TOPFREE EQUALITY

Into the 1930’s, men were often arrested, even at parks and beaches, for ‘indecent exposure’ for uncovering their chests.  Today, shirtless men are a common sight at the beach, in parks, or just cutting the grass.  No problem.  But women?

In 1992, seven women who had been arrested in Rochester, New York six years earlier for holding a topfree picnic, won a long-fought victory for female equality when New York State’s highest court ruled (People v. Santorelli & Schloss) that New York could not legally discriminate against women by refusing them the right to remove their tops, whenever men were permitted the same right.

In 2005, four women in upstate New York were arrested while eating ice cream in a park, because they were topfree.  (So were their male companions, of course.)  They spent hours in jail, and the prosecutor decided to ignore the case law of Santorelli and prosecute anyway.  Although the women eventually prevailed, it was not without the loss of considerable time and money on legal costs.

It could be worse–

In 1996, Kayla Sosnow was arrested in Florida for removing her shirt in the Osceola National Forest during a Rainbow Gathering.  (No one complained, other than the arresting officer.)  She spent three humiliating days in jail before seeing a judge, and seventeen more days in jail because of bail demands.  Eventually sentenced to time served, six months probation, 50 hours of community service, and $600 in fines and costs, her conviction was overturned after a four-year legal battle.  Read Kayla's story.

In 2003, ten Florida women, including a descendant of female rights’ pioneer Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Kayla Sosnow, and B.E.A.C.H.E.S.’ Executive Director Shirley Mason, brought a suit in the Federal courts for topfree equality.  This was only after the Florida courts had ruled in an earlier suit that the equal protection provisions regarding gender voted into the Florida constitution in 1998 did not require strict scrutiny.  (Such scrutiny standards are essentially judicial assumptions that some forms of discrimination are less harmful than others. Interestingly, gender is usually accorded a lower consideration than religion or national origin.  Read more on judicial scrutiny) The case was dismissed in the Federal courts due to a dubious legal technicality, that the federal suit added new arguments not present in the state suit.  The  plaintiffs were provided pro bono legal assistance by attorneys Lisa Kuhlman Tietig & Mark Tietig in both state and federal suits, with the ACLU backing the state suit.

In 2003, Liz Book was arrested in Florida for removing her shirt during the Daytona bike week.  (There were, of course, many shirtless men present.)  The city delayed her trial for several years, leaving her in a legal limbo, although the charges were dismissed in 2005.  She was as one point barred from visiting her daughter’s school because of the arrest.

In 2005, several women, including Kayla Sosnow and Shirley Mason, held a topfree protest in Daytona in support of Liz Book.  This time, the protesters obtained permission from the City of Daytona to stage a topfree protest under the protections of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment.  Yet five women were still arrested, including Shirley Mason and Kayla Sosnow, under the pretext that their protest interfered with traffic.  They were convicted and sentenced to pay a fine.  An appeal was to be filed, but through mishap the deadline for appeal expired.

In 2005, Liz Book was again arrested for posing topfree with topfree statues in Daytona.  She was acquitted in 2006 on First Amendment grounds.

B.E.A.C.H.E.S.’ Topfreedom Fund supports legal cases that challenge institutional, legal and cultural discrimination against women that prevent them from removing their tops in places and situations where men are not prevented from doing so. Contributions support legal case costs, expert witnesses, professional research and opinion polls, funding academic studies, legal costs, and costs for plaintiffs and lawyers to travel to court hearings, speaking engagements, & media events. Funds may also be used to support women's health issues.

B.E.A.C.H.E.S. supports the Topfree Equal Rights Association (TERA).

 For more information on this issue, visit the TERA website.

