Bras and Society

[Integrating Editor]

I think part of the disagreement, Vorpal, is that you might be thinking of the bralessness paparazzi love to capture, often very blatant and probably intentionally provocative. That's not really the case for a lot of women. According to Wikipedia, "in western cultures about 10–25% of women do not wear a bra, either as a matter of preference or sometimes for health or comfort reasons." I doubt you'd have thought the number was that high. I just took a picture of my chest area as I am today, completely braless. For some reason, I would find it utterly inapplicable to describe the attached picture as "semi-naked." Is it true that my breasts may be unusually qualified to go braless without attracting notice? Sure. However, you can tell from the lack of bumps in the back that I'm probably not wearing a bra, so conceivably some guy could know I was braless. Also, a hint of my nipples could show through if I get chilled or scared. Not much of one, but according to you, enough to make some young man feel victimized. So given your rhetoric, I'm someone who is "making an assault on men" when I dress like this. I've talked with my brothers, and they all find today's outfit to be perfectly modest, so I don't think I'm only seeing the female view here. In my opinion, when I am dressed like this, there is some small chance a guy will get an insight into my underclothing. There's that possibility any time I'm working out actively too. No matter how long my shirt is, there's some possibility it will ride up, and I don't put the accidental exposure on the same level as wearing a midriff-bearing shirt. In essence, that's what I feel you're doing. Your harsh condemnation of those who do it as "naïve and influenced by the philosophies of those who would like to gratify their lusts seeing more semi-naked women running around, or would like to remake our culture into a sort of genderless egalitarian feminist society" really seems over-the-top for the sort of bralessness that I readily advocate. I doubt any of the women who have admitted to going braless here are wearing particularly revealing, thin, or tight clothing that highlights their bralessness. In fact, random and I have both said we work to ensure that the nipple is not visible generally. While I agree that the sort of clothing some celebrities wear that shows nipple intentionally and provocatively is not modest, that's not what typical women are wearing, or at least not usually. As NerdGirl pointed out, for many women, even wearing bras wouldn't hide their nipples under the circumstances that would cause mine to be visible, so for them there is very little way for them to meet your standards. I'd like to note something here: given that women have varying degrees of breast motion, the amount of movement is not an accurate indicator of bralessness. So we've got to go by tightness, translucence, low enough of a neck to clearly show that there is no bra, or nipple showing. If a woman is definitely flaunting it, I can understand where you're coming from. If a woman is dressing so that the vast majority of the time a guy would have to be studying her breasts to know (which is the way all the women I know who go braless dress), then I don't.

[Portia]

Counterargument: my vast bra collection comes not from a desire to hide my large breasts, but to flaunt them. The fact that I know it's an attractive part of my figure and I don't mind if guys check me out is no more evil than a muscular guy wearing a tight shirt. It may not be demure, but it's my choice.

[Imogen]

IE: I love your top! And I wish I could get away with not wearing a bra and look that good. Mine are just too heavy and saggy. I'm waiting for my 30th because I'm asking for a lift for my birthday. And then maybe they'll look that good!

Oh...sorry...I mean....I'M BEING ASSAULTED....ahhhhhhh......

[vorpal blade]

As I said on July 17, 10:49 AM. “In conclusion, I think that there is no problem in going without a bra if no one else can tell. But anything that calls attention to your body, whether apparently braless (even with small breasts) or revealing or tight fitting or suggestive is likely to cause a reaction that you can scarcely imagine. I don’t say it is fair, logical, just, or the way it ought to be. I believe it is the way it is and we aren’t going to be able to do anything about it

On July 24, 11:24 I said: “I completely agree that you can only control your own behavior (and maybe for a time you have something to say about the behavior of your children.) Naturally you have to learn to deal with all types of people. I’m just saying that we can also talk about the responsibility of a person not to say impolite, uncivil, or provoking things. We can also talk about why you should wear a bra if not wearing a bra is noticeable. Being a civilized people it is okay to talk about what the rules are or should be which define civility.”

I think I already answered your question, Integrating Editor.

