Colorado town may allow women to go topless

[Davin]

Fort Collins officials are considering changes to the city's ordinance on public nudity that would permit women to go topless in public.
The proposal is in response to requests to change the ordinance from residents who say the current ordinance discriminates against women. City law does not prohibit men from appearing in public without shirts.

http://www.wtsp.com/story/news/weird...less/73486812/

[jasenj]

<sarcasm>How very noble of them.</sarcasm>
Nothing will change until WOMEN decide to go topless. Topfreedom is legal in NY, yet an extremely small minority bother to take advantage. Men used to be required to cover their chests. The law and culture changed when a bunch of men rebelled and started going topless. Until women do the same, it's just words on paper.

[nudeyooper]

Though only a small minority take advantage, cultural change takes a long time. It may take decades, but the fact that women have won this right and that some are using it is a beginning. The numbers are likely to grow, and the number of places where top freedom is allowed should also grow. It takes a lot of courage to challenge cultural norms, but those that have that courage will lead by example, especially if the law is made fully aware and law enforcement does not harass those women who enjoy their newly given right. In the 1960's when the bikini became popular, many were too shy to wear one. Look at today's swimwear and by comparison they use a lot less fabric. A greater part of the breast has been exposed for a long time already, I think the hang up is just over the nipple, and it really should be a non issue in that men have nipples too.

[usuallylurk]

"Though only a small minority take advantage, cultural change takes a long time. It may take decades, but the fact that women have won this right and that some are using it is a beginning....."

If women had REALLY wanted this as a "right", they would be out there fighting for it. In the grand scheme of things, women aren't doing so. And in the places near me where it IS legal - Maine, New York, New Hampshire (on state beaches) it isn't being taken advantage of.

Since the "right" has been around for a number of years in Maine - I can tell you, that a long walk up or down a Maine beach - you won't see women choosing to do this. Yes, they have the right to do something most women won't take advantage of.

Having the right is the victory - choosing not to take advantage of it? So be it. Frankly, I don't think you're ever going to see toplessness on beaches and in public as the "norm" in North America.

In fact, there was a "topless march" a few years ago - in Maine - and women who participated objected to the reaction - men out there ogling them.

Ever figure out why women DON'T do it?

On a related note, ever figure out why many women are averse to participating in nudism -- or why, when there are no restrictions on admissions at a nude event, IN GENERAL (not in all cases) the ratio of men to women is extremely high? "My wife has no interest in nudism"... ever wonder that there could be reasons behind it? Yes, there are supression issues, cultural issues, but the discomfort might not just be over body image - it might be over the possibility of ogling.

So, if you're all waiting for a day when you can go to the local beach and see most women top-free -- you have a VERY long time to wait.

In places where they have that right today, they choose not to exercise it , for one reason or another. And we really shouldn't concern ourselves with those reasons; rather, we should respect their choices.

[Agde]

...Nothing will change until WOMEN decide to go topless...

...If women had REALLY wanted this as a "right", they would be out there fighting for it. In the grand scheme of things, women aren't doing so. And in the places near me where it IS legal - Maine, New York, New Hampshire (on state beaches) it isn't being taken advantage of....

In a chicken-n-egg situation, the first step must be to change laws. Nobody gets arrested based on gender. Women ARE "out there fighting for" gender equality! Shirtless is just part of that. It is usefully symbolic, but, in my view, the most effective strategy is to deal with it in the context of the big picture of eliminating any gender reference in any law -- treating top-freedom as a symptom, not a cause in itself. The gay movements offers many lessons in this respect -- discrimination in housing and inheritance go to the Supreme Court not as sexual rights, but as issues of equal treatment under the law. I doubt top-freedom will ever get listed as a "right" but it is clear to everyone that arresting a woman but not a man for the same act is not equal treatment of citizens.

As for women taking their shirts off with the same serenity as men, there is a process of taboo morphing into trivial.While it may be true that multitudes of women embracing top-freedom might speed the process of public indifference, social taboos usually take time to evaporate. The good news is that it usually happens at an exponential rate, especially when there is a clear principle behind practical expectations.

As for "ogling," there is quite a literature concerning "the male gaze" but this is where we can and must all work together. It starts with teaching children how to treat each other. For older folks with progressive attitudes, it is a matter of just walking-the-talk and being role models. (How many times have I heard the joy and relief of nubie naturist women who realize that they truly are not being ogled?! Or the same from American tourists who "go topless" for the first time on a French beach.) Vis-a-vis guys who can't shake the taboo, we other guys must be quick to disapprove. And of course women have just as important a role to play in positive reinforcing experiences by being quick to voice disapproval of any disapproval from other women. It is a process.