The police in Virginia Beach clearly think they can get away with calling anything "obscene" which they wish to read "sex" into. Is all sexuality obscene? If so, then many clothed women are also obscene. (See the other photo seized in Virginia Beach.) While we may debate the use of a photo like the above in a store, what does calling it obscene tell us about attitudes towards the body, women's in particular?   2008 January 22. Some fancy Las Vegas hotels have been promoting topless options for women in their pools. Just how little this has to do with our concept of topfreedom may be gleaned from the purported county rules on the matter, which of course are part of the liquor regulations . . . "A resort hotel may provide for its guests a specially designated portion of its swimming pool area where topless sunbathing is permitted. However, such a specially designated area must be separated from all other swimming pool and guest areas; be obstructed from the view of patrons in other swimming pool and common areas; be off-limits to all minors under the age of 18; and cannot be used for any special events, contests or parties while any topless sunbathing is taking place." Forgive us for having no comment (for once).   2008 January 19. There's a new movement afoot, or should we say abreast: some women want to feed their milk to their children only by pumping it out first. It's called "breastfree breastfeeding." Read this article. Of course, women have always pumped, for a variety of good reasons. But what concerns us are those who now say they prefer pumping to feeding "straight from the tap." Because breastfeeding isn't just about food, there's something lost that's significant. Of major concern are women who refuse to breastfeed because "this is a part of my body that's always been reserved for sexual activity."   2008 January 11. Someone has started a TERA group on Facebook. It wasn't one of the TERA directors. Regardless, the person has done a fine job. Because TERA has no discussion forum here, those on Facebook who are interested in posting may go there to do so. Facebook is free and has over 40 million subscribers.   2008 January 11. In support of the group Rethink Breast Cancer, the Schick razor company in Canada has started a "booby wall." Women may upload photos of their breasts and make comments. The photos are anonymous (no heads). The breasts may be fully or partly covered or uncovered. We're not sure that photos of covered breasts speak well to the subject. Is the wall a good idea? Decide for yourselves: go here for it.   2008 January 10. Two more pools in Sweden have said it's okay for women to swim without tops: in Eskilstuna and Vingåker (both west of Stockholm). The manager in Vingåker points out that topfree bathing was quite common "10 or 15 years ago" and is simply not a problem. On the other hand, a pool manager in another city said, "We don't allow it, because other pool guests don't want it like that." He went on to specify children, seniors, and Muslims. Not only is that presumptuously wrong, it's illogical. TERA supporters will know why.   2008 January 08. Yesterday a pool in the Swedish city of Sundsvall's leisure centre declared that women could swim topfree there. (Syndsvall is in east-central Sweden, on the Gulf of Bothnia.) This is the first such successful declaration for the Swedish group Bara Bröst, although their Danish counterpart has had some success in its country. Nonetheless, a spokesperson for the Sundsvall pool made this comment: "The only condition is that other guests are not offended; in that case we will have to ask the women to leave." That negates the whole principle and implies that any complaint against a topfree woman --- but not against other attire --- is automatically valid.   2007 December 29. We recommend this editorial in a Canadian newspaper about breastfeeding, particularly a woman's right to engage in it anywhere, any time, in any manner. Congratulations, meanwhile, to Ruth Ellen Cummings of Trenton ON, for taking a restaurant to the Ontario Human Rights Commission and winning.   2007 December 28. Re: the man convicted of public indecency in a park in Columbus Ohio. He showed his penis to a topfree woman, apparently on her request. Immediately after, police swarmed in to arrest him. Clearly, with the woman there, the man did something he would otherwise not have done. The police denied employing the topfree woman; they may have just hung out to see what would happen. Or did the woman co-operate with police? This incident led to all kinds of comment about topfreedom in Columbus and in Ohio, many of them offbase. Although the conviction is being appealed, we are more interested in what happens regarding topfreedom in Columbus, Franklin County, and the rest of Ohio.   2007 December 21. The Swedish action has spread. On Wednesday, a group of 9 or 10 women in Copenhagen, Denmark went swimming topfree in a city pool. The story has not yet hit North America, it seems. The women were allowed to stay. One of them, Astrid Vang Hansen, put it this way: "This is a rebellion against a woman's body being considered everywhere and always a sex object. As women we want the right for ourselves to decide when our breasts are sexual. That isn't going to be in a swimming facility, and therefore they must not have to be covered. We want permission to bathe topfree, as men do."

A staff member at the pool in question more or less agreed for now. But she went on to imagine that topfree women might be allowed there once a week. Obviously she doesn't understand that equality doesn't mean once in a while. The video here adds no new information.   2007 December 13. The Pittsfield, Massachusetts City Council has denied the request of Katherine Gundelfinger for a "topless" area in a park. In a 9-2 vote, it rejected her petition, supposedly on a technicality. Ms. Gundelfinger's reasoning for her petition and TERA's Co-ordinator's letter on her request are here.   2007 December 10. Five days ago, the Brisbane Times (Queensland, Australia) ran this photo of a woman (who is accused of a crime, but that's not our point).

