Brave woman fights for my right to go topless in public

I sigh. Here’s the first I read of this, in the Daily News yesterday (another great headline, DN!):

Topless artist sues over bust

Holly Van Voast is tired of getting busted.

The breast-baring artist filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday in Manhattan, charging the NYPD repeatedly violated her constitutional right to tour the city without wearing a shirt — or handcuffs. “The NYPD needs to be taught the proper way to handle bare breasts,” said her lawyer, Ron Kuby. [Oh, Ron!]

Frequent flasher Van Voast, 46, cited 10 arrests, including one near a “Hooters” restaurant. [Nice touch there.] The court papers note the state Court of Appeals has ruled women can legally bare their breasts in public.

The NYPD had no response to the lawsuit. [Hm]

— Larry McShane

Now, this is one of the times that both the Daily News and the New York Times report on the same case. So we now have a great opportunity to compare how a tabloid and a great newspaper treat a story. The Times headline — “Topless Woman? Move On, Police Are Told” alone suggests the difference in journalistic approach.

Well, yes, but the NYT has some zinger quotes. Take a look at the last four paragraphs in which NYPD officers weigh in. Body paint is mentioned.

So. I admire Ms. Van Voast for sticking out her chest for women’s rights, but given what’s been going on in our world (see my category The Global War Against Women), I ask her to consider taking up a graver aspect of the cause like, maybe, religious fundamentalists v women? Given the way religious fundamentalist require women to dress, I’m sure Ms. Van Voast can broaden her legal scope satisfactorily.

Meanwhile, I’m not running around topless, but I am ever so grateful to Ms. Van Voast for suing for my right to do so.

This entry was posted in A. Why sue and who sues?, Law, suits and order and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.