Women are allowed to go topless in public in Ontario if it is for "non-sexual" reasons. (Ie breast=feeding, or just because it's hot out.)
It was decided by a court case about 10 years ago. Most of the arguments against seemed to boil down to "kids might see", which is a logic that makes my head hurt.
Following that same non-logic, I was taken aback a couple of years ago by a vehement letter-to-the-editor of a magazine I subscribe to.
The writer was angry that an article about breast cancer had included pictures of naked breasts, and berated the editors soundly for it. She ended the letter by demanding "What would have happened if my six year old son had seen that?"
Um..he would have learned that adult women have breasts. What's the big deal?
More non-logic: mothers who insist that nursing until age 3 or 4 is fine, but then freak out at the thought of their child, at age 6 or 7, seeing a topless woman. Why are breasts "wonderful and nurturing" at one stage of life, but then "shocking and inappropriate" at another?
I remember that campaign fondly. The protestors decided to march "topless" (I've always found it a silly word). Not surprisingly, it attracted a lot of support...
I think it was in '97, in Kitchener, a woman got kicked out of a public pool where she had pulled the top part of her bathing suit down to nurse her baby. Was she kicked out for nudity? Nope, the law permitted her to expose her breast to feed her child. They kicked her out because she was breaking another rule: "No Eating Allowed In The Pool." Heh. I kid you not.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
zvi![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
real live breasts
Date: 2003-12-18 12:31 pm (UTC)It was decided by a court case about 10 years ago. Most of the arguments against seemed to boil down to "kids might see", which is a logic that makes my head hurt.
Re: real live breasts
Date: 2003-12-18 12:44 pm (UTC)The writer was angry that an article about breast cancer had included pictures of naked breasts, and berated the editors soundly for it. She ended the letter by demanding "What would have happened if my six year old son had seen that?"
Um..he would have learned that adult women have breasts. What's the big deal?
More non-logic: mothers who insist that nursing until age 3 or 4 is fine, but then freak out at the thought of their child, at age 6 or 7, seeing a topless woman. Why are breasts "wonderful and nurturing" at one stage of life, but then "shocking and inappropriate" at another?
Re: real live breasts
Date: 2003-12-18 01:49 pm (UTC)It's always struck me as quite ridiculous. Sure, breats are a secondary sex characteristic of adulthood. So is facial hair on men.
Re: real live breasts
Date: 2003-12-18 01:47 pm (UTC)I remember that campaign fondly. The protestors decided to march "topless" (I've always found it a silly word). Not surprisingly, it attracted a lot of support...
Re: real live breasts
Date: 2003-12-18 01:55 pm (UTC)MOM! THOSE LADIES HAVE TAKEN THEIR *HEADS* OFF!
(no subject)
Date: 2003-12-18 03:28 pm (UTC)