[usuallylurk]

Vis-a-vis guys who can't shake the taboo, we other guys must be quick to disapprove. And of course women have just as important a role to play in positive reinforcing experiences by being quick to voice disapproval of any disapproval from other women. It is a process.

Funny that all these comments - are from men.

What we should do - is let women do what they want. To date, in North America, they choose to keep their shirts on. Not my business to tell them to do otherwise or promote any "process".

I'm frankly puzzled when I see that the majority of comments on this issue are from men. I could give a flying hoot as to whether topfreedom enters the general scene in North America. Women do have the right to exercise that and they don't.

For a variety of reasons. Which I respect.

The recent "demonstration" at Hampton Beach, New Hampshire, turned out to be a joke. Over in Keene, there was a woman arrested some years ago - for walking around topfree (where it is not legal) but she was egged on by a group - the Free Staters - who tend to go out of their way to confront police on nearly anything that they can.

The "right" is present at certain places. If a woman wants to doff her top at Hampton Beach - fine. But I'm not one to say "you SHOULD doff your top" -- a woman's right is hers. Nor will I walk up and down Ogunquit Beach and count the bare boobs.

And if 99.9 percent of women choose not to - as is the case today - I'll leave it alone.

And this is somewhat tied back to why some of your wives/girlfriends won't take part in nudism. THEY DON'T WANT TO. For some of the same reasons.

While I can get up and beat the nudist tom-toms and throw rose petals - and encourage participation in social nudism on beaches, public lands set-aside for that purpose (of which we need more), and of course, private properties - I won't get up and say "OK ladies, remove those tops because you can."

Why are guys obsessed with this?

[Agde]

...Funny that all these comments - are from men...

Many good points, but the fact is that "female areola/breast" laws were made by men for men, so we men must be the ones taking the lead to debunk and delete them. Ultimately, women are not gaining a "right" -- third-parties are losing their "right" to call the cops to enforce discrimination.

The fact that Fort Collins is wrestling with this spotlights another legal point. Equal treatment under the law is not a matter of "community choice." It is the bedrock of justice. So I am not "obsessed with this" as a "guy" but as a citizen. Gender-based dress codes are just an obvious manifestation of illegal laws that must be rewritten in conformity with gender-blind justice.

"Top-freedom" is far from the only, or most important, example of gender discrimination, but it is an easy one to correct immediately and with little effort. Because of the social taboo involved, it is usefully something that hits home locally for people who need to think more about and practice more equality thinking. Women can and will dress the way they want. That's the point! This is not about promoting or enforcing another dress code. It is a simple legal matter. It should be treated like, for instance, nobody getting arrested if either men or women decide not to wear top hats...

[jasenj]

In a chicken-n-egg situation, the first step must be to change laws.

I disagree. If women cared about the issue, they would break the laws and challenge them - that's how men did it.

"Though only a small minority take advantage, cultural change takes a long time."
No. It doesn't. Cultural change can happen very quickly. In the 50s women wore bras, by the late 60s some were not, by the 70s, women were commonly brafree - even on television. In the 80s that changed and women went back to wearing bras all the time.
In the 50s-60s it was common for boys to swim nude in school, by the 70s-80s this practice had died out, and by now our cultural memory has mostly forgotten it.
Culture can twist and turn in the matter of a few years.

[Agde]

I disagree. If women cared about the issue, they would break the laws and challenge them - that's how men did it...

Seriously? There is a long history of women getting hammered in US courts every time they try to "break the laws [like men]." Look at the case of Lee Ann Turner? She fought being arrested "for sunbathing topless in a city park" in Minneapolis and got an earful of old-fogey male judge tripe about sunbathing not being "artistic" and about female breasts being "erogenous":

"The female breasts, unlike male breasts, constitute an erogenous zone and are commonly associated with sexual arousal. Common knowledge tells us that there ... being such a difference between the breasts of males and females (however undiscernible to the naked eye of some), and that difference having a reasonable relationship to the legitimate legislative purpose which it serves, the ordinance does not deny equality of rights or impose unequal responsibilities on women. Protection of society's norms is a legitimate legislative goal."

Balderdash! "Common knowledge" among old-boy misogynists perhaps?

It was all based on the case law generated by the old laws on the books, so that the only recourse offered was to change the laws. Meanwhile - guilty for being female:

"[The ordinance] serves two important governmental objectives, controlling public nudity and preserving societal norms. The gender classification is substantially related to achieving those objectives... Turner, both before and after this appeal, is entitled to write or speak out for change. Turner can communicate with Congress, the state legislature, or the Minneapolis Park Board and advocate repeal or modification of any law or ordinance. However, while this ordinance is on the books, its violation cannot be negated by a claim that violating a law to protest it clothes the violator with constitutional immunity."

