studio36uk wrote:
LET'S PUT THIS URBAN MYTH TO BED

"no shirt, no shoes, no service, by order of the health code / health department" claims are 100% bunkum!

see: http://www.barefooters.org/health-dept/

Barefooters surveyed almost all of the US states' health departments, more than once, on the question of shoes [foot coverings] and NONE claimed that there were any health regulations, codes, ect, that were violated by a CUSTOMER entering a place of business including a restaurant without shoes. Some, but not all, in response to the barefooters question remarked that if any requirement exists in their particular state that it applies ONLY to EMPLOYEES and food service operators themselves... but NOT customers

Here is the response to barefooters from NY state. Responses from other states are linked from their page above.



I fully expect that if you asked the [additional] question about shirts the answers would be the same.

---

Those of us who are old enough know that those signs started appearing in the ca mid-1960s and were directed at keeping out hippies. It may be a matter of a particular place's policy but it is certainly not now and never was a health code issue.



Studio36

Wow, I didn't know that! But I certainly agree that not having a shirt, or shoes for that matter, is definitely not a serious health code issue. Nobody is eating off of the floor or off of my chest and my body isn't leaking fluids onto people's plates. I mean, even if it WAS leaking fluids, a shirt wouldn't stop it!!

studio36uk wrote:
LET'S PUT THIS URBAN MYTH TO BED

interesting

RennsportPhotography wrote:
Want to be bold? Try waking down any street in NYC with an unloaded shotgun, action open, all legal and see how many cops you meet with guns drawn.

Just because something is legal does not mean most people will know it...including police.

I'm not fighting for gun laws though. We all are passionate about something different. I'm writing a few articles for magazines now and delving into other women's rights issues from this such as women's wages in professional careers as compared to men's, and pro choice decisions when it comes to a woman's body and her fertility.

Just because people don't know it doesn't mean I won't try to help change it.

studio36uk wrote:
"Those of us who are old enough know that those signs started appearing in the ca mid-1960s and were directed at keeping out hippies. It may be a matter of a particular place's policy but it is certainly not now and never was a health code issue.

Studio36

Precisely.
Now they're directed at keeping out bewbs.

SPRINGHEEL  wrote:

j3_photo wrote:

I keep watching it, though. Hope springs eternal in the human breast.

So to speak.

MoRina wrote:
I don't want to see anyone topless in a restaurant, male or female. 

Beach?  Go for it.  I wish full nudity was allowed at beaches in designated areas at least.

Why can't people just go nude and topless where they want?  They're not hurting anybody.

Colorado Model Amber wrote:
If I saw someone get topless in a bar/restaurant while I was eating or even had my kids around I'd find it very disrespectful. Did you ask the people around you if it was okay or give them a heads up?

And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee
- - - Matthew 18:9 [KJ Cambridge Ed.]




Studio36

Dario Western wrote:

Why can't people just go nude and topless where they want?  They're not hurting anybody.

Society convinces itself that it's wrong to do certain things. In African countries, tribal women don't wear shirts as their custom. The only reason why American society can consider it immoral is if they consider breasts as symbols of sex, which is a private act. That is the first thing most would think in our culture, and then second, as a source for food (which even then some people shy aware from the thought.)

I don't know why a woman's breasts are such a sin to bare when I see overweight men bearing larger breasts than mine in public parks and what not. THEY LOOK THE SAME.

Think about it, unsupporters. It's all in your heads.

Cheyenne Lutek wrote:

Society convinces itself that it's wrong to do certain things. In African countries, tribal women don't wear shirts as their custom. The only reason why American society can consider it immoral is if they consider breasts as symbols of sex, which is a private act. That is the first thing most would think in our culture, and then second, as a source for food (which even then some people shy aware from the thought.)

I don't know why a woman's breasts are such a sin to bare when I see overweight men bearing larger breasts than mine in public parks and what not. THEY LOOK THE SAME.

Think about it, unsupporters. It's all in your heads.

They don't all look the same and they are most definitely not perceived the same way.

Echo_ wrote:
Maybe I'm just too boring but I'd rather have people spend this much time and attention to gaining equal pay in the work place, or reducing gender stereotypes that get imposed on children.

You have to make progress one thing [OK, two things] at a time.

Studio36

Echo_ wrote:
Maybe I'm just too boring but I'd rather have people spend this much time and attention to gaining equal pay in the work place, or reducing gender stereotypes that get imposed on children. I don't really buy the whole fighting for woman equality in this regard, I'm all for people dressing and not dressing how ever they please but to say its a big step? I disagree, we should be working harder at reducing our rape culture for that matter instead of just making it legal to go bare, seems like a lazy way to go about it.

But  congratulations on making such an impact either way, it gets people talking which is always good ! Plus the pictures at the restaurant that didnt kick you out look really good

In Saudi Arabia, some women leaders don't feel that allowing women to drive or be in cars alone is a worthwhile issue to put time and attention on

In one city, Riyadh, many women are doing it anyway


not an analogy, just some perspective

Allen Henson wrote:
And this girls an international sensation in just a week. There are decade old models on here that haven't garnered that level of visibility.

http://evgrieve.com/2013/07/topless-din … -nsfw.html

http://fr.news.yahoo.com/cheyenne-lutek … 20611.html

http://now.msn.com/topless-diner-takes- … restaurant

http://gothamist.com/2013/07/11/nsfw_ph … =2#photo-2

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … urant.html

http://gothamist.com/2013/07/11/nsfw_ph … hp#photo-7

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/cus … -1.1394592

http://jezebel.com/on-sunday-evening-an … -719033965

http://www.miaminewsday.com/national/13 … legal.html

http://doninmass.com/2013/07/09/female- … -at-verso/

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/sex … bled=false

http://ilterremoto.com/news/cheyenne-lu … i-new-york

http://grandefratellino.gfpoint.com/sve … ico-25527/

http://news.sinovision.net/portal.php?m … aid=260116

etc

Maybe because "decade old" models aren't interested in publicity stunts disguised as women's rights advocacy.