[Integrating Editor]

I didn't ask a question ... and I knew that you'd said that not being noticeable was fine. My point is that even for girls like me, it can occasionally and accidentally become noticeable, making a lot of your argument very, very applicable to me. Including this part: "If a man suddenly notices that you are not wearing a bra, his mind will think about your naked breasts and he will strongly react. Seeing the clear outline of a nipple will do it. Not seeing evidence of a bra may do it. Seeing a portion of your breasts will stimulate his imagination to fill in the blanks and he may react almost as strongly as actually seeing the complete naked breast." I do not show evidence of a bra, and (very infrequently) my nipple is distinguishable, so guys are going to be thinking about my naked breasts. That bothers me if it's true. The fact of the matter is that if we interpret potentially offensive bralessness under those constraints, a lightly padded bra won't be enough for many women to prevent guys from being visually assaulted. If you really are just talking about blatant, revealing bralessness, that's a totally different issue, and it's one that your wording isn't reflecting very well. Your description of what is problematic to you includes me very definitely.

[Portia]

If a 50- or 60-something man is obsessed with 20-something's breasts, he's the one with the problem.

[Imogen]

If a 50- or 60-something man is obsessed with 20-something's breasts, he's the one with the problem.

I'd say the same applies for any man, but THANK YOU!!!!!

[bobtheenchantedone]

Nor am I saying that men are unable to control their thoughts and women need to police someone else’s morality. I don’t know any reasonable person who believes that, though I admit that the world is full of unreasonable people.

Marduk and Random and I were at Deseret Book yesterday. Random picked up a book about things boys should know about girls and vice versa. She found, and read aloud, this paragraph: "Don't read this paragraph! Look at it, but don't read it; just look at the letters, not the words. Is it impossible? That's how it is for a boy when he sees a girl who isn't dressed modestly." (I'm not quoting word-for-word, as I don't have the book, but I assure you that the idea is accurate.)

A few months ago we had a modesty lesson in RS and talked about how much hemlines and necklines can be detrimental to men, and we need to be constantly checking our outfits to make sure they won't distract the men around us. (I left this lesson in tears because, despite an undershirt doing its best, I had the lowest neckline in the room.)

This is definitely something that we teach in the Church. Don't try to pretend otherwise.

In case it needs to be said, I don’t call women who go braless demons, evil, temptresses, rapists, or sluts. I think they are naïve and influenced by the philosophies of those who would like to gratify their lusts seeing more semi-naked women running around, or would like to remake our culture into a sort of genderless egalitarian feminist society. Once they know the assault they make on men women are at the least being unkind, inconsiderate, and selfish to think only of themselves and what they want to do.

This reminds me of one of Marduk's uncles, who I met this week. We were talking about tattoos, and he was expressing his opinion that anyone who gets a tattoo is simply misguided and confused. His sister asked him about the Polynesian ward she goes to while in Utah, where several of the members have cultural tattoos. His response included the phrase "false traditions of their fathers."

That way of thinking, about tattoos or bralessness, is what is misguided. For one thing, it's lumping everyone under one reason - they don't understand - which is not only false and hugely simplistic but also incredibly condescending. "You poor naive women, let me tell you how to dress because you don't understand society, men, or your own bodies." "You poor misguided Polynesians, let me tell you how your centuries of tradition are false even though the Church itself recognizes cultural tattoos and body piercings and makes exceptions for them."

As for a woman being selfish by dressing "immodestly" once she knows that it's "assaulting" the men around her, I think it's selfish for any man to want to control what a woman wears in order to cause him the least amount of distress.

Also, I am a woman who is aroused by the sight of other women's bodies. There have been times where I have been distracted by the sight of another woman's legs or cleavage or what have you. But I have never blamed the woman in question for what I see, I have never felt violated or assaulted, and I never will. I can and do stop the train of thought, and so can any man. It might take a little practice but he can. I'll repeat my previous opinion - the idea of powerlessness or violation comes more from teaching men that arousal is evil, which in turn leads them to blame the women for "making" them feel that way. Because I accept my arousal, I am able to more easily disregard it when inappropriate - and it never even crosses my mind to blame the woman I'm looking at.

Honestly, are their men who have to wear blinders at the beach? I think that you tried to make some exception for "expected" "immodesty" earlier, vorpal, but just like I don't believe a couple taught their whole lives that sex is nasty and dirty and wrong will have a great wedding night, I don't believe that an ingrained "immodest women are misguided/selfish and are assaulting me" mentality can be dropped for an afternoon.

[Portia]

The sexist attitudes displayed in situations like this have a direct link to sexual assault in our culture. It's not funny and it's not cute.

