The group “Breasts not bombs” had a protest of sorts at the Federal Plaza in San Francisco earlier today. After lunch a woman I work with came back into the office and reported that she had seen the antiwar group there going topless for peace.
My first thought was that this had been a protest wasted on my female coworker. Although I did not see this protest myself, the ladies were apparently not just flashing for peace, either.
Someone suggested that “Boobs not bombs” has a better ring to it. But perhaps they didn’t want to sound crass.
What’s next? Mothers of newborn sons out there with their naked boys carrying signs saying:
“weenies for peace not dicks for war” ?
With an international no sign over Cheney’s face?
There could be a whole series, and I agree, to not sound crass always use the formal term for whatever body part is being featured: Breasts not bombs, Penises for peace, Vagina vigils, Buttocks brigades, etc.
Has this group been around for a while and I’m just learning of them now? I guess so:
http://www.sherryglaser.net/Breast-Not%20-B-News.html
I like the notion behind them, and I only wish this had been our national focus in ‘03. Well, okay: I’m sure we were as focused on breasts as ever then.
http://breastsnotbombs.blogspot.com/
But the not bombs part. We really needed to mind our bombs then. We still do.
I would enjoy a breasts-not-bombs protests, but the people being protested enjoy destroying human anatomy, not appreciating it.
Inevitably, Bombs-not-breasts will be organized to counter the movement.
You’re probably right. Sort of like the loggers who advocate eating spotted owls.
The state bird of California is the California quail. In San Francisco they estimate that in 1900 there were at least 1500 of the cute little guys bobbing around Golden Gate Park. When I lived in the City I used to go for runs in the Presidio, and would see them up there.
Now people bring their unwanted cats to the park and release them. And others feed the feral cats, who kill the birds. They don’t need the food, as they’re fed — it’s just their instinct to kill what they can. It’s estimated that there are maybe a dozen quail left.
The cat lovers, outraged that anyone would blame cats for being cats (actually, the blame goes to people who throw their pets away) have organized groups to support the cats.
One group wanted cats to be declared an endangered species, so they could be protected, also.
The mind boggles.
I mean, I like cats, too. We were very devoted to our sweet old Millicent (a tortoiseshell, lived over 20 years), before she died. I still miss her.
But an endangered species? Feral cats?
There’s already a group with an environmentalist sounding name that does do some work to preserving wetlands for the purposes of letting duck hunters kill more ducks. I can’t remember the name of the group right now.
This makes me think that there may end up being some group that says something about keeping war out of one’s own back yard. That is, they the attitude will be something like keep it in the middle-east where it belongs.
Not knowing the name they’ll pick, I don’t see how to parody it yet.
Bongo, I can think of two such groups. One I once knew fairly well.
As a kid I learned how to identify birds on land owned by the Izaak Walton League. A group of birders were allowed to set up long, very light nets to catch and then band birds. I got to hold many different species in my hand, and learn to identify them.
The Izaak Walton League believes in stewardship including developing habitat for the purpose of hunting and fishing. A similar group, focused on duck hunting, is Ducks Unlimited.
I dunno…seems to me that they dilute their message by using these types of antics. Seems a bit tongue in cheek for what should be a serious message. My take on something like this is that they are more interested in getting attention than delivering the message. Hard to take them seriously.
WC
WC: as a writer, are you familiar with the Greek play Lysistrata, by Aristophanes? I think of this as similar. But I see your point, Anne.
If you can see things through the lens of the protesters, sometimes it seems as if the media portrays the antiwar movement as either grim or nuts. I mean, I know people who deliberately put on suits, ties, or “business” clothes to participate in marches because the TV cameras always focus on the nuttiest characters they can, probably because they are most visually arresting.
In answer to how grim or negative protests can be, maybe sometimes groups like this are formed out of exasperation. Sort of like, “hey fellas, yoo hoo, look over here, wouldn’t you rather make love than war”?