Let’s Talk About Boobs.

I need to talk about boobs for a few minutes. ‘Ya mind?

No?

Good. Okay, so here we go.

Boobs – okay, breasts: let’s keep it on the academic here – breasts are really, really strange when you think about them for any length of time. Perky, flabby, flat or D-cup, they’re just these extra mounds of flesh hanging off the front of bodies, with neat little nipples that get pointy when we’re cold.

Or when looking at a picture of say, George Clooney.

Alright, we’ve established this fact: breasts are kind of weird.

But are they immoral?

I’m going to go ahead and say… no. Breasts are not immoral.

I know you’re eagerly awaiting the media story tie in that would prompt such a post, so here it is. A New Jersey judge has ruled that breasts are in fact, a “moral threat.”

I’m not really sure how breasts are a threat to anyone, moral or otherwise. I mean, if they’re donned in one of Madonna’s old spiky cone bras, perhaps, it could pose a serious risk of injury to one’s eyes. Risk is a fair statement in that instance.

But I think on the whole, breasts aren’t what I would deem a “threat.” I’m pretty sure Homeland Security is not assigning colors to women’s breasts for their threat level for the day. (Although, I admit, in the days leading up to my period, the threat level is high as my boobs get pretty painfully tender. The threat really is if someone were to try and touch them during this tenuous period of time, I would bite their hand.)

Here’s the quick and dirty rundown: Jill Coccaro (an artist who goes by the name of Phoenix Feeley) was sunbathing topless on a NJ beach. Cops told her to cover up, she refused, so they cuffed her, took her downtown, and gave her a shirt. She was pulled over later by another cop because she was driving topless in that same town.

From the article at the Daily Mail:

Ms Feeley’s argument: If men can do it, why can’t she?

The court, however, dismissed her argument that the town’s public nudity law discriminated against women because men can go topless.

The court said ‘restrictions on the exposure of the female breast are supported by the important governmental interest in safeguarding the public’s moral sensibilities.’

And further down in the article:

In New Jersey, it’s illegal to expose genitals or breasts in front of children under 13 or a person with a mental illness. Breast-feeding mothers are usually exempt from the state laws.

Let me put this out there right now: this is not a debate on breastfeeding, mmkay?

Did Feeley flagrantly violate town law? Yes. She should have left well enough alone by not driving topless later. It was a snarky move on her part. But that’s not what the issue is here. The issue is that this judge has basically said portions of the female form constitute a threat to the general public’s “moral sensibilities.”

Unless you’re breastfeeding.

So what would happen if a mother breastfed her child on that same beach… while she was completely topless? What then? Do you try to cuff her before the kid latches on or do you wait until she’s finished?

Do you see the slippery slope here?

The female body is nothing to be ashamed of.

I’m going to say it again because it’s that important: the female body is nothing to be ashamed of.

This judge’s ruling only illustrates a misogynist current that pulses quietly and constantly throughout our culture, only to swell at times as evidenced by stories like these. There is a cultural message that women ought to cover up and shut up. The only threat to moral sensibilities here is this prudish judge’s stance that women should cover themselves as if we don’t know any better about what to do with our own bodies.

I realize how loaded words like “misogyny” and “patriarchy” are. I realize some people are going to dismiss this post as just another angry feminist rant in the blogosphere. But it’s not just a rant – it’s calling out something (the cultural norming of misogyny) that’s as plain as the nose on my face. And calling women’s breasts a threat to “moral sensibilities” is some pretty damn loaded language, too.

And, I hate to put this out there, you can’t say breastfeeding is kosher but topless sunbathing isn’t. I’m all for breastfeeding in public. Better yet? I’m all for dedicated, private non-bathroom spaces for breastfeeding moms (because would you eat your dinner in a bathroom? Didn’t think so).

Let me just be clear: I’m not anti-breastfeeding. And I’m not pro-topless sunbathing either because seriously? Sunburned nipples? The peeling skin? *shudders*

The issue at stake here is that a part of the female anatomy has been deemed immoral…

…That sends a bigger message that this part of the female body is then somehow wrong.

…Which feeds the cultural message of objectifying women’s bodies.

…And the ensuing slippery slope to violence against women.

What seems like a frivolous little lawsuit is actually a pretty pointed statement on the cultural perception of women and their bodies. And quite frankly, it’s bullshit.

Eyes up here, gentlemen. I’m not just a pair of boobs.

And even if I was, they’re my boobs. What I do with them is my business.

And they’re hardly a threat to your moral sensitivities.