In America, here in France is a right nationwide ✊
I assume it’s because France is a sane country.
deleted by creator
And if you’re not comfortable with people seeing you topless, just head further north, where there’s no people anymore
I’m guessing toplessness gets rarer as it gets colder, long before you run out of people.
Or as we Brits (of any gender) might say: “I’m freezing me tits off”
I’m in a very far southern area in Canada, and I’m here to report, it’s not something that happens here either.
So heading further north, let’s see, more rare than “I have never witnessed nor heard from anyone who witnessed it”… Uhhh. I feel like this is like dividing by zero.
It just doesn’t happen.
The fact is, it should be legal. It’s sexist if it’s not legal. Whether anyone chooses to exercise the right to do it, is an entirely different matter.
Totally agree, I was just reiterating what the previous commenter said - if someone doesnt like toplessness then they can just go where there’s no people <or where it’s cold>. Not really a serious comment. 😅
Same in Ontario.
In Washington state, you can just be nude. As long as you are not doing anything to be “obscene”.
Oregon too, last I knew at least.
This is, in fact, what makes Portland’s annual naked bike ride event possible.
Naked siblings, through and through.
What are you doing, step-city?
Whipping out my Oregon
Yes, Portland had decriminalized public nudity if participating in a peaceful protest, while not engaging in sexual conduct, and away from certain restricted areas like parks and schools. The annual naked bike ride is an organized peaceful protest that chooses its route appropriately as to not encroach on any areas where public nudity would otherwise be prohibited.
Free the boobies
It’s really just free the nipple, which highlights how ridiculous it is. Even more so when you see images where male nipples have been posted over female nipples, which would theoretically make those images ok.
I’m getting flashbacks to Tumblr’s “female-presenting nipples” censorship rules during the porn ban.
I was told (but didnt confirm this) that in Barcelona you can go full nude almost everywhere and there is a naked guy on a bike that is pretty famous there (didnt get to see him fortunately?)
I feel like they might have been wise to wait for a less fucked up SCOTUS before taking this before it.
It’s not a bad idea, as it’s something that needs doing but it’s unlikely to be passed as a federal law, and they’re kind of right that it is unconstitutional.
But this is bad timing.
The article is 5 years old.
Shoot - I just read the article and saw the related links, but it didn’t occur to me that it’s completely out of date.
Did they ever make it to the SCOTUS? I guess not?
https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-supreme-court-refuses-free-144949699.html
Unfortunately, though the problem has gotten much worse in recent years, the theocratic leanings of the Supreme Court has been an issue for decades now.
The argument that this is gender discrimination seems obviously true to me so it’s shocking to me that we’re still living in a society where this type of government violence is still widely accepted. I just have to hope that we’ll eventually evolve beyond this type of Puritanism.
Thanks, I had completely missed that ruling. Of course four years ago would not have been any better than today - it’s the same SCOTUS.
Hopefully four years from now the situation will look different.
I still think this is a great possibility for the judiciary to step up, as I doubt federal legislators are going to touch this issue, and it seems pretty fundamental to me. Seems like it’s not the most welcome discussion in this thread though!
Good point, I think of the change in court composition as a very recent thing but time flies. It has been a few years at this point.
I hope you’re right that the lower courts will make more similar rulings but I suspect the Supreme Court might overturn it if they went too far. We’re just lucky Fort Collins ran out of money here.
Unfortunately, the court’s composition could take decades to change. It’s a big problem with no easy solution.
Yeah, it’s impossible to tell. But time flies - with four new years a lot could happen. :)
(Or it could be reformed. One could dream)
Unfortunately I don’t see any of the proposed reforms measurably improving things while the right has an equal or greater grip on power. Any reforms that are easily implemented are easily neutralized or turned against the left when republicans return to power. Which, in the current political system, is an inevitability.
More radical reforms could solve the problem but would require much greater political power. In my opinion this can only be achieved by forming a mass movement that completely overpowers the right’s institutional advantages. Whether this can or will happen remains to be seen but it won’t be easy.
