Never Had Too Much

Okay, short answer: yes.

Long answer, you're asking me if two totally unrelated things can coexist just because they involve the same body part.

Yes, my friend, you can respect the autonomy of half the human population to exist in public spaces with the same body parts exposed as the other half. That respect shouldn't be based on the presence or absence of sexual attraction to the body part in question. That's a whole separate thing from respecting others' rights to dress freely in public.

For example, some people are attracted to feet. That does not mean we legislate sandals out of existence. It means we expect those who are attracted to feet not to sexually harass others in public.

The same applies to chests with breasts, as it applies to chests without breasts.

It is not the responsibility of others to control your sexual impulses.

When someone blames sexual impulses on others, it's almost always an excuse to legislate those others to an excessive standard not applied universally. That shifts the blame of sexual harassment away from the harasser and onto the victim. And that's the exact mechanic that leads to excusing rape on the basis of clothes.

That's the part that's the problem.

"Free the nipple" never meant "free to not wear a bra" or "free to breastfeed." Those were adjacent conversations that of course "free the nipple" supporters would boost, but that was NEVER the core of free the nipple.

The core of free the nipple was always that the breasts of people perceived as women ("female-presenting nipples" to use some Tumblr speak) are in no way different than the breasts of people perceived as men. And that since the chests of people perceived as men are not sexualized and are allowed to be exposed, so too should the breasts of people perceived as women. If men can be topless, so can women. If it's inappropriate for women to show their chests, neither should men. It isn't sexual assault for a woman to walk around barechested, because it isn't sexual assault for a man to do so either, and breasts are NOT sexual organs.

Claiming breasts are inherently sexual organs is factually and morally wrong, it is sexist and controlling, it is a tool of oppression, and it defines normal body parts (and bodily functions) as sex which leads to inherent sexualization of people with those parts. It leads to 12 year olds with large breasts being accused of seducing 40 year old men or trying to distract and corrupt their classmates.

"Free the nipple" doesn't mean "free the nipple in a god-fearing way." It means FREE THE NIPPLE, full stop, end of sentence. It means to free the nipple of the faulty social constructs that cast it as a sexualized, malicious force of seduction instead of a normal body part that should be free of expectations of shame or "modesty."

Breasts and nipples aren't shameful, sexual, immoral, porn-adjacent, kinks, a distraction, or things to be feared. They are a part of your body just like your elbows and ankles, and being afraid of them, thinking they will corrupt some innocent person or that being exposed to them is trauma akin to sexual assault, is the entire fucking problem.

Free the nipple, not just for breastfeeding, not just from bras, but from the fucked up social constructs that cast them as malicious instead of innocent. Stop trying to sanitize "free the nipple" for puritanical, conservative audiences who already hate you and the rest of us. You aren't helping anyone.

Agreed.

American families are diverse and inclusive.