Who would have thought that bras would be around this long? Certainly not Germaine Greer, who in the early 1960s refused to wear a bra insisting it was a "ludicrous invention". Yet exactly 40 years on, after her ground-breaking tome The Female Eunuch hit the feminist airwaves, it seems the undergarment is here to stay. Yep, a whopping 90 per cent of Aussie women own a bra, with most females housing at least six in their wardrobes.
But Greer isn't impressed with the lack of free-flowing bosoms on display. She recently wrote in The Guardian newspaper that bras had turned modern breasts into somewhat of a joke ...
"Where once 'boobs' were a secret waiting to be revealed, now double welts of marbled flesh propped up by balcony bras are pushed at you by waitresses, schoolgirls and receptionists of all ages," she wrote. "Where once you would have blushed to display a bra strap, dresses are cut so low that the brassiere and its bulging overspill are on permanent display ... Now that you can buy them, bosoms are over."
I'm not quite sure whether bosoms will ever be "over". After all, what will happen to Playboy bunnies, celebrity plastic surgeons and Pamela Anderson? Yet, despite the brassiere's increasing popularity (we can thank Heidi Klum, Lady Gaga and Jean Paul Gaultier's conical bras for that), these days, if a woman's breasts are naturally perky, upright and the right size, should she be forced to wear a bra? I mean, really, what purpose would a bra have for these anomalies, other than to make them walk around constricted, barely able to breathe and with metal wires sticking into their ribs?
At least this seems to be the mantra of France's first lady Carla Bruni, who arrived at a state dinner in a dress so tight it might as well have been made of cling wrap. Oh, and she wasn't wearing a bra either.
While news headlines around the world debated whether or not her decision to go without her nipples being covered up was indeed a sound choice to be made by France's first lady, the real question on everyone's lips seemed to be this: is she too old to let her feminine assets run freely?
Because, let's face it: while the Lindsay Lohans and Kate Mosses of the world might be able to get away with free-flowing breasts and pert nipples shining through see-through gowns, perhaps Bruni, aged 42, doesn't have as much freedom when it comes to what she should and shouldn't wear to important political occasions.
She's not alone in garnering negative nipple-related press either.
Forty-four year old Elizabeth Hurley came under similar fire for a similar nipple display, although she went one step further and donned a see-through sari dress.
Yet, it wasn't hailed as a bad but "conscious" fashionable decision. Nor was it applauded for being a bold statement of the times that announced no matter what your age, if you can look that good with a bra, then you're free to go without one. Instead her choice to waltz up the red carpet sans a bra was dubbed a fashion "malfunction"; a mistaken slip of the nipple.
Really? Surely, with all those stylists, agents, managers and makeover specialists surrounding Hurley's every move, would there ever really be such a thing as a mistaken case of the see-through dress? I think not.
I'd be lying if I said I've never left the house in a dress without a bra for a more comfortable stroll around my neighbourhood without feeling imprisoned. But whether I would do the same if I was wearing a slightly see-through dress, I'm pretty sure the answer would be no. Whether I would give a supermodel or actress kudos for pulling off the look with sheer and utter confidence - absolutely ...
No comments:
Post a Comment