Topless

It is now legal for women in Denmark to walk topless in beaches andpublic pools. Is it a victory to feminism? I think it is. Sure enough, when a woman walks topless it is perceived differently than a man walking topless. I guess a topless woman can cause men and women to stare at her breasts. But there are two reasons for that: One, we are brought up with the notion that nudity, especially feminine nudity, is something to be ashamed of. This education causes a myriad of psychological complications related to the self esteem and sexual confidence. The second reason is that social norms that women's breasts are perceived as sexual organs, while they are clearly not parts of the genitalia. Therefore it is required to cover them at all times and their exposure is used as a powerful tool to attract. Covering the breasts with layers of clothing has become a method to control women's ability to attract.

Allowing women to walk topless gives them the right to decide on how their body is viewed, when to use it or how. Just think on places where women are required to walk with cloths that totally cover their bodies. It is not a coincidence that these societies are also the same societies where women's rights are most limited. If we take it to the complete opposite it is probably going to give women total freedom and equality. What's wrong with that?

And finally, the way people dress determines the way society views the importance of the exposed body parts vs. the covered ones. Take the times in history when women wore dresses showing cleavage but covering the ankles. At these times exposing the ankles was considered much more erotic than showing the majority of the breasts. In placese where the body and face are fully covered it is sexual to show parts of the face. If breasts are exposed regularly their mental link with sex will be eliminated, just as we don't consider the breasts of topless men on the beach as sexual.

Puzzling news

Let's take the headline news from the USA: the governor of New York had to resign after admitting that he spent some time with a call girl. United states always presents itself as a democracy, probably the most liberal democracy of the world, but when it comes to sex, the Americans are as puritan as the Pope. They say that pornography is a matter of geography; however, sex and scandals are no different. I don't endorse politicians cheating on their wives, and I don't think that cheating is good, but cheating is not a crime, yet. Not even in the USA. And in other countries, France for example, past presidents cheated on their wives and the media kept it quiet. It seems that in France it is more acceptable to have an affair than it is in America, much like that it is more acceptable to show partial nudity on television. Don't get me wrong, I'd prefer living in the USA on living in France, and I dislike the French language or people, but when it comes to some aspects of their lives, they are much more sensible than Americans.
And there is another angle to this story, the girl herself, Ashley Alexandra Dupre. The 22-year-old has begun working as a call girl, like many other call girls, for personal reasons. I am sure that she had no intentions of revealing it to the entire world. Becoming a star was her dream, but as a singer and not as a call girl. I think that the interest of the media in her is prying into her privacy. A young girl, who had to make some tough choices early in her life, probably got some of the choices wrong, but that's no reason to make her a celebrity sex-worker. Somebody once said that any publicity is a good publicity. I doubt that, especially in the puritan USA, but I hope that some good will come from this poor situation and that Ashley Alexandra Dupre will become a successful singer after all, you can listen to her song here.

Another impossibility is the breakdown of European nations while the unification of the continent continues. The European Union, which looks to be as powerful as the USA in world influence and economy and spreads its wing almost to the borders of Russia in the east, has failed to approve a new constitution after some countries rejected it. The new constitution was too unifying for the peoples of the Netherlands or France. On the other hand, it seems that the various peoples of the nations that comprise the European Union are doing whatever they can to form an independent national home, under the wings of the EU. Kosovo is the last example of such, after it declared its independence from Serbia. Will other follow its example? The two ethnic groups in Belgium are close to splitting the nation in two. In Spain, both the Catalans and the Basques are looking for national separation from Madrid. In the 1990's both Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia splitted into independent countries, which later joined the European Union. It seems that the European Union, instead of eliminating national feelings and assimilating the nations into a homogeneous block, is aggravating nationalistic feelings and separation between groups. Relatively small nations feel that they can safely gain national independence while still keeping their relative financial and political stability under the wings of the EU. I'm afraid that unless the European Union puts an end to this trend, the nationalism will gain too much strength, which will result in the European Union breaking down.