The website philly.com censored it several different ways. It's good to know that media employ highly skilled sleuths to chase down and eliminate the atrocious areola abomination, especially in its more molecular manifestation.   2007 December 09. Last week, a very fine article appeared which simply and convincingly states the Swedish women's case for being allowed to swim topfree in public pools. The authors are Sanna Ferm and Frida Hellroth of the Merely Breasts Network (Bara Bröst-Nätverket). We translate a bit of it here: "If the Equal Opportunity Ombudsperson had declined a case about a woman not being employed because of "prevailing norms" that say women get more parental leave, should that be accepted? Until the 1970s it was legal for men to rape their wives, quite in accord with "prevailing norms." Merely because discrimination has always existed is no reason not to fight against it! "Women's breasts are more sexualized than men's in today's society. The reason for swimming topfree is to desexualize and demystify women's breasts. At public swimming pools there is no reason for breasts to be sexualized, even if there are other circumstances where they may well be. "We are far from that situation today. Now breasts are considered only in sexual contexts whereas they are forbidden in all other contexts. Why is it okay to have bare breasts on the front pages of men's magazines but not in a swimming pool? "It isn't valid to claim that this is about women's breasts being bigger than men's. That varies with the individual, and there are many men who have significantly larger breasts than many women. Nor may it be claimed that women's breasts are more sensitive than men's, because that too is an individual matter. "Others claim that bare women's breasts in a swimming pool would increase sexual crimes. So it's claimed both that men can't control their sexuality and that women must cover up and take responsibility for men's supposed hypersexuality. These arguments are frightening and recall the claim that women in "provocative" clothing must blame themselves if they are assaulted. "No, that is simply not a sensible explanation why men and women should be treated differently. There are discriminatory norms that prevail in society. These norms for how men and women must look and act are problematic for both men and women."   2007 December 07. Accrding to this report, a woman in Pittsfield, Massachusetts wants an area of a beach set aside for topfree women. Apartheid for women? Bad idea. Of course, politicians and other officials in Pittsfield are claiming that their conservative discriminatory prejudice trumps women's rights.   2007 December 03. As an indication of how sloppy reporting may be, this from the British paper Metro today: "Swedish women who want to go topless on beaches and in swimming pools have lost their legal battle to strip off." In that one sentence, the paper made at least three mistakes. For a more accurate interpretation, see the next item below.   2007 November 30. Today the Equal Opportunity Ombudsperson ruled against the Swedish women who swam topfree in Uppsala and were ejected from the swimming pool. The ombudsperson Anne-Marie Bergström cited "decency" and "prevailing norms." She also said that "women's bodies have more often been the subject of sexual objectification, decrees, and dress codes. In our society, the female body is sexualized in a way that the male body is not." Got that last part right. But what kind of reason is that to reject the women's right to swim topfree? Essentially Bergström is saying, "Women are not equally treated. Therefore they will remain that way." That is hardly an appropriate decision from an Equal Opportunity Ombudsperson. We surmise that she saw no political way to rule in favour of the women, so chose the status quo. Is she influenced by American media? Yes, according to her response. Should she be? No. A highly placed spokesperson for the ombuds office noted that the ruling wasn't definitive. It means mostly that the ombuds office isn't taking further action, that it's up to individual pools to decide. The women involved may take the matter to court. The group Bara Bröst is considering its next moves. We quote meanwhile a response from one member via her excellent blog: "Anne-Marie Bergström has obviously misunderstood the matters of equality, feminism, and discrimination. In all eras, women have been discriminated against because of the prevailing norms. That is no reason to continue the discrimination! Equality involves fighting for equal rights for women and men, not confirming the subordination of women occurring today by citing 'prevailing norms.'"   2007 November 23. Although the original information about the Swedish women is still being printed in the USA as if it's new, on this blog is the following: "Yesterday (Nov. 22) was accomplished what may be described as the first successful action for Bara Bröst. Oxiebadet [in Malmö] did not discriminate but allowed 12 women to swim topfree. And for those who think that topfree swimmers will bring on more dirty old men, assaults, and sexual excess, I can report that: 1. No one was assaulted. 2. No one was sexually exploited. 3. There were no dirty old men at all. "Instead, people swam in peace. "Another world is possible. :)" Oxievångsbadet is a small pool in Malmö. According to this report, the pool staff do not consider their action (or inaction) any sort of personal statement.   2007 November 20. Today a woman in upstate New York found the usual unacceptable response when she tried to get a topfree photo printed at Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart trotted out its standard line, "We don't print nude photos," when topfree women are 1) not nude; 2) completely legal in New York State. Wal-Mart defines nudity basically as anything that in its prudish, bodyphobic attitude it doesn't understand or like. Its policy seems to have been created by people who have no idea what they're saying. Its employees in photo developing continue to pretend to be moral guardians of the nation in matters they have no expertise in, legal or other. Nichole LaRoche sent us her photo, below left. A Wal-Mart employee deemed it "not in good taste." The photo of Nichole's friend, below right, was printed without question.