"Important governmental objectives"??? The only way to shut off this gushing American case-law nonsense is get the "female-specific" laws off the books and to mandate systematically eliminating all references to gender in laws and ordinances, based on the principles of equal treatment under the law and zero-tolerance for discrimination based on physical gender. Like what is happening hopefully in Fort Collins.

[rickwest]

Here in Orange County, CA, if a woman is seen topless in public and is reported to the police, she can be arrested and suffer dire consequences for doing so. Very sad, indeed. This is in what has been a conservative area, which usually means it is strong on individual freedom, but nudity is not one of the accepted freedoms.

I have to assume that the fashion industry, here, feels threatened by the very idea that the requirement for mandatory clothing would ever be relaxed. Most shopping malls here strongly cater to selling clothing to women, far more so than to men. If some women cut back on the buying as much clothing as they are enticed or required to do, these malls and the manufacturers and distributors that supply that clothing, would be negatively impacted.

So, it will be interesting to see if freedom seeking women will ever demand changes in these laws.

[jasenj]

Seriously? There is a long history of women getting hammered in US courts every time they try to "break the laws [like men]." Look at the case of Lee Ann Turner? She fought being arrested "for sunbathing topless in a city park" in Minneapolis and got an earful of old-fogey male judge tripe about sunbathing not being "artistic" and about female breasts being "erogenous":

Right. One woman was topless, an easy target for officials. Try making that 20, 50 or 100. See La Leche League and what they do with breast feeding demonstrations. If women really cared, they would organize and change the laws and culture pretty quickly.

[Agde]

Right. One woman was topless, an easy target for officials. Try making that 20, 50 or 100. See La Leche League and what they do with breast feeding demonstrations. If women really cared, they would organize and change the laws and culture pretty quickly.

Agreed! Having worked with La Leche League, I know the drill. If @FreeTheNipple were likewise organized, a woman mistreated in Minneapolis would lead to peaceful demonstrations by self-organizing local cells across the city, state and country. It still needs to be, not just about topfreedom, but instead about topfreedom as one part of a larger principled movement of solidarity. But you are right that breastfeeding is a similar issue, not of acquiring a right, but instead about removing a third-party's right to interfere. .

Given the way US law is currently structured, each of us should start (today!) organizing in our own hometown some sort of gender team to ensure equality in law (GenTEEL?) whose purpose would be simply to "remind" officials about gender-equality -- including through peaceful protest -- each time some numbskull law that treats women differently than men is proposed or enforced. Then work with them on corrected wording. Hashtag it (#GenTEELaw?), launch it, and you might get your gender-mixed "20, 50 100" person chapters self-organizing pretty quickly.

[Agde]

... it will be interesting to see if freedom seeking women will demand changes in these laws.

Or women can just make fun of the situation until male judges and politicians -- and Apple -- wise up...

[Bob S.]

lurk: "What we should do - is let women do what they want."

Women can't do what they want in most places in the US. Change the law and let them do so. BTW, most men don't take advantage of their right to go topless unless in specific circumstances such as swimming.

lurk: "Ever figure out why women DON'T do it?"

Women don;t do it because other women don't do it. It will be difficult to undo the cultural damage, but anything that can be done to normalize it is good.

From Agde's link: "The female breasts, unlike male breasts, constitute an erogenous zone and are commonly associated with sexual arousal"

You are right that this is wrong, Agde. While the male breast may not be as sensitive as the female breast, it is still considered an erogenous zone. However, banning erogenous zones from the public would require burkhas for all. Lips are one of the most sensitive areas, which is why kissing is so pleasurable. The neck is also sensitive, hence the popularity of the hickey. Ears are very sensitive. All of these areas are considered erogenous zones.

Bob S.

[usuallylurk]

lurk: "What we should do - is let women do what they want."

Women can't do what they want in most places in the US. Change the law and let them do so. BTW, most men don't take advantage of their right to go topless unless in specific circumstances such as swimming.

lurk: "Ever figure out why women DON'T do it?"

Women don;t do it because other women don't do it. It will be difficult to undo the cultural damage, but anything that can be done to normalize it is good.

Where it IS legal, and permitted, women have chosen not to do it. As I said - topfree is legal in Maine, and on state beaches in New Hampshire, yet you won't see anyone taking advantage. This is my point - it's rare/ Actually, for all intents and purposes, non-existent.

Women not doing it because others don't? Perhaps. But for men to say "do it because you can!" -- motives questioned. I agree - if more women did drop their tops, even more would, etc., but so far - after years of legality in some places, it hasn't become part of the culture.