Are Breasts 'Decent'?

My first experience in Toronto was the Gay Pride Parade on Sunday 3rd of July, under a blazing sun. Other than the fact that I was completely subjugated by the architecture which is really different from European cities, I noted that people were absolutely not afraid to be semi-naked in the street. In general confusion and effusion of joy, I saw a topless woman. Looking around me, I saw that people were not shocked: no one looked at her askance. There were no improper comments, no chiding remarks. This image was playing on my mind for a moment. I remember the French Gay Pride Parade (in the same weather condition), and I suddenly saw the difference: people were at least wearing underwear, generally only bikinis for women, but topless or naked? Never.

In my native France, the law about nudity in public is really confusing. Until 1994, it was called "attempt on decency" and it concerns exposures of the body and sexual acts in public. It was because part of the Imperial Penal Code of 1810 introduced by Napoléon Bonaparte, really strict. In 1994, this really obsolete law fortunately changed. The name changed too.

The new penal code called this "a law against sexual exhibition", which was concerned with "active acts" (masturbation and sexual relations in public) and passive acts, and here the problems began. The passive act is described as nudity in relation to sex imposed on the public. But, for a representative of the law, it could mean everything. In France, if a policeman decides your behaviour is against the decency law, like walking topless on the street under 40°C, you can be arrested. It's a kind of personal undemocratic judgment.
In Ontario, since 1991, being topless in the street is legal, thanks to the Gwen Jacob case.

The most important question reflecting on nudity, and particularly topless behaviour, is why the sight of breasts is shocking? Why is nudity, and especially women's nudity, immediately considered "sexual aggression "?

The problem grew and reached excessive proportions, breastfeeding became embarrassing and mothers have to cover their babies. The problem is that breasts are hidden because they are designated as a sexual part of the woman's body, and the girls are told for years and years to "never shock. Always be beautiful and innocent little dolls". Girls have become Lolitas.
By not providing a sexual education, the female body and sex have become taboo. A lot of problems result from this taboo. The mystification of sexual acts, for example, make young people afraid of it. They dare not talk about sexuality, and in consequence, they are ashamed to talk about protection, like the necessity of contraception. Everyone remembers the embarrassment of asking how to use a condom. Hiding sexual relations is to not completely accept sexual relations are natural, and not just procreation.

Obviously, religion has a certain influence on people's behaviour.
Talking about sex could relax people and allowed them to know what they want to know (and need to know) about sexuality without embarrassment. Maybe desexualizing women's bodies could promote respect and perhaps reduce real sexual aggression.

Morals are changing, notably thanks to the TopFree Movement, and the demands of naturalist activists. But I think it'll be a long time till we see a "free body" era.