2007 November 18. We said we'd report comments on the Goshen photo. Thanks to those who wrote in. With no comment from us, here's a selection from others: "To me the test is one of gender equality. If two men posed without their shirts in exactly the same positions, would it be wrong? Should it be banned from publication? I think there would be no complaint. The fundamental question to which we keep returning is, do women have the right to do what men can?" ---- "If topfree is legal, and it appears to be, the photo would be legal regardless the age of the girls. The teacher/student relationship is a bit shaky, but the photo should not be a problem." ---- "The topfree movement is about the equal right of men and women to be topfree. If a 19-year-old male coach and his 15-year-old male student had taken a picture of their naked torsos and posted it on the Internet, what stir would it have created? The criminalizing of female breasts in the US has terrible psychological consequences for women and especially teenage girls. Time has come to finally eliminate this 'Taliban' law!" ---- "I feel somewhat offended by the photo. It's not the nudity per se, but the context behind the photo. The coach (even though she is still a teenager herself), is a person of authority over this girl, and should not be that intimate with her. The girl shouldn't have been at that party in the first place. Did her parents approve of the party? Now the girl is going to have this hanging over her head for the rest of her life. "This website is just promoting the harm to the girl. This photo is a lot different from what Adelle Shea did. Adelle gave permission for her photos to be on your website. I don't think the girl in the Goshen photo gave you permission to post it to your website. What purpose does it serve your website to post this photo?"   2007 November 18. In court, Liz Book finally defeated the city of Daytona Beach, Florida, so what does it do? It spends even more money in its stubborn attempt to stop her. Earlier this month, the city changed its anti-nudity ordinance. It's unlikely to be successful, however. Liz is planning a rally there for March 8, 2008, the next International Women's Day. She's also suing for violation of her rights in past incidents.   2007 November 18. A few days ago came the case of a fireman in Columbus, Ohio, who was on trial for public indecency in Berliner Park. He was seen with a topfree woman in the park. What she was doing is unclear; but our point is that it's legal for women to be topfree in Columbus --- as it should be everywhere. (And no, topfree women do not increase the incidence of crime. There are reported problems in that park when women are completely clothed or not even present.)   2007 November 14. We noted earlier that two women were removed from a pool in Uppsala, Sweden for swimming topfree. Now there's a group in Sweden to stop that kind of discrimination. This article is excellent; it's the only one to explain the pun in the group's title: Bara Bröst means both Bare Breasts and Merely Breasts. Perfect! Other women have been removed from pools, on October 13 in Malmö and October 25 in Lund. For up to date information, this blog is it, although it's in Swedish. The goal: "to foster discussion of the unwritten social and cultural rules that sexualize and discriminate against women's bodies." In another location, the original two women put it this way: "We have to defend the right to be something other than a sex object, at a swimming pool as well as everywhere else." photo by Julia Lindemalm  The above photo was taken in Lund on October 25.   2007 November 13. TERA has made the acquaintance of gotopless.org, which has a fine website. They have several photos up from the amazing photographer Jordan Matter in New York.   2007 November 12. Ruth Moss's intelligent and engaging defence of breastfeeding photos is here. Take that, Facebook!   2007 November 04. A high-school cheerleading coach in Goshen, Ohio has been fired because she and a school student took a photo of themselves topfree at a private party on October 20. The party was at a football coach's house; he too was fired. Both he and the cheerleading coach were later charged with various offences by police. The photo (below) has a clichéd attempt at a slightly sexy pose. Although the photo is not the usual material found on TERA, we present it here because the pose in it would not raise a fuss if the people in it were dressed more. And the public, especially TERA's audience, is entitled to know what the source of this story is without censorship. The words on this image were not added by TERA. The woman on the left is the cheerleading coach, Victoria Schattauer, 19. Her arm is presumed extended to take the photo. The name of the 15-year-old on the right has not been released, to our knowledge. Some representations of the photo block out nipples or the face of the girl, in pretense that a photo of a topfree minor female is illegal. That pretense is false. There are also reports of the girl drinking a small amount of alcohol at the party, but that is not the focus of the discussion. So we ask you, our audience: is this picture wrong? Should it be banned from publication? Let us know, and we'll post responses around the middle of the month. (Don't forget what cheerleading is about.)   2007 November 02. A woman from St. John's, Newfoundland was approached by an official at Universal Studios' theme park in Orlando, Florida and told to cover up because she was breastfeeding her daughter. After she was harassed by more park officials, a higher authority there stated she was entitled to breastfeed and apoloigized to her.   2007 October 26. Lorien Bourne's appeal against a conviction for being topfree in Bowling Green, Ohio in 2006 failed today, in a ruling from the Sixth District Court of Appeals. It upholds Bourne's conviction for "creating a condition that is physically offensive to persons or that presents a risk of physical harm to persons or property." That harsh language about women's breasts is completely wrong, in TERA's opinion. Bourne wants to appeal the ruling to the state's Supreme Court. However, it is by no means certain that the court would hear the appeal, or if it did, would rule in her favour. It is also not clear that the best arguments were made by her lawyer in the recently lost appeal. Other, lower rulings in Ohio (notably in Columbus and Athens) make it clear that women's breasts are not "private parts," and women cannot be charged with an offence merely by exposing them. Bourne mowed down one reason given for her loss, namely that men and women are different. That's a claim that TERA points out has always been used to suppress women, without justification or indeed foundation. Bourme stated, "I know lots of females and gay males that think [male breasts] are so sexy, just like females, it's just absolutely ridiculous. Males and females both have breast tissues, women just have more. They both have nipples, they both are erogenous zones. Men and women's nipples both get hard, both are erogenous zones, both are attractive." The social prejudice that the Sixth District Court of Appeals upholds constitutes unjustifiable and harmful discrimination against women. Its additional inferences that children are damaged by women's breasts and that people must be protected against feeling offended are groundless.   