Lady Keeniacs to Destroy the Liberty Movement!
(FYI-those girls in the pic don’t live in Keene, and are actually wearing pasties. Click for the full version.) Apparently just having some ladies discuss the idea of a liberty event wherein women and men would go topless in public has already begun the next activist “schism”. If you’ve been paying close attention to the movement for a while, you’ll recall the first “schism” was between the politcos and the agorists. There was much forum drama, but the end result was that another forum was born, and the agorists (outside-the-system activists) had a place of their own. Most people still get along just fine, and many still mix their activism between both worlds, but there was much drama and sometimes it still raises its head.
This time, the ideological split is between the sexist prudes and their apologists (it’s not fair of me to call the apologists prudes – some claim to not be) and the freethinkers or as we have been labeled, by the apologists, “libertines”.
A single forum post was all it took to ignite the beginning of the end of the liberty movement. I could cite the absurd excuses to continue the oppression of women that some of these supposedly liberty-oriented posters have made, but you should just see the forum thread for yourself.
How do you feel? Shouldn’t females have the right to go topless in public just as males have long enjoyed? Seems like a no-brainer to me. These liberty ladies are in the right, and I will proudly walk beside them.
So, prepare for the end of the liberty movement as you know it, presuming you believe the apologists. If some naked breasts is all it takes to kill a movement, maybe it deserves to die. The irony is, liberty guys have been bitching for decades about the lack of women in the movement. Now a few of them show up in Keene, New Hampshire, decide to do this as their activism, and all of a sudden they are a liability? Sad.
My prediction is this could be the most popular activist event yet in New Hampshire, and that many other non-prudish freethinkers will be attracted to the Keene area as a result. Plus, I hope KPD does the right thing, and leaves these wonderful, courageous ladies alone. Though I wouldn’t blame them if they showed up with cameras to “gather evidence” for “investigation later”!
Comments
84 Comments on Lady Keeniacs to Destroy the Liberty Movement!
I fully support topless women. Do you have more pictures?
Let it be noted that I, as a Free Keene blogger and media producer, oppose this post.
This “event” is not scheduled or even supported by many “Lady Keeniacs” I’ve talked to. Ian has had a lapse in judgement to feel he can speak for them or put them on the spot for entertaining this idea in casual conversation.
Not to mention such an event, if held, is detrimental to people taking our ideas seriously. Show me ONE family who has been torn apart over someone being arrested for their shirt being off, and I might change my mind.
Settle down Nick.
The post clearly states “some ladies discuss the idea”. Not all the ladies, not an announcement of an event, nor does he claim to speak for anyone but himself. Frankly, I think you have the lapse of judgment in your comment.
The topless protest is great and the counter-protest of private property is equally as great. Excellent ideas you all!
Bring it on!
“Shouldn’t females have the right to go topless in public just as males have long enjoyed? ”
Of course. I believe in most Canadian provinces there is legal protection for topless femlales (though it is rarely seen in public) and society isn’t crumbling as a result. Then again Canadians are a bunch of liberal crazies with our topless women, marjiuana smoking and same-sex marriage.
Comment by nick
Not to mention such an event, if held, is detrimental to people taking our ideas seriously. Show me ONE family who has been torn apart over someone being arrested for their shirt being off, and I might change my mind.
Nick,
Its not a matter of if it has happened yet. What matters is that it has the potential to happen to anyone and that makes the law wrong. That any family COULD ever be torn apart because of any stupid law that should never have existed in the first place, is the point. Even putting people in jail for “unpaid parking tickets” has the potential for tearing families apart.
To rid ourselves of a bad law you must eventually confront the state with the evil of it.
A protest like this has the potential to get national headlines, and bring a lot of people to the FSP.
The fact that this is so controversial among alleged “liberty activists” is, while unsurprising, disappointing to me. Didn’t Voltaire say “I disagree with women going topless, but I’ll fight to the death for their right to go topless.” However, it’s precisely the controversy that would help get this into major media.
One has already deleted his forum account and canceled his $6 FTL AMP subscription.
The schism has begun!
Wow thats crazy. Over breasts? Whoever killed their account must have never seen any and been very very afraid
Grow up, whoever you are. Breasts never hurt anyone. In fact, I’ve seen little babies sucking on them! Maybe we should arrest or ostracize the babies?
