- Joined
- May 20, 2016
- Messages
- 34,432
- Reaction score
- 15,875
LOL in this country a woman can mow her lawn topless and the cops can't do shit. We hashed this dumb crap out over 20 years ago,
The court fight
"In 1991, Jacob was found guilty of one count of committing an indecent act and fined $75. During her court case, she argued that women's breasts are just fat tissue, not unlike men's.
But in his ruling, the judge said a woman's breast is "part of the female body that is sexually stimulating to men both by sight and touch," and should not be uncovered in public.
In 1996, the Ontario Court of Appeal overturned Jacob's conviction, saying "there was nothing degrading or dehumanizing in what the appellant did. The scope of her activity was limited and was entirely non-commercial. No one who was offended was forced to continue looking at her."
Moreover, the court ruled that Jacob did not exceed "the community standard of tolerance when all of the relevant circumstances are taken into account."
The court did not rule on the constitutionality of the issue, though Jacob's lawyer had argued that her client had the same constitutional right to go topless as men did."
It blows my mind how a guy (that judge) can think out and write out that reasoning - that women's breasts should be kept from public sight because they give men boners - and not realize how illogical it is. Like, I understand it as a more visceral reaction or impulse, but to actually lay it out in all of its naked (giggity) silliness and still stick by it is absurd.
