Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Gay group criticizes transgender women for going topless on Delaware beach
June 3rd, 2010

http://www.dallasvoice.com/instant-tea/2010/06/03/gay-group-criticizes-transgender-women-for-going-topless-on-delaware-beach/ (http://www.dallasvoice.com/instant-tea/2010/06/03/gay-group-criticizes-transgender-women-for-going-topless-on-delaware-beach/)

The News Journal reports that some transgender women decided to bare their enhanced breasts on a public, non-topless beach over Memorial Day weekend, and the incident has left the city in a real uproar. Beach-goers complained to lifeguards, who asked the trans women to put their shirts back on and called police. The trans women complied before police arrived, but it wouldn't have mattered. The police chief acknowledges that they didn't break any laws, since they have male genitalia. According to Rehoboth law, "A male is guilty of indecent exposure if he exposes his genitals or buttocks under circumstances which he knows his conduct is likely to cause affront or alarm to another person."

One city commissioner says she plans to revisit the law in response to the incident. And the director of a local gay group is criticizing the trans women:

    "Technically it wasn't against the law," said Steve Elkins, executive director of CAMP Rehoboth, a nonprofit based in Rehoboth that aims to promote a positive environment for the gay and lesbian community.

Heh heh. I love it. See what happens when you have a double standard?

if we have enough trouble makers pointing out the fallacy of societies double standards things will change

You know what I think is funny? Practically everyone is exposed to boobs at one time or another, but we get all freaked out when it happens in public. Lots of babies get to see boobs from the time they're born. Straight men and lesbians get to play with them behind closed doors. Girls and women in the gym locker room see them on a regular basis. We even have cis men wandering around town quite legally with their moobs hanging out.

Seriously, people, WHAT'S THE BIG EFFING DEAL? ???

Boobs are toxic to children ages 1-17.

They were not ladies.

yes. It is a double standard and is both wrong and foolish.  however, the topless "ladies" did not do our cause any good. they just gave more ammunition to the haters who want to marginalize us and portray us as freaks.

We don't need help like that.

From the article, it seems the lifeguards asked the women to cover themselves and they did so.

So, calling the police seems to be a bit of an over reaction here. Possibly harrissment.

However, having separate laws for men and women does seem rather silly.

Here in the UK most laws are general so individual circumstances can be taken into consideration.

http://gouk.about.com/od/uknudebeaches/f/nudity_law_uk.htm (http://gouk.about.com/od/uknudebeaches/f/nudity_law_uk.htm)

Quote from: Susanne Pascale on June 05, 2010, 05:37:28 AMhowever, the topless "ladies" did not do our cause any good. they just gave more ammunition to the haters who want to marginalize us and portray us as freaks.

I know, I know...but then somebody else has to challenge these silly laws and set a precedent. People on the fringe are in the best position to do so: men with moobs, FTMs who are legally female but who've had top surgery, women who have had a double mastectomy and no reconstructive surgery, and MTFs who are legally male but have visible breast growth.

Do any of these laws specify an age range, or is it illegal for all little girls, regardless of equipment, to go topless, too? It's just stupid and frustrating.

that particular place says after the age of 5.

Quote from: LordKAT on June 05, 2010, 01:09:28 PMthat particular place says after the age of 5.

I would have been in serious tunafish if I'd been there as a kid, then. Five, indeed.

Someone has to do stuff like that. I don't know if the way they actually did it was the right way, but laws have to be challenged at times.

Like, personally, I wouldn't go topless in public because I don't want to be assaulted or raped.

Quote from: LordKAT on June 05, 2010, 01:09:28 PM
that particular place says after the age of 5.

Wow. We wouldn't want anyone seeing a six-year-old's flat chest, now would we?

Quote from: SilverFang on June 05, 2010, 01:14:28 PMWow. We wouldn't want anyone seeing a six-year-old's flat chest, now would we?

I don't think I would ever recover from the trauma.

There was someone who knows these guys and said they are female to male transsexuals. The 'surgically enhanced' breasts were the removal of them. I was pretty angry when I first read this article thinking they were women but in fact they are men.

That puts an entirely different light on the whole matter Dana.

Here is a link to the story that gives more details.

http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2010/06/04/topless-trans-women-told-to-cover-up-but-not-arrested-because-of-male-genitalia/ (http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2010/06/04/topless-trans-women-told-to-cover-up-but-not-arrested-because-of-male-genitalia/)

It is pretty interesting to think about how dangerous the display of boobs in public is. It will surely cause the destruction of the entire world as we know it. Save us from the boobs!!!

Quote from: Dana Lane on June 06, 2010, 09:31:56 AM
There was someone who knows these guys and said they are female to male transsexuals. The 'surgically enhanced' breasts were the removal of them. I was pretty angry when I first read this article thinking they were women but in fact they are men.

Not quite. The person says they are "transmasculine/genderqueer," not FTM transsexuals or trans men. And nothing was said about surgical removal...sounds like a bunch of genderqueers with natural breasts took their shirts off.

This is only one report to contradict the "news" story. I for one will be taking both stories with a grain of salt. Especially the part about these folks' having "male genitalia." Were they asked to drop their drawers and verify that for the cops?