All of the people who are against this idea seem to be men. That is strange. Everyone who supports it also seem to be men. Oh well….
That picture does a fine job in demonstrating the hypocrisy of the whole current legal situation. A piece of plastic the size of a nipple, placed on the nipple—that looks like a nipple itself—is the difference between legal and illegal?
As a european, I do not see how sex or nudity is offensive. What is offensive to me is people freaking out over the idea of saying a dirty word, talk about sex or being naked.
Maybe there’s a way to combine topless women and paying taxes with $1 bills. Boobs and dollars just go together….
I don’t consent to people restricting other peoples’ rights to wear or not wear what they wish. On my land of course I can restrict what I wish. On other peoples’ land I don’t care.
I find it amazing how many activists are concerned they might actually offend someone.
As far as someone having their life ruined for exposing their breasts, this isn’t exactly someone gardening topless. It is however pretty ruinous and was based on nothing more than a woman being topless around her own children (in her own home) and committing the indecent act of breastfeeding one of them:
“Fernandez took several photos of the boys ‘playing around,’ naked and innocent, with the oldest flashing a big smile. Mercado, who says she often bathed with the kids, is in several of the shots unclothed from the waist up, holding her arm modestly across her bare chest.
In one–the photo that would threaten to send Mercado and her boyfriend to prison–the infant Rodrigo is suckling her left breast.”
http://www.dallasobserver.com/2003-04-17/news/1-hour-arrest/
This one is a little closer to the innocent gardener scenario. I don’t know how much of her life was ultimately ruined, but a case that has to be appealed all the way to a state supreme court is no picnic to deal with:
“In this case, Lorien Bourne was arrested and convicted merely for appearing topfree at a Bowling Green city park. It was not an ostentatious or salacious display; on a warm day she simply engaged in a picnic without a shirt on, as any man is able to do without fear of arrest.”
http://naturistaction.org/AlertsAdvisoriesUpdates/ADVISORIES/Bourne_12-18-07/OH_2007_Lorien_Bourne_NAC_amicus_juris_12-10-07.pdf
Considering that some convictions require listing on sexual offenders’ lists, even something as minor as a simple indecent exposure arrest has the potential to destroy an innocent person’s life. Regardless, the threshold for opposing a law shouldn’t be the requirement that someone’s entire life was ruined by it. Nor should the fact that most people don’t mind complying with it be a reason not to oppose an unjust law.
With the recent propensity for “baggy pants” laws and charging of teenager girls with child pornography for sending unwise pictures of themselves to their boyfriends (or the boyfriends for receiving them), my suggestion would be to make it more of a broad based anti-sexual freedom/nudity laws rally. I think that would have a wider appeal without a lot of the “we’ll scare away people who would never be interested in us anyway” type of opposition from within.
Otherwise, I’m all for it.
The porcine aspect of Ian’s personality seems to be rearing its ugly head, as he once again reveals the adolescent prism through which he views women, i.e., as sex objects. Ever wonder why there’s only a shrine of FEMALE listeners on the FTL site? Because we all know that the most important thing about women is being able to look at them! And of course there are all sorts of protests a group of women could undertake to publicize why women’s concerns can be particularly well-met by adopting the principles of the so-called “liberty” movement. But the protest under consideration is the one that’s most satisfying to the 13 year-old male mindset: get some women to show their breasts! Anybody surprised?
Exercise care, folks; while the threat of the swine flu has no doubt been exaggerated, the virus IS still out there.
The FSers are already having trouble winning support in Keene. Personally, I’ve tried to see some things your way … although most of the time I don’t know what you want, except for the ability to intentionally break laws and then get all bent when you’re held accountable.
If you pursue the “rack attack,” you will further risk losing the hearts and minds of the public.
This discussion is so bizarre. Why ppl in the us are so afraid of nudity or “dirty” words is not something i can relate to.
This also happen to be one reason why am having a hard time to decide if i want to move to new hampshire or not. 
