Women ask Supreme Court to toss topless ban: Why are rules different for men?
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
WASHINGTON — Three New Hampshire women are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to declare that a city ordinance banning women from appearing topless in public violates the Constitution by treating men and women differently.
Their rallying cry is "Free the Nipple," a global motto for women seeking equal treatment.
The case began in 2016 when Ginger Pierro did her yoga exercises topless at a lakeside beach in Laconia and was arrested for violating a city ordinance banning public nudity, including "the showing of the female breast with less than a fully opaque covering any part of the nipple."
Three days later two other women, Heidi Lilley and Kia Sinclair, went to the same beach, appearing topless to protest the arrest. They, too, were charged with violating the nudity law.
All three challenged their convictions but lost in the New Hampshire courts. Now they're asking the Supreme Court to hear their appeal when the court's new term begins in October.
They say topless bans are discriminatory because men can appear in public without their shirts. The bans also further the "sexualized objectification of women," according to their Supreme Court legal brief.
The New Hampshire Supreme Court rejected their challenge, acknowledging that the law treats men and women differently.
But it said the sexes "are not fungible" with respect to the traditional understanding of what constitutes nudity. Public exposure of the female breast "almost invariably conveys sexual overtones," the state court said. Most lower courts have come to the same conclusion.
But in February, the federal appeals court for the Tenth Circuit struck down a topless ban in Fort Collins, near Denver.
The ruling found no justification for treating men and women differently when they wish to bare their chests. Society's sexualization, the court said, "has engrained in us the stereotype that the primary purpose for women's breasts is sex, not feeding babies." Such a stereotype, the ruling said, "serves the function of keeping women in their place."
The Supreme Court will likely announce in early October whether it will hear the case.
Tags
Who is online
97 visitors
Well … uh … what was the question again?
I don't think anyone wants to see old women walking around topless, but, well.....otherwise no problem for younger women as long as they wear a hijab as well. After all, their desire is to declare, establish and prove their freedom so they should balance it with a symbol of suppression and submission.
So women can only go topless if YOU approve? Guessing equality isn't an issue for you. If it's good for one, it should be good for all, what you think is, "a nice set of tits", be damned. This isn't about what YOU like.
Here's to you MISTER Frost....
I don't want to see pasty, fat old men walking around topless, either, but they seldom consult me about it before they do.
They should have a speedo ban.
I agree with you, but that's not the topic.
What about all of the overweight men with moobs in banana hammocks on the beach? It is not a pretty sight.
Why can men walk around any time they please, any where they please, and it is just fine. But, if a woman does it she gets arrested for indecent exposure.
And no, I am not the least bit interested in seeing women walking around topless, but, it is the Misogynous hypocrisy of the law.
I have seen men with bigger boobs than some women out walking around as free as you please. Very disgusting.
Lol I agree fat, pasty, all wrinkly, liver spots all over, grey back hair sticking out everywhere. Now imagine that wearing a yellow banana hammock cause I've seen it (still gives me the willies)
Whether the skin shown is esthetically pleasing isn't the topic, either. It's legal for men, and there's no good reason it shouldn't be legal for women, too.
Of course, hijab isn't the topic, either.
Care to tell us what that reason is?
Touche, Sandy
Pretty much as I thought. Your comment, as usual, was not intended to contribute anything of value to the discussion.
And I sure as hell don't want to see topless men in their beater pick-up trucks driving around town
With their truck nuts hanging off the rear view mirror or license plates?
Those, too! LOL!
OMG....I've seen some men that need suspenders just to hold up their pot bellies. Ugh!
I'm with you Sandy
But it is Buzz. It is about that the human body, be it male or female should be treated in the same manner.
Since you're unlikely to get a straight forward answer from FW I'm gonna guess the reason is puritanical institutional misogyny.
speaking of things that should be banned . . .
that's 3X too many big words
Want a real eye opener when it comes to inappropriate dress, try The People Of Walmart videos on YT.
I don't see how such laws are misogynous or hypocrisy. As I understand it, misogyny is the dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women. I don't see that as the basis of any law concerning this. Nudity laws, as I understand them in general, prohibit the public exposure of sexual organs, for what I hope are reasons that do not need to be explained. Most civilizations have considered women's breasts as sexual organs. So it seems to me the law is recognition of normal sexual mores of the society, not a conscience effort due to dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women.
