FREE YOUR BREASTS! FREE YOUR MIND!
A UFO-based religion called Raelianism, whose followers believe that life on Earth was created by an alien science experiment led by Spiritual leader who claim that
women have the same constitutional right that men have to go bare-chested in public
As long as men are allowed to be topless in public, women should have the same constitutional right. Or else, men should have to wear something to hide their chests, It’s a question of discrimination, Why do we ask about women and not men?
We want to have this taboo disappear”. Women have been oppressed for decades.
Demonstrators across the country took to the streets without their shirts today to celebrate National Topless Day, a holiday intended to prove there’s nothing wrong with women baring their bodies in public. In New York, activists marched through midtown Manhattan for a Nipple Pride Parade organized by GoTopless, which describes itself on its website as a group dedicated to demonstrating “women have the same constitutional right that men have to go bare-chested in public.”
According to CBS Local, the parade began at Columbus Circle and moved to Bryant Park near Times Square, while another 60 events were planned nationwide.On its website, GoTopless provided a nationwide map of cities involved in the day, designating cities that currently prohibit a woman from exposing her breasts in public.
Ladies of New York, you are free to walk bare-breasted through the city! New York City’s 34,000 police officers have been instructed that, should they encounter a woman in public who is shirtless but obeying the law, they should not arrest her. This is a good step towards gender parity in public spaces.
This decision means that breast exposure is not considered public lewdness, indecent exposure, or disorderly conduct. It also notes that, should a crowd form around a topless woman, the officer should instruct the crowd to disperse and then respond appropriately if it does not. Relative coverage is no longer a factor.
This policy shift comes after several years of litigation and protest. In the 1992 case People v. Ramona Santorelli and Mary Lou Schloss, the New York Court of Appeals ruled in favor of two women who were arrested with five others for exposing their breasts in a Rochester park, holding the law void as discriminatory. The ruling was put to the test in 2005, when Jill Coccaro bared her breasts on Delancey Street in New York, citing the 1992 decision, and was detained for twelve hours. She subsequently successfully sued the city for $29,000.
In 2007, Go Topless, a national organization supporting gender equality in shirtlessness laws, established Go Topless Day. Dozens of women protest – often topless – in thirty cities around the United States, promoting equal rights to be shirtless. Protests usually include chants of “Free your breasts. Free your minds” and a song “Let ‘em Breathe” to the tune of the Beatles’ “Let it Be.”
While some who have witnessed these events have suggested that “[t]his is extreme liberalism and why America’s in decline” or “[i]t’s degrading to women,” others have been supportive. One man even said he would encourage his wife to join them.
Though bare-breasted women might shock the sensibilities of some in the public, it is encouraging to see the police responding positively to gender bias, even on such a seemingly small scale. After all, no one thinks twice about a man shirtless on a summer day. However, the female nipple or chest is still considered “lewd.” By reminding its officers of this, the NYPD is publicly declaring that it will no longer perpetuate unconstitutional gender discrimination, a standard to which all law enforcement should be held and a decision for which it should be applauded.
The New York event coincides with a brewing controversy over naked women posing for photos with tourists in Times Square, which city Mayor Bill de Blasio recently committed to outlawing.
Mayor de Blasio told a press conference earlier in August, “Our current laws do make it harder to enforce in the way we might like to […] There is a First Amendment protection for painting yourself and displaying yourself in a certain fashion. It makes no sense, but I understand that is a First Amendment protection,” according to the Observer. He added the city would no longer “tolerate” the women and said he would find “legislative and regulatory solutions” to the problem.
Related Posts
Satya Brahma’s Vision India
Photo Gallery