Apparently, “Brad” is not from Keene, and, he missed the “Walk a Mile in Her Shoes” event a while back…And, the “Take back the Night” protests of the last few years…And, although it’s a bit tangential, “Men Who Cook” is another very popular, very sexist attraction here in Keene. Women exposing their breasts, just like *men* do? Sure. Why not. It’s family oriented. How many families do you know, with breast-less women? None, I bet. So, this could appeal to all families. Look at the splash it caused in Brattleboro a while back. So, a piece of plastic the size of a nipple, placed on the nipple, that looks like a nipple itself, *IS* the difference between *legal* & *non-legal*….(merci beacoup, jraxis…)……Hmmmmm, I like that idea. I bet I can find a 3″(inch) piece of plastic the size of my penis…Is it OK if my buns go “Au Natural”???….THE NAKED PEOPLE OF KEENE ARE HERE! YOO-HOO! The Mothership can’t be long now, foolks!…///”rack attack” yourself, assholebrad…or do you prefer “Bradley”???…
break laws and then get all bent when you’re held accountable
brad, i here declare that if you eat oatmeal on a tuesday i will send a gang of armed thugs to hang you by your toes until your ears fall off.
are you prepared to be “held accountable”? douchebag.
oh, i forgot that i need a bunch of people to “pass” my declaration, at which point you become “accountable” because it’s “law”. and maybe some more procedures, but people not butt stupid like you get the idea.
I’ll bring sunscreen !
When there are so many more important things to deal with, specifically the enemy within, this would seem the perfect thing to do to further marginalize your movement and make fools of yourselves.
Go topless if you want, but please, there are people being tortured in jail right now, or having their property stolen from them by the government.
There are plans in the works to control every aspect of your life.
When the sh** hits the fan, no one is going to worry about who is topless and who isn’t.
What no erudite quotes yet from Mr Springer on what the New Hampshire Revised Statutes Annotated have to say on this? :’)
Sorry, Mr. Springer is about to fall into bed. Most likely topless as it’s kind of hot and sticky.
@”REALIST”
If you think there are more important things to fix then why aren’t you fixing them already?
Can you try to fix more than one thing at a time? Or is there some kind of rule against that?
Oh my god! They are just breasts people. Of course, we have to protect the children! Little Billy can’t be aware of his own penis until eighth grade health class. Yea, the whole thing seem silly to me too. However, it’s even sillier that we live in a society embarrassed to death by their own freaking bodies. Is my mom a sex offender because i found her dildo when I was nine?
I was following this and willing to be supportive but basically feeling uninspired about it until I started hearing all the sexist remarks in the forum and and a few here. That put a fire in me about this controversy and made it very clear which side I wanted to be on.
Using the word “prude” is a mistake, I think. Most of the remarks I’ve heard, even from liberty-lovers, come down to sexism, i.e. it’s okay for men to go topless but not women followed by some really contrived excuses for their sexism. If someone was saying no one should go topless, then that would be prudishness, but that’s yet to be the case as far as I can tell.
Wowza. Who knew…
The irony is, liberty guys have been bitching for decades about the lack of women in the movement. Now a few of them show up in Keene, New Hampshire, decide to do this as their activism, and all of a sudden they are a liability? Sad.
I don’t think it’s “all of a sudden they’re a liability.” Rather, if they’re coming up with a “bad” idea for activism that’s either detrimental or pointless, then they are in fact a liability. While I am a woman and daily oppressed by a law that prohibits me from doing something I already would not do, And I am not convinced of the idea being a “good” one, I’m open to be convinced that it would be a good to do. Hell, I want to be convinced that it’s a great idea even though I could not do it myself.
But what is wrong with an idea for activism undergoing serious scrutiny before it’s carried out? Because it’s a woman’s idea, everyone should treat the idea with intellectual kid gloves? Because it’s a woman’s idea, people should not vent their concerns or take their own direct action to show they do not support it (cancelling subscription, removing ads, et al)? How condescending and sexist.
As I have stated before… even though I disagree on this and will not take part in this ONE protest, I don’t stand in the way of those that plan to do this.
Have fun with it ladies and gents.
This is not responsible blogging. Common decency calls for having a warning notice on the main part of the blog and the topless women after the jump.
Keith,
As has been mentioned multiple times, the girls in the photo are not topless – those are pasties. Look closer.