2007 October 18. In Bradenton, Florida, two Manatee High School senior girls were tossed out of a football stadium on October 12. For what? For being dressed. They were dressed but wearing body paint in addition. Because a few people in the stands claimed the girls were topfree, the school principal ordered them to leave. We'd say this was a case of the blind leading the blind, except that most blind people have more sense than those who are so obsessed over female breasts that they see them exposed even when they clearly aren't. And if they had been exposed and painted in the school's colours, so what? The high school's boys are often half-dressed that way at football games. The principal later claimed that bikini tops weren't proper attire at school football games.   2007 October 14. An article on protesting against the criminalization of women's breasts is mostly written by Liz Book. It's an interview in today's Orlando Sentinel. If you want something heroic, don't miss it.   2007 October 11. "Officers received a report that upon several accusations a resident who lives near the Gunnison River witnessed females rafting the river topless." This is novel. Someone makes accusations, which cause someone to see topfree females. "Although officers have been extremely vigilant after receiving the report, they have not observed the same activities." We wonder what extreme vigilance means. Half a dozen officers deployed? A dozen, perhaps. We wouldn't stand for anything less than day and night observation for such a serious attraction --- oops, crime.   2007 October 09. A 1949 photograph of a topfree woman in water with her nipples scarcely visible has been removed from a show seen by elementary school students in North Platte, Nebraska. It normally resides in an art gallery that any student could walk into. Here's the photo:   photo by Harry Callahan   2007 October 02. A state legislator giving a civics lesson to about 20 high school seniors in Norwalk, Ohio, put a storage key into a computer and mistakenly pulled up a photo of a barebreasted woman. Rep. Matthew Barrett was surprised. (Turns out his son had put it there, probably without his knowing.) In a Janet Jackson flash, he closed the computer, continuing his talk without it. Police were called in. Not just Norwalk police but the Ohio State Highway Patrol too. They confiscated the storage key and the computer and possibly two more school computers, and launched an investigation. All this, note, over one legal image which only a few of the seniors present saw for a few seconds --- and giggled at. One report says the police then interviewed every student in the class and had her or his parents contacted. We have a question for the police: Why didn't you arrest Rep. Barrett, the class teacher, and all the students? Wouldn't all that have been more effective politically? Or maybe you just couldn't wait to see what other images of topfree women were on the storage key? At least you could have wasted more tax dollars by sending all the students and their parents for six months of psychological counselling.   2007 October 01. In Victoria, British Columbia, at the swearing in of a new, aboriginal Lieutenant Governor, murals showing bare breasts of native women were covered up. Arguments about the murals have gone on for years. Those against them say that the barebreasted women demean natives. They may, of course, merely be putting a contemporary breast-shaming spin on the subject. Whether the murals as a whole are demeaning in a colonial way is another question but hardly ever discussed.   2007 September 29. Breasts not Bombs held a protest in front of the the White House today, against the war in Iraq. Five women and one man were topfree. Because such dress is legal in DC, they were not harassed by authorities. photo by zendwarf From BnB's website: "Funny, we hadn't sent out a press release, but Fox, CNN, AP and Reuters all were present. Gosh, I wonder what brought them out???"   2007 September 26. It's a simple notice, from elsewhere: "If you're currently lactating, or will be on September 29, join the Quintessence Breastfeeding Challenge & be part of a large group of women, all 'latching on' at the same time to bring attention to the importance of breastfeeding." The events are open to all breastfeeding supporters. A list of locations in many provinces and states is here, and more information here. More about the Quintessence Foundation is here. We post this in support of World Breastfeeding Week.   2007 September 25. Final victory for Liz Book in her 2004 case. Daytona Beach, Florida has lost its futile and wasteful appeal to have Liz Book's acquittal contested yet again. The city's own rules specifically allow Liz or anyone else to protest topfree, which she has claimed all along. No further action from the city is possible, according to her well-known lawyer, Lawrence Walters.   2007 September 21. With permission, we print a couple of things by Janet Fuchs Jackson, originally found in the Facebook group "Hey, Facebook, breastfeeding is not obscene! (Official Petition to Facebook)." The Facebook problem is mentioned below, on September 8 and 12. The topic is breastfeeding. The connection to topfreedom is obvious. It even gets mentioned in the first post. -------- If a woman breastfeeds with her whole breast out of the shirt, there's someone in the room wishing she would pull the shirt down a little more. If she pulls her shirt down a little more, there's someone in the room wishing she would put a blanket over her side boob or cleavage. If she blankets her boob, there's someone wishing she would put the blanket over the baby's head. If she blankets her baby, there's someone wishing she was in the corner. If she moves to the corner, there's someone wishing she would face the wall. If she faces the wall, there's someone wishing she would leave the room. Can't please 'em all, so do what feels right to you, I say. But regardless of how you do it, keep nursing, ladies. -------- I for one am sick to death of people telling me what breastfeeding is "like." BFing is like defecation or urination, because liquid is coming out of your body. BFing is like picking your nose or scratching your balls in public, because it's rude. BFing is like masturbation, because it's natural. BFing is like making love, because it's private. Let's all shut up about what BFing is like and talk about what it is: a baby eating! That's it! It's eating! It's like eating! Because it is eating!!!! Sometimes I eat alone with my husband and we hold hands and gaze into each other's eyes and it's beautiful. Sometimes I eat with my parents and my brothers and it's loud and we all talk at once and it's joyful. Sometimes I eat in a mall food court with a bunch of strangers because I'm famished and can't wait to get home. And get this: my baby does exactly the same thing!!! To everyone who thinks that nursing is gross, or private, or so freakin' special that I have to make it a Hallmark moment every time I do it, think for a minute and realize that it's JUST FREAKING EATING!!!!! -------- In the same group, the following Benetton poster was recently displayed. Thanks to Wendy Jolliffe of St. John's, Newfoundland for pointing us to the current source of information for it, which states it is from September 1989.   