In 2016, three women went topless in a beach in Laconia, New Hampshire. One was doing yoga, while the other two were sunbathing. When they refused to cover themselves after beach attendees complained, they were arrested. The Laconia law bans sex and nudity in public places but specifically applies to women by prohibiting the "showing of female breast with less than a fully opaque covering of any part of the nipple." These women acted in coordination with the Free the Nipple campaign, a global group advocating for the right to be topless in public places. Is the law under which they were arrested justified? Does the law violate the rights of the women (such as free expression or sexual discrimination)? Is this a good example of restricting offending conduct that should be justified -- or not?
I do not believe that the law under which these women were arrested are justified as it is discriminatory against women and places inequitable laws across genders. Though women have breasts and men do not, they are both the same part of the body and are not necessarily "reproductive" organs on the female nor the male and are highly sexualized on the female body. Though there are some beaches designated as topless beaches where it is known that women may have their breasts out, those beaches are not located in places such as New Hampshire where it is illegal. It is understood that male and females chests look slightly different, but if a woman would like to be topless in an appropriate location or beach, she should be able to choose to do so without laws discriminating against that. Perhaps if there were more designated places as topless beaches/ public areas, it would also make it more convenient not only for those who choose to be topless, but for those who do not want to be in that environment. Women being topless does not harm another individual should not be considered nudity. The argument of toplessness is sexist towards women because their breasts have been sexualized and does not actually cause any harm to others which Mill would argue is then is not violating society. Though historically it has been restricted due to discomfort, overtime society changes and laws ought to change with the ever evolving society and we need to reevaluate the premises on which ones such as this were created.
ReplyDelete