They didn’t lose their case in front of SCOTUS. SCOTUS just decided not to hear the case so the lower court’s ruling stood in that lower jurisdiction.
Same goes for NY.
I know this because at the college I worked at, a city public safety officer walked up to a young man who was sunbathing on campus thinking it was a woman, and told him to put his shirt back on or be charged with indecency or something. The school was outraged and had a shirtless demonstration march around town.
Did a I mention it was an all girls school?
I found this map: https://gotopless.org/topless-laws The religion behind this site seems kind of strange.
There is a gallery, for research purposes.
Praise be
You guys stumbled upon Raëlism! A cult that originated in France. I have firsthand experience. I met a “Raelian Guide” at a convention and gave a presentation on his religion. They mention the topless stuff, and they’re also anti-genital mutilation. But they also wish to reclaim the Swastika as a symbol of peace and love.
During this presentation, the guide, in talking about reclaiming the Swastika, "it was traditionally a symbol of peace and love, but you all wouldn’t learn about that in our Jewish controlled education system. " (Word for word what he said in front of 100~ people)
They’re, uhh, Nazis.
Im all for reclaiming the swastika, but you lost me at “the Jews control…”
The religion behind this site seems kind of strange.
Extraterrestrials Created All Life On Earth
Let’s Build An Embassy To Welcome Them
Thats a more plausible explanation than the big religions offer.
Just a different version of the same explanation
I like to think life crashed onto earth innitially from an astroid. Then life evolved from single cell organisms into…this.
Coincidently enough, life crashing onto earth on an astroid is exactly what the black suit symbiot was in the spiderman comics. After Spiderman got rid of it, it bonded with Eddie Brock to form Venom!
Oh lol, it’s the Raelians.
I’ve used this site in the past but never noticed they were out of their damn minds
Maybe they LOST their mnds?
What’s an all-girls school? Like what do they do when a man applies?
Might be starting to dox myself but they have a separate campus that is mixed.
Eh? I have definitely gone around topless in NY a couple times and wasn’t bothered over it. To be fair, it was Pride. To be extra fair, it was almost 100 and everybody was dying. I do remember a couple times on the news where they would have to remind the police in NYS that it is legal on a couple roasting summers. I am definitely not the best at keeping the bits well covered in general. Still far better up here than when I used to live in Texas.
None of which have beaches like the one in the photo.
AFAIK anyone can go fully nude in most public spaces in Germany. It’s actually kind of weirder to not allow it and carve out arbitrary exceptions if you think about it.
I think its decriminalized, not legal. That way the cops can just arrest people they want to discriminate against and let the white Christians violate the laws.
Legal in Ohio as well for women to go topless. I’m not sure if there are any age restrictions or anything.
Yeah, but…you have to see women from…Ohio…
Idk of age restrictions but it’s not an explicit right here, so most municipalities have laws against it. Columbus doesn’t though so you can free the tits there
Equal protection clause. Any law that imposes itself on women and not men should be unconstitutional.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Equal protection*
Dunno, an intentionalist would argue that by “people” they were only talking about rich white men.
Obviously they didn’t think slaves were people. Why would you think the considered women as people?
It’s the 14th amendment. Kind of an important one.
Isn’t that the one that kept slavery legal?
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
There’s a lot going on there.
And you’re thinking of the 13th amendment.
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
You might want to spend more time studying our constitution if you’re going to participate in discussions about it.
The Supreme Court did pretty much read out that 3rd section.
Should, but laws outlawing toplessness are almost always upheld by the courts, unfortunately.
“Protecting the public sensibilities from the public display of areas of the body traditionally viewed as erogenous zones — including female, but not male, breasts — is an important government objective.”
I chose my words.
But since its not a protected class I assume businesses can turn them away
Sex/gender is a protected class.
Shirted/Shirtless isn’t
The entire point is, where men are allowed to do so.
Yes, but the nuance of the situation is selective enforcement.
Luckily, many of these explicitly allowed areas are resultant of lawsuits so there is precedent for those discriminated against.
