In some cultures, bare-breasted women would not garner a second glance from a man. But here in the U.S., they get second, third and fourth glances. Unless someone can show that bare-chested women would not cause the sort of distractions that result in car crashes, twisted ankles and slaps from spouses, the women’s point is lost.Slaps from spouses? Talk about losing a point! Show me exactly who, what, when, where and why the sight of a woman's breast caused any car crash. If automobile accidents are going to be touted as a reason to prohibit the public display of female breasts, then let's ban cell phones in cars altogether because anytime I see someone driving dangerously they always seem to be laughing and talking with their phone pressed to their ear.
Before they organize the next parade, they should consider what happened when gun owners hosted a barbecue recently in Portland with side arms strapped to their waists to assert their gun ownership rights. The demonstration spurred some to call for stricter gun controls. Bare-breasted parades are an assertion of legal rights, but they ultimately empower those who would want to change the law.
No, the point of women's topfreedom is simply equality. Men can take their shirts off just about anywhere in public, and women simply want the same right as protected under the Constitution of the United States. It's not about distractions, or leering, or gun rights, it's about women's rights.
And it's not like women everywhere are suddenly going to start taking their tops off. Men have the right, and certainly not all of them take their shirts off. What's the percentage of shirtless men on any given summer day walking down the main street of town? The point is that nobody cares about how many men take their shirts off because it's simply legal and accepted that they can.
And let those who want to change the law give it their best shot. It's high time this issue is tested in the courts. When the laws were tested in Columbus, Ohio, and in New York State, the right for women to be topfree was upheld. Either women have to be accepted as having the same right as men to be shirtless, or the law needs to be changed to force men to wear bikinis at the beach, and t-shirts when playing basketball on public courts. And you know that ain't gonna happen.
People get all worked up, calling the baring of breasts immoral, or dangerous for the children, or a manifestation of the homosexual agenda, or any other irrational reason they can pull out from their confused minds. The bottom line is that it's simply no big deal, they are just breasts, and they do no harm to anybody. If someone does not want to see a topfree woman, there is a wonderful part of the human anatomy called the neck which allows the head to turn and look the other way.
3 comments:
Topfreedom for all!
I'd like to give a hint to future success. I went to law school and have learned a little about equality under the law. For top-fredom to win, one suggestion is for everyone who sees a bare chested male to call the police for "indecent exposure." When no charges are forthcoming as a result, a "equal Protection" claim can be made. If the courts won't recognize that, then they are in violation of "Equal Protection" of the U.S. Constitution.
I agree with every point you've made here but the biggest point that is being left unsaid is that the so called distraction of female breasts to men is a MALE problem not a women's problem. But the homophobes use the same argument for DADT. If you have issues with equal protection under the law then I suggest you move to an Arab country where such freedom does not exist.
Enough protecting the few bigots in this country at the expense of individual liberty and freedom!
Post a Comment