Aw, let us have their fun. Liberty and Just-tits for all!
And Keith, the attractive girls are wearing pasties. As a lesbian trapped in a male body, if you don’t like ‘em, go join a monastery. Nothing to be ashamed of in what God gave ya.
In my hometown of Kingston, Ontario it is currently legal for women to walk around topless. It happens downtown on a rare occassion but I have seen it. The women protested for a whole summer walking around topless downtown until the city gave in and just said screw it.
Edit: Apparently it’s legal in all of Ontario to be topless.
Regarding NSFWness:
“Don’t worry, boss, these girls are wearing pasties so we’re all good, right?”
This is not responsible blogging. Common decency calls for having a warning notice on the main part of the blog and the almost topless women after the jump. You have broken standard, voluntary common decency.
This has set the Free Keene blog back more than any other story that has ever been covered here.
Obviously photoshopped.
Nobody wears Heidi braids any more.
That dude behind them is at least a c-cup and yet he wouldn’t even require pasties or a warning notice if he took his shirt off.
I think all women should be required to wear burkas.
Maybe one of the people at the event could wear one with a sign that reads “Would you prefer women wore this?”
I won’t encourage os discourage anyone for this. It’s up to the women who are being discriminated against to decide.
Ladies, I think we should get together and plan a protest where all the men go without pants. 
Last night or whenever Ann said:
‘The porcine aspect of Ian’s personality seems to be rearing its ugly head, as he once again reveals the adolescent prism through which he views women, i.e., as sex objects. Ever wonder why there’s only a shrine of FEMALE listeners on the FTL site? Because we all know that the most important thing about women is being able to look at them! And of course there are all sorts of protests a group of women could undertake to publicize why women’s concerns can be particularly well-met by adopting the principles of the so-called “liberty” movement. But the protest under consideration is the one that’s most satisfying to the 13 year-old male mindset: get some women to show their breasts! Anybody surprised?’
Ann, I think this comment was personally insulting, not only to Ian, but also to his lady friend Julia. Do you think she would tolerate a man of the type you so vividly describe above? Do you even know Julia? Because you might as well have characterized her as some empty headed slut who trots along behind Ian all day with her head up his ass. Bad form, Ann, and I think YOU came in juvenile there.
Keith, settle down, man, they’re breasts. Most females have them, all of us have seen them, they occur naturally and do harm to no one simply by being present.
Thank You
bOObies!
OK, now that that’s out of the way…
Here’s what I see in this debate. I see the people who are voicing an opinion in the negative as simply saying ‘I want you to be free to do what you want to do so long as I want to let you do it’
We will not gain liberty for ourselves until we’re willing to grant it to others.
LP,
Unfortunately, there are plenty of women who, as a result of self-loathing, involve themselves with men who are sexist and even abusive. Indeed, our society encourages this in countless forms. So the scenario you describe is, sadly, not unusual. Although characterizing this woman as “some empty headed slut who trots along behind Ian all day with her head up his ass” was not only unkind, it was a wild exaggeration; it is manifestly true that even accomplished, intelligent women can get involved in destructive relationships.
Ann
dancin machine
Tell me in 25 words or less, Ann:
Why do you read this website?
I am an FSP member. My wife was not, though she did want to move to NH for other reasons.
Because of this proposed protest she is going to sign up for the FSP.
Are there any Americans in this group who are concerned about their COUNTRY? What’s this “in my backyard” crap? This country is in serious trouble, get with it , folks.
Lpviper,
I’m perfectly calm. Nice breasts don’t bother me one bit. However, there is such a thing as being decent to your fellow man. Ian decided against the NSFW tag. Maybe he did it to encourage more controversy, I know he said on the air that he enjoys it.
McDuffie,
I have no idea why your wife isn’t a FSP participant because of Ian’s behavoir and views. Where is the relation? The only thing I can figure out is that Ian happens to be an FSP participant, seems likely a giant leap to make. I could understand her not wanting to become a Free Keene blogger, because that would very loosely associate her with Free Keene, which is owned and mostly controlled by Ian.
