From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
SACto mammaphobes try to squelch topfree protest
SUN's opinion: "Mammaphobia and femaphobia rule in Sacramento, as a federal judge refuses to shield topfree women peaceniks from gender discrimination and Stalinist repression by California Highway Patrol. "
[ Mammaphobic U.S. judge bans peace breasts.]
------------------
Saturday, November 5, 2005
(SF Chronicle)
SACRAMENTO/
Judge tosses a blanket on topless protest/
Breasts Not Bombs told nudity
not part of free-speech rights
Lynda Gledhill, Greg Lucas,
[SF] Chronicle Sacramento Bureau
Copyright ©2005 SF Chronicle
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/11/05/BAGOLFJBB11.DTL
Sacramento -- A federal judge denied on Friday [ 4 Nov. 2005]
a request from a group of Mendocino women who
wanted to protest topless on the grounds of the [California] state
Capitol.
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 [ Nov. 7,
the day before a statewide special election].
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."
Group members, whose protest on the west steps of the Capitol is intended
to contrast the "indecent" initiatives backed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on the November [8th ] ballot with their "natural and decent" breasts,
sought a temporary restraining order prohibiting CHP officers
from arresting women who protest topless.
The First Amendment protects their right to protest bare breasted, the
group argued. "The very act is a dynamic and fully expressive statement
worthy of constitutional protection," their brief asserts.
[..... etc.]
[ For the rest of this article,
please see:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/11/05/BAGOLFJBB11.DTL ]
.......
Copyright ©2005 SF Chronicle
.........
###
[ Comment by SUN:
" The California Highway Patrol threatened to arrest anyone [* ]
who went topless."
Really?
Would the Chips arrest a MAN who goes topless?
Or will they apply
a double standard,
discriminating against females? ]
......
------------------
Saturday, November 5, 2005
(SF Chronicle)
SACRAMENTO/
Judge tosses a blanket on topless protest/
Breasts Not Bombs told nudity
not part of free-speech rights
Lynda Gledhill, Greg Lucas,
[SF] Chronicle Sacramento Bureau
Copyright ©2005 SF Chronicle
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/11/05/BAGOLFJBB11.DTL
Sacramento -- A federal judge denied on Friday [ 4 Nov. 2005]
a request from a group of Mendocino women who
wanted to protest topless on the grounds of the [California] state
Capitol.
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 [ Nov. 7,
the day before a statewide special election].
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."
Group members, whose protest on the west steps of the Capitol is intended
to contrast the "indecent" initiatives backed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on the November [8th ] ballot with their "natural and decent" breasts,
sought a temporary restraining order prohibiting CHP officers
from arresting women who protest topless.
The First Amendment protects their right to protest bare breasted, the
group argued. "The very act is a dynamic and fully expressive statement
worthy of constitutional protection," their brief asserts.
[..... etc.]
[ For the rest of this article,
please see:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/11/05/BAGOLFJBB11.DTL ]
.......
Copyright ©2005 SF Chronicle
.........
###
[ Comment by SUN:
" The California Highway Patrol threatened to arrest anyone [* ]
who went topless."
Really?
Would the Chips arrest a MAN who goes topless?
Or will they apply
a double standard,
discriminating against females? ]
......
For more information:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network