Church Times (II): women’s bits

Got lectured this morning, as I headed off to church. Its just that I’ve just bought a beautiful green top with in-built support and shaping panels and…it really needs to be worn either bra-less, or with something satin-y and smooth. Definitely not anything that leaves an imprint under the top, because…well, because the top IS a bit see-thru.

According to t’other half “everything was on display”. In vain I pointed out that the priest was a man of God and certainly wouldn’t be looking.

Besides, it did feel a little over-done, since I wore a fairly substantial black cardy with it as well as a bright yellow scarf-cum-shawl arrangement. So my embarrassment – my “décolletage” – was fully covered so long as I remained indoors and didn’t make any sudden movements.

(I did test this theory to near destruction an hour or so later, as I wandered around a cold and revoltingly windy car boot sale. The boy scored well, including a lovely warm mock-russky hat, go-go’s, an xbox game and roller skates – all for around a fiver! I, on the other hand, did very well out of a fairly naïve bloke selling off odd bits of make-up along with the usual bric-a-brac. Victoria Jackson: unused! Not exactly top of range, but a sight better than No. 7 – and he was asking 50p for a palette. I suspect girlfriend troubles…and these, perhaps, all that were left behind).

Anyhow. I thought the fuss overdone, given the fact that the top wasn’t being worn on its own. Although, seized briefly by wickeder thoughts, it did cross my mind that the church shouldn’t, couldn’t object anyway.

Cause, after all, the official line is that my gender is God-given and what I had when I was born is immutable.

So these can’t really count as boobs, can they? How could they possibly object to my… hmmm. No. I am practical enough to know better. But still, its food for thought against future protest. If the church doesn’t recognize this body as female, then what possible objection could there be to flaunting it?

Interested in the answer to that, actually. There is the consistent answer, which would say I shouldn’t bare my chest in church as male or female. And I am sure that there is a theologian somewhere who has worked this one through and determined that even if it ISN’T a female breast, it still LOOKS like one, so it shouldn’t be allowed. (Though the corollary of that would be that less endowed women should be able to bare all too).

Nah. It’s a mystery to me, but one that leads me to think wicked and naughty thoughts.



2 Responses so far »

  1. 1

    andrea said,

    i’d have said the same even if you were just going to Tescos….i just made the mistake of thinking that bringing the church (or actually the congregation) into the equation would make you pause before displaying your wares so obviously.

    • 2

      janefae said,

      ye-es…though the view from arch feminist and intermittent catholic fiona is that the dress would have been OK on its own even without the cardy!


Comment RSS · TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: