Greetings,
The following discusses the subject of toplessness, or topfree, as may be indicated by the title of the article. This is a long article, being that I have collected evidence from various different sources nd mde argument from various different perspectives. From an anthroplogical point of view all the way to the politicisation of the subject an the use of toplessness for use in politics, each subject is addressed. Rather than argue a point of view, the article is intended to educate the reader about the subject, and possibly argue for a little more understanding in the community at large.
Cheers,
Henry.
Copyright Notice
“the data found
is freely available on the Internet, books, journals and articles, so this
means that the permission for the use of its resources and analysis has been
implied.”
For
the purposes of what is presented here the author only claims copyright for
original content which is presented. All other copyright reverts to the author
or publisher, as may be the case. The information presented here in its
original form is for educational and personal purposes, not for profit.
Introduction
The
bare breast and nipple are a common sight at swimming pools, because males have
two of them unless they have had them removed due to some accident or medical
procedure. However, should a female, either deliberately or accidentally,
expose a breast or nipple, there is either problems of considered indecent
exposure from the former, or embarrassment from the latter. This would seem
ironic considering that both of them are simply skin covering tissue. Here, we
can see how the female breast, and especially the nipple, is for the most part,
a taboo sight in public. There are those who will push the limits, but there
are still limits.
The
following discussion will address the subject of toplessness, or topfree, as
some might call it. There will be different elements discussed so the subject
can be founded on the basis of understanding. Evidence of the exposed breast as
a normal part of cultures will be presented, through history, and in
contemporary cultures. There will also be a brief discussion of fashion, and
considered appropriate places for females to be seen with exposed breasts. This
will all lead to the inevitable discussion of the politicisation of the body
and how female bodies have been politicised and even used as political weapons.
Before this can be discussed, the definition of some terms is necessary.
Definition
“By definition,
topless is the dimunitive of top; it is the opposite of topped, and refers to
the state of wearing no top at all, so that the breasts and nipples are fully
exposed.”
The
definition presented above gives a simple explanation of what it means to be
topless, simply to be without a top. This could refer to either a male or
female individual, but mostly it is used to refer to the female, being that it
primarily refers to a female with her breasts exposed. Evidence for this is
found in alternate words used when referring to males without a shirt on.
“Toplessness
refers to the state in which a woman's breasts, including her areola and
nipples, are exposed, especially in a public place or in a visual medium. The
male equivalent is barechestedness, also commonly called shirtlessness.”
The
most interesting thing about such indications within the English language is
the indication points toward what the individual is lacking, and is indicated
in two cases, topless and shirtless, with barechestedness simply indicating
that the male has a bare chest. If further examination is made, one will find
that such a focus on the lack of garment on the top of the body is not found in
French, for example, where it is indicated that the individual is wearing
“bottoms alone.”
“Synonyms
include culotte seule (French for the bottoms alone), bikini sans
soutien-gorge, culotte solomente, barebreasted, and barechested (although this
last term is usually reserved for men). Topless implies the subject also has
bare shoulders, torso, midriff, and nipples, but as a noun or adjective the
term makes no commentary about what the subject is wearing below the waistline,
except it is implied the subject is wearing something.”
The
French focuses on what the individual is
wearing rather than on what they are not
wearing, as in the English language. Similar terms all point toward the individual
not wearing something i.e. “topfree,” the alternate term, used by activists
that will be noted later on in the discussion, also indicates that the top is
missing from the individual. This focus on a lack of clothing on a particular
part of an individual, points toward an issue which can be seen throughout the
history of western culture and clothing.
Historical and Contemporary Attitudes
“In many
European societies between the Renaissance and the 19th century, exposed
breasts were acceptable while a woman's bared legs, ankles or shoulders were
considered risqué.”
In
some fashions the breast was even completely exposed, and this was considered
normal. Some of the highest of the high wore these fashions, and the exposure
of the breast was considered just a part of the fashion of the age. The
exposure of the leg or ankle, on the other hand, was considered to be quite
provoking. The dress which exposed the shoulder a little was considered more
arousing than the one which exposed most of the breast. Attitudes change over
time. This is even seen in contemporary attitudes.
“In a survey of
190 different societies, researches found that very few associated exposed
breasts with sexuality, but that there was an insistence that women conceal
their breasts.”
Even
in contemporary societies around the world, the breast is not necessarily
considered to be sexually arousing, or even connected with sexuality. Still
there is an insistence that they remain covered, for some reason. Some moral
more that requires the breast of the female remain covered. Even during the
hey-days of the 1960s where peace and love seemed to rule, toplessness was
risqué.
“Although some
social attitudes to increased body exposure began to soften during the late
1960s, contemporary Western societies still generally view toplessness
unfavorably.”
These
were in western societies, the indigenous societies of other nations will be
discussed afterward, and differences in attitude toward the exposed female
breast will be noted in their history, and in their contemporary attitudes. Of
more interest, in our more current age, studies have been conducted in regard
to the exposure of the breast with some interesting results. Social and
cultural contexts were found to be important.
“A more recent
study of 116 college-age women in Australia found that those who had gone
topless were more accepting of toplessness generally, more sexual, and had
higher self-esteem and higher body image. In contemporary society, the extent
to which a woman may expose her breasts depends on social and cultural context.
Women's swimsuits and bikinis commonly reveal the tops and sides of the
breasts. Displaying cleavage is considered permissible in many settings, and is
even a sign of elegance and sophistication on many formal social occasions, but
it may be prohibited by dress codes in settings such as workplaces and schools,
where sexualized displays of the female breast may be considered
inappropriate.”
Some
swimsuits expose quite an amount of the breast. Mini-kinis, cover very little
of their wearers, only covering the nipple and very little of the breast. It is
relatively common to the side and front of the breast at beaches and swimming
pools, and this is not considered a problem. Low-cut tops and push-up bras are
a common feature in fashions, and seen commonly on the street, as are evening
dresses with fittings which accentuate the cleavage and figure of the person
wearing them. However each is only worn in its setting. There are those who
would wish and do put even further restrictions.
“Some cultures
have even begun to expand social prohibitions on female toplessness to
prepubescent and even infant girls. This trend toward covering the female
nipple from infancy onward is particularly noticeable in the United States,
Eastern Asia and the Middle East, but is much less common in Europe.”
The
appropriate age when a girl should begin to cover her breasts and nipples is a
question which has been asked, in those cultures where such a thing is a
concern. In some cultures it is only a problem when the girl begins to turn
into a woman, so at puberty. Others believe that this should occur earlier
because they need to be enculturated sooner to develop the appropriate amount
of modesty. Such concerns are, or were, not present for many indigenous
cultures.
Indigenous Cultures
“Topless
costumes have been and continue to be widely worn by a diverse societies around
the planet, not only for swimwear, but also as formal attire ... and especially
in tropical environments, for everyday dress ... But the total exposures of the
breasts have always presented a challenge to Western societies and media, a
concept discussed by Langer and which he called relative modesty. Needless to
say topless in the West has migrated from the burlesque hall, the stripper, and
the pinup girl to the mainstream woman.”
While
Western cultures have restricted the exposure of the breast as a part of
costume to situations such as adult entertainment, models and other such
situations, in other cultures women have walked about in their normal lives
with their breasts and nipples completely exposed as a part of everyday dress.
It is the culture that decides whether something is normal or not, it is not
something which is in-built into the human psyche. The challenge for Western
cultures about the exposure of the breast is a relatively recent occurrence,
considering the expanse of history, and relatively limited, considering the
amount of cultures which consider the exposure of the breast to the norm.
“Attitudes
towards toplessness have varied considerably across cultures and over time. The
lack of clothing above the waist for both females and males was the norm in
traditional cultures of North America, Africa, Australia and the Pacific
Islands until the arrival of Christian missionaries, and it continues to be the
norm in many indigenous cultures today.”