Men find women's breasts sexually arousing. As far as I know, women do not seem to have the same preoccupation with topless males. At least, I've never heard of such. If it should come to be that women can go topless, then there's really little point in restricting them from going bottomless as well, for the reason already mentioned. And this is why it really isn't hypocrisy, either. Since societies do not sexualize male chests the way it does females, they aren't exposing sexual organs. If males got to expose their sexual organs but not women, that would be hypocrisy.
As I said below, breasts are not required for reproduction, therefore they are not sex organs.
Tell that to nearly every society that has ever been. Whether or not it is required for reproduction isn't the determining factor. Whether the organ is involved with sex is. Hence, a sexual organ. And don't blame me for my opinion. It is an established fact that women's breasts are a hardwired biological sexual trigger for men. It isn't anyone's fault. It is less than realistic to ask half the population to stop being attracted to them. Especially in a hypersexualized society such as ours.
Perhaps here in the USA, but in Europe, not so much. Hell, even in Russia they are pretty lax about women going topless.
As I said before, how men may feel about looking at boobs isn't really the fault of the woman, so why should she have to be covered up when it's the men who seem to have the problem with women going topless?
Lol so we should all cover our lips then?
You are not addressing my point. That they are more lax in Europe doesn't detract from the reality that it is still a sexual trigger for men.
To answer, let's try to put the question the other way round.
How women may feel about looking at penises isn't really the fault of men, so why should he have to be covered up when it's the women who seem to have the problem with men letting their junk hang out? Basically, it's the argument against speedo's, which in my opinion, should be illegal in public except in swimming competitions or similar events.
Of course, all this is my opinion on this subject. I understand not everyone will agree but I think the reason for their not agreeing isn't quite what they think it is. If you have been reading through the various comments being made about this, the one point of agreement is that nobody wants to see fat people, male or female, topless. They are making fun of such people. Apparently, the only people that should be seen topless are sexually attractive people. And it doesn't even have to be topless. How many jokes have you heard about fat people wearing spandex? Apparently, only people who are sexually attractive are suitable candidates for spandex.
Personally, I'm not comfortable with going shirtless in public so I don't do it, and not because I have a problem with body image. I might take out the garbage shirtless occasionally, but not very often. I usually put one on first. About the only suitable place for it is swimming for the most part. If anything, if this really needs to be an issue, I would say ban men from going shirtless in most public situations rather than let women go topless.
Well said Sandra. What do we have here 3 women? Case dismissed!
I am attracted to really nice pecs and abs. Most straight women I know are, too. By that logic, we should require men to wear shirts, by law. Especially those who spend time in the gym. Women like me can't be expected to stop being attracted to well-toned male bodies, so those men should be jailed for displaying themselves.
<chuckle> Yer not wrong. LOL +1
I like a man with some meat on his bones, all well distributed throughout. Snuggling to a skeleton is not my idea of comfort.
However, there is a difference between meat and flab. I want to buy a man a shirt by the size, not by the pound.
Yea, we have a wal-mart in town that is that way. I am sure I could walk in there wearing nothing but a jock strap, flip flops and a tool belt and no one would say a word.
I don't like a skeleton, either. I like some muscle - not a guy who's muscle-bound like a bodybuilder or anything, and he also doesn't have to have < 5% body fat. If he looks like I could take him in an arm wrestle, I'm not interested.
We have found something upon which we agree fully.
Outstanding!
Drinks are on me.
Ah, but freedom as opposed to suppression and submission is. My comment speaks of balance.
Sure, Buzz.
The pattern continues.
Considering the looks of many Russian women, they may be right.
I think that the guy (and I'm pretty sure it was a guy) who somehow convinced a group of otherwise intelligent women that the way to show that you were a FEMINIST and EQUAL TO MEN was to walk around in public half naked really missed his calling. He should have been selling air conditioning to Eskimos. He'd have made a bundle.
Yes. That is why I think men should have the same restrictions as women. But men would work around them the same way women do. But at least they'd be wearing something. It's only fair, right?
I've been known to swoon at a pair of well toned pectorals.....
