to one side" when they pass one of these coffee huts, as if that's something dangerous to their normal sexual development. You got trouble my friends, with a capital T and that rhymes with B and that stands for "Boobs".

This is an issue that directly affects nudism because these people want to regulate "near-nudity", which seems to be a new concept that they just made up out of frustration and irrational thinking, and to arbitrarily designate such "near-nudity" establishments as adult entertainment subject to zoning and age restrictions. Any nudist venue or non-landed club could conceivably fall under these new restrictions depending on how the law is written, as would drug and convenience stores where girlie mags and condoms are sold.

My sense is that the city council is just going to have to live with the bikini huts. Any attempts to impose dress codes or widen the definition of adult entertainment businesses will only result in lawsuits and more trouble.

It's also likely that any overt sexual activity has died down at these joints due to all the increased scrutiny, so all the surveillance and investigations will just be a waste of taxpayer's money. As one reader noted in the comment section of the article, "Where was the meeting about the increased theft, gang and drug activity in Silver Lake?" It's obvious that police have more important matters to attend to.

The county prosecutor’s office advised the sheriff’s office that part of the county’s ordinance wouldn’t stand up in court, said deputy Jeffrey Miller at Tuesday’s meeting. He said his office wants to deal with the conduct, not the attire. The conduct has gotten “more out there than we anticipated.”“We are a public safety organization not the fashion police,” he said. “There are some things that have to be worked on the legislative side before we can take action.”

So the ball is in the court of the city council, which finds itself impotent to deal with the bikini huts and is desperately trying to make up something to placate the masses at Clearview Foursquare Church. Aside from monitoring the coffee shops for sexual behavior, there's really nothing they can do that's constitutional.

“The United States is watching us,” (Stephanie) Postier said when addressing the audience. “How is Washington state going to take a stand? This is not what we want to be known for.”

Right, you do not want to be known as the town that tried to ban the wearing of bikinis, so live and let live. Take away the freedom of the baristas, and you lose a little more freedom of your own.

Punish the Monkey, Let the Organ Grinder Go

Well, they found a way in Washington state to close down those bikini hut coffee shops - they have charged five young women with prostitution.

Detectives also witnessed some of the women charge customers to touch their bare breasts and naked buttocks. Touching of that kind, for pay, falls under the city's definition of prostitution.

As is typical in "investigations" like this, it was the undercover cops who were the recipients of the alleged sex shows.

On a second visit, a detective was told he couldn't have a mocha because the stand was out of chocolate. He also was told he couldn't order a small drink because they only served 20-ounce beverages.The barista told him that for $20, she and the other barista would give him a show. He paid and they bared their breasts and pulled down their undergarments, police reports said.

He paid. HE PAID. And apparently lots of other men PAID. Yet the "city's definition of prostitution" apparently does not include any responsibility on the part of the men who employ, encourage, exploit and PAY women to take off their clothes.

This wonderful little photo essay "Waiting Topless" on the Vassalboro topless coffee shop, which later burned to the ground, shows the humanity behind the objectification, that these young women who bare their breasts for money are just trying to make ends meet in a horrible economy.

So congratulations to all involved in the Washington state bikini hut scandal, you have successfully taken down the weakest members of society, likely ruining their lives, and the lives of their loved ones. What real men you must all be.

Good Nipple, Bad Nipple

Just when you thought that the public was growing more tolerant of women's topfreedom, along comes this story from Washington state where the Grab 'N' Go Espresso bikini hut is under increasing scrutiny from a nearby business, and the Snohomish County sheriff's department. The Everett City Council is expected to propose changes to the "lewd conduct ordinance" to include coffee shops, which basically means more criminalization of women's bodies.

The proposed changes are part of a routine review of city codes that would bring the city's long-standing lewd conduct ordinance up to date, city spokeswoman Kate Reardon said. The changes would not prevent baristas from wearing bikinis, she said. In fact, under the proposed update it would still be legal for a woman to wear pasties or even a sheer undergarment in public as long as her nipples and areolas are covered. Just the possibility of toughening rules for bikini stands filled the seats at Wednesday's Everett's City Council meeting. In the last six months, the city has received about 50 calls from people furious about bikini huts, Reardon said.

What on earth would cause people to be "furious" about women wearing bikinis?

In the city of Lynnwood, one coffee shop located near an elementary school backed down when the police "negotiated" with them to have the baristas wear more clothing during hours when children were likely to be present. On what law was this "negotiation" predicated?

The biased story on this situation does not interview one person supportive of the coffee shops, even though the businesses appear to be thriving. Rhonda and Louis Bremond, owners of a nearby business which sells high school class rings and letterman's jackets, are interviewed extensively. Their "expertise" on the situation stems from an obsession with the Grab 'N' Go, which has involved constant monitoring, photographing, and emailing complaints to the sheriff like this one:

This morning over at the bikini hut, there was a red pick up truck that stayed around for around 1.5 hours. He would pull up and then when another car came, he would pull around to the other side. He left for about 10 minutes, then came back again and stayed doing the same thing … It was just really weird … Something was going on …

The class ring business must be very slow if these people have hours of spare time on their hands to watch girls in bikinis sell coffee. And so what if something is "going on"? Just maybe the reason police are doing nothing about the shop is because nothing illegal is taking place, or maybe the guy in the red pick up truck was a cop himself.

The Bremonds said this is about business, not morality. "There is more going on than bikinis in these huts that needs to be addressed publicly," said Louis Bremond, Rhonda's husband and business partner.

The Bremonds have contradicted themselves. Of course this is about "morality". This trend of enacting stricter regulations on dress and behavior based merely upon suspicions or anecdotal evidence is both dangerous and unconstitutional.

Municipalities face a number of challenges when it comes to regulating businesses such as bikini huts, said Rick Robertson, an assistant chief deputy prosecuting attorney for Snohomish County. Cities and counties may regulate and define "adult entertainment" differently, Robertson said. A bikini barista stand may or may not fall under a particular definition. To complicate matters, some may contend that the business has an expressive component that is protected under the First Amendment. Cities and counties also face potential lawsuits. "Many municipalities have endured legal challenges over regulations that govern the adult entertainment industry," he said. "Even when they have prevailed, many have found it to be quite costly."

Then leave these bikini huts alone. Enacting new or tougher ordinances which further criminalize the female body is not the answer.

And if you think that this does not affect naturism, think again. Any law which prohibits a women from exposing her nipples in public affects any efforts to secure lands for nude recreation. Washington state does have a state law which exempts breastfeeding women from being fined or arrested for indecent exposure, but this "good nipple/bad nipple" schizophrenic lawmaking is indicative of a very conflicted society. In effect, a woman can expose a nipple to feed a child, but not to serve coffee to a customer. And don't forget that a man has the right to expose nipples just about anywhere for any reason.

Chances are local lawmakers in Washington state will not be able to do much to extinguish the bikini hut phenomenon, aside from passing some band-aid ordinances which make the exposure of female nipples illegal inside public business establishments. It's easy to see the problem with the constitutionality of such ridiculous laws - what about hospitals, spas, nudist resorts and other venues where nudity or partial nudity is part of everyday routine?

Women should have the right to topfree equality without the government deciding where, when or how a nipple should or should not be exposed. Eventually someone will test the constitutionality of all these nagging nonsensical nipple laws.