[The Black Ram]

Portia, it seems to me you do for women what you accuse Vorpal of doing for men. It seems he would ask women to dress modestly as to not (tempt? Inspire impure thoughts? Bring about physical reactions?... something like this right?) and you see this as manipulative and pushing the blame on women (to which I generally agree). Whereas you support a woman’s right to cry “rape” after saying “Yes” to sex and he seems to believe that women should be accountable for their choices (to which I also agree). It seems to me that you’re both pushing for your gender more than true equality. THAT is what has a direct link to sexual assault. Though I will once agree with you that it is neither funny nor cute.

[vorpal blade]

Everyone makes interesting and intelligent points from their perspective. However, I would just be repeating myself if I were to respond to them. I don't think I have anything further to say on this subject.

[Now I wish someone would give me a hug.]

[The Black Ram]

Here ya go Vorpal, >:D<..(Hug).. where's Portia?

[Portia]

Whereas you support a woman’s right to cry “rape” after saying “Yes” to sex and he seems to believe that women should be accountable for their choices (to which I also agree).

Straw man argument. I don't, and if you would take me at face value, maybe you would see that.

I am not interested in living in a society where the "consequences" of "choices" are decided and enforced by hostile people already in a position of power. The past 48 hours on this forum have shown that women are

(A) just so darn hard to understand, LOL
(B) damned if they wear a bra, damned if they don't
(C) drastically underrepresented in cinema
(D) actively discouraged from seeking accurate information about sex (the original point of the thread I started months ago)
(E) have their viewpoints twisted when they espouse an opt-in policy on sex (read here for a viewpoint which coincides closely with my own, despite a couple of typos)
(F) despite the wide consensus that rape is underreported, subjected to psychological harassment over the miniscule non-problem of false rape accusations. it's like white people whining about admissions committees when whites are still the ones in power. even a self-proclaimed rapist doesn't hew to the "crying 'rape'" theory
(G) represented in literature as disposable idiots made for the cloying adoration or sexual violence of men
(H) slut-shamed for wearing normal clavicle-baring tops while attempting to worship their God

Sex-positive, non-Mormon people can still be just as sexist, not to mention strident and/or arrogant, as anyone else. As you of all people should know, the patriarchy doesn't go away just by dropping some bons mots about "equality" at my metaphorical door.

An equal world would be one where women like me could wear the tops we liked, get the education we needed, were represented on screen and in books as the complex, intelligent, interesting, imperfect people we are.

It's worth asking ourselves what kind of community we want to create here.

It takes a lot for me to feel attacked, but this is like the worst days of the Beckpocalypse, from someone I thought would be in my camp. I can sort of expect (though not excuse) retrograde attitudes from Vorpal, for example, because he is from a different generation and a longstanding Palin supporter and I don't think we have anything in common but reading the 100 Hour Board. Why you feel the need to wage some campaign against me is mystifying to me. You decided to turn a thread about sex education fully six weeks after it was dead into a cause celebre about what you insultingly and misleadingly call "second-day rape." I tend to be protective about my threads and keeping discussions not only honest, but a safe place where believers and doubters and heathens and old people alike can feel valued and that they can contribute. Instead, I feel like you've decided to paint some kind of scarlet letter on me because my sexual choices didn't match your values. (Rich irony, indeed, since presumably most other people here think my choices would constitute actual sin, yet they show more charity toward me.)

I'm officially over this nonsense. Carry on.

[vorpal blade]

Here ya go Vorpal, >:D<..(Hug).. where's Portia?

Aw...Thanks Black Ram

[TheBlackSheep]

Okay, so. I don't feel the need to apologize for the Black Ram or explain his position (he's a big boy and he can do it for himself), but I know everybody in this situation better than most people, so here's my two cents.

I think many people here have felt attacked, and I think that has rarely been anyone's intention. These are charged topics for everybody, but I don't think that, for the most part, anybody has been coming for anybody else. Maybe something that would help lots of people on this thread is to tone down the aggression/sarcasm and to ask more questions. It seems that there have been precious few questions on these threads, at least that weren't meant to set somebody up. It seems to me that that this had lead to many situations in which people have then chided someone for beliefs that weren't exactly what they meant to express.

And of course, as Portia says, this depends on what type of community each one of us wants to create here. The strength (and sometimes the frustration) of theboardboard is that it is an open forum, and that no one is obligated to behave any certain way, as long as they aren't obscene or overly vitriolic.

