Of course, nothing would happen because men can go topless at sporting events and do so all the time. Fembot-Liberal-nutcases commenting on the page seem to think that there is no difference between a man's chest and a woman's breasts.
Proactive Indifference writes:
Human Rights Violation?Right, because men have had the constitutional right to bare their breasts since confederation? What breasts? Also, the last time I checked, the arena (and all private venues) reserved the right to remove anyone. I wonder how many men are removed compared to women? If more men are removed, is that discrimination based on gender?
If a man had bared his chest, nothing would have happened. It is common at sporting events for bare chested men, often with painted letters, to be shown off on camera. So why not a woman? This game was in Vancouver, and since 2008, women have had a right to legally bear their breasts. The arena authorities had no right to remove the woman. Since they would not even have asked a man to leave, this constitutes as a sexual harassment/human rights violation based on gender.
Gotta love North American culture...Because I forgot that consensual physical contests should be curbed but involuntary exposure to sexual body parts, as long as it's a woman exposing herself to a man is ok in all but the most repressed societies.
It's OK to knock the head off a player, bare knuckle scrap (all crimes in society) yet a woman hurts no one with a part of her body that is legal to be in public with (in most provinces) and she is treated like a criminal? Give me a break, is sexuality worse than violence?
Although most people would not put baring breasts on the same level as a man exposing his genitals, it is still in the same category since they are both sexual body parts. So what would happen if a man exposed his genitals? He'd be put in jail and called a pervert. But this wanton, intoxicated woman is somehow revered? I don't think that she should be in jail, but I'd describe her behaviour to be worse (more offensive) than a green-man handstand which is also banned in the Rogers Arena. Yes, men in tights are disgusting when viewed at the wrong angle.
Offense is not the right word to describe my reaction to this behaviour. One would be hard-pressed to find a warm-blooded hetero-sexual, non-theist man who would be offended by the display of breasts. I'm sure I would feel differently if my sons were watching at the time, but since West-Coast games are broadcast at 9pm so the little kiddies are away in bed, but I'm sure there are a few mothers and fathers who have feelings stronger than mine about this incident.
However, I am a concerned by the trend and the comical attitudes everyone takes. Everyone knows that nobody is allowed to criticize a woman today [full stop]. A woman is free to do whatever she wants [full stop]. At least that is the prevailing opinion.
If left up to young men, they'd be happy to have women bare breasts as much as possible. I was when I was younger - heck, I'm more than happy to see an unexpected free show and probably will until the day I die. But, to say that a woman's bare breasts are no different than a man's is ridiculous and it is time to let this idea die. It was used in Ontario to successfully challenge the law outlawing bare breasts in public. To the "surprise" of everyone and disappointment of some, breasts are not routinely bared in public here. Apart from outdoor concert events, (having not been to one in over a decade, I can't say whether phone cameras have reduced the behaviour, if anything it seems to increase it) social standards, decorum and personal sense of decency have kept breasts covered in public for the most part.
To feminists who hilariously try to argue that breasts are not sexual, I would ask one question: What kind of assault is it if a man grabs a woman's breast? If you say sexual assault, then it means that breasts are inherently sexual. When a woman bares her breasts, her body sends signals to any male pair of eyes (connected through neurons and chemical reactions to a pair external sex organs) in view. I see no reason that, if such signals are unwanted or done in a way meant to tease or distract that it could not be considered sexual harassment. The man in my flip-side comparison would be jailed and put on a sex offenders list. Why is there such a disparity of reaction to the woman's "crime" which varies only in severity.
To be clear, I agree with the Ontario law in that it should not be automatically be crime for a female to display her breasts in any circumstances. But, it is one thing to lay on a beach (which is the only place breasts are commonly bared in public in Europe) and another still for a woman to go walking through a children's park or live television. Perhaps we're generally too uptight in North America, but it does not mean that anything goes.
Where, as a supposedly tolerant society can we draw the line on personal behaviour. Currently, men have as many social boundaries as people can think of... but women ...