2007 September 20. On September 5, two women were told to leave a pool in Uppsala, Sweden for swimming topfree. Although North Americans think of Sweden as having much better attitudes in this subject, the pool staff behaved on this occasion like they were borrowing words from the USA. They claimed that "crimes of a sexual nature were particularly common in swimming pool environments" and that bare female breasts would create a security risk. Other excuses: "There is a hygiene issue, and finally there is what we call 'prevailing manners and customs.'" A hygiene issue? Women's breasts are what --- toxic? (The same official also denied that there was a hygiene issue.) And what are the prevailing customs? Discrimination against women? The last excuses were the usual: children and ethnic minorities. (Also in Swedish, this report.) Ragnhild Karlsson photo by Ted Callander We can't comment on the legalities in Sweden, nor on other issues that may affect this case. But Kristin Karlsson and Ragnhild Karlsson (no relation) have filed complaints with an ombudsman --- which is, ironically for us, a Swedish word. Ragnhild summed it up: "It's a question of equality. I think it's a problem that women are sexualized in this way. If women are forced to wear a top, shouldn't men also have to?"   2007 September 19. On September 1, a breastfeeder was harassed and told to leave an area in the YMCA in Scarborough, Ontario, part of the Greater Toronto Area. A prolonged discussion in front of other parents made Carolynn Prior feel "that breastfeeding my son was obscene and breastfeeding should only occur away from public areas." The articles don't come any better than this, by Andrea Gordon. What that article doesn't say --- it will come out eventually --- is that when Carolynn approached the Ontario Human Rights Commission on the subject, the person she spoke to told her that she had no case because breastfeeding is not appropriate everywhere. Carolynn's continued upset was wholly understandable. The article today makes it clear that that statement flatly contradicts the OHRC's longstanding position. The person who made it should be fired. The Y's policy is also correct. So why wasn't it followed? It seems to include this: "If a member complains about someone breastfeeding, the onus is on staff to address that person's discomfort, and not the nursing mother's actions." And not even approach the nursing mother, we add. North America, please note: that is the only thing to do. That a woman may legally be topfree in Scarborough is a useful fact but has not come up in the discussion. TERA makes the point again that topfreedom for women, if widely known and understood, even if not practised, would make all breastfeeding complaints disappear.   2007 September 17. Not to be outshone in the breastfeeding wars, last week a PacSun store in Toledo, Ohio told a woman to leave with her infant. "We are a privately owned family store, we don't need to follow that law," is what was reported said by the store person responsible --- or is that irresponsible. There was a protest nurse-in held near the store (in Westfield Franklin Park Mall) on Friday. Under Ohio law, the store is probably subject to civil action for its harassment of the woman.   2007 September 17. Last week, an Ohio appeals court heard the case of Lorien Bourne, who was convicted of disorderly conduct in 2005 for appearing topfree in public in Bowling Green, Ohio. Lorien put it succinctly: "It all has to do with a sexist double standard, unequal treatment, and selective enforcement of the law. Time has gone on, but the fight hasn't gone away." It should not be difficult to overturn her conviction in Ohio. The city's prosecuting attorney argues that men and women are different. Hmm, that must mean women shouldn't be allowed to vote.   2007 September 12. The Toronto Star today put an article by Andrea Gordon about Facebook's intolerance towards breastfeeders and their photos on its front page. So did the Torstar publication the Hamilton Spectator. In its print edition, the latter even included a photo of a baby breastfeeding that Facebook would remove. Bravo, Spectator!   2007 September 11. Today in a federal court in Philadelphia, arguments are heard in the appeal of the half-million-dollar fine the FCC levied against CBS for the world-famous Nipplegate, the distant, fraction-of-a-second exposure of Janet Jackson's nipple in the halftime Super Bowl entertainment on February 1, 2004. The FCC's indecency procedures are in trouble in other ways, and we do not expect it to prevail in the current case. A US Senate committee, however, is preparing legislation to require the FCC "to maintain a policy that a single word or image may be considered indecent." If that gets anywhere (which it may not), we will see further discrimination against women, banning of a lot of legal images and bleeping of any word and removal of any subject a broadcaster may fear. The implications for fr** sp**ch are very serious. Despite any favourable court rulings, the USA is maintaining a world-wide reputation for what some have called living in a tribal time warp, a sexual Stone Age. Government officials, including the FCC, clearly have a sex obsession far more problematic than that of the country's citizens.   2007 September 10. Protests around the country took place Saturday at Applebee's restaurants, against the company's action and statements denying breastfeeding mothers their rights. There were breastfeeding mothers out in force with their babies, at several dozen stores in a majority of American states. Many of the individual stores have had no problem accommodating breastfeeding. The original incident behind the protest: an Applebee's in Lexington, Kentucky repeatedly harrassed Brooke Ryan in June for refusing to cover herself with an awkward, unnecessary, demeaning blanket while breastfeeding her son. For some fuller details, go here.   2007 September 08. Dicussion of breastfeeding in public goes on everywhere, especially on the Internet, usually with little consequence. But a prominent news source in Australia, among others, has reported on one of the bigger and more difficult projects: to get the social network Facebook to stop removing photos of breastfeeders. Facebook's faceless staff members go about the site removing photos which they say contravene their terms of service. Those ban photos that Facebook in its sole ignorance declares obscene. We put it that way because to Facebook, all breasts are obscene --- but only on women, of course. A photo removed by Facebook from its website in July 2007 source: BLISS In most of the USA and in many other countries, women may breastfeed in public in any way they deem necessary. But not on Facebook. When confronted with its capricious and annoying actions, Facebook staff members mumble vague nonsense that shows how clueless they are --- and how they contribute to American cultural foolishness, prudery, and denigration of women. Facebook has almost as many users as the population of California. It has a responsibility to be better than it currently is. Even though it does leave some breastfeeding photos up (for a while?), it should be ashamed of its official intolerance towards women, issue a wideranging apology, and leave all breastfeeding photos alone.   