When
Western cultures came into contact with cultures who were wearing little
clothing, there was a culture shock. The social mores that they were accustomed
to did not apply. They applied their approaches to social feelings in regard to
clothing and which parts of the body were allowed to be exposed. It was not only
Christian missionaries who influenced change in indigenous cultures. Some of
the cultures kept their cultural practices even with the presence of such
influences, and still do today. To a point, this was accepted, yet when it
comes to toplessness in their culture, there is still a major sticking point.
“toplessness of
the natives is natural it is acceptable, whereas topless of white women is out
of the question. An undercurrent of the puritanical view also holds that the
dark-skinned people are not entirely human, and as animals, slaves, or
entertainers they remain a creature somewhere between the monkey and the
civilized, and thus are not entirely subject to human rules. Thus from this
perspective, the display of the female breasts, both in real life and in media,
contains deep political and social implications.”
There
are images of topless natives in relatively recent publications of
investigations of indigenous peoples. Even in news articles where the images
have not been censored to protect anyone from embarrassment from seeing naked
breasts.
Yet you find a news article from a similar source, and white women are
conveniently facing the wrong way or other similar situations so as not to reveal
themselves, or at least their nipples.
The implication of such is that there is some racial implication, some
separation between the two, that the indigenous breast does not count, but the
white breast does. Ironically the reverse has also occurred.
“George W. Bush is actually in favour of toplessness. In his homestate of
Texas, during the time that he was governor, he passed a law that white women
are allowed to go topless in public... but only white women. Apparently black,
asian, latino or native women are somehow "obscene" just because
their breasts are a different colour.”
The
irony here is that if the same Black, Asian, Latino, or Native women were found
in an “indigenous” situation then their toplessness would likely be ignored,
because they were indigenous. Such racial stereo-typing, one would expect
should have gone out, but it is still current as has been demonstrated. It is a
hangover from the Victorian period, one which has been reinforced.
“Euro-American
confrontation with topless prior to the 1960s are often deeply conflicted and
involved a racial separation. This is because the dark-skinned, tropical people
world-wide often are topless, whereas their white-skinned northern hemisphere counterpoints
wear more clothes.”
The
1960s began to loosen things up a little bit in regard to the difference
between people, but as has been demonstrated by the contrast between news
articles depicting women of indigenous peoples, and white women in contemporary
media, there is still a hangover present from the earlier period. The norm is
still enforced that native people do not wear clothes, while civilised people
do wear clothes, because they are civilised; likewise women should wear clothes
and cover themselves to remain civilised, and modest.
“Exposed breasts
were and are normal in many indigenous societies. However, western countries
have social norms around female modesty, often enforced by legal statutes, that
require women to cover their breasts in public.”
The
legal statutes that enforce the covering of breasts in public are primarily
concerned with the concern for the enforcement of old ideas of modesty which
have become social norms in Western cultures. There is no evidence of health or
other risks concerned with the exposure of female breasts, and in many cases it
has given evidence to improve self-esteem. Toplessness and the social mores and
the clash between cultures become a real problem when indigenous and Western
cultures collide, as they often do.
“In many
indigenous, non-Western cultures it is generally acceptable for both men and
women to go without clothing that covers the torso. Female toplessness can also
be a traditional aspect in indigenous cultural celebrations.”
One
of the prime examples of such toplessness in indigenous cultural celebrations
is found in regard to the Australian Aborigines. In particular it concerns the
tribes of the Northern Territory who inhabit the area around Alice Springs.
There was a cultural clash between the indigenous population and the local law enforcement.
Australian Aborigines
The
argument arose concerning a “police ban on a traditional Aboriginal dance
featuring topless women.”
The indigenous population of Australia has been mostly assimilated into the
more Western population, but there are areas where indigenous cultures still
remain, and indigenous practices still remain. It should be noted that the
Australian native population, like many indigenous cultures, does not have one
homogenous cultural practice, but many depending on which tribal area that a
person travels.
In
the case of the tribe which inhabits the area around Alice Springs, their women
perform an indigenous dance, which they practise in a park, and it is practised
topless. “Aborigines are furious that police told dancers from the remote
community of Papunya to stop practising in a public park in the city of Alice
Springs.”
Likely, the group was reported by one of the relatively few members of the
white population to the local police who was offended by the sight, and who likely
did not understand the cultural practice which was being exhibited.
If
the case was argued on historical precedence, based on the practice of culture,
then the indigenous culture would certainly win, “women said dancing topless
was part of Aboriginal culture dating back thousands of years.” These
cultures which many Western nations see and think of as “backward” or
“primitive” when they see them, and their the colonists saw them, have been
practiced the same for thousands of years. They are a chance to look back
through history. Further, in the case of these topless women, they have had
their indigenous practices broadcast around the world, and in public
gatherings, with great interest.
“"This is
part of our culture and thousands and thousands of people around the world have
seen Aboriginal ladies dancing without their tops on television, theatres and
many public occasions," CLC chairman Kunmanar Breaden said.”
The
case is a perfect example of a the invasion of Western concepts of what is
correct and proper in regard to what should and should not be seen in public,
imposing itself on another culture. The ironic thing being that the same
culture has already been seen, famously in public, breasts exposed, already,
before the incident occurred. So as a part of cultural practise, the bare
breast should not be of any concern, but such has already been indicated. When
colonists come they make changes, as they did in Australia, so did colonists in
other places.
Indonesia
Moving
a little north of Australia to Indonesia there are further examples of cultures
where the females did not cover their breasts in their traditional cultures;
where before the introduction of foreign influence, no one was concerned about
the exposure of the breast. Here we find it was not just Western cultures which
had their influence, but also the influence of Islam
“In the
Indonesian region, toplessness was the norm among the Dayak, Javanese, and the
Balinese people of Indonesia before the introduction of Islam and contact with
Western cultures.”
There
is a lot of blame laid at the feet of Western civilisation when it comes to the
ruin of indigenous cultures, but it was not the only cause. In this case the
introduction of Islam also had an effect on the changing of culture. This changing
of culture is what caused in the ending of toplessness amongst women in the
tribes in the South-East Asian region. A similar progression is found in
Thailand.
Thai
“Until around
one hundred years ago, northern Thai women used to be naked from the waist up,
especially when at home. They wore a long tube-skirt - pha sin - tied high
above the waists below their breasts, and had a shawl which they could use for
modesty.”
The
long tube-skirt of the Thai was perfectly suited to the tropical weather, and exposure
of the upper body allowed more heat to escape. There was no need for covering
of the breasts when at home and a shawl is noted that could be worn for modesty, but was not required. Here there is a
normal situation where the female’s breasts are exposed at home, especially, as
a normal situation and may be covered when outside the home. Again, it is
external influence which changes clothing.
“In the late
19th century the influence of missionaries and modernization under King
Chulalongkorn encouraged local women to wear blouses to cover their breasts.
This evolved into the lace blouses worn today.”
In
this case at least the missionaries were supported by the king rather than
simply invading and attempting to impose their ways by influence. It is noted
here that the blouses which were worn to cover the breasts evolved into the
lace blouses which are worn today, this notes a change in culture. A further
effect can be seen in the culture, where such effects on the culture are
enshrined in law. “In Thailand, the government of Field Marshal Plaek
Pibulsonggram issued a series of cultural standards between 1939 and 1942.” This
resulted in the fashion which is seen today, cultural standards enforced by the
government. Remaining in the same region, in India there was a similar
liberality with clothing in the traditional period.
India
When
the clothing of India is brought to mind, considering the female clothing, the
image of the sari comes to mind a wrapped garment which covers most of the
body, concealing most of it. This was not the case in the traditional period;
the clothing was quite a bit more liberal.
