If going topless is so empowering and sex-positive, then let's see some bare-chested guys [Topless Coffee Shop Drew 150 Applicants For 10 Positions, usnews.com]. When men don't strip to get ahead, their actions say it's degrading. What's the matter bros? What's good for the gander is for good for the goose. Or would it make you jealous for your wives and girlfriends to have nice set of pecs to look at while you check out a nice rack? Eye candy for all! That's equality.
Comment by Angela of PA
I'm a chick, but I think this is a fabulous idea! If I were in my 20s again, I would've applied. People are working, and it's drawing good business, which in turn stimulates the local economy. So...who cares? A friend and I had talked about this same idea last summer. Kind of wishing we had followed through now.
Comment by Selena of TX
I hope only the servers are topless and not the baristas. I can't imagine anyone wanting to get close to a steam wand in just their bare skin. Not that I've heard of any espresso-related accidents, but it just seems dangerous to have naked flesh and hot liquid and machinery!
Comment by Sofia of CA
I am in no way "churchy." But, when women still have to fight for respect, equal pay, etc., this is a giant step backward. I have to wonder where self-respect has gone these days.
Comment by Leslee of TN
There used to be one of these topless coffee/doughnut places in Dickson City, PA, called Superdad. Pressure from local religious groups and organized mothers caused a zoning change that zoned old Superdad right out of business. I am sure the proprietor of this establishment in Maine can soon expect the same situation. Let us hope that everyone earning a living there is banking those tips.
Comment by Dave Giaimo of GA
So what? If they are comfortable, so am I. You see topless in the Caribbean. No one gives it a second thought. Good for the girls!
Comment by Bill of CA
More Baby Mama Drama
Unlike other mothers who may have had less control over there circumstances, Nadya [Suleman] brought this all upon herself [Octuplet Dilemma: Should Hospital Let Kids Go, Should Taxpayers Be Burdened? usnews.com]. There was no night of passion with lack of contraception. There was just goal- oriented procreation without a partner and mostly a dream that the government and college would bail her out of her selfish behavior. Shame on her for suggesting that this was God's will that she should have this many children! It is almost like a thief saying well it's God's will that I should break into this big house, otherwise why would he allowed people to have nice things?
Comment by Dee of NY
Having raised a child as a single mother with no financial help from the government, I find this situation appalling. When the $7 an hour hospital job wasn't enough, I cleaned apartments in the evening with my daughter at my side. I wish I could have participated as a room-mother or field-trip chaperone. Didn't happen—I was working. What's this woman thinking? She knows the system...Single mom, six young children, three of whom have disabilities, collecting food stamps, receiving grant money for education, having daycare for her kids while she's in school, depending on her mother to help. Solution: Foster those innocent babies to loving homes. Allow Nadya a chance to support the "older" kids without the help of our taxes. If she's successful, then, maybe she deserves to "mother" these new ones. Quit enabling this woman. She has spent enough of our time and money already.
Comment by LeeAnne Stone of IL
Personally, I'm a little tired of hearing the media try to vilify Nadia Suleman. This is a woman who is obviously not mentally stable or at the very least out of touch with reality. The real blame should be laid on the educated medical doctor that made the judgment to implant a litter of embryos into the womb of this woman who had questionable motives for expanding her family. This story just shows the need for regulation and oversight even in the realm of medicine. Without strict regulations there will always be a person that chooses to abuse the system at the cost of others. Now because some doctor used poor judgment and implanted too many embryos in a woman who can't afford to feed the kids she already had, it is the taxpayer of California that is going to have to foot the bill.
Comment by Jeri Slavin of MA
Nadya has proven her mental instability time and time again. It would be dangerous to let her take those tiny babies home. What I find ironic is she's going to school to study psychology. Who in their right mind would go to her for mental help when she is so clearly in need of it herself? As a Californian, I'm disgusted by the greed of this woman in a time when families are tightening their belts, not loosening it to birth a litter.
Comment by B.J. Moritz of CA
Concern for the welfare of these innocent children should have been done before they were conceived. Obviously the mother was incapable of this decision on her own, so where was the help she needed at this critical time? The doctor who implanted the embryos must surely take the blame as he clearly ignored his oath to "First, do no harm". Now he should be held responsible for the welfare of these children, much as a deserting father is held to child support for his actions. Did he not make the decision to allow them to be born? Is this medical malpractice on his part? Responsibility from both parties involved here would be a welcome change, rather than forcing taxpayers to foot the bill once again.
Comment by TD Hart of MI