Cheyenne Lutek wrote:
I don't know why a woman's breasts are such a sin to bare when I see overweight men bearing larger breasts than mine in public parks and what not. THEY LOOK THE SAME.

Oh boy... I hope not for your sake.

Life isn't fair and it never will be.

Besides, a private business should have the right to designate their dress code.

C.C. Holdings  wrote:

In Saudi Arabia, some women leaders don't feel that allowing women to drive or be in cars alone is a worthwhile issue to put time and attention on

In one city, Riyadh, many women are doing it anyway


not an analogy, just some perspective

But I'm not talking about another culture, I am talking about issues that affect more women and in the case of gender stereotypes it affects everyone. To me, this is more of a publicity stunt, which is not a problem but... For whatever reason people always see the ability to be naked as more of an issue... (Creates more media interest as there are more extreme emotions attached to it). When if we are honest with ourselves and the way our culture is ,it won't work until we get rid of rape culture and gender stereotypes.

But sorry ,taking it too seriously >.> I'll go and be quiet now

K E E L I N G wrote:
I must be missing something... please explain why it's important we fight for women's rights to be topless in Sushi joints.

You're not missing anything. This is what's "really important" to a lot of people who can't think of weightier things to fight for.

MoRina wrote:

Maybe because "decade old" models aren't interested in publicity stunts disguised as women's rights advocacy.

I guess I should have said decades

Cheyenne Lutek wrote:
In African countries, tribal women don't wear shirts as their custom.

This sounds like the wish of a 13 year old boy looking at National Geographic under his bed sheet with a flashlight.

Can you name an African country where a woman might be murdered for baring her chest? Can you name 10? How about 25?

"tribal women"... when you don't know anything, just make shit up.

Cheyenne Lutek wrote:
In African countries, tribal women don't wear shirts as their custom.

Cuica Cafezinho wrote:
This sounds like the wish of a 13 year old boy looking at National Geographic under his bed sheet with a flashlight.

Seems to be the case in Ethiopia.

Here's a woman Joey L photographed on his last trip there.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lqrn4 … 1_1280.jpg 18+

de0rbit wrote:
What happened to "No Shoes. No Shirt. No Service"

?

Was wondering the same thing.

FYI, with obesity out of control if women are not allowed to go topless then why should those males that SHOULD be wearing a bra not be forced to put on a shirt?!?

I'd rather be surprised to see a pair of so-so bewbies on a woman out in public than fatty bewbs on a guy out in public. Those images are quite difficult to forget...

de BUEN PHOTOGRAPHY wrote:
FYI, with obesity out of control if women are not allowed to go topless then why should those males that SHOULD be wearing a bra not be forced to put on a shirt?!?

I'd rather be surprised to see a pair of so-so bewbies on a woman out in public than fatty bewbs on a guy out in public. Those images are quite difficult to forget...

Hmm, we probably ought to give the 'fuller figured male' a bit more respect, especially if they're comfortable with their body. Not sure why a fat guy with his top off induces such over the top hysterics!

Cheyenne Lutek wrote:

Wow, I didn't know that! But I certainly agree that not having a shirt, or shoes for that matter, is definitely not a serious health code issue. Nobody is eating off of the floor or off of my chest and my body isn't leaking fluids onto people's plates. I mean, even if it WAS leaking fluids, a shirt wouldn't stop it!!

Then explain the "we'd Love To See You Naked But State Code Requires Shoes & Shirt" sign in Five Guy's.

Kincaid Blackwood wrote:
Still trying to figure out what this has to do with women's rights.

Nothing.

Technically it also has nothing to do with the law she was trying to bring attention to because she didnt understand it well enough to know she wasnt actually following it by trying to use it as a defense for being topless in a private establishment.


So its got nothing to do with anything, except boobs.

Kincaid Blackwood wrote:
Still trying to figure out what this has to do with women's rights.

Laura UnBound wrote:
Nothing.

Technically it also has nothing to do with the law she was trying to bring attention to because she didnt understand it well enough to know she wasnt actually following it by trying to use it as a defense for being topless in a private establishment.


So its got nothing to do with anything, except boobs.

~

Portrait Model Shandra wrote:
You realize the law you're referencing has been a thing for EONS, and that private businesses can do whatever they want?

I've been topless all over the streets of NYC, and was nude with about 100 others inside the Four Seasons.

Annnnd, everywhere else.  So what?

If you really understood and believed in the issue, you wouldn't think there was anything bold about it, and you wouldn't be trying to force nudity for equality's sake, by being topless in an area that men are not allowed to be topless, either.

Publicity stunt.  Yawn.

This is not the way forward.

+1

Laura UnBound wrote:
Nothing.

Technically it also has nothing to do with the law she was trying to bring attention to because she didnt understand it well enough to know she wasnt actually following it by trying to use it as a defense for being topless in a private establishment.


So its got nothing to do with anything, except boobs.

Which, I have to admit I'm an avid fan of. But, as far as making the fuss that the OP has made, it just seems that she is looking for some attention. Which apparently, she has received.

Colorado Model Amber wrote:
If I saw someone get topless in a bar/restaurant while I was eating or even had my kids around I'd find it very disrespectful. Did you ask the people around you if it was okay or give them a heads up?

You have to understand, a true Narcissist isn't the slightest bit interested in being respectful to you or anyone else -- but they will demand that you be absolutely respectful to their needs.