What interests me is that the actual ruling was made in 1992
, but women (or at least this Van Voast person anyway) have been being harassed by the police for being topless for years regardless. She deserves to win her lawsuit.
The whole case of topless women being lewd or not is an interesting case study in how women's bodies are still defined by male desire. We've seen it with breastfeeding even, though that has gotten a lot better, where people think it is somehow lewd to do the most natural thing in the world - feed their baby. The fact that men find women's ******* to be sexual is the ENTIRE basis of the lewdness argument. That fetishization (similar to the fetishization of ankles etc in other cultures) is imposed on women's bodies, and women are expected to change their behavior to deal with it.
It actually feeds into the idea of rape culture - where women are viewed as sexual objects when they are just doing ordinary things (like walking around topless on a hot day). We still live in a society where women are expected to alter their lives and behavior (and subject themselves to restrictions not placed on men) based on the male gaze/fetishization.
TL;DR: in B4 "she was raped cause she was walking around topless"
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.