For a forum headed
Philosophy & Morality I don't see much philosophical work being done here. What I see is mostly people posting their personal tastes, opinions, beliefs, values, etc. and insinuating that anybody who doesn't share those tastes, opinions, beliefs or values is wrong, perverted, amoral, irrational, a religious extremist, hypocritical, naive, out of touch with reality, needs to get a life, etc., etc. I see very little objective inquiry, refining of thinking, synthesizing, etc.
If personal preference and personal opinion are what this thread is about, then here is mine:
1.) Bikinis, public nudity, etc. are foolish. Has anybody heard of
skin cancer? Even in the winter in cold climates where people don't go to beaches and dress "comfortably" there is great risk of harmful UV exposure, it is my understanding. Hmm...do skiers use sunscreen/sunblock while on the slopes of Colorado and Vermont? (Do the sunscreens/sunblocks on the market even work in cold temperatures?) Yet, not only do people fail to minimize their exposure to sunlight, they go to tanning beds when they aren't at the beach, working in the garden, etc.
I avoid the sun as much as possible. Several years ago when I lost 30 lbs. by walking 12 hours a week (and by giving up the 2 liters a day of Mountain Dew also
[I gave it up entirely--for six months, that is; the caffeine withdrawal was the strangest experience), I consciously did the walking before sunrise and around sunset. Most of the walking, therefore, was in the dark.
A cap with a big bill that shades the face; sunscreen/sunblock applied regularly; and lip balm to protect the lips are standard, among other precautions--and that is for spending
minimal time in the sun. And I am supposed to believe that bikinis are healthy and that anybody who has a problem with them is a prude?
2.) While people quarrel over the sexual aspect of "revealing" clothing, women's right to dress however they please, men's responsibility for their own thoughts, etc., I assert that things like shorts, bikinis, swimwear in general, etc. are mostly about our obsession with and worship of the sun. For whatever reason, it is cool (no pun intended) to spend as much time as possibly dressed as little as possible in the sun.
I am an Anthropology major, so I can easily think of possible biocultural explanations. A popular explanation is that sun exposure has health benefits such as Vitamin D production. The sun is the energy source that supports all life on Earth, of course, so maybe it is instinctual for people to revere the sun. Then, there are things like Seasonal Affective Disorder. Maybe SAD occurs disproportionately in the populations of the sun-worshiping cultures; kind of like how people in the United States are lactose tolerant while people in Africa and Latin America are lactose intolerant (just going by memory of what I have read; don't quote me on any of it). But whatever is at the root of it--be it purely biological, purely cultural, or some intersection of biology and culture--I intuit that the cultural phenomenon of things like bikinis has more to do with our obsession with the sun than with sexual liberalism.
That obsession with and worship of the sun is impacting the landscape in a number of ways. Indigenous cultures and livelihoods in the southern hemisphere are being destroyed to make way for resorts and other tourist attractions to be consumed by the wealthy consumers of the U.S. and Europe. Harsh places with little water have been settled by large populations seeking a sunny climate to live in. To support those populations in such harsh environments taxpayers have had to pay for numerous engineering projects. As a result, we get statistics to the effect of "For every $1.00 California taxpayers send to Washington, D.C. they get $2.00 back; for every $1.00 that Indiana taxpayers send to Washington, D.C. they get $0.80 back." That is just a few examples--I have barely scratched the surface.
I find most of the clothing of the sun-worshiping culture to be in poor taste. Notice that I didn't say it is immodest, indecent, sinful, etc. I said that it is in poor taste. I have no formal or informal education in the principles and theories of fashion design, so maybe I don't know what I am talking about. But it seems to me that while things like business suits are designed like the finest cuisine that stuff like swimwear is designed and mass-produced like quick-service, chain-restaurant hamburgers.
That is my personal tastes, opinions, beliefs, values, etc., with some anthropological and geographical analysis thrown in. Now for philosophy...
A recurring theme in the thinking of those who have defended bikinis, thongs, etc. is
comfort. Bikinis are about what is most comfortable in the sun and in the water, it has been asserted. Therefore, they are morally acceptable, the thinking continues. Therefore, people should respect other people's right to dress comfortably without being ridiculed, sexually harassed, laughed at, etc., it has been concluded. Okay. Fine.
If we assume the latter empirical and moral statements to be true and to be logically connected, then it follows that everybody should be able to present himself or herself however he or she feels comfortable, does it not? Therefore, if somebody is more comfortable wearing long sleeves in July because they protect him from UV radiation and ultimately from skin cancer, people should respect that, right? Same with long pants. Yet, I am often ridiculed for not wearing shorts. "Aren't you hot in those jeans?", people ask in a tone that suggests they think that I am strange or that there is something wrong with me.
Wait a minute. I thought we are all supposed to see past things like our own biochemical responses to other people's dress and our own cultural values and respect everybody's right to dress however they feel comfortable. Why the inconsistency when it comes to people who prefer to expose as little as possible? It's not just about protecting oneself from the sun. For reasons such as religion, personal tastes in clothing, and personal ideals about body image, one might prefer to show very little skin. Yet, such people are going to be prejudged as being prudes, said to be pathologically anxious about their body image and/or their sexuality, said to be living "a sheltered life", told that they need to "live a little", etc., etc. (I know from experience). Again, why the inconsistency?
) I am not offended by women who do wear them though (although some should be more considerate in considering what flatters their body types and what doesn't). As for nudie beaches, I could care less...if someone is offended by it, they have the option of not going. And other public areas, well, it depends on the place. Some restaurants down here you can wear your bathing suit and nothing else, so it is hard to stereotype "appropriate" attire for general areas.
