Close-up of de-nippled Victoria’s Secret boob
As part of the Twisty Institute of Patriarchy-Blamingâ€™s ongoing research into the American sex class and its consequences, today we look at â€œcoverage.â€ Coverage is what a garment has when it reveals less of what gives men erections.
For example, J.Crew is currently hawking a â€œboy-leg hipster bikiniâ€ with â€œfull seat coverage.â€ Never mind the fundamentally insane idea that a bikini–a garment designed to simulate nudity–can offer â€œcoverage.â€ It is only in the mind of the coveraged that coveraging an extra centimeter of butt-cheek will actually provide indemnity against public ridicule, self-loathing, or unsolicited boners.
â€œCoverageâ€ is not a word you often see in conjunction with menâ€™s fashion. Imagine:
â€œThe new Armani sportcoat provides maximum coverage while still looking sexy.â€
â€œIs this necktie giving me enough coverage?â€
â€œWith all the new see-through trousers out this season, get the coverage you need with new PakageProtektorâ„¢ Briefs, now with our patented KokBlokâ„¢ panel. Colors: Tequila Sunrise, Pago Pago, Tourmaline, Air.â€
But no. This season you will perceive nary a dude frolicking down the avenue in see-through pants. Thatâ€™s because menâ€™s sartorial decisions are not expected to achieve an impossible balance between â€œvirginâ€ and â€œhooker.â€ Rarely can they expect violent repercussions to result from their choice of undergarments. Male costuming reflects utility, comfort, the fact that the world is their oyster, and, in an unfortunately declining number of cases, taste.
But the opposite is true for women. Weâ€™re the sex class, baby, and with that high honor come exigent fashion responsibilities. In order to avoid smiting society a crushing blow from which it can never recover, the pre-menopausal among us must strive to project just the right amount of desirability. Too much and weâ€™re sluts, which disrupts male cohesion by inviting harassment and rape. Too little and weâ€™re frigid, which disrupts male cohesion by failing to respond to it. Get it? Womenâ€™s sex appeal is the lifeblood of patriarchy, but it is such a mighty, unfathomable force that it can be decanted only under rigidly controlled conditions and only in exactingly measured increments. All regulated, of course, by patriarchy. This is where coverage comes in.
The degree to which a woman wraps herself in fabric is a statement of her relationship to male desire. This relationship is so meticulously monitored that in certain parts of the world deviation may result in violence or death. Even in the US, subtracting an inch of material here or there can make headlines, cast the FCC into turmoil, and permanently damage delicate jesusbag psyches of TV viewers drinking beer and watching pro football.
So nipples are now illegal. They are too sexy! Men canâ€™t control themselves when they see one! Even the Desperate Housewives get theirs photoshopped out! You must nip those boners in the bud with coverage, ladies!
I mean, check out this $45 bra from misogynist cheap crap lingerie pusher Victoria’s Secret. The company says they spent 2 years developing this thing, which is astonishing, since itâ€™s not a cure for cancer. All it does is hide nipples. But these days nipples are protrusia-non-grata on the boobal landscape. Victoriaâ€™s Secret canâ€™t even say the word â€œnipple.â€ They call it â€œthe apex of the bust.â€
Fun fact: I found out while researching this essay that Pamela Anderson is Canadian! Coincidentally, she is currently appearing in â€œStacked,â€ a prime-time TV show about giant breasts from which nipples have been prohibited by network censors.
Another fun Canadian fact: Victoria’s Secret sends out over one million catalogs per day. They are printed on paper made from the deforestation of the Canadian wilderness.