I don't know, I have seen some damn good looking Russian women. Example. Svetlana on Shameless.
Since I lost over 100 lbs, my stomach looks like a shar pei dog. Even if it were lawful to go out without a shirt on, there is no way I would subject the visually non impaired world to that sight.
Congratulations!
Lol, hopefully time will help with that (or surgery if you are so inclined)
At my age (67) it would be a waste of money even if I could afford it.
they think they're looking at a pig
Or a Picasso painting.
Why? I presented the argument in a logical order. No need to flip it around.
A penis is a sexual organ, boobs aren't so the likelihood that men going bottomless in public will never even come up.
I get your point and as I pointed out below, there is room for tongue-n-cheek comments. Without joking, I seriously don't care how old a woman is if she wants to go topless, (18+ of course). Boobs are big, small, perky, not so perky, big nipples, small nipples, etc...It doesn't matter, the point is that if a woman wants to go topless, she should be able to.....legally.
I agree that there are women that probably should avoid spandex, but if I see a large woman in Wal-Mart wearing spandex, it's not really my place to point it out OR complain. Just because *I* don't like it doesn't mean *SHE* can't wear it.
I had nine abdominal surgeries in 2 years. I have LOTS of scars, so I get it. I still almost never wear a shirt around the house or outside doing yard work but that's mostly because my neighbors can't even see me. If my neighbors wife comes over to BS, I throw a shirt on.
I disagree. Why punish both sexes because women want to go topless. Much easier to just tell them to go for it. And honestly, if they DID remove the law, how many women do you think are going to run around topless the next day? A handful at most.
Well done.
With America in the throws of an obesity crisis perhaps what we really need is to require that men with more than an A cup cover-up and maybe try lifting up their massive pendulous breasteses. Nobody wants to see your fatass juggs fellas...
Hahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My dad had a set of mitties you had to see to believe.
If I could find it and knew how to paste a picture, I would choose one of the guy from the first Borat movie. He was naked chasing Borat also naked. It is the grossest case of moobs that I have ever seen. Dolly Parton would look flat chested compared to him.
Yes it was and you know just what guy I am referring to.
Maybe not what you are looking for, but it does make a point. Or two.
Someone pass the eye bleach please.
Doesn't that violate the TOS or something?
j/k
OMG Sister....that is totally gross.....but...also totally hilarious.
Oh god I looked!!!!
His chest reminds me of my x mother in laws ass.
She liked spandex.. It was.....gross.
Yes....that is definitely how you knew your MIL's ass. Spandex doesn't hide a GD thing
I'm pretty sure that message has already been delivered. I've been stuck in line at Disney World behind a woman with an at least 80 inch hip line and wearing (ugh) spandex.
If she floats an air biscuit, many will die...run for your life!
Breasts are not required for reproduction and the "rule" is that reproductive organs need to be covered in public.
I know this article has a lot of potential for some, "tongue and cheek" comments, but...from a scientific standpoint, there is no reason why a woman should not be able to go topless in public.
Scientific, schmientific. You just want to see boobies every time you leave the house.
Well duh... When it comes to boobs I am like a woman in a shoe store, "I want to see every pair!!!!!!!".
How very strange.
And disturbingly funny.
Breasts were designed to offer sustenance. Men were the ones who decided that breasts are a sex object.
Ever see the movie "Who's Talking?"
John Travolta sees a nice pair of breasts and asks the baby "Are you thinking what I'm thinking?"
And the baby replies "Yeah...lunch!"
We did not decide that. We actually have no idea why we are so fascinated with breasts. All that we know is that we are.
Not a choice, not a decision; we were born this way.
That's your story and you're sticking to it, eh?
Yup, not our choice. We are cursed with this by nature; that damn Y chromosome I suppose.
Tig,
It is cultural. In France entire families got to the beach topless and I didn't see fathers looking at their teenage daughters in any sexual way.
That's right. There was much debate and disagreement. Elbows were also on the agenda. In the end, though it was a close vote, we decided breasts would be a sex object and elbows would not. Not everyone agreed, but we stand by the process.
Yes indeed, and I saw that movie! It's one of my favorites. And that part in the movie always has me in stitches no matter how many times I watch it.
You and TiG are cracking me up. I'm glad you guys took my comment in the good natured way it was intended.
