The World Series Flashers incurrs a life ban! The purpose of activism and awareness about Breast Cancer is undermined as talks of nudity take over?

With the Breast Cancer Awareness month ending a new stunt to publicize it has come to life. Surely, October is the Breast Cancer Awareness month but not many are knowledgeable of it. So it requires publicity to attract attention to this topic.

But some people go out of their line to do so. Or is their purpose even what they depict?

In the Game Five of World Series, Sunday night, Julia Rose and her accomplices flashed Houston Astros pitcher Gerrit Cole.

Reportedly, the ladies had it planned from last year. They were determined to do something in this game. And so bought tickets for this game, hoping to create an uproar.

Consequently, the SHAGMAG founder and brand executive Lauren Summer are banned indefinitely by Major League Baseball.

The ladies were dressed in SHAGMAG t-shirts and thus stopped by guards. Since being warned that they could not promote their brand they were asked to zip up their jackets.

Apparently, Rose claimed that the stunt was acted out to spread awareness about Breast Cancer. Also, they wanted to spread the movement about Free the Nipple. They argued that women should feel proud of their body and breasts.

Thus, they should not be restricted to go topless in public. On the other hand, they criticised men’s casual disregard of covering themselves and showing their body in public.

However, the topic arises – Has their stunt benefitted the knowledge of Breast Cancer? Or was it for their own popularity?

Breast Cancer is common in women. It emerges in the breast tissue and still, most of the people are unaware of it.

Now, Rose and SHAGMAG’S blunt action claims that the funds they receive would help aid breast, cancer patients.

Apparently, they have garnered around $10,000 subscription for the magazine. The said magazine details women expressing their nudity besides sex, sports and other issues.

Clearly, the activists ensure that they are doing it for the feminist cause. But flaunting nudity in middle of a live game would not be sufficient or efficient.

Since the transmission has spread about this flashing incident, only the women are discussed. Then, where is the campaign addressed? Even in their testimonies, they have referred to their distinguished cause once! Otherwise, it all emerges like an attention-grabbing trick.

Would nudity aid to further the feminist motive or subvert it rather?

The magazine might address feminist issues but are the subscribers also utilising it for the indistinguishable purpose?

The sensitivity with which the freedom of women to be naked as men need to be handled is lost in the gusto of popularity!

The Instagram accounts of the women sure seem bordering on violating Instagram policies. They have used it to normalise showing boobs in public.

But it does not seem like an empowerment step. Apparently, it is mostly a way of advertising their magazine.

So could it fulfil the feminist aspect when nudity is tantamount to promote it? If nudity is all people care about when subscribing then won’t the purpose be lost?

Nudity is in itself not a taboo but manipulating it to one’s advantage while advertising for a serious issue may make the issue redundant in itself.