Another Blog Post About Bras and Boobs
Feminists, anti-feminists and plain horny people who stumbled upon this piece by accident (no images for you, shoo!), welcome back!
I came across yet another article on bra-burning today, written by a Facebook friend of mine. If you don’t have time to read the entire article about how bras are an invention of a patriarchal society, allow me to summarize it.
One garment to rule them all
One garment to find them
One garment to bring them all
And in Darkness, bind them!
While that captures the essence of the diatribe, I would like to respond a little more specifically to the points raised by the author.
The principal concern is that bras are meant to sexualize a non-sexual body part. This includes training-bras. You can tell that the author’s a male by his obliviousness of what boundless (yes, I use that word most deliberately) joy is to go out jogging with the breasts flying all over the place. In this case, at least, bras have more to do with aerodynamics and comfort than male-domination. In case you’re asking, I’m a guy too but I have man boobs, so I’m at least partially qualified to make this assessment (not that you needed to know that).
If breasts are a non-sexual body part, then I don’t see why a bra-burning feminist should consider a person ogling at a woman’s breasts
as “sexual” harassment. Perhaps the next time a person says “Excuse me, miss?”, he could knock on the knockers instead of tapping on the shoulder, or any other non-sexual body-part. If the goal is to ‘unsexualize’ the female breasts, then why continue to treat them as sexual objects yourselves?
The author – no, wait. I think the term ‘random-guy-with-access-to-the-keyboard’ is more appropriate. The guy spices up his argument with the claim that bras can cause breast cancer. As a doctor, I’ve never heard of this (probably because sexist men control medical science). I couldn’t find any credible study on this on the internet either. I’m guessing this is no more of a hazard than a tight neck-tie is for males, as it causes throat problems, cardiovascular issues and deaths due to entanglement in moving machine parts.
It pisses me off whenever feminists start suggesting that people can be “taught” what they should or shouldn’t be sexually attracted to. This polemic flies awfully close to the gay conversion hypothesis, which I have a personal disgust for due to my bisexual orientation.
Listen, folks, if you could actually teach a person what to be sexually attracted to, gays would not exist! I cannot imagine anyone in our exquisitely homophobic societies teaching young boys to be attracted to abs, muscular pecs or facial hair. Yet it happens! It is obvious that when it comes to sexual preferences, nature trumps nurture. It is extremely unlikely that men’s affection for women’s breasts is something that has developed artificially.
While it’s not possible to absolutely rule out environmental influences and the epigenetic triggers, a woman likes what she likes, and a man likes what he likes. Stop trying to make people feel bad about liking the color orange when the socially acceptable choice is blue, especially when this preference deals no real psychosocial harm, and only perceived damage.