I would hope not.
Now, how did the fathers look at other women on the beach?
In Japan, the nape of the woman's neck was what was considered sexy, not the boobs. That is why the Geisha's word their Kimonos with the back of the neck exposed and their boobs fully covered.
In some other cultures, it was the ankles that were considered sexy and not the boobs. I think that was because women were required to wear long dresses, but, low necklines were acceptable. So when a woman's ankle was accidentally exposed men got all excited.
Depends on how henpecked they are, and how good at acting they are.
Forbidden fruit. While that is true, I am willing to bet that most men would prefer to see boobs over ankles and boobs over nape of necks. All good, but some parts are more ... interesting ... than others.
True and it was most likely a, "save me from myself" law.
True. It's a cultural thing. In Europe walking around topless may not be a routine thing, but they certainly don't flip out when a woman goes topless on the beach.
I cannot even imagine seeing my teen daughter topless... That would be years of therapy.
I don't doubt it....rofl
Very true. Customs and cultures around the world at different times in history have given way to what is popular today. But, it is interesting to see how different female body parts were sexual turn stimulants over time.
Years ago, Air France needed borrow one of Continental's 727s and 2 complete flight crews to go with it. We ferried the plane to Haiti and spent 2 days flying passengers to and from the various islands. We stayed in a fabulous resort that was protected by a 12-ft wall, and our rooms had individual courtyards that opened up onto the most beautiful beach I had ever seen. Slightly shocked, I was, by the amount of buck-nekkid that seemed to be everywhere. We had to remember that to them, it wasn't a nude beach or a topless beach; it was just a beach. It took a few minutes to acclimate. After that, I could carry on a conversation with completely naked Pappy and keep my eyes on his face. Of course they were both spinning in one eye socket.
Did I? No. Did anyone else on our crew? No. Did the pilots pester the crap out of us with the 'when in Rome' mantra. Of course. We told them that we would if they did first. Cowards.
A few years ago, I had an employee who had spent her high school years living in Ireland. I had just visited there, and commented on how hardy the Irish are - swimming when it was maybe in the upper 60s, and the water was too cold for me to wade in ankle deep. She said it was customary there to carry one's bathing suit to the beach and change there. No changing room required. Just strip down and suit up in front of God and everybody. She said she was pretty shocked her first few trips to the beach.
It's just a social norm, that's all. People don't want to see that shit. And speaking for myself, I don't want to see your man-nipples either. What makes anyone think that body part is so attractive that it needs to be on display?
Gynecomastia on a man is extremely unattractive. I've seen it on boys as young as 13
I've seen that on a few men. Some look like they had breast implants.
There is a medication (I forget which one) that causes gynecomastia in young males. They usually end up getting medically reduced.
I think it's the medication used for ADD and ADHD.
When I first heard about this side effect, I thought maybe that drug had female hormones in it...to calm the boys.
Hey!
It's an old-white-guy, kinder-küche-kirche country, so what do you expect?
Our "place" is anywhere we wish to be.
Exactly.
Mine would certainly be in a place the man would not like, and be more than a little 'uncomfortable'.
Ah, a nipple by any other name.
I see no difficulties here, after all we all have them. Though as many have mentioned there are those I am better off not having seen.
Ban ALL clothes to reduce crime...nowhere to hide the weapon!
Seriously though, it is time we stopped thinking there is anything wrong with nudity, in any form. It is leftovers from the Puritanical past generations. Don't want to see those floppy tits or low-hanging balls, then don't look at them. Why do I have to sweat my ass off when you can simply look away???
Just wanted to say thanks for helping me with my diet.
Do you know who the most popular man at a nudist colony is?
He is the one who can carry a dozen doughnuts and two cups of coffee at the same time.
I wasn't sure anyone would get that.
The lucky women there will!
Do you know why men drive cars to a nudist colony?
Because they always have somewhere to hang their keys.
Nothing like pulling that bowtie string right there.
That has nothing to do with this thread.
Stop bragging
Who are you?
I'll let TiG be the judge of that, taking all current posts in to consideration.
LOL
You're just bragging how you take advantage of two women.
Another who turns X into Y.
Carry on.
Show us your TITS !
On Second thought …………...
Its a fair question.