College Media Network - Search the largest news resource for college students by college students Jobs and internships for students -

Women can bare it all in the Rose City

Did you know Portland allows women to go topless in public?

By Meaghan Daniels

Vanguard staff

Print this article

Published: Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Updated: Tuesday, November 24, 2009

toplesswom

Illustration by Kira Meyrick/Portland State Vanguard

Portland women have the right to bare their breasts in public and still be in compliance with the law. It seems like equality is alive and well in the Rose City, and it is one of the few cities where it is not illegal for women to go topless in public.

Oregon’s indecent exposure law only prohibits nudity that is intended to cause arousal in public. Portland created its own ordinance to include exposed genitalia, but there is no law against women baring their breasts in public.

The right to bare one’s breasts publicly is about freedom of expression and equality. Just because a woman can go topless in public does not mean it is an act of sexuality. Not everything is about sex and that is something people forget, especially in a city that contains a multitude of strip clubs.

If men are able to show their chests in public, why should women not be able to? Yes, men and women’s bodies are different. Yes, women have breasts. Yes, let’s embrace Portland’s law.

Two Portland State students recently decided to embrace this law along Northwest 23rd Avenue. Lauren Krueger is in a Women’s Studies Sophomore Inquiry course and she came up with this idea for her final project as a revolutionary feminist act.

She asked a guy who was also in the class to walk with her after she realized that most people in the class felt uncomfortable participating. But that is not to say that Krueger was not nervous herself: In fact, she was very nervous. She pushed through it with her male friend, both of them topless.

“I expected to get hassled by the law or possibly arrested while baring my breasts in public,” Krueger said.

They walked along the popular avenue, asking people if they could talk to them. They did not come across too many negative responses. Krueger said that most people who would have given them negative responses were fearful and would not talk to them or would completely avoid eye contact.

Krueger and her friend asked if people would like to know why they were doing it. They explained that they were participating in the movement for equality.

“We're trying to help women to perceive their breasts as natural parts of the body that shouldn't have to be shamefully hidden,” Krueger said.

Part of the reason they did this was so that men can distinguish between nudity and sexuality, and so that women can feel comfortable exposing their breasts in public.

Krueger asked people if they knew that what she was doing was not illegal. Shockingly, no one knew about the topless law in Portland.

Women having the ability to go topless brings Portland one step closer to gender equality. Sexual objectification and body-image issues need to end for women to be seen as equal and for them to be comfortable in their own skin. But for now, the topless law is a great step forward for equality.

   
  What do you think?
Is the issue of cell phones being used on the road really cause for concern? Are they another distraction making it more dangerous to drive, or is driving and using a phone no big deal?


Also, what about the topless law in Oregon? Is it a matter of gender equality, or have we perhaps lost a sense of modesty? Could driving topless while on the cell phone be the true culprit?


Send a letter to the editor and tell us what you think. E-mail opinion@dailyvanguard.com.
 

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

22 comments

Daniel k.
Sat Jan 9 2010 19:41
Years ago men could not go topless in the US whereas many places in the southern hemisphere topless was the norm. Now days clothing is designed to enhance ones sexuality. When visiting a topples or nude venue, this becomes quickly apparent.
Anonymous
Fri Dec 25 2009 23:29
@bisonex...we're so glad you don't live in Oregon too!
Your name
Sat Dec 19 2009 13:01
"There is a reason the human female breasts are external and not just internal as in other species: to attract the attention of the male." As if that's true, or even relevant? It happens to be popular speculation from Desmond Morris and has been thoroughly refuted by real scholars.

Nothing else the so-called "East-Coast Professor" says about this is either true or relevant. Taken very simply, her or his "argument" must lead to the banishing of all women from all public spaces, regardless of clothing, unless they are protected by men.

"East-Coast Professor" seems to be living on a coast of a country in the Middle East.

Bisonex
Sat Dec 12 2009 17:22
One word sums this up - REVOLTING!

Glad I don't live in Oregon.