I like what someone said about surgical enhancement--interesting that the reporter mentioned that in the original article. Did someone personally interview each of the topless people and say, "Excuse me, miss, are those natural?" Or did they get up really close and see surgical scars? Or did they assume that since these people were "actually" men, they must have had surgery?

A lot of people apparently don't realize that HRT can bestow quite ample chest equipment on a lot of trans women. They're probably the same people who think that HRT will endow me with a full-size, functional penis. ::)

Well, the reason exposed female breasts are taboo is they cause men to get horny and those men lose control of themselves and that leads to sin. 

"I can't control myself so I have to control you."

Is there a problem here?

Quote from: Julie Marie on June 06, 2010, 05:31:15 PM
Well, the reason exposed female breasts are taboo is they cause men to get horny and those men lose control of themselves and that leads to sin. 

"I can't control myself so I have to control you."

Is there a problem here?

I have always thought that if men are so unable to control themselves, they should not be allowed to hold positions of responsibility.

Sexual positions do not count...

Holy crap, who even knows that the actual story is.

http://www.towleroad.com/2010/06/transgenders-go-topless.html (http://www.towleroad.com/2010/06/transgenders-go-topless.html)

Interesting comments on that story, Dana. The ones that bother me say that since the people in question identify as women, they should follow all laws as they apply to women.

Yeah, use that logic with regard to bathrooms. If you are an MTF in the women's restroom, someone calls you on it, and your picture ID labels you as male, you are in shaving cream up to your neck.

Until very recently, no laws gave a hang how people identified. For the most part, the law still doesn't care. Legally speaking, what mattered most (and still matters) was the legal definition and the documentation belonging to the people in question. If these were MTFs with male identification cards, they apparently did nothing illegal.

I don't really care why they went topless or why they initially refused to cover up. Yeah, maybe it's tacky. Maybe it's all for attention. Maybe they weren't making an ideological statement. But for me, the point is that existing laws not only do not account for people like us, they are often uniformly used against us. So people who are legally one sex who identify as another--or even people who have had their documents changed--are usually subjected to the MOST restrictive interpretation of the law, not the one that is most appropriate to their situation. Case in point, Littleton v Prange.

It's only so useful to protest, "You can't have it both ways! If you identify as a woman, then follow all the laws for women!" You know what? Number one, this particular law is a ridiculous and antiquated double standard. Number two, the laws regarding the sexes are all over the place, and there's no set guideline. The law does not uniformly treat trans women as women (especially when such people are arrested), yet people want trans women to voluntarily kowtow to all laws pertaining to women. Yet another double standard.

Trans people don't fit the established categories. Incidents like these will continue to happen until the law starts to catch up with us.

You make some good points Arch.  And if we could store incidents like these and make them available and easily accessible to all members and advocates of our community, we might be able to readily use them to make the mainstream see they are in fact "all over the place" on issues like this.

But the reality is, when an incident occurs, people react to that in any way that they feel is right.  They see breasts and the person becomes a woman.  They see an "M" on their driver's license and the person becomes a man, regardless how that person presents.  And then they decide how the situation should be handled.  Typically that decision is highly influenced by their comfort levels. 

Can we say "knee jerk reaction"?

Of course, if it might be a story that sells, the media jumps right in and tells it.  In this case, someone allegedly in the know says the two are FTMs.  The media stories say MTFs.  If they were FTMs and they had mastectomies, the boob issue shouldn't be an issue regardless of what's between their legs.  If they were MTFs and had breasts they should be held to the same expectations (and laws) as any other woman and they should have known that.  If they were somewhere in between, then.....

And I guess that's where many people get confused as to how to react to this situation.  Maybe relaxing the puritan laws a bit is a much easier solution.

Quote from: Julie Marie on June 07, 2010, 05:24:42 AM
If they were FTMs and they had mastectomies, the boob issue shouldn't be an issue regardless of what's between their legs.  If they were MTFs and had breasts they should be held to the same expectations (and laws) as any other woman and they should have known that.  If they were somewhere in between, then.....

Good observations.

The outliers are the most interesting people to test the law. What if they're FTMs who HAVEN'T had top surgery? Should they still be required to obey the laws pertaining to the gender they claim, regardless of what's on their IDs? All of a sudden, the logic of some people's argument becomes a little problematic. And what about genderqueers and androgynes? I'm sure some would say to go with the most restrictive law if a person identifies with both legal sexes. Then, on the other hand, what about people who identify as non-gendered, as some androgynes do? Guess they don't have to obey any sex-specific laws at all.

Maybe I should be writing a comment on the story instead of just here...

Does this follow the first rule of California nude (clothing optional) places that they tend to be full of the last people you really want to see naked?

Quote from: tekla on June 07, 2010, 03:27:54 PM
Does this follow the first rule of California nude (clothing optional) places that they tend to be full of the last people you really want to see naked?

Sorry about that, Kat. I'll stay home next time.  :D

Quote from: ƃuıxǝʌ on June 07, 2010, 04:34:10 PM
From the perspective of a protest, this would be great; i.e. if these trans women were denied their gender marker change in court and baring their breasts was, in essence, them waving their middle finger at the legal system, "You won't legally acknowledge me as a woman, so I'm not bound by the laws which apply to women and can hang my tits out where ever I like."

A titty protest! I'm in.
lol