You get a s*** load of spew from yours truly.
“When we have people out of work, when we are struggling with balanced budgets, when we have two wars overseas, I don’t think the voters are particularly interested in the question .... The ballot question, if approved’’
FRONT-PAGE STUFF in my Boston Globe, folks!
PITTSFIELD — In Katherine Gundelfinger’s view, women should have “equal access to sunshine.’’ That means being able to walk or bike shirtless through downtown, or bathe at Onota Lake wearing only a pair of bikini bottoms.
“Here I am, a grown woman, who can’t go for a swim and feel the sun on my chest and feel comfortable,’’ said Gundelfinger, 39.
Prompted by this “major resentment,’’ Gundelfinger said, she has collected the 200 signatures needed to pose what might be the state’s most unusual ballot question in the Nov. 2 election.
I was told anger was never a good thing to bring to politics.
The nonbinding question will be considered only by voters in the Third Berkshire District, which has about 40,000 residents.
What a WASTE of TIME!
It seeks to rewrite the legal definition of nudity, so that the same rules apply to both genders. Gundelfinger, an amateur artist, launched the ballot effort after failing at Pittsfield City Hall in 2007 to win a woman’s right to swim topless.
Yeah, fine, whatever.
I won't be getting much of anything done, readers.
:-)
Public nudity has caused controversy elsewhere in New England....
Hey, as long as you don't mind me staring....
The ballot question, if approved, would ask the district’s state representative to support legislation — not yet introduced — to amend the nudity definition, “so that no part of the female breast is included.’’
And what will we tell the children?
The issue has become an electoral sideshow in an economically challenged city that Mayor James Ruberto calls the “downtown of the Berkshires’’ and where unemployment is slightly outpacing the state rate. When asked about the ballot question, Ruberto answered with barely concealed annoyance.
“When we have people out of work, when we are struggling with balanced budgets, when we have two wars overseas, I don’t think the voters are particularly interested in the question,’’ Ruberto said. “I just don’t think that the issue is worthy of discussion.’’
I COULD NOT AGREE MORE, Mayor!
The mayor’s sensibilities were echoed inside Greystone Gardens, an antique clothing store, where an attendant responded quickly and firmly when asked about the issue.
“I know how I’d vote — no, they cannot!’’ said Gloria, who declined to give her last name. “I don’t believe in it. Go in your own yard, in your own privacy.’’
Other residents and business owners expressed a more expansive view.
“The human body is the human body, and a woman’s body is a beautiful thing,’’ said Mark Papas, 55, third-generation owner of the Lantern Bar and Grill. “It’s fine with me. I believe in women’s rights.’’
This is what women's rights means, huh?
How far you feminists have fallen.
In addition to gender equality, Papas said, “I can see where it would be a real boon to tourism.’’
Well, maybe. Some boobs might turn people off.
Debbie Metivier, 41, who handles the Lantern’s counter, offered a qualified endorsement.
“I personally wouldn’t do it, but I’m for it if your body’s presentable,’’ Metivier said. “If people don’t like it, don’t look.’’
And who decides that?
Looks like Pittsfield is for it, huh?
If you believe the divisive, diversionary, agenda-pushing Globe, that is.
Gundelfinger wonders what all the fuss is about. So, too, do the 230 registered voters who signed her petition at two tables set up on Pittsfield sidewalks.
“People have been raised to believe that it shouldn’t be this way,’’ Gundelfinger said. “There’s a lot of fear.’’
STOP READING NEWSPAPERS and WATCHING TV then!
She drew a stark distinction between her goal and what she considers the immorality of exploitive sexual imagery.
PFFFFFFT!!!!
So WHO DECIDES what is what?
As an example, she said, she filed a complaint with municipal officials about suggestive illustrations of barely clothed women that had been posted in the windows of an adult-video store.
At least they have bodies that look presentable.
Yup, a HYPOCRITICAL, AGENDA-PUSHING PRUDE!!
Just what EVERY COMMUNITY LOVES!!
Egged on by 0.575 percent of the community that signed her petition.
That minority reminds me of another slim minority that controls the Congress -- and the same interests the papers represent.
“Why is it OK for children to see smokers, to see alcoholism, and to see beer trucks going by?’’ Gundelfinger asked. “I think it’s messed up. I’ve seen women more provocative fully clothed than I would be in just a pair of swim trunks.’’
That must be the MUSLIM VEIL that is RUINING the WORLD!
Yeah, NEVER MIND those MISSILES and BOMBS blowing up their families and villages!!
Veil doesn't do a very good job of keeping those out, does it?
And if it is PROHIBITION YOU WANT, well, I AGREE in THESE QUARTERS!
If it is GOOD ENOUGH for POT it is good enough for BOOZE!
Gundelfinger even bristled at the use of the word “topless’’ to describe her initiative. “The word ‘topless’ always brings to mind the image of women in seedy clubs,’’ she said with a snarl.
A rose is still a rose.... and a turd is still a....
While acknowledging that her opponents have public safety concerns, Gundelfinger argued that the novelty would wear off with time.
Yeah, in this case it is screw public safety.
Let that airport scanner outline your curves though!
“If children are raised to be exposed to that,’’ she said, “it wouldn’t be that big of a deal.’’
Yeah, and MAYBE ONE DAY we will begin to TELL KIDS the TRUTH!
Hell, we can't even discuss the truth in AmeriKa as adults!
Maybe we should start with the war lies before you take your shirt off.
--more--"
Actually, just keep your shirt on, "lady."