2007 September 04. A couple of weeks ago, the Guelph Mercury carried an article that explains fully the lack of appearance this year of a 2008 Breast of Canada calendar. From 2002 on, the calendar built up a terrific international following bordering on devotion, fully justified. TERA considers the loss a serious one in women's breast health awareness and women's topfreedom. Meanwhile, we wish Sue Richards, the calendar's creator, nothing but the most splendid health.   2007 August 29. A woman in Lexington, Kentucky is on a campaign to get people to recognize the importance and legality of breastfeeding. In June, Brooke Ryan was told at an Applebee's restaurant to cover herself with a blanket while breastfeeding her son because someone had complained. It happens that in Kentucky it's illegal to interfere with breastfeeding, which is exactly what the restaurant did. What's Ryan's opinion of this particular event? "That's like telling Rosa Parks she still had to sit in the back of the bus, but we'll give her a blanket to make her more comfortable." We couldn't say it any better. Meanwhile, Ryan is organizing a "nurse-out" in front of the restaurant where she was accosted. Date: September 8. This has apparently spread to all Applebee's restaurants across the country on that date at noon. Reason: the official corporate Applebee's response to the above incident stated, "We believe that this franchisee made a reasonable and lawful request of this guest in order to promote a pleasant and comfortable experience for all of its guests." No, Applebee's, it was both UNREASONABLE and in Kentucky UNLAWFUL.   2007 August 26. The rock band Poison showed a video during one of its performances at a fair in Oregon that included a shot of a topfree woman. For this, demands for apologies from everyone involved have cluttered the news. Our favourite comments: "Those audiences generally include a large number of children and it's important that their presence be taken into account." And: "Women's breasts are luscious things but they're dirty too and should stay put away, in most cases." Although we haven't seen the video, we'd bet that American prudery and its associated sex obsession (with misuse of language) are far more dangerous to children than an image of a topfree woman.   2007 August 21. Another victory for Liz Book! It was announced today that Florida's 5th Judicial Circuit Court of Appeal ruled in favour of a woman's right to protest topfree. The issue is fairly simple: the law as written in Daytona Beach, where Liz Book has been arrested, specifically states that this is legal, as it is under the US Constitution's First Amendment. This has not prevented Daytona Beach from vindictively now wanting this case, originating in 2004, to be retried or reviewed. Liz's lawyer, the famous Lawrence Walters, has filed for sanctions against the city for abuse of court rules, and $100,000 in damages for the city's continual violations of Liz Book's civil rights. Liz Book and Linda Meyer (see next item) are the most valiant and successful topfree activists in North America, and probably the world!   2007 August 21. In the Cambridge Times (Ontario, Canada) in July, a columnist wrote an arrogant article mostly against Linda Meyer, topfree activist from British Columbia. The best response was Linda's, a very lively one, printed today. Her concluding sentence: "I have been going topfree since I was four years old and I will continue to do so." TERA's co-ordinator had a letter on the same subject printed in July.   2007 August 14. In early August, an advice columnist was consulted by a father whose family lived next to a single woman who liked to sunbathe topfree. He was concerned that his twin teenage sons were hitting too many baseballs over the fence. The woman said the boys were "perfect gentlemen" when they came to retrieve them. She generally didn't move from lying on her stomach. Once, however, she asked them to apply sunscreen to her back. The advice giver said that the family should have almost no contact with the woman, and implied that seeing her breasts, should that ever happen, would be catastrophic.   2007 August 03. TERA's Co-ordinator was quoted at some length in an excellent article by John Schudlo on breast exposure and topfree rights in Niagara This Week. In it, Schudlo also quoted Mauren Connolly, a Physical Education and Women's Studies professor at Brock University, as saying that women don't care about this issue, whose gestures she called "meaningless." Was she referencing research, or merely putting forth her own opinion or bias as "the facts"? The author also quoted Gwen Jacob, the pioneer in the issue in Canada, who fought hard to win her case in 1996 against conviction for indecent exposure for a topfree walk in Guelph, Ontario in 1991.   2007 July 30. A Toronto columnist in the Globe and Mail told readers that women should go to any office job with their breasts completely covered. She also advised wearing nipple covers, just in case. Allowing breasts to move (more importantly: to be seen to move) was a horrible thing to do. TERA's Co-ordinator wrote back, in a letter printed on July 31: "Initially I thought it a joke, telling women at work to cover their breasts completely and even to wear nipple covers (Don't Be The Office Boob --- Life, July 30). But no, the author accepts sexualized hetero-male domination to the point of condoning things that are actually unhealthy. "Women's breasts need to move some. There is research suggesting that binding and exerting constant pressure on them is bad for the lymphatic system. Indeed, apart from fashion's constrictions, women don't need bras unless their breasts are big or they are engaged in sports that are rather uncommon in offices. "Work interactions aren't determined by clothing alone. If men misbehave because of it, they are the true office boobs."   2007 July 24. Breasts not Bombs was out today in San Francisco, protesting the war in Iraq, in connection with both the visit from House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the campaign of Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination for President. photo by Mark Grissom   2007 July 24. A North Carolina woman, Tabitha Redding, was told she could not breastfeed her son in a food court near where she worked, no matter how she did it. The reason: one person was reported to have been "offended." Her boss threatened to fire her. Only after she complained and there was a nurse-in at the mall did she get anywhere. The mall management then denied that any of its staff had been involved and said it was okay to breastfeed there.   