I think the reasonable way to resolve this issue is to have the topless side and the anti-topless side be represented by female mud wrestlers. One lady grappler wrestles topless, the other in a burka. Whom ever wins the match decides the fate of this issue of exposure/expression. Or freedom in general could be embraced and then there could be a forum where both topless women and ladies wearing burkas could attend and speak about the virtues of freedom of expression and the freedom of religion.
Myself, I support the freedom to choose baring boobies, I have the radical view that things created naturally to feed babies aren’t obscene, but I am far too shy and bashful to bear my breasts in public. Plus, I sunburn easy.
If you have EVER objected to laws forcing women in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia to wear burqas, then you have ZERO right to object to women going topless in the US, and are a hypocrite.
The two laws, forcing women to cover specific body parts men need not, are identical in effect and repressiveness.
A march to protest through civil disobedience the states position that it has the right to act violently towards peaceful people IS the liberty movement.
If you think your understanding of biology proves going shirtless is wrong, don’t go shirtless.
If you think it’s distasteful, don’t do it.
If you don’t want your kids to see it, tell them not to.
If you argue your point and attempt to convince others, you are an advocate for your position.
BUT, if you support the government actions in jailing those who disagree with your position you are a statist.
Fighting for people to be free from violence even in things you disagree with is what the term “principled” means.
This “protest” would be a huge win-win for all concerned:
For FreeKeeners, it would draw attention to themselves without accomplishing anything substantial; very familiar and satisfying ground to tread upon.
For those who consider FreeKeeners to be a blight on a community that would be better off without them, this action (which would be reminiscent of a KSC Frat stunt) would make the effort to successfully portray FreeKeeners as childish losers even easier.
You’ve GOT to do this.
ann, I believe I heard once that the “Shrine of Female Listeners” was less about having chicks on the site and more about showing potential advertisers and program directors that there are in fact women who listen to their show. I figure it might help with ad sales if Mark can prove that women listen. Can’t get much more proof than a lady who sends their picture into a talk show knowing it’ll be on a national website.
Just a guess. I do think it’s a better one than Ian being a 28-30 year old hornball. Especially since he’s got a girlfriend anyways.
I am shocked, shocked, that women have nipples. Please, God, say it is not so!
you know, many shops in keene say, no shirt, no shoes, no service… and it applies equally…
For the past three weeks I have been attempting, from my leftist vantage point, to wrap my mind around your positions, with marginal success. Thank God I have finally found an issue with some meat on it, so to speak. To wit: Boobs.
Well, female boobs that is. When fat dudes like me go around topless showing off ours people simply look away in disgust. You get used to it.
Anyway, when women do the same thing everyone freaks out; but they do look. Hell, I look too. Big time. So, if you’re not generating enough controversy wearing handguns in public, nudity should do it for you. Of course the real problem is convincing the women to actually walk around shirtless and probably get arrested.
On a serious note, topless protests have been traditionally the provenance of the radical feminist left. Their message has been the desexualization of the female breast (in which they have been singularly unsuccessful). “Boob walks” have taken place in Northampton, Ma. among other venues and always draw a crowd. Of course, with upwards of a hundred participants, there is no police intervention.
Perhaps it would be wise to clarify in advance whether that (desexualization) is your position; or do you feel that topless women should be allowed to frequent bars thereby attracting vast numbers of elligable males away from their more modest (and more sensible) sisters.
Just a thought.
Hey Commiebob,
This is rather tangential to the topic at hand, which I am not going to get involved in here, but I’d be happy to explain my understanding of voluntaryist positions, and do my best to answer any questions you might have.
here’s a thought for you liberty-loving-ladies: Do a “human statue” demonstration topless. Call it ART. (Places like NYC, Austin TX, etc., have a large enough population to support this.) You mimic the pose, etc. of some famous statue, like a greek/roman venus, aphrodite, etc. Just stand there in pose. Maybe w/, w/out body paint…could work better than the past forms of protest/expression. As for me personally, well, I’m a heterosexual man, & I’ll look at bare breasts, if they are there to see. No, I’m not gonna get all excited, or go out of my way, just to see bare breasts. Now, touch/taste/fondle bare breasts? That’s different. It’s also illegal to do that in public, under NH RSA’s…c’est la vie! VIVA LA DIFFERENCE!…*grin*…
Ladies, don’t do it! Not that I’m opposed to nudity but you already have a cause going up there that isn’t popular with the townsfolk.
