The Boobs Say What?

The other day, a federal judge denied a request from a group of Medocino, CA women who wanted to protest topless on the grounds of the State Capital.

U.S. District Judge Garland Burrell said the group made no compelling argument that showing their breasts constitutes free speech.

"Being topless is not inherently expressive" speech, Burrell said. The group, Breasts Not Bombs, had scheduled a protest for noon Monday. The California Highway Patrol threatened to arrest anyone who went topless.

Sherry Glaser, a leader of the group, said the protest may take place without bare breasts.

"All we really have is the power of ourselves," she said. "Our bodies bring attention."

So now we have an interesting admission here. Is Ms Glaser really saying that all women have to express themselves are their bodies? What sort of message does this send to our young women?

Well, the Breatsie Girls went ahead anyway, with sadly typical and rather unflattering results:

Police arrested two members of an organization called Breasts Not Bombs after they removed their tops during a protest on the steps of the state Capitol on Monday afternoon.

The women, who were protesting Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's ballot measures for today's special election, took off their shirts despite warnings from the California Highway Patrol last week that doing so would lead to their arrests — and possibly their inclusion on the state's list of sex offenders. A federal judge Friday refused to grant a request from Breasts Not Bombs to block the police from arresting topless protesters.

Angered that Glaser and Love could be listed on the sex offender registry if convicted of lewd acts, state Sen. Gloria Romero (D-Los Angeles) joined the protesters before their arrests to announce that she would introduce legislation to decriminalize the baring of breasts in public. "While it is legal for men to go shirtless in public in California," she said, "women risk being classified as sex offenders for baring the same body parts."

At the risk of stating the obvious, I want to go on record as being in "support" of breasts. I like breasts. As a general principle. However, I want to make two, uh, observations. If BNB wants to get some real attention, take a page out of the Cannes Film Festival's playbook and hire some stunningly beautiful and fit starlet to remove her shirt.

Second, in reducing their argument to body parts sported by over half of the population, BNB is illustrating what one does when they have either run out of arguments or never really had any in the first place. It would be fine with me if the baring of breasts was "decriminalized" because, let's face it, when you've seen one, you've seen them both. And in making this, uh, statement, aren't these women actually reinforcing the slogan that got Abercrombie & Fitch into all that trouble last week? In other words, aren't Ms Glaser and Ms Love saying, in essence, "With these I don't need to think?"

Comments

[Vavoom]

Why is it that nude protesters are always the people you never want to see naked?

[Daniel]

It's a mystery, V.