It's legal to be topless in New York. She didn't commit a crime or anything.
It’s legal to be topless in NYC as long as it’s not for “sexual reasons” (whatever that means)— so this particular case might be something of a legal debate… but I don’t see any cop bothering to arrest her for it. Shockingly, they don’t care.
Not sex, pure marketing
Do you think those two things are separate?
What year do you think this is? 1830 whatever?
? lmao
She’d just argue that it’s “art” probably…
Yeah, you’d be surprised about how much that wouldn’t fly with the NYPD. I watch Matthew Silver run into the Union Sq. Whole Foods in a Speedo in a legit performance art piece.
The cops had little respect for that.
I did, tho. After he managed to escape, we met up after and smoked a spliff. Then I made it to class at Parsons.
That guy was very interesting to know while I was an undergrad at design school.
I suck at art!
But not Dublin! Those catholic bastards…
I’m a catholic, but I’m just addicted to cats.
8 out of 10?
I too love drinking cathol
Did I mention legality? I don't find topless necessarily rude the same way I don't find hands to be rude, but if someone gave me the middle finger, that changes things.
Whenever I've been in NYC, there's always someone desperately trying to be seen.
Well, that was one of the instances of abuse of the portal. Another was a mooning, and yet another was a man showing NYC citizens pictures of 9/11 over the portal.
I assume they never thought that so many people would start being a punk-ass because they think the magical screen makes them safe from all persecution like the one at home. It is trained behavior.
think the magical screen makes them safe from all persecution
People do this shit face to face all the time. It's only easier to record like this. Same with the internet. It didn't make people into assholes. It just made it easier to record.
The busy main streets of NYC and Dublin certainly have seen some great and terrible things, but these recordings were all published by nearby peers and not the company. There isn't much incentive for breaking indecent exposure laws even with the screen, but you can't pretend it was ever so common.
Do they think NY is censored from 9/11 like China from Tieneman Square?
Or just they think its going to bother anyone?
I think it was one of those things like "This is what happened the last time you talked shit overseas" statement. In which case, that dude might be on a no-fly list now.
Or Australia and the recent church stabbings. NZ and the Christchurch thing, plenty of counties have shit banned beside China.
I'm pretty sure that New Yorkers knows what 9/11 looks like. I think people dramatically overestimate how much Americans care about stuff like this.
Can't blame them for thinking that, we built a monument for 2,996 people and then waged a war over it that killed 100,000, not including a lot of our own.
It's New York. What did they think would happen?
It's legal to be topless in New York. She didn't commit a crime or anything.
It’s legal to be topless in NYC as long as it’s not for “sexual reasons” (whatever that means)— so this particular case might be something of a legal debate… but I don’t see any cop bothering to arrest her for it. Shockingly, they don’t care.
Not sex, pure marketing
Do you think those two things are separate?
What year do you think this is? 1830 whatever?
? lmao
She’d just argue that it’s “art” probably…
Yeah, you’d be surprised about how much that wouldn’t fly with the NYPD. I watch Matthew Silver run into the Union Sq. Whole Foods in a Speedo in a legit performance art piece.
The cops had little respect for that.
I did, tho. After he managed to escape, we met up after and smoked a spliff. Then I made it to class at Parsons.
That guy was very interesting to know while I was an undergrad at design school.
I suck at art!
But not Dublin! Those catholic bastards…
I’m a catholic, but I’m just addicted to cats.
8 out of 10?
I too love drinking cathol
Did I mention legality? I don't find topless necessarily rude the same way I don't find hands to be rude, but if someone gave me the middle finger, that changes things.
Whenever I've been in NYC, there's always someone desperately trying to be seen.
Well, that was one of the instances of abuse of the portal. Another was a mooning, and yet another was a man showing NYC citizens pictures of 9/11 over the portal.
I assume they never thought that so many people would start being a punk-ass because they think the magical screen makes them safe from all persecution like the one at home. It is trained behavior.
People do this shit face to face all the time. It's only easier to record like this. Same with the internet. It didn't make people into assholes. It just made it easier to record.
The busy main streets of NYC and Dublin certainly have seen some great and terrible things, but these recordings were all published by nearby peers and not the company. There isn't much incentive for breaking indecent exposure laws even with the screen, but you can't pretend it was ever so common.
Do they think NY is censored from 9/11 like China from Tieneman Square?
Or just they think its going to bother anyone?
I think it was one of those things like "This is what happened the last time you talked shit overseas" statement. In which case, that dude might be on a no-fly list now.
Or Australia and the recent church stabbings. NZ and the Christchurch thing, plenty of counties have shit banned beside China.
I'm pretty sure that New Yorkers knows what 9/11 looks like. I think people dramatically overestimate how much Americans care about stuff like this.
Can't blame them for thinking that, we built a monument for 2,996 people and then waged a war over it that killed 100,000, not including a lot of our own.