Anatomy is for chumps

1. You reference studies that show both men and women CAN BE sexually aroused due to nipple stimulation but go on to ignore the fact that men are included to advance your theory that women’s nipples are sexual objects intended for men’s entertainment.

2. Just because something can be sexually arousing when stimulated does not equate it with your genitals. Most people, of all genders, become sexually aroused when their ears are stimulated; are you going to argue that those should be covered as well? Although, I suppose you would just be interested in covering women’s ears…

3. It is hilarious that you use the fact that men find breasts attractive (in this elementary school hetero–normative understanding of evolution) to be a legitimate reason why we should consider breast to be sexual organs. These cavemen in your watered-down Darwin example were also drawn to females with more fatty tissue in all areas of their bodies as well as long hair. By your reasoning, all women should wear a burqa regardless of religious context.

4. Not all cultures and regions prohibit women from uncovering their breasts so your whole argument comes off as ignorant, imperialistic, racist bull shit. Oh, and really God damned sexist.

5. Your whole argument is flawed from the get go because it hinges on the doxa of a hetero–normative gender binary which is scientifically false. This goes beyond identity and sexuality; people are not only born with XX or XY chromosomes, and formation of external gender is incredibly nuanced and varied. Men with XY chromosomes can and do develop breasts that look and act just as a female with XX chromosomes do.

COOKIE CAAAAAATTT!!!