2007 July 20. Earlier this month, breastfeeding activist Anna Swank of Columbus, Ohio, won a $2500 settlement via the Ohio Human Rights Commission because Lifestyle Family Fitness threatened to cancel her membership if she breastfed in a common area at the Kids' Club in one of its centres. The settlement also involved paying $2500 to the Ohio Breastfeeding Coalition for its educational purposes. LFF is also required to post the international breastfeeding symbol at its Kids' Club areas! More of interest here.   2007 July 07. In August 2006, Lass King was told to breastfeed her infant son in some place other than the company showroom of Fossil, a jewellery and accessories store in New York. After she complied, she was not allowed back in the showroom. An employee told her not to come back to the store at all. Recently she won a small amount from Fossil after she threatened to sue it. The New York Civil Liberties Union assisted, in the third such case it has been involved with in the past year. The store now understands that breastfeeding is a legal right there and has recently welcomed Ms. King and her son.   2007 July 06. Every year Columbus Ohio holds its ComFest, a large community arts event with many kinds of activities, displays, and entertainment. Topfree women are reasonably common. The news media and many blogs are always sure to comment, usually without understanding any of the issues involved. But what's to comment? This photo, by bloc7 on the flickr site, in which three women are being painted, is of a calm and ordinary scene from this year's ComFest, held June 22 to 24.   2007 July 04. We regret to announce two cancellations. First, the July 7 event in Rochester NY marking 15 years since the Rochester Topfree Seven were acquitted (July 7, 1992) will not take place. Second, the Breast of Canada calendar for 2008 will not be issued. Although it's possible that the BOC calendar will appear in the future from the same amazing person (Sue Richards in Guelph ON), nothing is definite at this point.   2007 July 03. The site Topfree Action is back, with information, news, photos, videos, and discussion. This site is unlike TERA's in many ways. It has more, although some items are marginal to TERA and some photos have faces blurred. It's worthwhile; and we support all sites that share our goal.   2007 June 17. Another woman has won damages for being arrested and seriously mistreated for being topfree in New York. The incident dates from 2005 in New York City. How many women, we wonder, have the perseverance and patience (and money) to fight police misconduct in the courts? (Recall the recent case of Amy Gunderson.) Jill Coccaro won $29,000, a paltry sum given the reported details of the case. The date of her arrest, August 4, 2005, is exactly a week before the date of the arrest of four women in Moravia NY for exactly the same thing. Their case was dropped three months later after considerable hassle and expense. They did not sue.   2007 June 16. A few days ago in Denver, a woman was harassed for breastfeeding her son in Elitch Gardens, an amusement park. Kristin Skrydlak-simlai, from South Dakota, dropped her top to do so, close by a large swimming pool. Since she was wearing a bathing suit, what else was she supposed to do? According to her own report, staff accosted her and demanded she cover herself up while breastfeeding or go elsewhere. They continued to berate her, causing her son to scream and making feeding impossible. Then they called the police. Meanwhile, the boy breastfed, stopped, and fell asleep. Ms. Skrydlak-simlai replaced her top. The police arrived and threatened to arrest her for trespassing if she returned to the park. Her action had been completely legal. The park then had the gall to issue a statement that it did not try to coerce her to do anything but merely "offered" an option to her. (Someone needs to make it illegal for officials to create their own cover-up.) Although it would appear beyond the officials of this park, the person who needs to be approached in this sort of incident is the one complaining. A little education might go a long way. Meanwhile, bravo to Ms. Skrydlak-simlai! Today a nurse-in by about eight mothers and their children was held at the park without incident. A staff member of the park back-tracked further but confirmed that she expected women to breastfeed the way others around them demand. In TERA's view, that is an unacceptable position. It also runs contrary to Colorado law. (In New York and a few other states, the park could have been fined for what its officials did.)   2007 June 07. A week from today, ten years ago, TERA was formed. In these ten years, we operated under our mandate of helping women who get into difficulty simply for being topfree. We've assisted in some court cases that have been won, and some that haven't. We've provided information to countless people. We've written articles and given talks. And 100% of our funds have gone to women's legal expenses (none going to office expenses). It's easy for websites to come and go. We're proud to still be here and to be recognized around the world as an authoritative resource on the subject of women's topfreedom. Happy birthday to us? TERA was formed on June 14, 1997. If you too are glad we're still here, please consider marking our 10th anniversary by making a donation. You may send a check in any currency to our address in blue at the top of this page, or go through PayPal. For the latter possibility, press the button below to donate. (Send us an e-mail, please, telling us of your PayPal donation, so that it goes into the right account!)   Many thanks to all our many supporters and donors over the years! You have been the backbone of this organization, without whom it would not exist.   2007 June 06. A few weeks ago, photographs appeared of someone breastfeeding in public. Nothing too unusual in that. But this was someone famous. Actor Maggie Gyllenhaal was feeding her daughter Ramona in a park in New York. The American press had the usual field day, with people writing in many both good and foolish comments. It has long been TERA's position that women may breastfeed anywhere, any time, and in any manner suitable to them and their child. If they wish to cover themselves maximally, they may. If they wish to be completely topfree, they may. At last we have a real star (and splendid actor) leading the way on this issue. Bravo, Maggie Gyllenhaal! In a few movies, she has appeared completely naked. She is entirely comfortable with her body, despite American officialdom promulgating exactly the opposite attitude. The current Newsweek has a relevant article. (By the way, we don't recommend emulating photo no. 2 for effective breastfeeding. But kids poke and go at nipples from all sorts of positions from time to time.)   2007 May 10. Although Josephine Baker will hardly be known as a TERA example, a recent news item about her is instructive. One of her adopted sons tried and failed to send postcards of her through the US mail. When the USPS saw the topless pose of Baker in a watercolour painting, it labelled the postcards "pornographic advertising." Jean-Claude Baker tried to send the cards with a big CENSORED sign over the breasts, still with no success. Only when he got the help of the New York Civil Liberties Union did he prevail. TERA encourages its supporters to send topfree photos on postcards to see whether the USPS (or Canada Post) will play body-phobic censor or will have a better attitude than most government officials in the USA (or Canada). Feel free to send a card to us!   2007 May 03. It was announced today that there will be a celebration in Rochester, New York on July 7 to mark the 15th anniversary of the acquittal of the Rochester Topfree 7 on charges laid in 1986. That landmark decision was handed down on July 7, 1992. More details about the coming event will be p