Fwd: the silver bullet: death to ORDINANCE NO. 2002 - 13

[sean <o2design@wsu.edu>]

>"I'm looking for law breakers." [snip]
>
>I'd rather have a law that punishes those who offend a top free 
>person with stares and gawks.  Punish those who are a real threat.

What law would a gawker be breaking?  If a topless female is 
revealing nothing in need of concealment then whey would this be 
different than staring at, say, her arm?  I fail to see how a person 
staring is a threat unless you are suggesting that a man staring at a 
woman's revealed breasts may indicate his willingness to verbally or 
physically assault her.  If that is the case, perhaps this is another 
practical reason to say it's not a good idea to (un)dress this way.

>
>Hope to see you all at the Woman's Rights Rally this saturday, 7/27 
>at 1pm at Friendship Square.  We'll have our petitions ready to sign 
>to put this to a referendum vote, or better yet, have the city 
>council draft a more reasonable law.

Will all women's views of their rights be represented, or only a 
feminist perspective on rights (and wrongs)?  If both, then am I to 
presume petitions will be on hand to both oppose and support the 
ordinance's representation of "women's rights"?  I suspect not, but I 
may be presuming too much.  Will there be speakers?  If so, will 
women of either persuasion on this issue be encouraged to speak?

-- 
Thanks,
s


         * * * * * * * *
         Sean Michael
         .dwg