D.R.
Sat Dec 5 2009 20:44
This is great! I talked to my US History teacher last year on this very same subject. You go girl!
celilo
Fri Dec 4 2009 17:12
Just three quick comments on Eastcoast-Professor's distinction between "freedom of expression" and "freedom of interpretation." First, the "lust activation" aspect of bare female breasts is a learned social convention, not shared by many other cultures so demonstrably part of human conditioning not the human condition. Second, lust is often activated when breasts are covered by, say, swimsuit tops, again demonstrating that bareness isn't really the issue. Finally, both men and women have breasts, with the same exact elements differing only in volume, so unless legal restrictions are somehow based on size, they are clearly misogynist. The formula that wherever/whenever it is ok for men to be shirtless then it is also ok for women, is just common sense since laws must apply to all citizens equally. Otherwise the "lust issue" is already well-covered by existing inter-gender social etiquette -- it is up to the "interpreters" to react correctly to the "expresser's" intent, not vice versa.
Lupe
Thu Dec 3 2009 16:25
Breast feeding and being topless in public are the same to me. What is so different??
John
Thu Dec 3 2009 10:52
There is nothing wrong with a women going topless. I thnk every women has a right to be topless if they want. If a man can do, then a women can do it. Its called equal rights. We just have a bunch of prudes and morons in this country. Dont worry about what everyone else is thinking, live your life for yourself. " GO FOR IT".
Sanman
Thu Dec 3 2009 00:06
To Anonymous, on Tue Dec 1 2009 11:13... How is top-freedom equality a moral issue? Do you base your decision on what is moral from the Bible? If so, maybe you should re-read it. Did you know that God commanded Isaiah to prophecy completely naked for 3 years? Did you know Jesus was naked when he washed his diciples' feet? Did you know Peter was naked while in his boat fishing? Did you know field workers in Bible times (including women who gleaned after the harvesters passed) were naked? People only had 1 or 2 items of clothing back then because there was no textile industry, and it would have been foolish to wear your clothes while working because you would get them dirty or torn. This is why when the Bible speaks of pledging a garmet for a promiss that it must be returned by sundown because that is the only way to keep warm at night (meaning, they're walking around naked during the day until they fulfil their pledge). I could offer several more examples, but if you would really like to understand how nudity is not imorral, go to figleafforum (dot com) for detailed Biblical accounts.
Dick Springer
Wed Dec 2 2009 21:59
I live in the other Portland (Maine). Here topfree is legal, but rarely practiced. Under Maine state law indecent exposure requires the exposure of genitals. In several cases courts here have ruled that a completely nude woman is not guilty of indecent exposure because women's genitals are internal and therefore not exposed.
equalrights
Wed Dec 2 2009 14:03
in France even the President's wife is topless; in America we are a bunch of Christian moralists who think it's wrong--no wonder France recovered from the recession faster than America!
Eric K
Tue Dec 1 2009 13:33
I think this is great. Women should be able to go top free anywhere a man can. The only way to change society is to to it by action. That is why I participate in the World Naked Bike Ride every year.
Anonymous
Tue Dec 1 2009 11:13
I seem to be the only person in Portland with a brain, in that I believe women should not be topless. I think it's interesting in your little fantasy world how you think that breasts are not sexual. Ask any guy on the street if he wants to see a woman topless and his response would most likely be, "Yeah, man! Why not?" Being topless should be between a husband and a wife (or a locker room, of course) whether you believe that breasts are sexual or not. This is not an issue over rights...this is an issue over morality, and right now, American culture is destroying the bounds of marriage.
I am a guy and just like any guy, I would like to see a girl topless. However, I understand that it's morally wrong and I wait until marriage to do so. We live in a society nowadays where the attitude is "If it feels good, do it," when it may not be what's best.
Here's another question...how come you aren't promoting for guys wear bras or to not go topless? Then there will be true equality.
Your name
Mon Nov 30 2009 11:59
hope she gets an A for her project! The people who say she's indecent are religious. My family's religion is Bran7hamite. The real Bran3hamite religion may be the world's strictest. The clothing they wear is sort of like 110 years ago. It is often taboo for Bran7hamite men to be topless. My dad raised me to be a Bran5hamite, but parenting in the extreme causes rebellion. Now I have done the opposite & become a complete nudist & even got brave enough to sign the petition for women's equality at Gotopless.org after making sure my info wouldn't show up. I think women should be allowed to be topless just like men.
Danglin
Mon Nov 30 2009 10:26
Austin, Texas has had topfree equality for decades.

In related news, the earth continues in it's orbit.

Russell
Fri Nov 27 2009 22:40
Women should have the same rights as men to be bare chested.Congrats for common sense,Portland.
Terry
Fri Nov 27 2009 18:59
Women's breast can be such a thing of beauty. And, should be enjoyed as much as any other work of art. They are so varied in appearance. If you had 100 women, many would have a similar appearance, but all would be different. Different shapes, sizes, and nipple variations. In Portland, thousands of people go to the rose gardens to see the variety and beauty. Why should breast be hidden away out of sight. I guess it goes back to the idea that your body parts belong to your husband, wife, boyfriend or girlfriend...as the case may be must be hidden from all others
Sue
Thu Nov 26 2009 11:01
Good for Lauren - why is it such a big deal?
Steve R.
Thu Nov 26 2009 10:54
That is wonderful news. Women should be able to be topless, go with out a shirt and feel free and wonderful. If a man can do it, so shouldn't a woman. The rest of the country needs to follow as well.
Eastcoast-Professor
Thu Nov 26 2009 08:40
fMRI studies have shown that men and women operate differently when it comes to the visual realm. A woman thinking she is not looking erotic or sexually desirable by being topless has NO impact on how a man (or for that matter, a teen boy)views her. Areas of the brain involved in lust are still activated. Sure, you may have 'freedom of expression', but you do not control another's "freedom of interpretation". There is a reason the human female breasts are external and not just internal as in other species: to attract the attention of the male.






log out