Those Things Could Kill You

The campus of Kennesaw State University is a beautiful place in August. Fresh new faces roam among familiar friends. Sit in the patio area of the Student Center and one might eventually encounter every student of the school, passing through on the way to the next class or appointment.

A striking aspect of the student population is the amount of exposed flesh one also sees, especially with the summer’s last gasps of heat before Fall. Women, in particular, seem to take the most delight in showing off their bodies. Necklines plunge to the navel while undersized brassieres push natural assets to the point of nearly spilling over the blouse. No place apart from a beach or pool does one encounter so much bare skin as when these young ladies decide to flaunt their breasts for the stares of others.

It should be noted that there is nothing terribly wrong with showing off one’s body with pride. Many problems of this country stem from the over-prudishness of past generations with regard to the styles and norms of youth. Yet, there is a special mystique reserved for women’s breasts. One need look no further than the supermarket magazine stand to see a supposed ideal of the female body splashed across covers and advertisements. From a cultural standpoint, America is fascinated with breasts and the female population shares in this. A 1990 study from the University of New York found women are so socialized to believe the breast equates self-worth that they do not believe their breasts belong just to them, but to others for evaluation and pleasure. A woman’s very femininity is determined by the size, shape, and attractiveness of her breasts.

This socialized view of the breast may account for the attention breast cancer receives versus more popular or “trendy” afflictions, which garner celebrity galas and epidemic status. For example, AIDS deaths in 2003 were just over 18,000, with 44,000 newly diagnosed cases. Contrast that with the predicted 211,000 new breast cancer patients and 40,000 deaths among existing patients and one cannot help but wonder which is the real epidemic.

The problem of perception does not just rest with attention given to the disease, however, but also to the treatment of it. Among breast cancer caregivers, a debate has raged for years on the effectiveness of removing just the tumor and following up with radiation over the more drastic treatment of cutting off the breast entirely. Whole studies have been done to weigh the benefits of one over the other among patients whose cancers are still relatively small. For those women who either have no choice at all or take the preemptive step of a mastectomy, there exists a multi-billion dollar industry to ensure they can retain at least the semblance of a breast. This is despite the fact they no longer have the same sexual nerve sensations women with whole breasts still enjoy. The point is they must continue to look like the ideal in order to find acceptance among a culture dominated by the male definition of female sexual attractiveness. A counterpart to this exists among males with testicular cancer, yet there is rarely even a question of removing the entire afflicted testicle and no offering of a prosthetic replacement. There will not be any complaints from males, however, since the breast obviously means more to the culture.

Some of the ladies of KSU are buying into this same notion wholeheartedly. For whatever personal reason in the choice of dress or style, the overall offering of a nearly naked breast only furthers the concept that their bodies are not their own. They are giving up ownership to a sex-laced advertising campaign and Barbie-doll stereotype. Even more confounding is that many of these women would call themselves staunch “feminists”, implying the notion their gender identity exists above mere physical limitations or endowments. The next time you see a nearly nude breast and did not expect to, consider the line used for so many things in American society: “Remember, those things could kill you.”