Topless Activist Secures Settlement in Fight for the Right to Bare her Boobies

As a follow-up to one of my earlier posts, one Woman in New York City, who was repeatedly arrested and detained for not wearing a shirt, finally sued the city for her multiple wrongful arrests and detentions because, as she pointed out, toplessness is not a crime. Not in New York City anyway. And that is true. But police officers there apparently still arrest and detain women for it, despite being repeatedly reminded of the laws, at which point the charges are presumably dismissed as nonexistent. Well, this lady finally settled her lawsuit against the city for $40,000 because, as she acknowledged, she would not play well to a judge or jury . . . not without a shirt (assuming she would also show up shirtless to court).

Topless Activist Wins $40,000 Settlement From City for Boob Freedom - nymag.com

Earlier information about the legality of toplessness in New York:

Cops Reminded Repeatedly That Exposed Boobs Are Not a Crime - nymag.com

Gender Equality: Is there an App for That?

Here's another wonderful editorial about gender equality by Natascha McElhone. (This is actually an edited version of a speech she gave at Wired 2013 in London.) She shares a lot of anecdotes of her experiences with sexism which will probably ring true for (or sound familiar to) many of us. She discusses the phenomenon of "casual sexism," which is oft times subtle and is far more pervasive, I would imagine, than any of us realize. One facet of that phenomenon is the casual objectification of women, which, according to McElhone, is sexist primarily because it happens so much more frequently than the converse (the casual objectification of men), and because of the powerless positions in which women are portrayed in sexual images.

And McElhone asks a number of great questions about a variety of issues. Among those most important in my mind are:

"Why should men not garner respect for staying at home for those formative years?"

Undoubtedly an issue worthy of much discussion is the right of men to play a more active role in raising their children and maintaining their households if they so choose. The importance of this issue should be abundantly clear because, as anyone who has thought long and hard about gender equality should realize, women will never and can never play a truly equal role in the workplace until men play a truly equal role at home. Or, in the paraphrased words of Sheryl Sandberg, women can't "lean in" at the board table until men "lean in" at the kitchen table.

Many men are wonderful fathers, and homemakers, but they are never truly given the chance because of the stigma, stereotype, or casual sexism wrapped up in the still prevailing idea that these tasks are women's tasks--and continue to be women's tasks--even as women are expected to contribute equally to the workforce. If you find this insulting to men, then that only proves the point that domestic (and traditionally feminine) roles are demeaned and stigmatized in our society. Maybe a woman makes a free choice to stay home, or a man makes a free choice to bring home the bacon, but until the stigmas are eliminated for both sexes, no one can really make a choice that is completely free. And, in my view, this is the area in which WOMEN are the most guilty of contributing to the problem of gender inequality, by refusing to let their male partners play a more active role at home. You have to step back if you want them to step up. I only know this because I have been quite guilty of this myself!

Here was another of my favorite excerpts from McElhone's piece: "If I were a journalist, I would ask every man I interviewed if he was worried about his hair loss, his weight, how he managed his work/home balance, what his neuroses were – and skip over the content of what he actually did."

Ha. I would pay to see that. This is of course hilarious because this is usually what happens when the media interviews many women; they ask them about their appearance and not about their accomplishments--even women as accomplished as Hillary Clinton, which is presumably what brought them onto the show in the first place.

Natascha McElhone: It's Time to Find an App for Gender Equality

Burping and Ball-Scratching My Way to Gender Equality

Here is a VERY interesting bit about the gender dynamics of body language. This seems like a given when you think about it, but it becomes more interesting as you CONTINUE to think about it, peeling back the layers of sexism in each assumption, stereotype, and movement of your body. In essence, the movements and postures we typically identify as "feminine" are really just submissive. Conversely, "masculine" body language is really just domineering and/or empowering. However, that does NOT mean the TRULY feminine IS submissive or that the TRULY masculine IS dominant. Although female and submission are not actually synonymous, nor are male and domination, we have nonetheless conflated these two distinct realities in our bodyminds and body memories by literally acting out gender inequality each time we take a step. WOW. Trippy.

Researchers realized this when they discovered that MEN who are ordinarily "masculine" in their movements become more "feminine" when interacting with bosses or other authority figures. Of course, they are still men with the same levels of testosterone et al, but as they act out their feelings of submissiveness or inferiority in a given situation, they associate those feelings with typically "feminine" body language. Studies also revealed that the bigger your car is, the more likely you are to drive in a typically "masculine" or domineering fashion. Well, everyone who's been cut off by a giant SUV (a.k.a. everyone) already knows that.

Gender and the Body Language of Power - Sociological Images

Gender and the Body Language of Power - Jezebel

Now we can see why some men become defensive or indignant when women defy these norms by not crossing their legs, not being "ladylike," etc. Who cares, right? Well, it's because it's about more than that. They take it personally because it strikes at the very heart of their perceived superiority over half of the human population.

So, in sum, gender equality really does start one fart, burp, and curse word at a time. I've always been a firm believer in that. It's about time everyone else caught up!! :-p Take it from someone who is truly Feminine. :-)

Is Toplessness Everyone's Constitutional Right?

Here is a very interesting piece out of Michigan about the double standard of toplessness in America. According to this writer (Bill Schroer), many women believe that the fact that it is socially acceptable in the U.S. for a man to be topless but is NOT acceptable for women . . . is gender discrimination. Well, interestingly, some courts in Ohio, New York, and Canada agree and have declared laws against toplessness for women to be unconstitutional!

Perhaps this goes back to our notion of the female breast (and lactation? reproduction?) as something dirty, or something of which we should all be ashamed. But interestingly, this was NOT the case in America before the 1930's, when toplessness was forbidden for everyone, men and women alike. But then men rebelled (and, presumably, women kept quiet), so men fought for their right to flaunt it--and won!

In Europe, as this writer points out, this topless double standard doesn't really exist and many women are free to go topless without incident. This Past Week was National Go Topless Day. I did not even know this was a holiday! (Now I will know for next year . . . .)

Bill Schroer: Women's Rights to Choose is About Gender Equality - Battle Creek Enquirer