“The royal
ladies in the frescoes wear pleated robes from the waist upwards, save for
necklace, armlets, wristlets, ear and hair ornaments and displayed their
breasts. The ladies in waiting wear waist clothes, few ornaments and a firm
'breast bandage' or thanapatiya. The Sigiriya style of clothing — Sigiriya
frescoes depict women wearing the cloth gracefully draped like a dhoti tied in
a knot at the front and pulled down to expose the navel — must have survived a
few centuries in Ceylon”
The
fresco displays Indian women in quite the opposite of the “popular” image which
is portrayed. Naked from the waist upward, except for some jewellery, and a simple
cloth covering the groin area, pulled down to expose the navel. This tradition
of exposing the breasts did not mysteriously die out after a short period of
time, but was quite prevalent in the culture. Through to the tenth-century as
indicated.
“In the Tenth
Century when a lay devotee, Rohini, wore a blouse before Anuruddha Thera only
to cover marks left by a skin disease. This indicates that it was still unusual
for women to cover their body. Women's dress was then a cloth round the hip
leaving the body bare from waist upwards”
Anuruddha
Thera is one of the disciples of the Buddha, and so a very important
individual. Rohini only wears clothing on her upper body to cover marks of
disease, not to cover her breasts, indicating that it was not unusual for them
to go uncovered, even to see important people. The indicated clothing is a
cloth wrapped about the hip, this leaves the entire upper part of the body
exposed. This state, with the wrap of cloth about the body is common for both
sexes.
“In many parts
of northern India before the Muslim conquest of India, women were topless.
Women and men typically wore an antriya on the lower body and were nude from
the waist up, aside from pieces of jewelry.”
The
Muslim conquest of India occurred during the twelfth-century, and its effects
will be discussed later on, though some of them will be noted sooner. What will
be noted above is that both men and women were uncovered aside from jewellery
from the waist upward in northern India in this earlier period, unconcerned
about the exposure of the female breast, it was only later, after the influence
of external forces that changes began.
“by the
Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries it was acceptable to remain uncovered at
home but when going out to wear an upper garment. At this stage the cloth was
worn with a separate garment covering the breasts thrown over the shoulders,
which evolved into the shawl and breastband”
India
covers a large area and the influence of external forces would not be noticed
for quite some time. Indeed it would not be for centuries after the Muslim
influence had been felt in the northern parts of the country that effects of
any kind would be felt in the south. “Toplessness was the norm for women among
several indigenous peoples of South India until the 19th or early 20th century,”
in each case it was an external influence which changed the fashion and
resulted in the covering of the breast.
“there was no
place for prudery and Puritanism in the authentic tradition of Hinduism and
Buddhism. One may speculate that it was the rise of Islam in India and the
Muslim conquest of south India by the mid-14th Century that was responsible for
these changes in women's attire”
The
stricter approaches to social mores and the modesty and place of women in Islam
are likely causes of the changes in the fashion in India as a result of the
Islamic invasion. These influences would have resulted in the increased modesty
of women and thus the covering of the breast, as too much exposure of the
female would have gone against more the more conservative ideas found in Islam.
There was no concern for covering the upper part of the body, save for warmth,
external influences were the reason for the changes.
“for many
centuries Indian women did not wear upper garments except during winter in
certain parts of northern India. He quotes the example of the Nayar tribal
women of south India, who until the mid-20th Century went about topless.
Bhasham implies that the Muslim invasions were what altered the dress codes of
Indian women.”
History
would have it that India would change hands between various influences because
of her natural resources. This would result in different influences on her
culture. These influences on the culture are clearest seen in the clothing that
the people wear; for the significance of the current discussion most in the
covering of the breast. “Until the late 19th Century many women of the
so-called low castes did not cover their breasts, whether at home or when going
outside.”
These were the low caste people, and no one paid them particularly much
attention, so their state of dress would not have been particularly noticed. Of
course that would be until colonial rule was imposed and the influence of
missionaries felt.
“Nira gives an
explanation about the puritanical influences that came with Western colonial
rule and the imposition of Judeo-Christian culture on the liberal tradition of
Hindu-Buddhist culture that prevailed in ancient Lanka”
While
the source indicates the influence which was most felt in Sri Lanka, previously
known as Ceylon, the same was felt on the mainland of India where colonial rule
was imposed by the British. Many ideals and cultural ideas were imposed,
including social mores about the exposing of the breast. Such ideals
originating from Judeo-Christian culture were also taken with them when they
went to the South-Pacific and the island nations which were there.
South Pacific
The
South-Pacific had many islands and many island-nations, each with their
cultures and customs. “In the South Pacific, toplessness was common prior to
contact with Western missionaries, but is less common today.” Again,
we see the impact of one culture imposing its moral ideas on those of another.
In particular, an examination may be made where a particular topic is easier to
talk about if the object is normalised, whereas if it is taboo it is much more
difficult to talk about.
“Cultural taboos
are less stringent, however, regarding women’s breasts. Traditionally on the
islands, women appear bare-chested in public; hence discussion about breasts
can happen more easily whether on the islands or in the U.S.”
Women
from the Marshall Islands find it much easier to talk about the subject of
breast cancer than they do about cervical cancer, because the breasts are
usually exposed in their culture. Breasts are a normal part of the everyday
life. There is no cultural taboo about them, nor social more attached to them.
Whereas similar attitudes are less present in Western cultures, so talking
about breast cancer is more difficult. Here toplessness promotes physical
health by talking about the subject of breast cancer and raising awareness. The
South-Pacific is not the only place where the lack of coverage of the breast is
still a cultural practice.
Africa
“Among Himba
women of northern Namibia and Hamar of southern Ethiopia, besides other
traditional groups in Africa, the social norm is for women to be
bare-breasted.”
In
this case a bare-breasted woman is the social norm, and a woman who covers her breast
is the one who is acting against the cultural situation. One must always look
at things from the point of view of the culture, not one’s own socialised
cultural views. Many of the tribes in Africa have women who do not cover their
breasts in everyday life, or who are uncovered for cultural practice. An
example of the uncovered breast in African culture for cultural practice would
be the Reed Dance (Umhlanga), an annual Swazi and Zulu event.
This has seen some controversy due to the age of some of the participants, a
very Western view of the event.
In
each indigenous culture that has been presented, the indigenous culture had the
breasts exposed, especially in home situations, and even in public situations
in many cultures. The exposed breast in these cultures was not seen as risqué,
but as a normal part of life, as a part of the cultural practices. Some of
these cultural practices continue today, and should be allowed to do so,
supported as part of the culture in which they are found. This part of the
investigation should provide sufficient evidence that such topless practices
are not unique or unusual, but quite common amongst non-Western cultures and
should be considered apart from any social mores.
Fashion
When
the subject of “fashion” arises in conversation, indeed as a topic made public
in the media it is generally a Euro-centric concept in generalist opinion that
is being discussed. The fashion of the indigenous peoples who have previously
been discussed is certainly not up for discussion, and most often neither are
many of the fashions of many other non-Western cultures regardless of whether
they have bared breasts or not. One guaranteed way to make people take notice
of fashion is to show a little too much flesh on the catwalk, or in public.
Topless Swimsuit
The
1960s was an era in which many changes were happening and many parts of the
world were accepting of many changes, but the exposure of the female breast was
something that was something that was going to make people take notice. “In 1964
he [Rudi Gernreich] made headlines with his infamous topless bathing suit that
exposed breasts for the first time in commercial fashion.”
This was the first time that breasts were exposed in commercial fashion.
The
swimsuit deliberately exposed the breasts. The individual did not take off a
part of the swimsuit to expose themselves as might have been done with previous
swimsuits. This approach can be seen with the bikini where the top is removed
to expose the breasts, and there is an argument as to whether a bikini is still
a bi-kini if the top is removed.
“It has been
argued that a bikini without its top is no longer a bi-kini, and is more
correctly classified as a monokini. Supporters of this argument rely on both
the structural arguments of the costume as well as the fact that the true
monokini is not even sold with a top.”
