Maine Voices: A good time to ponder the mixed messages we get about breasts

[Danee]

From: http://www.pressherald.com/opinion/a-good-time-to-ponder-the-mixed-messages-we-get-about-breasts_2010-11-06.html

YARMOUTH - Breast Cancer Awareness Month. We are awash in a sea of
pink solidarity, of ribbons showing our support, of fundraising
efforts. We worry, we pray, we drive our friends to chemo, we bake
them pies -- and not just in October. So why, oh why, is it so hard to
talk about -- breasts?

A review of my latest book for children states, "the sketch of the
plaster breast that hangs on the family's living-room wall may provoke
more than giggles." Apparently, the reviewer was right.

The breast has elsewhere been called offensive, which I in turn find
shocking.

The sculpture is a tribute to bravery, the equivalent of a belly cast
of a pregnant woman. In the book, it's there on the wall to honor the
one lost to cancer by the mom of the title character, India. Even
India's fourth-grade buddy Colby understands. It's art. It's supposed
to make you think!

India knows that some people stare a bit too long at it. She wonders
why breasts make people act funny. What if mom put a plaster cast of
her nose or her foot on the wall? Would it be different?

The answer, it seems, is yes. We are uncomfortable as a society
talking about a part of our body that everyone has -- men, women, and
children.

Like noses and most other things, breasts come in all different shapes
and sizes. Pretty much the first thing any of us sees is our mother's
breast. But after that, where do breasts go? Under cover, under wraps?
Plastically jutting out of Barbies, displayed on prime time TV,
revealed cartoonishly at halftime during the Super Bowl?

The mixed message unsettles.

For an early picture book of mine, the publisher asked that I change
the nursing picture to one of a bottle-fed baby. This astonished me, a
Swede by birth. Nursing is risque? Well, the editor explained, they'd
otherwise not be able to sell the book in the South. I grumbled but
redrew the picture. Here in Maine, it didn't seem to be much of an
issue.

I published a series of small books about the seasons. The spring one
featured a new baby brother, nursing, laundry, mud. Nobody said
anything.

It wasn't that I was crusading for the La Leche League, but it was my
reality, and that of most toddlers I knew. Moms nursed babies. Big
sisters played and sulked in the quince bush pretending to be
princesses. Breasts were not an issue.

I suppose I should have understood that I really wasn't in Sweden
anymore when youthful strangers passing by our hedge saw my toddler
daughter frolicking naked in her tiny pool, and loudly proclaimed,
"Gross."

Anna didn't hear them (she was too busy being a dinosaur), but I did,
and my heart sank.

Poor teenagers -- to think a 2-year-old's naked dancing was
disgusting.

What did they think of their own bodies, I wondered.

Bodies way up in sun-starved Scandinavia are not considered gross, or
necessarily sexual. Even breasts! Children in particular are allowed
the freedom to feel air on bare skin.

Later, I lived in Hong Kong where nudity was not casual at all. I
understood: Practices were different depending on where you were.

Moving to Maine at the end of the hippie era, there was an open
feeling. Nylons? Fine. Unshaved legs? Fine. Both at once? (Maybe not
so much.) But still I was unprepared for what happened recently.

The line drawing of the plaster cast of the breast on the wall
elicited the word "offensive" -- from a New England librarian, no
less. Librarians are my heroes -- champions of liberties. I'm thinking
that this was a "rogue" librarian.

But her comment made me think: Why is it OK for our kids to see
endless violence, but not breasts?

If the breast on the wall in the book were an entire body, would that
have been OK with the annoyed librarian?

Does the fact that the character's father is gay play into the
supposed offense?

Maybe it's time to rethink what our norms are. Families come in all
forms, and some hero mothers fight breast cancer. India's mother
triumphs, and celebrates.

I wish this outcome for each and every woman facing a breast cancer
diagnosis.

Let's hear it for breasts!

[Jann]

It is indeed odd how people react to issues concerning breasts:

Anyone who watches NFL football will know that the league decided to take up breast cancer awareness as one of the special causes. In order to do this their players and coaches wore special items of pink gear and then auctioned it off and donated the proceeds.  Also they sold pink team gear through NFL and team stores.  Meanwhile . . . in the CFL players and some team owners thought this would be a good idea and wanted to do it too.  The league disagreed and denied players a request to wear pink on their uniforms.  Winnipeg Blue Bombers fullback Jon Oosterhuis was fined a token sum by the CFL for wearing pink gloves during a game against the Toronto Argonauts.  The fine was for violating uniform policy.  Thanks Jon, we appreciate your effort!
http://sportifi.com/news/Bomber-fined-for-pink-gloves-114453.html

In Pittsfield, MA there was a ballot question concerning top-free equal rights.  "Under the proposal, females of any age would be allowed to be exposed from the waist up in public anywhere males are allowed to be similarly semi-clothed."  It was defeated by a wide margin.  A bouquet for the sponsors; brickbats for the voters.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20021799-504083.html?tag=contentMain;contentBody

In Maine the court ruled years ago that breasts are not sexual organs and that in any case women's sexual organs are internal and therefore cannot be seen in the course of casual nakedness.  That said, some entrepreneur opened the Grand View Topless Coffee Shop in Vassalboro.  While I think that the business is exploiting breasts in order to sell product it is, after all, legal.  Some local idiot burned it to the ground and the chief suspect is a man whose girlfriend was working as a barista.  If this is true it moves the question from an argument over public decency to one of supposed male ownership of his girlfriend.  How long, oh Lord, how long will we have to put up with this crap?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20001833-504083.html?tag=contentMain;contentBody

In Portland, ME a top-free equal rights march attracted scads of protesters all eager to take pictures of the marchers.  It sounds to me like a bunch of pervs clad as prudes to protest what they desperately want to see.  Sounds to me like the protesters should all sign up for Second Life because they don't have one at the moment!
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20001737-504083.html?tag=contentMain;contentBody

[brandon]

In regard to the ballot defeat in Pittsfield, Mass., I'm still pondering what exactly this woman, quoted in the linked article, meant:

Denise Yon told The Berkshire Eagle she voted no because of her 12-year-old daughter. Around 70 percent also voted against the measure.

I would think that being concerned about the future of one's 12-year-old daughter would be a reason to vote FOR the referendum measure. Wouldn't a mother want her adolescent daughter to have the same rights, the same freedom, that a 12-year-old boy would have? Wouldn't a mother want her daughter to grow up with a healthy, positive, body image?

Anyhow, I am impressed that only 70% of voters voted against the measure. Given that voters at midterm elections in general are older and more conservative than the adult population, and in this year's election conservative voters were much more energized to vote than liberal voters, a 70-30 vote isn't that bad. It probably means that if all potential voters had voted, it might have been 60-40.

I realize that ballots are secret, but it would be really interesting to see the breakdown of votes by age and sex.

The ballot measure might have been responsible for a very high voter turnout. Pittsfield saw 71.09 percent of registered voters — 1,178 people — vote in the Nov. 2 general election, the highest turnout in the county.  http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20101110/GPG0101/11100603/Pittsfield-had-best-voter-turnout-in-Brown-County

[crasher35]

I honestly don't understand how it is constitutionally possible (in the U.S.) for a woman to be fined for walking around topless when men are allowed to! It's kind of weird too, because this topic has come up with my circle of friends at work and it always seems like it's the women who are least comfortable with the idea of being allowed to. I always point out that they don't have to if they don't want to, but it just allows them the freedom to choose. They quickly jump on me and tell me that they don't want to see other women walking around topless. Especially older women with saggy boobs.

I think people are just very immature and narrow-minded about these things.