Nudity is legal in the UK for everyone, that's a non story. UK is not America.
Microblog Memes
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
Rad.
It would have been icing on the cake if trans men would have been in the same protest, also topless, but they weren't censored lol
Damn, these people are bold as fuck. Get it!
Malicious compliance at its best.
This is fucking rad.
Isn't it also not illegal to be topless. Pretty sure that one applies in Scotland as well anyway. Simply being naked isn't a crime, doing it to cause distress is though. A protest like this would be fine.
In America most men are overweight or obese and have pendulous lumps on their chests with nipples attached. Personally I don't love seeing them, but when the weather is right, they are all over the goddamn place. It's absolutely ludicrous that women can't do the same. If there were any logical rule it would be don't show your chesticles unless you are a woman who uses them for feeding a child OR everybody gets to have their tits out regardless of any gender types. Pick one and go with it, but the current laws are base AF.
Isn't it technically legal there for women to be topless, too?
Edit: a bit dated, but it seems that they can go topless only in a few state.
Everyone can choose to have their tits out!
My kind of party!
Austin actually has a city ordinance with more or less this exact logic. Once you’ve seen a dozen or so average women with their chests uncovered at the pool, it loses any excitement it may have initially held.
actually proud of Scotland for once, not the government but the people
It's the UK supreme court, not a Scottish court, that decided to stomp over all the progress we had made with trans rights.
The Scottish Parliament tends to be considerably more left wing than the UK Parliament. Left to their own devices they would probably be much more like a Scandinavian country.
But actually, yes, the Scottish people are indeed awesome.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is what we call a brilliant catch-22 situation.
What do they mean by "biological" women? There are different characteristics to biological markers: gonodal, genetic / chromosomal, anatomical, hormonal. All can be manifested differently.
They have three categories: "biological woman," which is a fertile cis woman with XX chromosomes and a vulva; "biological man," which is a fertile or formerly fertile cis man with XY chromosomes; and undesirables, who are everyone else and are referred to by whichever terminology is convenient for them at any given point.
That's part of what their protest is getting at — as you highlight, even "biological sex" is pretty complex (In science, I have heard that the "three G's" (Gonads, genetics, genitals) model is the standard definition, but scientists who research biological sex seem to consider this an extreme oversimplification). Fuzzy definitions like this are fine in science, but things get much messier when we try to write these things into law. One of my problems with the recent Supreme Court ruling on transgender rights is how they use the phrase "biological woman", as if it is a simple matter.
I find this especially striking because I'm a cis woman who has plenty of experience of being treated poorly due to being a woman, and I feel like my "biological sex" (as in gonads, genetics and genitals) don't factor into it much; far more significant is whether I am perceived as a woman, and this is why "gender" can be far more useful than "biological sex" in these discussions.