<-This One's For You, PJ |Main|Mr. Barrett, You Are an Idiot, Sir->

Why Would Anyone Complain About Seeing Breasts?

October 10, 2006 1:21 AM

meant to write about this topic some time ago, but never got around to it. Now, because of this post over at LawNut and this article, I've been reminded of my idea. Originally, I was inspired to write about public breast feeding because of some controversy over the cover of a woman's magazine that featured what I considered to be a beautiful picture of an infant breast feeding. I can't find a link to that cover or article now, so if anyone knows what I'm talking about, please let me know if you have a link. In any event, I don't understand the animosity towards public breast feeding.

Now, I think the taboo against women publicly displaying their chests is pretty fucking stupid to begin with. This doesn't have as much to do with the fact that I'm a heterosexual male as you might think, either. A man can go to the beach without a shirt on, a man's chest can be broadcast on primetime TV, and magazines featuring pictures of topless men don't come in opaque plastic wrapping, even when the men in question look like this, this, or this. Why should that be the case when the only real difference between a man's chest and woman's is subdermal mammary glands?

The fact is that there's no good reason at all. The only reason is that our society somehow sees breasts differently. And that's stupid. There's nothing inherently dirty, immoral, or wrong about breasts, regardless of what social norms tell us. But, while I'd love to see the day when society at large realizes this, I know it's not likely to happen soon.

Still, I would have thought that the puritanical bullshit would stop at the issue of public breastfeeding. Breasts, aside from looking damn nice, have a very simple biological purpose: to make, store, and deliver milk to baby humans! That's why they're there!

Now, certainly, the two purposes of the penis, it's role in procreation and it's role in elimination, are biological. But I think there's a world of difference between ejaculation/urination and providing sustenance to another human being. Ejaculation is distinguishable because it is inherently sexual. Sex, at least when it's that overt, is rightfully prohibited in public areas such as, for example, a public bus. The correctness of this prohibition stems not from the inherent dirtiness of intercourse, but rather because it would be rather unhygienic for everyone to be allowed to get it on whenever and wherever they wanted. Urination can be readily distinguished - I'm not even really going to talk about it.

That brings us to breast feeding. It's not inherently unhygienic, it's not inherently offensive (nothing is). Instead, it's a biological necessity - infants need food, and numerous studies have suggested that breast milk is best. So why should we demote nursing mothers to second-class citizen status for doing something it's their duty to do?

The fact is that we shouldn't, and none of our stupid social mores justify the attitude that we should.



6 Comments


sadielady said:

i think you're talking about this

October 10, 2006 3:03 AM



LawNut said:

I personally am not a fan of the public breastfeeding thing, but not because I think there is something wrong with breasts, but just because I'm not a fan of children/babies and even if I had kids, they wouldn't be suckling at my nip.

But all that aside, I have to agree with you that there is this irrational double standard with breasts, but it really goes beyond breasts - women are constantly objectified into objects of sexuality, while men aren't. Even in advertisements in fashion magazines, we see this time and again. I agree with you that putting men and women on equal footing would be the first step in eliminating the double standards we still have today with genders.

P.S. - Thanks for the link! :-)

October 10, 2006 8:48 AM



Lauren said:

Good points and all, but where the hell did you find those pictures? Did you have to google 'man-boobs'?
I have this great image in my head of you typing your articulate and morally astute blog entry and then scouring the muddy slums of the internet, looking for man-boobs...its really quite entertaining, and even if that's not quite how it happened, that's how I"m going to picture it.

October 10, 2006 9:48 AM



Ismael Tapia II said:

sadielady,
Yes, that's the cover I was talking about. Thank you!

LawNut,
I like children, myself, so that aspect of it doesn't bother me at all. As far as the double standard - it pretty much sucks, but I don't see it going away anytime soon.

Lauren,
You caught me. I totally had to google something similar to "man boobs," although the exact term escapes me at the moment.

October 10, 2006 8:43 PM



TheExpat said:

Man-mary glands?

Bro'sts?

Beer-zongas?!?! o.O

Someone...please...help me...

*goes to staple his hands together*

October 11, 2006 7:07 AM



sadielady said:

this morning on the today show there was a segment about a married couple that couldn't have a baby one their own and ended up having a surrogate carry their baby. there was video of the birth. in it, the mom (not the surrogate) was standing next to the hospital bed when the surrogate was giving birth. the mom had been taking hormones or something so that she would be able to breastfeed the baby herself. also, later in the segment, the mom made a comment about how wonderful it was to hold the baby when he first came out into the world, how much it meant to her to hold the baby up against her own skin. so anyway, what i'm getting at is, in the video of the birth, when the mom is standing there next to the surrogate in the hospital bed, and the baby is born, and the mom is waiting for the doctors to hand her the baby, which they do, the mom is wearing a hospital gown that opens in the front. and the hospital gown is untied, and gaping open in a big way. so there, on the today show, were this woman's boobs, clear as day. and her nipples too, totally visible. in the context of the birth, it seemed completely natural. but still: i can't believe that the today show showed that much of a woman's breasts, including nipples, on television this morning.

i won't add that the segment was so moving it actually made me tear up. because that would be sappy.

October 12, 2006 10:15 PM



Leave a comment