The Times OnLine Editorial Page for August 5, 1997


Letters to the Editor

Covering up

Editor:

Re: the ongoing controversy over the fact that women's public exposure of their breasts for certain reasonsis no longer a legally indecent act in Ontario. The national community - as distinguished from the feminist community - regards physiology (i.e.: biology), not personal intent (i.e.: volition), as being the determinant of whether or not a body part is sexual.

The average woman's breasts are significantly more erogenous than the average man's breasts, due to neurological differences between them involving tactile corpuscles (a type of peripheral termination of nerves), as well as connections between certain autonomic neural plexuses. (The erogeny of breasts is primarily a product of neurology, not culture.) Unlike men's breasts, women's breasts have been naturally preserved in part to perform the function of arousing sexual desire, when stimulated, in the individuals whose bodies they are a part of (i.e: nature "intends" them to perform this function); hence from a physiological perspective, they are sexual.

An indecency law that requires men and women to publicly conceal whatever is, for their respective genders, physiologically a sexual body part acts on a single standard. Furthermore, the fact that such a law treats men and women differently at the level of concretes (i.e.: the perceptual level) does not make it sexist; likewise, neither does the fact that the physiological identities of the genders are of consequence to it.

Sheldon Warnock,
Beaverton


1