The
monokini, as indicated is simply a pair of bikini-style pants with no top, sold
as a single unit. It is most interesting that arguments can rage over such
things as whether the name of a thing and whether a piece of clothing is the
same thing with one of the parts of it removed. Such arguments hide the
politics of the topless swimsuit, “The topless swimsuit - as modelled by muse
Peggy Moffitt - became an international controversy. It was THE symbol of
women's liberation.”
This swimsuit
became the symbol of women’s liberation because it freed them, at least their
breasts, from the confinement of the swimsuit. In a symbolic gesture it freed
them also. One would think that such a piece of leisure-wear that would be worn
relatively infrequently would have little impact, but the reverse was the case.
“The topless swimsuit soon led to the topless dress, and also gave birth to
another revolution, the no-bra bra. This did much to change the fit of
clothes.”
Rather than being uncomfortable and bulky, women’s clothes began to become more
slim and form-fitting, more feminine in nature, and more comfortable. Of course
the topless swimsuit was here to stay, at least in the form of the topless
bikini, such situations even exist to this day, but such occasions are most
associated, as noted with bathing.
Topless Bathing
When
considering the subject of topless bathing the subject of fashion is not too
far away, because there is always part of a set of swimwear to consider, the
part that covers the lower half of the body. So, in part, it is integrally
linked to the subject of fashion, at least in the contemporary Western world.
Topless bathing is a subject which covers some different aspects which will be
discussed.
Most of all
topless bathing highlights that, “Toplessness in a public place is most
commonly practised or encountered near water, either as part of a swimming
activity or sunbathing.”
Or at least this is the common Western view. Here is a subject which people are
more comfortable discussing in regard to the bare breast. The bare breast is
almost an expected sight on many beaches of the world, and the association with
bathing has historical precedence.
Historical Bathing
“In terms of
bathing and swimwear, topless bathing is practiced in antiquity by the Greeks,
Romans and others. Baths decline in the middle ages under pressure of the
spread of the black plague and church condemnation of washing the body. The
tide begins to turn during the Victorian era as French Orientalist painters
like Gerome present an idealized depiction of Muslim harem baths”
Communal
bathing was practiced by the Greeks and Romans, not only was it topless in many
of the baths, but it was also nude. Baths like these declined in the medieval
period due to the spread of disease, due to the lack of sanitation in the
cities. This is ironic considering that if more of the people actually bathed
then disease would have actually been less of an issue. The irony of public
baths being present in the Victorian era cannot be lost considering the prudish
nature of much of the era, but these baths were, no doubt, either restricted or
in reverse only frequented by people of lower born character.
Contemporary Beginnings
The
contemporary beginnings of topless beaches are found in French and Dutch
colonies, especially in the Caribbean. These beaches are much less restrictive
in regard to dress, and have been for an extended period of time.
"A number of
Caribbean locations, especially those that were formerly French and Dutch
colonies, permit nude and topless sunbathing, like the French West Indies
islands of St. Barths, Guadeloupe, Martinique, and St. Maarten.”
These
beaches allowed not only topless bathing, as has been noted, and discussed here
but also nude bathing, as subject which is well-worth discussing. It also has
elements which concern many of the same topics which are raised, but affect not
only females but also males, though again, the female seems to take most of the
spotlight. It seems that the “fairer sex” takes the spotlight in regard to the
exposure of flesh. Though, it would seem, that the popularity of topless and
nude beaches was to spread, regardless of others’ opinions of the social mores
that were being broken.
“Topless
sunbathing slowly spread to other Western countries throughout Europe and
Australia, many of which now allow topless sunbathing on some or all of their
beaches, either through legal statute or by generally accepted practice, and
beaches were designated for nude or topless bathers. A topless, or
top-optional, beach differs from a nude beach in that beach goers of both sexes
are required to keep their genital area covered, although females have the
option to remove their tops without fearing legal prosecution or official
harassment.”
There
are many beaches around the world on which a female is permitted to take her
top off and reveal her breasts. This right is protected by legal statutes, or
is generally accepted by the people who attend the beaches. There are also
beaches which are clearly signed as nude or topless beaches as well. Often,
there are gate-keepers at these beaches to keep the “tourists” out i.e. those
who just want to see naked bodies. This latter part identifies an unfortunate
part of the identification of the naked breast and body as a sexual object to
be observed, and this sexualisation of the body seems to be having an impact on
younger populations.
Declined
“media reports
in recent years note that the number of women sunbathing topless on French
beaches has markedly declined, and that younger French women have become more
disapproving of exposing breasts in public.”
The
locations of topless beaches, it will have been previously noted, were
primarily those with relatively high French populations or former French
colonies. Yet younger French women are less inclined to sunbathe topless, and
have become more disapproving of the exposed breast in public. This marks a
present trend which is seen toward more conservatism in regard to the exposure
of the breast, and hence the discussion which is made throughout the discussion
which is presented here.
In
regard to the exposure of the female breast in public there are debates which
rage across the world as to whether it is appropriate, and there have been
debates in regard to legal statutes, as have been presented. The subject of
topless bathing merely scratches the surface and reveals a subject that is
always present, the subject of body politics. There is always a question of politics
when it comes to the rights permitted in regard to the female body, laws have
been made which control what women are allowed to do with their bodies, yet the
same are not present with men, the subject of the bare breast is one of the
subjects which is of concern in regard to the issue of body politics.
Body Politics
“the publishing
of white female topless subjects has been a much more carefully controlled
endeavor. Topless mythological creatures have been tolerated since Renaissance
times, especially when the figure is not entirely human ... or when the theme
has a religious excuse.”
The
publishing of images of white females with exposed breasts has always been a
controlled situation. The situation of indigenous breasts has not been the
same, except when such a situation has endangered social mores, as indicated
previously in the discussion of indigenous peoples. Where such white female
breasts have been associated with non-human figures there has been some leeway
given. This identifies the issue which has always been associated with female
bodies and highlights the politics associated with the female body.
“Women’s bodies
have always been central to feminist politics. The female body has historically
been the site for the exercise of gendered and racialized power relations,
involving violence, discipline, exclusion and normalization.”
Feminists
have highlighted the body politics of the female body and emphasized the issues
surrounding the issues associated with the controls associated in regard to the
female body. Most often these social controls have been imposed by governmental
bodies composed primarily of male members of white ethnicity which make their
decisions based on cultural and social norms. Such social norms have resulted
in an effect on the perception of females who do expose their nipples or
areola.
“Many societies
consider women who expose their nipples and areola as immodest and contrary to
social norms. Most jurisdictions do not have laws prohibiting toplessness
directly, but in many jurisdictions a topless woman may be socially or
officially harassed or cited for public lewdness, indecent exposure, public
indecency or disorderly conduct.”
The
exposure of the breast and especially the nipple and areola according to social
norms places the female who performs such an act as deviant according to
certain social norms. The result of which, even where legally the individual
may have no ramifications, is that they may be harassed, though in some
situations they may also come face legal issues as well. The result of which
has been political groups forming around the exposure and denial of such social
norms. “The topfree movement looks beyond the taboo surrounding naked breasts”
such movements strive to free women from the bounds of such social norms and
create campaigns to normalise the exposure of the breast and nipple in public
areas, in an attempt to gain the same rights as males do.
“The Free the
Nipple campaign – named after Lina Esco’s 2014 film – is a global push to
desexualise women’s breasts and allow women the freedom to be topless in the
same places in which it is acceptable for men and boys to do so.”
These
campaigns are intended to examine social norms and address the concepts upon
which they are based. They attempt to address the sexual connotations which are
associated with the female breast and try to remove such ideas. These ideas are
present even in the etymology of words associated in comparison between the
male and female in regard to the absence of clothing on the upper part of the
body.
Etymology
“The word
"topless" usually refers to a woman who is naked above her waist or
hips or, at least, whose breasts are exposed to public view, specifically
including her areola and nipples.”
When
the word “topless” is used it is primarily used to refer to a female who is not
wearing clothing on the upper part of her body. It primarily refers to a female
who has her entire breast exposed to public view. This is a clear statement of
what the situation is, and most often is associated with sexual connotations as
will be presented.