In my opinion, you will only set back the Free Keene movement (or whatever it is).
But if you insist, then do it where it is appropriate; at a beach, quarry, pool etc.
This is not responsible blogging. Common decency calls for having a warning notice on the main part of the blog and the almost topless women after the jump. You have broken standard, voluntary common decency.
This has set the Free Keene blog back more than any other story that has ever been covered here.
===
as if anyone could tell me what the common anything is. If so, show me your polls. I did one myself. Guys like boobies. I bet my poll wins. Stories do not set blogsites back, only holding in stories you feel are important and could bring more people to your cause. I feel this is most responsible and honest blogging instead of the usual FSP spinster pragmatic crap bloggers are used to.
Near where I live there are about 5 naked events every year (in Boulder, CO), so I am wondering what the big deal is. They recently had a naked bike ride for peace, the PETA people do a nude protest every year, they do a nude pumpkin run just for fun, and other nude/semi nude events pop up here and there. At least this event won’t suffer from the problem that those protests suffer from, which is that the nakedness over powers the message and people remember the nude part, but not the “for peace” part of the event.
People willing to trade their boobies for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.
If you are a true Liberty Lover, then you will always support any people trying to live free, regardless of what floats their boobies, err, boat.
Freedom is not about controlling others to varying degrees, based off of your “definition” of what freedom others should have.
Rather real Liberty is about respecting others’ right to live free. As long as someone isn’t intiating physical force and/or fraud against another, then there should be no foul.
This potential story is exactly the type the Press loves and even though the majority are working on much more serious things, the PR from this potential protest could equal the motherlode thus far.
Why is it so difficult for others to let others live free? Because they’ve been told their whole lives you can’t trust man. Guess what? You’re a lot better off trusting your neighbors then the tyrants (mankind) who are currently “running” things.
So what are those ladies waiting for?
If you are a true Liberty Lover, then you will always support any people trying to live free, regardless of what floats their boobies, err, boat.
asserting the “public” ownership of stolen property is not people trying to live free. when these demonstrations are proposed on private property, or with respect to the owners of relevant stolen “public” property, full speed ahead to the difficult subject of visual/aural infringement across property lines. until then, these are nitwits generally making things worse, with an overflow load of jackass sanctimony and the usual FK performance-fartist shtick.
As long as someone isn’t intiating physical force and/or fraud against another, then there should be no foul.
“public property” is the initiation of force.
This potential story is exactly the type the Press loves [...]
that alone should give major pause. then there’s the genesis of this proposal, which was fully up the ass of what “law” allows.
this proposal is founded upon strengthening the dual fictions of “public property” and “law”, intentions of the proposers notwithstanding.
I think we all need to read Charley’s post above and think about what he’s saying here.
Charley, I think you come off as a dick but you are spot on here.
A proper nudity protest should take place on private property and be treated as a demonstration of private property rights.
Charley, re: your “public property is the initiation of force” comment). The sky is blue and I also know that publc property is the initiation of force. So I see it as stolen property, as our Master’s property, because they are ones who get to say what we can and can’t do with it (if you recognize it’s stolen, why do you care what people do on it anyway?).
Your private property idea is a good point as it will be a lot easier for people to understand (Fliers could be passed out to drive by a certain house at a certain time to see boobies), but doing it on stolen land is also OK by me.
And all this concern and worry that this will somehow damage the movement for life I find absurd. If that’s all we got, then we deserve to die.
I wish everyone would stop worrying so much about the exact proper “image” (I think people are watching too much TV) and just get on with the business of doing what you can to bring more people to NH so the movement can keep growing.
The bottomline is, most poeple are not even going to hear about this and the ones that do, who don’t invesitgate further, aren’t worth our time either. But the ones who DO investigate and check us out in depth……why that’s the gold standard of Liberty Activist that we’re mining for my friend.
—
In earlier comments, people have mentioned Americans fear of nudity vs Europe…makes me wonder…
Do Americans fear Mammory Glands more than they do the Government?
I think that no matter what you do on the ‘public property’, you will be offending someone whose wealth was stolen to take the property and make it ‘public’.
