If you haven’t heard, Titties at Tulane are out and about. The idea is for Tulane women to “proudly share” pictures of their breasts, tumblr-style. It’s all anonymous and based on Boobs at Bard. More information about it is available on the Hullabaloo, the T@T website, or the grapevine in general. I was a little shocked that this website came up. At first, I thought it was a ploy for college women to exploit themselves for attention. In contrast to a campaign like Save The Tatas, their seems to be no purpose or vision to showing your breasts. Like flashing at Mardi Gras, the exhibition lends itself less to self-expression and more for exploitation. At least they don’t have a “Like” button.
What I like about Boobs at Bard, is the artistic spin that they take on it. The photos treat boobs like objects of artistic representation, and the presenters clearly think about the way they want to portray the boobs. Does this lose sight of the B@B vision to present all boobs in all their original glory? Maybe.
Cocks on Campus: Tulane is iffy and gross. Every cock is hard, erect, and reeks sex. Can I please see a flaccid cock on the site? The sexual overtone diminishes its message and the message of the boob counterpart. The sexually assertive cocks on the Tulane version makes the viewer a partner in a sexual act, even unintentionally. Retuning to the Titties at Tulane website, a viewer’s perspective is tainted by the sexual explicitness. It transforms a possibly woman-positive site to one that encourages sexualization of boobs. The focus on boobs/titties on this website is that is a source of self-consciousness but not necessarily societally sexual.
According to the creator in an interview with Jezebel, “I wanted people to feel comfortable viewing these images in a variety of ways, from an appreciation of the female form to masturbatory purposes.” The question that needs to be asked is if the reactions to naked boobs is heavily one way or another and if a spectrum of reactions is elicited from an individual… does a heterosexual man appreciate the form before masturbating? Are boobs being judged by peers, men and women alike, for their quality?
The Jezebel article on these sites is enlightening. It provides a lot more context about this article, like that Bard already had a magazine featuring nudity, The Moderator, and that the website was in response to the magazine’s method. It clarifies the purpose, and describes an example of the ways the site is changing discussion about nudity. A highly negative response to the Harvard edition of Boobs at Bard and criticism of Harvard’s boobs elicited some proof that “there is still a certain aesthetic standard of “perfection” to which breasts are held” and that “displaying “normal” boobs gives women a chance to see examples of anatomy that does not fit a porn/Hollywood/Playboy ideal.”
As much as I’m wary about the sexual exploitation of the boobs posted at T@T, there’s also a need for body-acceptance on our campus. The pressure to look a certain way from a couple of thousand peers, drives many of us to extremes lows of self-esteem. Yet I also worry about the “cocky” female population of our school making it a breast campusacb. If the comments on the boobs on the Bard version are any indicator, there’s mostly just love for all of them.
- So, if you’re a Tulane student, are you going to post?
- What do y’all think of the Hullabaloo article on it?
- And is the website feminist? The Hullabaloo has a short response from Mimi to consider.