“It may indicate
a designated location where one might expect to find women not wearing tops,
such as a "topless beach" or "topless bar". It can also be
used to describe a garment that is specifically designed to reveal the
breasts,”
A
“topless beach” indicates a beach in which females are seen without the top
part of a bathing suit being worn specifically, because it is normal for the
male not to wear a top with their swimwear. The indication of such is that it
is not normal for a female to have their top exposed. Further, the “topless
bar” indicates a bar in which the hostesses are not wearing clothing above the
waist, this is usually for men to go and observe females in this unclothed
situation and derive pleasure from the presence of females dressed as such, a
clear sexual connotation.
“The word
"topless" may carry sexual or exhibitionist connotations. Because of
this, advocates of women's legal right to uncover their breasts wherever men
may go bare-chested have adopted the alternative term "topfree",
which is not perceived to have these connotations.”
“Topfree”
has been used by activists and advocates of individuals to avoid the sexual or
exhibitionist connotations which have been socially attached to the term
“topless”. They have had to invent a new term to avoid previous socially
established ideas of the idea of going without clothes above the waist. No such
issue exists for the male.
“Barechestedness
is the state of a man or boy wearing no clothes above the waist, exposing the
upper torso. Bare male chests are generally considered acceptable in or around
the house; at beaches, swimming pools and sunbathing areas; when exercising
outside in hot weather; and in certain outdoor construction work settings.”
The
male has a completely different term for the same state of lack of clothing
above the waist even though the same term could be used to describe the female,
as both have bare chests; both are exposing the upper torso. It is accepted
that the male can have no clothing above the waist in several different
situations, situations in which if a female was to do the same, she would be
considered risqué, or immodest. The male term simply describes the situation
and has no sexual connotations attached, even though the male chest is
considered arousing to some.
“In most
societies, male barechestedness is much more common than female toplessness,
even among children. Exposure of the male pectoral muscles is often considered
to be far less taboo than of the female breasts, despite some considering them
equally erogenous.”
Males
who are unclothed above the waist could easily be considered “topless” as they are
equally as unclothed as the female, yet they have the much more neutral term
“barechested”. This is a term that could be used for the female as they also
have nothing on their chest, but their term focuses on the absence of clothing,
something considered taboo, highlighting the sexualisation of the breast and as
a result, toplessness of the female.
Sexualisation
“Social norms
around toplessness vary by context and location. Throughout history, women's
breasts have been featured in art and visual media, from painting and sculpture
to film and photography, and such representations are generally defended on the
grounds of artistic merit. Toplessness may also be deemed acceptable on
educational, medical, or political grounds. At many beaches and resort destinations,
especially in Europe and Australia, women are either formally or informally
permitted to sunbathe topless. However, societies tend to view breast exposure
unfavorably, and subject it to stringent regulations or prohibitions, if its
intent is perceived to be sexual arousal.”
What
needs to be remembered about the issue of the female breast, its exposure and
the social norms which surround it, it varies depending on the location,
context, and culture. Breasts can be found in art in many forms, such
presentations are excused on the basis that they are art. Other presentations
are excused on the basis of the reason that they have been presented, as
indicated. There are social norms present and social mores present in regard to
the exposure of the breast, especially if indicated social arousal may result.
It is this sexualisation which causes the greatest issue.
“Breasts. Just
over 50 percent of the population has them. American culture is fascinated by
them. Slang terms number in the hundreds. They’re in magazines, on billboards,
in beer commercials—always as purely sexual attachments, bouncing enticingly as
physical manifestations of femininity.”
There
are many different slang terms for the breast, and they are seen all over the
place, often highlighted, pointed to in some situations; most often seen as
sexual attachments and indications of femininity. There is the issue, the
sexualisation of the breast. They are not seen as a simple normal part of the
human anatomy. The social norms which are established are hard to break. The
laws which are created from these social norms demonstrate the social norms,
and even when the laws are repealed, the spectre of the social norm remains.
“In much of
contemporary Western society, it is not culturally acceptable for women to
expose their nipples and areola in public. In most Western societies, once
girls enter adolescence, it is the social norm for them to behave modestly and
cover their breasts in public. Until recent times, women who went topless were
cited for indecent exposure or lewdness. Women and the law in most western
countries generally do not regard breasts as indecent. However, wearing a top
in public is a social norm and most women are reluctant to go against it.”
The
laws of nations change, often as a result of political or social pressures for
them to change. There was not too long a time ago when the bikini was not
allowed on public beaches, where women were arrested for wearing them. An
example of social mores, enforced by law, changed as a result of social change
and pressure. More recently women have been allowed to be seen with their
breasts exposed, and in more places, but women are reluctant to do this because
there are social norms which they grew up with, so are reluctant to go against.
The breast is
still seen as erotic. “Contemporary Western culture codes breasts as erotic
objects, as the increasing practice of breast enlargement through implants
illustrates.”
The practice of breast enlargement is a process by which the breast is enlarged.
For many women this is a process to make them feel more sexually appealing to a
prospective partner. It highlights the focus on breasts as a sexual object,
part of the female which is used to lure the male. This view while shared by
many Western cultures does not always extend to the exposure of the breast and
the problems associated.
“Europeans think
Americans are over-excited by bare breasts, and although the Europeans are more
suave about it, even in topless-rich environments ... a complex set of symbols
and rules govern etiquette and behavior about covering and uncovering of the
breasts”
The
exposed breast is approached differently depending on where an individual is
and what they are doing. It is also different depending on the culture that they
are associating with. Not all Western cultures are the same, as the difference
between the Europeans and Americans, above, presents. Even here, there are
rules of behaviour, social norms in place which determine the proper processes
by which the breast is revealed or not. The same attraction has not even been
present throughout history.
“Other parts of
women’s bodies have been viewed as more enticing than breasts, including
buttocks, legs, ankles, hair, and feet. Bound feet (or the “golden lotus”) in ancient
China had strong erotic connections and acts that could be performed with them
were detailed in illustrated sex manuals.”
A
discussion was made about the breast and its exposure through history. It was
also noted that the breast was not always the object of sexual attention that
it is today. Other parts of the female body have drawn the attention of the
male eye throughout history and different cultures, and this is of worthy note.
This needs to be considered within the view of the politicisation of the female
body and especially the sexualisation of the breast. Attitudes have changed
over history, and it is the attitude which is important.
The
attitude to a thing is important because it forms the way that it is viewed. “Breasts,
it seems, are suitable for viewing only when the center of their main evolutionary
function—the nipple—remains hidden.”
The function that is being discussed here is breastfeeding, and that is a
subject which will be discussed further along in this examination as it is integrally
linked. The nipple must remain hidden because it is has sexual connotations. “What
makes the breasts of women so special?”
Men have
breasts, at least the smaller part of them. Men do have them; they are simply
not as developed as their female counter-parts. The man can more often go
without covering their chest, and their nipples. “The nipple and areola of female
breasts are sexual objects to the American public, while the same parts on a
man are commonly exposed.”
How are male nipples any less sexual than female nipples, or vice versa? The
sexualisation of the female breast does harm.
“Breasts are an
example of concealment feeding into sexual attraction today, but there are
other instances that reveal how this process is not the result of an innate,
“hardwired” desire.”
The
concealment of the breast especially makes the breast more attractive, because
they are not accessible, they are more wanted. It is the simple thing that
because a person cannot have something they want it more. This leads to the
sexual desire for the breast. The sexualisation of the breast has only harmed
society through such concealment desires.
“women all over
the country to begin to reject the stigmatization of breasts, proclaiming their
right to go without shirts in the same way men can. Topfree advocates say the
hyper-sexualization of women’s chests has only harmed society. By hiding
breasts, American culture has made them an enticing taboo and encouraged both
males and females to consider them nothing more than aesthetic ornaments,
ignoring their true function as sources of food for infants.”