How do you resolve this in a principled way when applying it to a protest that some people would find offensive?
The obvious answer is to eliminate public property, but we’re a long way away from a paradigm shift like that.
This is a tough one, and I’m not sure there is a right answer. Perhaps if people see things happening on ‘public property’ that they don’t like, then other liberty lovers who happened to be nearby could help explain to those folks about the tragedy of the commons.
Anybody else have thoughts on this?
Why are there no males volunteering to walk the streets naked (i.e. “bottomless”)? The principle is the same, correct? Strange how that obvious option has never been mentioned…..
@AnAmazedReader:
Men aren\’t volunteering to rock out with their c*ck out because the Indecent Exposure laws specifically forbid public fornication (or other sex acts) as well as the display of GENITALS. If I was to pull out Mr. Winkie and walk down the road… I would be showing my genitals. Just like if you (I\’m assuming you are female) pulled out Ms. Winkie, you would be in the same boat. Breasts are not genitals.
But if it would make you feel better, I\’m sure you can find someone who is willing to \”let it all hang out\”. Me? Trust me… you don\’t want to see it. I\’m surprised that my WIFE wants to see it.
(if you recognize it’s stolen, why do you care what people do on it anyway?).
why do i care when stolen property’s used by other than the owners? you really asked me that?
, but doing it on stolen land is also OK by me.
you then either 1) presume non-owner rights to the property (false), or 2) don’t give a shit about rights.
And all this concern and worry that this will somehow damage the movement for life I find absurd.
why you’re telling me that, i don’t know. not a position i hold.
I wish everyone would stop worrying so much about the exact proper “image” (I think people are watching too much TV) and just get on with the business of doing what you can to bring more people to NH so the movement can keep growing.
when such action contradicts the supposed principle of “the movement” (property rights)… good plan!
But the ones who DO investigate and check us out in depth……
…will find that people supposedly committed to property rights piss on them indiscriminately, for the purpose of PETA-style wanking.
how blind must one be to not see that the proposed demonstration supports “law” (i.e., property-violating edicts from official crime syndicates) and “public” property (i.e., confiscation of property for the mob)?
for most everyone it’s probably impossible to live without trampling property confiscated for the mob. however, moving from this regular sickness to trumpeting the treatment of that same property as owned by individual mob members (in this case the tits-akimbo club)… WTF. how that leads to liberty is a mystery. only by accident/misunderstanding.
Charly, I thought we were talking about Public Property being the stolen land (i.e. where the demonstration could be held, or in public).
So I dont understand you tieing property rights to the use of public property as if some individual owners’ private property rights are being trampled.(?)
If this were held on private property, I always thought it be with the full knowledge of the owner (a porc?) so I’m not following how you consider this a violation of property rights(?).
So I dont understand you tieing property rights to the use of public property as if some individual owners’ private property rights are being trampled.(?)
the state cannot own property. therefore, the question with all such “public” property is who owns it. when a group ostensibly based in property rights asserts a right to go topless on this property, ownership should be addressed. far from a right to go topless, non-owners don’t have a right to even be there.
if a topless practitioner considers these truths and wants to proceed topless, that is conditionally defensible (i.e., as defensible as even being on “public” property) on grounds that only the property owner or his representative may rightfully thwart the action. the protest, if it’s to reach the ignorant, should emphasize the fiction of public property and stress that only the owner may prevent benign action.
the protest proposed here, however, was founded in cutesy adherence to unlawful “law”, with an indignant — not apologetic — use of property not that of the protester nor expressly permitted the protester by the owner (owners who in many cases are dead or otherwise disconnected). it was based in the usual “what can we do to get attention” smarm trash of FK.
life would be nearly impossible without treading on the vaporous land called “public property”. however, i do not assert a right to be on such stolen property, and any voluntarist protest on it should be done with full awareness of the shakiness of the ground, and merely an “in your face, hypocrite” stance with regard to “law”. haven’t seen anything near that proposed here. what was proposed here has “snot-nose” written across it.
generally, i oppose artificial clashes with the badged criminals. if you want to do a thing, do it. if you foresee trouble, have witnesses, video, etc.
