Bearing It All...

To mark the anniversary of the 19th Amendment, a crowd of over 200 people gathered to witness 12 dozen scantily-clad women fighting for the right to bear their chests in public this past weekend. These brave women, dawning only strategically placed red tape and bandaids, marched along Venice Beach Boardwalk as part of a larger demonstration organized by gotopless.org. Marches also took place in Miami, New York City, San Francisco, Seattle, Oahu (Hawaii), and Chicago. Men, not to be left out, wore red bikinis to represent the double standard for men and women.

It is currently illegal in California for women to go topless, and some feminists argue that this is yet another example of blatant, institutionalized sexism. Nadine Gary, organizer, argued that "If we are not allowed, men must be forced to hide their chests on the basis of gender equality." Surprising enough, many onlookers agreed. Onlookers were quoted in saying "Women should have the right to express themselves as they want, as long as it doesn't hurt someone else" and "We walk around topless. They should be able to if they want."

I'm genuinely curious about what you all think of this. Is the right to go topless a feminist issue? On one hand, yes. It is obvious. Men are allowed to, women are not. Further, society's obsession with and hyper-sexualization of the breast causes many women to feel ashamed about their own bodies. Clearly, this poses a problem for achieving true gender equality. The cynic in me, however, questions the consequences of such a movement. Would women ultimately be "more free" if California allowed women to not wear tops, or would they continue to be (even more so) objects of men's sexual desires, fantasies, and gaze? What do you think?

Plan C

Recently, the Food and Drug Administration unanimously approved a new emergency contraception (morning after pill), ella. Unlike traditional emergency contraception pills that must be taken within 72 hours after unprotected sex, women will be able to take ella up to 5 days after. Medical studies demonstrate the pill is 98% effective, when used properly. The drug works by blocking the egg from being released in the first place, thereby delaying ovulation and preventing fertilization.

Although this would clearly make life a little easier for a lot of women, ella is not without controversy. In the face of medical studies proving otherwise, anti-choice, anti-birth control critics claim that this medical progress brings us one step closer to "over the counter abortions." This criticism is not necessarily surprising - expanding a woman's ability to control her own body is somehow always viewed as threatening and dangerous.

One (actual) problem still remains- "Plan C" will not be available to women over the counter and requires a prescription, unlike earlier forms of emergency contraception, such as PlanB and ellaOne. By requiring a prescription, the FDA unnecessarily delays a woman's access to the (obviously time-sensitive) medicine, potentially damages a woman's right to confidentiality (especially for young women who are on their parents' insurance plans and/or do not have transportation), and excludes women who do not have access to comprehensive medical coverage. This seemingly simple requirement severely limits many women's ability to actually benefit from this drug.

In addition, there is no word on how much this new medicine would cost. Undoubtedly, this raises questions over who will be able to actually benefit from this new technology, and who will be excluded. Despite these controversies, ella will be released into the market later this year.