LAST WEEK, I WAS IN THE FOURTH OF July parade. It was great fun, and you could see the range of efforts that people put into their entries. There was everything from the basic bike riders to the Daughters of the American Revolution (who rode in a Toyota, but who cares?) to the extremely well-thought out floats like the transplanted New Yorkers.
It all served as example of the equality we share as Americans, but it also reminded me of the inherently discriminatory treatment of women in Santa Monica — land of the “progressives,” home to the “open-minded,” sanctuary for the “spiritually enlightened.”
I believe that our city is sexist. Santa Monica sexually discriminates in an unfair way. You’ve seen it almost every day, and you’ll see it every day this summer at the beach. Our own police force will likely enforce it with great zeal this summer. It is a law that serves no purpose, is absurd in the reasoning behind it and I think it should be abolished. I would heartily support a proposition, a referendum, or even a City Council motion to reconsider it.
The law is the Santa Monica Municipal Code on topless women.
A woman is not allowed to do as a man, who can walk around town shirtless. He can wash his car without a shirt on. He can tan at the beach. He can walk his dog or play ball with his kids. He can have flabby, floppy pectorals and no one says a thing. He can proudly display a hairy and obese chest lawfully. His areolas are fair game for all the world to visually enjoy.
But not a woman’s. This is sexist. It is discrimination. And the City Council should do something about it.
The law reads: “(a) It shall be unlawful for any female to expose the areolas of her breasts … on public beaches, public streets, public parks or other public property within the City. The provisions of this Section shall not apply to persons ten years of age or younger. Moreover, this Section does not prohibit women from breastfeeding infants on any public property. (b) Any person violating the provisions of this Section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be fined an amount not to exceed five hundred dollars or be imprisoned for a period not to exceed six months or both.”
Now, to be clear, given the wackiness factor of our City Council, I am not advocating that the men of the city be required to wear a shirt at all times. I like the ability to go shirtless, and I like the fact that so many others do too.
I want the women of our fair city to be able to comfortably enjoy the same rights, privileges and benefits of our society as I have.
The women of this city should be allowed to go shirtless anywhere a man can do it — the parks, the beaches, strolling down the street on a sunny Tuesday morning. They should be allowed to enjoy the warmth of the sun on their breasts as much as a man can.
I think this is a much more important issue, on an equal rights basis, than the endless lip service to “protecting the rights of the homeless” that goes on at most of the City Council meetings.
The City Council are all about the headline. Let them make a real headline, with something that will not only enhance the quality of life for the residents, but make Santa Monica the number one tourist spot in California within weeks.
This would be a tremendous boon for our economy. The Europeans would finally have a place in America where they could relax comfortably on the beach topless. Businessmen would swamp the local hotels. I’d be willing to bet a steak dinner at The Galley, that we would have a tremendous and sustained increase in our tourism rates if we went topless.
I know some people are going to say, “It’s immoral.” Hogwash. Show me where in The Bible it says that men, but not women, can go shirtless. “It’ll be the end of society” others will cry. Doesn’t seem to have hurt France, Italy or Spain.
The publicity we would garner would be worth millions, perhaps billions of dollars, and for once, we could use our ‘wacky factor’ to our advantage.
There is nothing inherently different about a man’s areola versus a woman’s. They should be treated the same under the law.
This is not likely to taken up by the City Council, they have much more important things to do, like make sure we tear down trees and then replace them with... trees.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on July 10, 2007. Read the original PDF.