Now, Portia, the Black Ram IS on your side about a lot of the topics that have been discussed. I'd say you are in agreement about the way that men react to how women dress and personal accountability in that situation. I'd say you are also in agreement that you want to see absolute equality for both sexes. You just disagree about how to get there in the present moment. The Black Ram and I have discussed at length the societal stumbling blocks that women have to deal with (though I haven't quite used your words, as "the patriarchy" sounds like the boogeyman to me, and I don't believe that malicious old men are keeping us where we are as much as we are doing it to ourselves by not recognizing social constructs for what they are, though I do believe in the reality of those forces on women). We've discussed where women are taught that their value comes from (relationships with men), and how women are subtly (or not-so-subtly) taught to defer to men. I think the Black Ram can accept all of that, and therefore most of your point (though he and I have also discussed stereotypes that society teaches boys that affect men). I believe his point is simply that until women are willing to step down off of the pedestal of benevolent sexism, there can be no actual equality. Benevolent sexism is romantic, with men treating women as special creatures, buying them gifts, paying for dinner, and maybe even putting the breaks on in sexual situations in order to protect the woman. But there are also tradeoffs. The thought that women are special is, inherently, the thought that women are different than men, which is sexism. And the thought that women are special often leads to believing that "good" women are as precious as rubies, but if there are good women, there are also bad women. That leads in to the rape culture stuff that we have been talking about. The Black Ram believes very strongly that equality is not given or earned (that's an impossibility, as it implies that equality does not exist), but that it is rather demanded. The way to demand it in these circumstances is, to the Black Ram, to take full accountability for one's sexual choices.

Do I agree with exactly where the Black Ram draws his line? No. Do I think that there is middle ground in there, and that there is something admirable about the Black Ram's stance? Yes.

The Black Ram is sometimes caustic and sarcastic and he enjoys conflict. He is also incredibly direct and respectful (I was going to say "of women," but he would say "of people," as that is how he regards women) and he abhors manipulation of any kind. Sometimes, Portia, if I can offer some feedback, you can make posts on this forum more about you than is always warranted. (I felt this way on the trans sibling thread, and I wonder if that is not what is happening again.) You also passionately care about the plights of others and you cannot tolerate their victimization. As for me, I often dance around people's feelings too much while attempting to state the truth, which is both empathetic and somewhat cowardly, and I am trying not to do so here.

I don't know if any of this helps or if it makes things worse. It's simply how I see it. You two have been pushing each other's buttons just wrong, and while I don't think we all need to be all cumbaya about it, I think it would be nice if we could avoid feeling like we are being directly attacked and attacking back.

[The Black Ram]

I’ll say that is a fairly accurate representation with a few caveats;

Do I *enjoy* conflict? No, am I afraid of it? No. Am I caustic and sarcastic to make a point? Probably more than I ought to be.

You might ask WHY do I have such a strong stance on my position, how do I feel justified in it?

I have been abused, sexually, physically, emotionally all before I was eighteen. I was 125lbs at my high school graduation. I spent countless hours training in Martial Arts, I learned how to read a situation tactically, and decided it was never happening again. I’ve had unfortunate sexual experiences since then and put a lot of effort into educating myself. I’ve taught self-defense, performed hundreds of hours of volunteer work for places that teach sexual education, I’ve risked my life to intervene in a situation where my neighbor was dragging a girl into his house despite her (vocalized) protests, I’ve spent Christmas behind a minigun defending the minority religion’s right to pray. I’ve done everything I know to do in order to promote equality, to then be painted as a sexual predator because I advocate personal responsibility is something to which I take great exception.

[TheBlackSheep]

I'd say both your caveats are correct, particularly where you added "to make a point."

Also, to make it clear, I said that I did not feel the need to explain the Black Ram's position because he is capable of doing so himself. I also said that I didn't feel the need to apologize for him, but what I did not say is that I don't think there is much that would even warrant an apology. Just for clarity's sake, per a second read through.

[SmurfBlueSnuggie]

TBS, you mentioned asking more questions. I have one. How is a man seeing a woman's nipples significantly different from a woman seeing a man who is clearly having an erection?

[Whistler]

um, erect nipples don't always signify arousal? Although I guess men get erections for other reasons too.

[SmurfBlueSnuggie]

I don't mean what is the difference between the actual happening, but what is the difference in response to the opposite gender seeing it?