The
enticing taboo is further feeding into the concept of sexual attraction of the
breast. This has led to the breast being more sexualised, and consequently the
social taboo of their exposure only reinforced by such taboo and sexualisation.
Their true function as sources of food for infants, and simple pieces of
anatomy has been lost in the sexualisation. Such social mores forget that
natural things are natural and if they are treated as natural remain so.
“Which is funny,
because if you raise the children in an environment where breasts are casually
seen, the children simply don't care. This is true in Europe, Canada,
Australia, Africa, Brazil and a variety of places around the world.”
There
are those in Western cultures who believe that exposing children to breasts
will corrupt them. This is because of the sexualisation of the breast and the
social mores which have been built around the breast as a result. Traditional
cultures do not have such sexualisation, and as a result do not have such
social mores. The breast is a natural part of life and presence in society.
“When thinking
about the Free the Nipple movement, there is also the obvious point that many
traditional cultures around the world did not require women to cover their
breasts until the intervention of Christian missionaries or introduction of
Islam. In locations where women are routinely topless, attitudes towards
breasts are, unsurprisingly, different to places in which there are
prohibitions on their exposure.”
The
section on indigenous cultures described several cultures whose traditional
clothing had females who had a lack of clothing above the waist. This meant
that they had exposed breasts most of the time. The only reason that such
cultures’ clothing changed was the result of Christian missionaries or the
introduction of Islam which introduced social mores which caused the
introduction of the covering of the breast. There are still indigenous cultures
around the world whose women still wear their traditional clothing which has
their breasts exposed, and this is normal in their culture. None of this denies
that the breast does not give pleasure.
“None of this is
to deny that many people derive pleasure from looking at breasts or that women
themselves often derive sensual pleasure from their breasts. But when it comes
to the debate about whether women should be able to appear in public topless,
we can challenge the idea that an unstoppable desire to gaze on women’s breasts
in a sexual way is an inherent part of male biological makeup that will never
alter.”
Desire
will always be present, but it is something that an individual can control.
People have the ability to control what they do, and have the responsibility to
do so. The desire of men to gaze at women’s breasts should not prevent women
from being able to appear unclothed above their waists, and feel comfortable
doing so. The concept of women being able to do so has been challenged by many
activists as a basic right.
Basic Right
“Toplessness/Topfreedom
is a fundamental women's right. It is a basic freedom and without it women will
always be subjugated and considered to be "lesser" simply because
they are censored.”
MacNevin
claims that toplessness is a fundamental women’s right; that without it women
will always be censored and considered lesser. This is a rather large claim to
make, but if the basic elements are examined some truths can be found. The male
is able to go without clothing on their upper part of their body in public
without social recrimination in far more situations than the female. The only
difference is the presence of larger breast tissue and nipple, in most
instances, but both are exposing skin.
“The right to
bare skin is as basic to all human rights as the right to food, the right to
safety and the right to have children or not have children. We were born
without clothes, therefore why should it be a "sin" to show the body
that we were born with?”
The
right to bare skin, the skin that an individual was born with is the claim that
is used to support the idea of toplessness being a right. There is also the
addition of other simple rights along with others that have been previously
fought for, such as the choice of whether or not to have children. While not
explicitly, questions about abortion and birth control all question the right
whether an individual wants children or not. There is an organisation which
supports the idea of women going bare-chested in public the same as men are
allowed, based on the constitution.
“In the United
States, GoTopless.org claims that women have the same constitutional right to
be bare chested in public places as men. They further claim constitutional
equality between men and women on being topless in public. They have
successfully joined in legal challenges that have resulted in laws permitting
women to expose their breasts just as men do in New York State and in Ontario,
Canada.”
Organisations
such as this in the United States have argued successfully for the rights of
women to go without tops, as men do in public places. This has resulted in laws
being changed in regard to the exposure of the female breast in public being
changed, and thus organisations such as these making some headway. Whether they
will ever be able to claim it as a “right” or not will remain to be seen. The
legal battles so far have been on the side of the advocates for females going
topless in public places in many jurisdictions.
Legality
“Despite such
strong reactions to exposed nipples, going topless (or topfree, as some advocates
are calling it in an effort to remove the sexual connotation) is completely legal
in Oregon, as well as other states such as Vermont and New York. Oregon law specifies
that nudity without the intent to arouse is perfectly acceptable.”
The
specificity must be noted “exposed nipples” seems to be the issue. This is
evident from swimwear such as the micro-bikini where most of the breast is
exposed, and only the nipple is covered. Of significance is that while the
legal side of the argument has been resolved, at least for the moment in the
above states in the United States, the social issue clearly has not, due to the
strong reactions against the exposure. The legal side of the argument was even
expanded.
“The federal
government finally stepped in and stated that toplessness is legal and a basic
human right, thus erasing the patchwork of provincial and local laws. Lower
half "obscenity" is still illegal in public in most places.”
While
the top half of the body seems to have had a federal statement made about it,
the lower half of the body still seems to be obscene if it is exposed. This
causes issues for those involved in naturism and other natural pursuits. Legal
battles are still being fought about this as well. The federal side of the
argument solved, it would seem that this has placed toplessness in a safe
place, but it still does not.
“If we are ever
to have equal rights, then we need to make laws that are equal for both men and
women. Treating women differently is like saying they are somehow inferior.”
Equality,
it would seem, is a distance off yet. There are still places where the laws are
not quite as equal as they could be. The problem with laws is that they can be
repealed if a more conservative government decides that it needs to, so the
fight continues. This is especially the case where such laws and rights have
not been granted. The exposed breast has become a simple of liberation in the
feminist cause, and some others as well.
Topless Protest
“While an
exposed breast in public can have many associated connotations, some women in
America today argue the exposed breast is a symbol of liberation. They speak
against the proposed notion that their rightful place was below their male
counterparts. Throughout the late 20th Century, more and more women began to
link the struggle for female equality and the repossession of the female body.”
There
have been many protests for female equality for different reasons. It has been
only in the later 20th century that the breast has been exposed to
emphasise the point of the protest. This has been a symbol of the protest
attempting to take back women’s bodies; often the protests were about abortion,
topfreedom, and other controls over the female body. Here the exposed breast
served as a symbol of freedom.
The same acts,
due to their effect, have caught on. “In recent years, topless performances
whereby feminist bare their breasts in protest have become popular across the
globe,” one
reason is the instant publicity that such exposure gains. Others use it to gain
focus on the issues that they are protesting about.
“While some
women exposed their breasts individually, there was also an upsurge in topless
demonstrations used to gather public attention for women's issues such as
pornography and sexism.”
In
these protests it was not individual protestors who would expose their breasts,
but all of the protestors who would expose themselves. The point of the protest
was to draw attention to themselves and they knew that by the act of exposing
their breasts they would do that. Some argue that the attention that such
exposure draws may not be the attention that they seek.
“As she put it,
this was not because she had anything against bare breasts per se, but rather
because she had to wonder whether women exposing their breasts ‘represents the
highest form of emancipation’.”
Some
peaceful protests gather thousands of individuals marching on government
buildings, claiming to be marching for peaceful reasons, which then turn
violent and garner interest from the media due to their violence rather than
their cause. Some would claim that the exposure of the breast by women at
protests is only to draw the attention of the media, and loses sight of the objectives
of the protest because the attention is drawn to the social issue of naked
flesh rather than what is being protested. It is not that the exposure of the
breast is not effective, it has been.
“In Western
countries, toplessness in public often generates media coverage, leading some
female political demonstrators to deliberately expose their breasts in public
to draw media and public attention to their cause. For example, in January
2012, three members of the Ukrainian protest group FEMEN attracted worldwide
media attention after they staged a topless protest at the World Economic Forum
in Davos, Switzerland.”