If they allow it for men they might have to allow it for everybody.
Most businesses will turn away anyone shirtless, especially where health code violations come into play.
Why is it not healthy for me to eat without a shirt again??
It’s not healthy for others for you to eat without a shirt
Why?
Because (in your case) it would be vomit inducing!
🤣 Just joshing you.
Which is fair. There’s a difference between walking down the street topless and being inside a resteraunt.
Right. “No shoes. No shirt. No service.”
Yeah I’ve gone topless in cities where it’s legal before and you just need to bring a shirt if you plan on eating
Are tits really that unsanitary that you’re going to infect a restaurant topless? I’ve got nipples, and I think they’re cleaner than my hands because I didn’t touch the door handle with my pecs.
It’s something you wouldn’t have a problem with until you sat down in a booth and suddenly your back is covered in some shirtless person’s sweat.
If its so hot they’re sweating, the shirt would be wet and so would the chair
Not really, but it’s one of those things you need to be prepared to be asked to do. Many bars are cool with it though, even ones that are restaurants. I guess the whiskey disinfects the tits
How do YOU open doors???
I won’t reveal this secret but I will tell you it’s large and prehensile.
Also legal in Ontario, Canada. A woman was arrested for walking around topless in hot weather. She was finned by police but topless men in the area were not. Ontario courts eventually rulled this was discriminatory but the provincial government did not appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada so the ruling only applies in Ontario.
Take Oklahoma off your list because in Tulsa they will still arrest any woman who does this. Apparently they refuse to follow that law that was passed.
I know because the city made big fucking stink about it when Tulsa women started to go topless when it was found to be legal. So they passed and ordinance making it illegal within city limits at public spaces so practically everywhere.
Yeah, this is effectively illegal in every conservative state.
Yeah, this is effectively illegal in every conservative state.
It’s because y’all qaeda hates women.
de facto vs de jure
Have there been any lawsuits about that? Surely someone has done it so they could then sue the city right?
I bet they would charge them with “Creating a public disturbance.”
That’s what the cop who told me in Indiana, “Sure, you can wash your car at a public car wash while having a pistol in view; it’s not illegal. But I’ll arrest you and put you in jail for ‘creating a public disturbance’ in less than a heartbeat”. And, no, he wasn’t joking.
It’s also legal in British Columbia, Canada and it has been since 2000
Happy about this. A scant few hours ago I had an over the fence conversation with my neighbor and neither of us were wearing shirts. It’s the ideal way to live.
Yeah despite there being a law against discrimination, the cops are obviously going to use their subjective view of things like lewd behaviour to charge topless women where they wouldn’t men.
That’s literally the law Ontario courts rulled cannot apply to topless women as it is discrimination.
On July 19, 1991, a sweltering and humid day, Gwen Jacob, a University of Guelph student, was arrested after walking down a street in Guelph, Ontario while topless after removing her shirt when the temperature was 33 °C (91 °F) and was charged with indecency under Section 173(1)(a) of the Criminal Code
Oklahoma is very much not Ontario
Yeah. Shit, isn’t it?
ACAB
It’s legal where I live. Nobody does it
Where is that? I think women often don’t walk around topless because men sexualize them or take photos, etc.
As a woman who’s done it: it’s mostly just awkward. I don’t go topless unless it’s an occasion warranting it or it’s way too damn hot to wear a shirt. The men don’t help for certain, but there’s just also the element of being the only shirtless woman around
Yeah, it’s kinda built in
Could be anywhere, it’s legal in a lot of the US but nobody partakes because it draws unwanted attention.
Which is how it SHOULD be viewed! If you’re going to be intentionally sexy in a public place, you should expect people to notice. I don’t walk down the street with my balls hanging out of my pants…well, unless I’m single.
Being shirtless isn’t being sexy is just being shirtless, not the same as balls, and thinking that your balls would help you not being single is…weird
You just admitted that balls are sexy. How WOULDN’T they help me not be single?
Fetticini
Linguini
Bikini
Martini
You’re gonna love my nuts!
