"With July being UV Safety Awareness Month," Sheree R. Curry writes, "now feels like the perfect time to ask: What if we all, regardless of gender, just kept our shirts on this month in the spirit of gender equity, in addition to skin safety?" Above, a woman shelters from the sun with an umbrella. (Alvaro Barrientos/The Associated Press)

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes a mix of guest commentaries online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Summer is the season of sweat, sunscreen and shirtless joggers. For many, seeing men and boys without shirts on city streets is considered a harmless social norm that typically isn’t afforded to women. But a recent court case helped clarify that it is legal in Minnesota for women to go topless in public. While some women may choose to do so, we are likely a long way from it being socially acceptable. So, with July being UV Safety Awareness Month, now feels like the perfect time to ask: What if we all, regardless of gender, just kept our shirts on this month in the spirit of gender equity, in addition to skin safety?

State laws have long supported women going topless in public, but when women choose to, passersby often scoff or call the police. That happened to Eloisa Plancarte, who bared her breasts in a gas station parking lot in Rochester in July 2021. Her conviction on charges of indecent exposure was recently overturned by the Minnesota Supreme Court.

In State v. Plancarte, the court found no evidence that Plancarte’s actions were lewd or sexual in nature, a requirement for a misdemeanor conviction under Minnesota Statutes section 617.23, subdivision 1(1). (The decision did not determine her arguments about whether toplessness standards violate equal protection or whether women’s breasts count as “private parts,” which is an area of the body that is unlawful to expose in public.)

Although it is technically legal for any appropriately behaving person, regardless of gender, to be topless in public areas across Minnesota, local ordinances can say otherwise. For example, historically, the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board made it illegal under code PB2-21 for women to be topless on park property, defining it as showing a “female breast below the top of the areola with less than a fully opaque covering … .” This part of the code applied to females “10 years of age or older.”

In 1986, the Minnesota Court of Appeals decided in State v. Turner to uphold the 1983 conviction of Lee Ann Turner, who reportedly had fully exposed her breasts while sunbathing in Wirth Park. It determined that the code “does not deny equal protection.” To its credit, the court noted that Turner “is entitled to write or speak out for change,” saying that Turner “can communicate with Congress, the state legislature, or the Minneapolis Park Board and advocate repeal or modification of any law or ordinance.” It took until 2020, after arrests of many other women, before the Park and Recreation Board finally repealed that ordinance.

As we move closer toward bare-chested gender equality, we could leverage the Plancarte decision in advocacy for other women’s rights: pay parity, improved reproductive health care, better protections for gender-based violence victims and elimination of a pink tax on items marketed toward women. The case already has raised discussions for transgender rights based on if a transgender woman or man wants to shed their shirt in public.

To further the cause, we could march up the Capitol steps, men, women and nonbinary, all bearing our bare chests in solidarity. But let’s be honest with ourselves, women endure enough ogling, harassment and shaming from all genders, that it continues to affect people’s self-esteem and safety. It can even result in the types of issues we’re trying to eliminate, such as unequal career advancement based on how we dress, including makeup, heels or even whether or not legs and armpits are shaven.

And what about the children? How many parents are ready to let their daughters from age 5 to 15 go bike riding topless around the neighborhood, while flying a kite at the park or when they’re just sitting on the front porch of their home? If we’re teaching our daughters to cover up out of fear of being judged, violated or otherwise sexualized, shouldn’t we at least ask our sons, brothers and our husbands to throw on a T-shirt in solidarity?

So, instead of addressing inequality by allowing everyone to go shirtless, maybe the more respectful, realistic solution is for everyone to keep their shirts on. Equality doesn’t have to mean “everyone takes it off”; it can also mean agreeing that no one does, unless the setting clearly allows for it — like the beach or a pool.

If it seems unrealistic for men to wear a shirt outdoors all the time, or men feel they just can’t mow the lawn with a shirt on, even though women do, then how about we target only the month of July — typically the hottest month of the year — for everyone to keep their shirts on. There is already No Shave November (also known as Movember) and Dry January, so what about “Shirts On July”?

Since July is UV Safety Awareness Month, donning a shirt the remaining days of July yields a two-fer: A win for your skin, and a win for solidarity with women. It’s a win-win — one for each breast.

Sheree R. Curry is the co-president of the National Association of Black Journalists Minnesota (NABJ-MN), formerly known as the Twin Cities Black Journalists. She also wears many other hats, including covering news about corporate America for national media outlets. Follow her @shereecurry on LinkedIn.