The
FEMEN protests were particularly effective for several reasons. They were made
by a group from a well-known repressive cultural regime. The protest itself was
staged effectively so it had placement and effect. The group itself already had
a reputation and a certain level of notoriety, before that protest, and
continuing notoriety after that protest. This gave the group the impact that it
needed.
It
wasn’t that the FEMEN protest was the first topless protest in feminist
history, “it should not be forgotten that topless protests have a long history
in feminism. It is hardly new that women use their naked bodies as a form of
rebellion.”
Social mores are built to hide the female body for the most part, and certainly
not expose it in public for the purposes of protest. Topless protests go
against Western culturally-held ideas. The problem is it requires time and
place to be effective.
“feminist
topless protests take place in specific locations and need to be evaluated in
terms of how they expose power relations or empower women in that particular
context. Bodies may be a powerful sites of resistance historically, but not all
topless protests are effective forms of feminist rebellion. One of the most
well-known examples of this can be found in the organized protests of FEMEN,
who demonstrate topless in public with political slogans written across their
bare breasts (‘freedom for women’, ‘rape is not tradition’, ‘fuck your rules’,
etc.).”
The
effectiveness of the topless protest needs critical evaluation before a person
can see how effective it is, or will be in the future. Political and social
issues and events need to be taken into account to find out whether or not a
topless protest will have the same impact as it did previously. For example, it
would be almost pointless staging one immediately during or after an annual
naked bike ride, or at the other extreme, after a terrorist incident. Both
incidents would leave the public numb, even to the sight of female breasts.
Another is to examine the reason for the protest and see how it compares to the
use of the tool.
“The reaction to
exposed breast as a symbol of liberation was two-sided. Women who took part in
the movement expressed their desire to turn attention away from the excessive
eroticization of the female body in American popular culture to more essential
societal needs.”
Exposing
the breast when talking about essential social needs is a little pointless,
except if one is maybe talking about
the feeding of infants. It would be effective if one is talking about the
sexualisation of the female body, having the breast exposed could be seen as
normalising their presence, rather than hiding them. A further issue becomes
about where do different women fit in these protests?
“While many have
applauded FEMEN’s transgressive performances because they expose and reframe
hegemonic control over women’s bodies and reclaim their agency and raise their
voices in public, others are more critical. Their protests are always performed
by young, white, slender, educated women with bodies that perfectly match the
sexualized stereotypes of femininity. Where do older women, women of size,
lesbians, disabled women and women of colour fit into FEMEN’s politics?”
If
protests are always performed by fit, slender, white, educated, women with
bodies that perfectly fit the stereotypes of bodies that fit within they type
that individuals are “supposed” to be looking at, where do other women who
don’t conform to that particular profile fit? This is the question that needs
to be asked if a protest is to be effective and inclusive. A protest may be
effective at aiming in one direction, but being so effective in its message, it
may simultaneously disenfranchise another group.
“body politics
resonate differently in different contexts and that what might be considered
feminist in one context may be considered ethnocentric or even racist in
another.”
The
image that the protestors present is important and will resonate through their
message with the first impression, just like any other first impression, and it
matters if they want to get the message through to the largest group. Having a
group of white women turn up to protest female issues in a neighbourhood which
is mostly of a different ethnicity may not be the best approach. “It makes
perfect sense to think critically about body politics within the cultural and
geopolitical landscape which we both share and in which we differ.”
Breasts come in different shapes and different colours, and all of them are
normal.
Normal Bodies
“a group of
feminist students compiled a booklet of photographs of naked breasts, calling
it the ‘Boobie Bible’. Their goal was to criticize the sexualization of women’s
bodies and the unrealistic images of perfect breasts in the media that make
women feel ashamed of their bodies. By exposing and photographing their own
breasts, the students not only wanted to show how different breasts can be: ‘sexual
but also funny, big or small, dark or light …’, but also, as they put it, that
women’s breasts are ordinary, ‘just breasts’.”
Women
are under a lot of pressure to have “perfect” bodies with “perfect” breasts,
and some go to the extent of having surgery to correct their breasts or enhance
them because they don’t like them or for other reasons. The “Boobie Bible” was
an attempt to present breasts as they are, normal and perfect just the way they
are, to show that the media presents unrealistic images giving people
unrealistic expectations of what they should be like, and this is not the first
time it has happened.
“feminist
activists and artists have often assembled photographs of differently embodied
women to show how ordinary bodies, breasts and vaginas seldom conform to
cultural ideals of femininity.”
The
purpose of such art works is to show female bodies in their normal states; to
show that the natural body rarely conforms to the cultural ideals. These
collections are designed also to desexualise women’s bodies and make them
ordinary, to be viewed simply as human beings, not as sexual objects. The issue
with such collections have always originated from cultural and social concerns
in regard to modesty and nudity.
“Whether large
or small, perky or pendulous, boobs are more than just funbags—they have a
biological function to fill. There is nothing inherently indecent or obscene
about them. They’re just breasts.”
Breasts
are a normal part of the human female body, and also present on the human male
body, just in a smaller proportion. The male can also get breast cancer; it is
just rarer and not often spoken about. The function of the female breast is to
feed infants, an normal function of a normal part of the body.
Breastfeeding
“Much of the discomfort
and shaming surrounding public breastfeeding stems from the overwhelming
understanding of breasts as sexually arousing to the viewer.”
Breastfeeding
is the best way to feed an infant and gives the infant the greatest amount of
nutrients. However there are still embedded social issues associated with
breastfeeding attached to the exposure of the breast which is a part of the
process. This is because the breast, and in particular the nipple is seen as
sexually arousing.
“With such
strong sentiments against nipple exposure and the sexual status attributed to
breasts in the U.S., public breastfeeding has become a controversial action.
Thanks to the general view of breasts as sex organs, many see nursing in public
as an indecent and impolite act that forces passers-by to be exposed to nudity.
Supporters of breastfeeding, however, counter with the fact that producing milk
is the only natural function of a breast and is far better for both mother and
child.”
Breastfeeding
is a natural function, it is seen with all mammals, yet human beings are the
only ones who have taboos which are associated with it. Noted above is the
issue associated with this normal function being the exposure of the nipple
which is associated with sex. Further the breastfeeding process may expose some
passer-by to a naked breast during the process of the infant feeding and this
may cause offence to the individual. The whole issue stems from social issues
based in puritanical issues of centuries previous.
“Around the
world, it is common for women to breastfeed in public. In the United States
during the 1990s and later, there were a number of legal incidents where women
were harassed or cited for exposing their breasts while breastfeeding in
public. A public backlash spurred legislators in some jurisdictions to
specifically legalize public breastfeeding.”
Consider
the implications. You are a mother, your child is hungry, you are breastfeeding
the child by choice, you now have to find somewhere to feed the child because
you can’t do it out in public because someone might get offended. The
legalising of public breastfeeding is something that simply had to happen,
women were often forced to feed infants in public bathrooms, unsanitary
conditions for feeding an infant. Such negative attitudes toward the naked
breast that is present in society cause issues for the breastfeeding mother.
“American
attitudes toward naked breasts play a large role in persuading women to make
the switch to formula, as discrimination against and harassment of nursing
women are all too common despite numerous state laws allowing public breastfeeding.”
It
is not laws discouraging mothers from breastfeeding and to deciding to use
formula when it is not medically advised, it is social pressure. Mothers simply
decide that they do not want the social issues associated with having to breastfeeding
in a public place. Laws may state that it is legal for a mother to breastfeed
in a public place, but it does nothing against those who may discriminate or
harass them. The attitude to breasts needs to change.
“When the
general public is uncomfortable with the act, mothers are hesitant to nurse.
The underlying sentiment is that breastfeeding is somehow dirty and shameful—an
attitude directly related to American society’s highly sexualized view of
breasts.”