IMO, stunts on “public” property such as holding pot in your hand and telling the cops about it, digging up earth and trying to plant tomatoes, or walking topless when you don’t really care to beyond making some point, suck. they smell false, and even most stupid people are still aware enough to combine the obvious with their biases and give off — wait for it — the opposite of the desired reaction.
‘the protest, if it’s to reach the ignorant, should emphasize the fiction of public property and stress that only the owner may prevent benign action.’
The Nugget O Gold in a sea of prick
lol
Seriously, read that. That was what I was trying to figure out
I still think this whole thing is much abo about nothing. I’ve copied our Porcupine Realator’s words from a similar thread on the FSP as I think he said it best:
“Someone is worried about the poor children seeing nekkid breasts. The horror! What about the fact that I’m FORCED, ultimately at the point of a gun, to FEED AND SCHOOL THOSE SAME CHILDREN against my consent? As a childless taxpayer, I find that utterly unjust and bordering on tyrannical. I’d take public nudity over public education every time.”
Porcupine Realator
I agree with all of that, but I still think that a nudity protest would be better off either
1) As a group of women or men acting individually and displaying their bodies on their own private properties;
or
2) As an educational opportunity for the ignorant. Lure em in with the boobs and then explain the tragedy of the commons and the myth of public property and how it assisted in the offense of their sensibilities.
‘Hey looka me I’m naked’ isn’t good enough, Markus. A principle really ought to be demonstrated and explained for a protest to have any meaning
I’ve copied our Porcupine Realator’s words from a similar thread on the FSP as I think he said it best:
the sick retardation evinced by that quote is eclipsed by you passing it along as a bon mot. okay, so you don’t see the usual disease of false dilemma fallacy (i.e., “you may choose an unprincipled stand for tits, or a gun to your head to pay for the kids of the tit opposers; what’s it gonna be?”). that’s an ailment common to the fools who post here. you should at least note that the quoted “argument” is by extension against protesting anything less egregious than the worse “evil” he invokes. that’s almost good for a belly laugh; his argument disintegrates not only within sentences, but across them. and you, proud dumbass, think that rocks.
ron paul!
Better late than never, that’s what I always say. I think it’s crucial that we keep the nipples from our kids. But it’s equally important that we retain their right to watch teevee shows featuring bombs, guns, blood , murder, and gore. Consistency, people, this is what I’m talking about. Make War, not Love!
We need updates from the frontlines during this steamy summer of 2010. I’m with poster number 1, we need more pictures!!! An informed America is a strong America. God Bless the Queen, and pass the pop corn.
After blowing up the picture to full size (I research all issues carefully) I noticed that kid in the background has bigger hooters than the chicklets. Fortunately he’s not part of the movement and kept his shirt on. We need to be very, very careful where we draw the line folks.
Post your comment below. Login in the far right column to get rid of CAPTCHA. If you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!
Want to discuss rather than just comment? Visit the Free Keene Forum.
Supporters of FK
Recent Forum Topics- Keene City Council Contact Info February 8, 2012
- Pledged Free-stater heading to "The Shire" later this year February 8, 2012
- FBI is watching February 7, 2012
- New February 7, 2012
- Free Minds Radio 02/05/2012 February 5, 2012
- HELP . . . Still unable to access . . . February 5, 2012
- Marijuana decrim bills up for vote February 5, 2012
- Episode 35 - Anarch-Elitism February 5, 2012
- HB 1533 -- fines for hurting legislators' feelings February 4, 2012
- HB 1494 -- "Your papers, please" February 4, 2012
- Recent Forum Posts
- Re: Keene City Council Contact Info February 9, 2012
- Re: What I wrote to the Chief of Police in town of Weare February 9, 2012
- Re: What is the latest on Sam Dodson February 9, 2012
- Re: What is the latest on Sam Dodson February 9, 2012
- Re: What is the latest on Sam Dodson February 8, 2012
- Re: What is the latest on Sam and New angle on trolling? Hmm. February 8, 2012
- Re: Bearcat petition at city council meeting February 8, 2012
- Re: What is the latest on Sam Dodson February 8, 2012
- Re: Keene City Council Contact Info February 8, 2012
- Re: What is the latest on Sam and New angle on trolling? Hmm. February 8, 2012