Latest Fashion News From Around The World

Bare Breasts Gain Steam as Fashion Statement (photos)

Rudi Gernreich set the fashion world on fire in 1964 when he introduced the “monokini,” the first official topless swimsuit. Needless to say it didn’t go over very well in uptight America. But bare breasts are increasingly becoming a fashion statement.

In Europe, topless sunbathing on beaches is no big deal, and women in various stages of undress up top are frequently featured in fashion magazines and even billboards.

The latest issue of V magazine, photographer Mario Sorrenti shot five of the worlds sexiest ladies in some of the hottest fashions. No need for modesty. Some of the models pose topless. Avert your eyes if you must, but fashion keeps pushing the look.

Countless Hollywood celebrities have been photographed in public in loose free-flowing clothes without bras. Their full breasts have been captured by paparazzi and are regularly featured on the Web.

Are We Finally Ready for Bare Breasts? Click Here for Photos (nsfw)

It may be that the United States is growing more cosmopolitan, or maybe it’s because of the hard economic times. But bare breasted models are increasingly turning up in U.S. magazines like GQ and Esquire.

The whole reason Playboy’s came about is because U.S. magazines, even high-fashion tomes like Vogue refused to publish even partially unclothed women.

Now even the Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition is growing more daring. It regularly features topless models although nipples are still a no-no.

Let’s face it, breasts are a sure attention getter. And, the struggling media industry is doing everything it can to hold onto readers.

Oddly, Gernreich had to hire a prostitute from the Bahamas to pose in the swimsuit for the first time, but the iconic photo of his design features model Peggy Moffitt.

The suits actually sold well, but mainly as a novelty item, and the the San Francisco Chronicle boldly printed a photo of a woman wearing one on its front page.

Gernreich unveiled his swimsuit in the Look magazine as part of an article on futuristic fashions. Judging from these photos, he may have had his eye 2010.

  • Let’s drop the “NSFW.” You don’t know what anyone’s work or situation is. The label is presumptuous and patronizing and promotes the really inane idea that women’s breasts are harmful.

  • And while we’re at it, cut the censorship as well. The black bar mars the photo, draws attention to that area of it, and infantilizes your readers. It also demeans women.

  • David

    Well, while the photos are, artistically, quite nice, they are not suitable for viewing in most work environments in the United States (so the NSFW is appropriate). They are at best a lawsuit waiting to happen (if you happen to view them on corporate or government equipment), regardless of your personal view point. I cannot imagine the hue and cry if you actually had a copy of the magazine open to these pictures on your desk.

    The sad fact is that, while this sort of advertising might be OK in GQ or Vogue, it will be a long time before we see it on television and given the political correctness and amount of sexual harassment training most have to go through, it might be another generation before “breasts,” especially “nipples” are considered acceptable in a corporate environment.

  • Scott

    Paul: “NSFW” indicates that a link goes to a website that contains nudity. So while you pompusly sneer at the designation, and take umbrage at the very notion that a link to a naked woman is offensive, you clearly miss the point to monumental degree.

    Whether you personally are offended by nudity, or more broadly if society is or is not offended by the appearance of a nude woman is not the point.

    The point is that most people cannot view a nude woman on their corporate asset – most people have taken compliance training and have signed agreements with their companies regarding asset utilization. These agreements indicate that they can be terminated for such an action.

    Thus a courtesy “NSFW” tag on the link to images of a nude woman would seem to be perfectly reasonable. It is also a great way for the website to absolve themselves of liability in the event that a reader does view the content inappropriately (e.g. “at work”) and is terminated as a result.

    Your delecate sensibilities are offended by it? Too bad. Most people appreciate a NSFW tag as it prevents them from inadvertantly viewing illicit content on a corporate asset. Deal with it, schmuck.

  • Roy

    I’m glad to see the “censorship” and would not be at this website if it had shown more. We are in America, not Europe! I think magazines starting to publish such have stooped TOOOoooo low to get readers. All that’s going to do is loose more readers! I think the classy magazines have now become trash rags no better than national inquirer or playboy. just trashy!! if these girls had respect for females and themselves, they would cover up! It is offending to many people and religions such as Christianity and Muslims, etc..

  • Anna

    If women with small breasts should cover up I think men with man boobs should to. Just because they are men they should have respect for themselves and keep their shirts on. Some men have ” breasts” and nobody takes it bad but if a woman showes her breasts and nipples it’s a bad thing?? Men and women both have nipples so what’s the beef?

  • Tom Perry

    Who said women with small breasts should cover up? I love small breasts and so do many men. If we would just stop judging a woman on the size of her breasts or her buttocks we’d all be happier.