Result
“Even when
topfreedom becomes legal that doesn't mean that women will suddenly start
running around topless all the time. It’s a choice. Many women have been raised
to think its not proper. Things will change slowly after the new laws are in
place. A few women will go topless, the same few who likely would have broke
the law anyway. The square people and religious freaks would still be against
it, but that’s their opinion and they're entitled to have their opinion.”
There
is a fear that when women are given the right to go topless that they will do
so all of the time without any sort of control. This is simply not the case.
There are those who will take it to the extreme, but there are always those who
will be at this extreme, and there are those who are doing similar now,
flaunting the laws that say that they should not be doing it. Protestors will
lose a lot of their impact at topless protests with the granting of topfreedom
as it will not be so risqué, so that needs to be considered as well. One thing
is for sure, the female body will always remain political and the subject of
politics until the rights between men and women are equal.
Conclusion
There
has been quite a bit of discussion about toplessness, in this investigation. It
is not a subject which tends to hit the mainstream media, unless it is in the
form of a protest, or some scandal. There is always the connotation that there
is something rude, or shameful about the bare breast, even the subject of
breastfeeding is contentious, most often stories in the media about this concern
an issue about a lady who has been asked to leave a restaurant because she has
decided to breastfeed, and then the boycott of that restaurant that follows.
The subject of the breast needs to be normalised.
The
focus of the discussion has been on the subject of the bare breast, primarily
in regard to the concern of toplessness, mostly concerning the female being
unclothed from the waist upward in public. The definition that was given was
discussed in two places, first to establish a definition, and then to highlight
the etymological and political difference between the male and female
indication of being unclothed from the waist upward.
For
the male it simply indicates that they have no clothing on, the chest is bare.
For the female it is indicated that the top is missing. This shows a focus on
the normality of males and females being unclothed from the waist up in Western
culture, it is not an issue for a male to be unclothed in this fashion, yet for
a female the approach is different and it is, here is a key to the difference
culturally. If both male and female are to be considered the same when they are
unclothed from the waist up they should be referred to using the same term,
simply indicating their state of being, “bare-chested.
Historical
examples were given as to the approach to the breast, demonstrating that it was
not always the sexual object that it is today, that other parts of the body
were considered more sexual. Further that the breast was exposed in fashions as
a normal part of dress in Western culture. Such considerations need to be
considered when addressing the supposed “inherent” sexual nature of the breast.
Such claims are further disputed when examining indigenous cultures.
In
many indigenous cultures the breasts were exposed as a normal part of dress.
This has been presented as a part of this investigation. In many of these
indigenous cultures the covering of the breast only occurred as the result of
external influences. Further, there are indigenous cultures in which the native
dress still has the breast exposed. Here the breast’s presence is naturalised,
it is not considered “sexual” or “taboo” so there is no need to cover them.
Accusations of the “primitive” nature of the cultures only expose the
Western-centric nature of the individual who makes these claims, and the
influence of older social norms established centuries previous.
Moving
onward from indigenous cultures one can examine Western fashions and can see
examples of topless fashions. These are, in many cases, simply the removal of
the top of the bikini, or the simple absence of the top, in the monokini’s
case. The topless bathing suit invented by Rudi Gernreich was a simple
experiment designed to challenge the status quo, as fashion often does, but
points toward the subject of topless bathing.
The
Europeans believe there is no cause for concern in regard to topless bathing,
though they have cultural practises in place, and do not understand the
American issue with it. Toplessness is most associated with water and bathing,
and has a long history of this association. It is the expanse from this area
which is the main cause for concern for many people, into public areas away
from bathing.
There
is always politics concerning the female body. Laws have been written
controlling what women may or may not do with their bodies, thankfully many of
these laws are being re-written, or repealed completely, returning the control
to the individual. The subject of the female body will always cause contention,
as the female body has been sexualised due to Western culture, and many other
cultures as well, and this has resulted in social norms, which have caused such
laws as previously indicated.
There
is a fight for basic rights for the control of female control over their
bodies, in this case for the same rights for females that males have to have
their upper bodies exposed in public. This challenges social mores and norms,
so there is argument against it. Legal battles have been fought, at least in
the US, and won. Further protests continue, featuring topless protests for the
argument for the desexualisation of the breast and normalisation of the
presence of the bare breast in public.
Arguments
are present about the topless protest and whether such protests include all
women. These need to be addressed sincerely to ensure that the protests achieve
the ends that they aim to set out to achieve. The most important of these is to
demonstrate that all bodies are normal, and that each females’ body are
something to be embraced, not just those which are presented in the media, or
in the ideals of femininity.
Breastfeeding
is a normal function of the breast. It is a subject of some contention,
especially when it occurs in public. While there are laws which protect the act
of breastfeeding in public, there are also social issues with the act. Social
recrimination may still occur and breastfeeding mothers may still be harassed
for performing this natural act in public, because they are exposing the breast
and nipple in public. This is rooted in the idea that they are sexual objects,
which is founded back in the basic argument upon which the topless argument is
also founded.
The
breast, at least in Western cultures needs to be desexualised, to be accepted
as a normal part of the human anatomy, not as an inherently sexual object.
Males have breasts, just not as pronounced as the female. Indeed in the
question of breast cancer, the male is subject to the same threat, just not as
often. The key to the question of the bare breast and its acceptance lies in an
acceptance of its normality, to see that the breast is a normal part of life,
and that it is no different to any other part of the body. Indeed the naturist
community who argues for public placed in which people are free to go
completely without clothes, top and bottom, argue for a normalisation of the
entire body, all bodies. All bodies are natural, and all bodies need to be accepted
as natural, not inherently sexual.
Bibliography
Anon (2021) “Traditional Dress” in Window
to Chiang Mai in Thailand, https://www.chiangmai1.com/chiang_mai/sub/traditional_dress.shtml,
[accessed 25/1/2021]
BBC (2004) “Aborigines' fury over topless
ban” in BBC News, news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3493408.stm, [accessed
25/1/2021]
BBC (2008) “Topless Swimsuits and Dresses”
in I Love 1964: Fashion, bbc.adactio.com/cult/ilove/years/1964/fashion1.shtml,
[accessed 25/1/2021]
Briand, G. and Peters, R. (2010) “Community
Perspectives on Cultural Considerations for Breast and Cervical Cancer
Education among Marshallese Women in Orange County, California”, Californian Journal of Health Promotion 2010,
Volume 8, Special Issue (Cancer Control), pp84 – 89
Davis, K. (2016) “Bared breasts and body
politics” in European Journal of Women's
Studies, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1350506816650860,
[accessed 25/1/2021]
Fernando, R. (1992) “The Garb of Innocence:
A Time of Toplessness” in The Living Heritage Trust, livingheritage.org/toplessness.htm,
[accessed 25/1/2021]
George, K. (2010) “Busting Out: The Right
to Bare It All” in Ethos Magazine, https://web.archive.org/web/20120815075239/http://ethosmagonline.com/archives/6654,
[accessed 17/3/2021]
MacNevin, S. (2021) “Topfreedom: The
Fundamental Right of Women” in The Feminist eZine, www.feministezine.com/feminist/toplessness004.html,
[accessed 25/1/2021]
Rodio, C. (2017) “Criminal Profiling: Lust
and Violence Intertwined”, Thesis for BSc
(Hons) Criminology, London Metropolitan University, London, p.2
Rosebush, J. (2009) “Topless (No Top)” in
Bikini Science, https://web.archive.org/web/20100108023628/http://www.bikiniscience.com/costumes/soutien-gorge_SS/topless_S/topless.html,
[accessed 17/3/2021]
Smith, M. (2016) “No, you’re not
‘hardwired’ to stare at women’s breasts” in The Conversation, https://theconversation.com/no-youre-not-hardwired-to-stare-at-womens-breasts-53449,
[accessed 25/1/2021]
Wikipedia (2021) “Toplessness” in
Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toplessness,
[accessed 25/1/2021]
Wikipedia (2021a) “Umhlanga (ceremony)” in
Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umhlanga_(ceremony),
[accessed 24/3/2021]
