The Times OnLine Editorial Page for August 25, 1997



Letters to the Editors

Skins vs shirts

Editor:

Recently, a number of municipal politicians have alleged, either explicitly or implicitly, that municipal governments in Ontario are legally unable to prohibit women from baring their breasts at public swimming pools; in the words of one of them, these governments have "no power to regulate the mode of dress of persons in a public place."

However, most - if not all - municipal governments in Ontario prohibit cross-dressing at public swimming pools, and/or the wearing of Brazilian-style (as distinguished from American-style) thong bikini bottoms, even though neither legally constitutes a publicly indecent act.

If municipal governments in Ontario are legally able to prohibit either cross-dressing at public swimming pools, or the wearing of Brazilian-style thong bikini bottoms there, then they are also legally able to prohibit women from baring their breasts there!

In any case, I urge every municipal government in Ontario to pass a resolution endorsing Scarborough West MPP Jim Brown's private member's bill, the Municipal Amendment Act 9 (by-laws respecting nudity), 1997, which, if it becomes law, will give all of them the same legal authority to prohibit women from baring their breasts in public places in general as they have to prohibit female strippers in adult entertainment establishments from choosing to allow their customers to touch their breasts.

Helen St.Claire
Sunderland


Editor:

Re the ongoing controversy over the fact that women's public exposure of their breasts for certain reasons is no longer a legally indecent act in Ontario.

Gwen Jacob, Anne Hansen and other "topless protesters" have demonstrated against Canadian Criminal Code. Section 173 (1)(a) - which concerns public indecency - because they falsely believe that it acts on a sexist double standard; they have not demonstrated against it because it acts on a puritanical value system, or because it violates women's (and men's) body autonomy per se. To borrow a quote from Ms. Hansen about breasts - "sexual, but only when a woman chooses to present (it) as such"; or that men have sexualized it.

How can the concept of "tolerance" be defined in Canadian law such that it truthfully be stated that a woman exposing her breasts in public does not exceed the "community standard of tolerance", but a woman exposing her (or a man exposing his) genitals in public does?

Sheldon Warnock
Beaverton
1