Not All Readers Were Uplifted By Article, `Comparing Cleavage'

As promised, here are some of the reader reactions to the Aug. 17 Scene story written by 32B, 34B and 36B. Just in case you missed the story, three female reporters set out to do consumer research on the "uplifting capabilities" of the many bras being touted as modern miracles.

Reader reaction was swift, mostly favorable and always heartfelt. Some of you said you laughed until tears streamed down your face and that the story was all the talk among your friends and neighbors. Others of you were angered. If you liked the story, you called us. If you didn't like the story, you mostly wrote out your reasons. Here are some excerpts from our electronic and paper mail:

Editor, The Times:

I am 35 years old. I have a loving husband (who, by the way, loves my boobs) and I have a pretty decent bod. . . . Ten years, two kids and a couple more miles have taken their toll. I always thought I'd get implants or at least get lifted. Being semi-intelligent and somewhat informed, I can't take that risk. . . . I called last week to put in my order for a Wonderbra. . . .

I loved the article by you three daring gals. You've gone above and beyond the call of duty as reporters. It was light, funny and informative. Keep up the good work.

Dina Marcoe Bellevue

I am a 17 year-old-female student at Lakeside High School, in Seattle, who was very offended and upset by your article, "Comparing

cleavage."

Your article objectified women in the grossest sense. As a teenage girl, I strive every day to be seen as something more than just a pretty face, or a body, or breasts, and I feel that your article completely undermined the efforts of women to be seen as more than just sex objects. It's sad that the underlying message many women still receive from society is: "We know what men really care about: It isn't a woman's eyes, and it sure as shootin' ain't her brain. . .," as your reporter so eloquently stated.

It is flashy articles like yours, however, which promote the message of "women for body, not brains," rather than combat it. The double standard, women for beauty, men for brains, is obvious - or is it?

Can I expect a follow-up article, "Jocks for Jocks," with accompanying pictures of males posing in jockstraps? Will I learn about "comfort," "projection," and how it looks under running shorts?

I'm not implying that this article is wrong or dirty. If I picked up Cosmopolitan or any number of female fashion magazines I would expect to find such an article. One of the reasons women read magazines like that is for information on bras and the like. I simply find it ridiculous and ironic to read this article in the same paper where I read weekly about rapes, crimes against women and sexual harassment.

Tiffany J. Sparks Bellevue

I could not believe that your paper, which touts itself as a "family newspaper" would print such an article as a comparison of the new-fangled Wonderbras. . . . I found the article shocking, superficial, and without any morally redeeming value or justification.

Could we please have more like it?

Jim Stacey Seattle

. . . We're sure your "Wonderbra" story was very entertaining to many readers (even though every woman's magazine in the country did a story on it months ago), and no doubt the front page "tease" and cleavage shot may have even sold more newspapers. Yet when The Seattle Times did a story on penile implants a few weeks ago, it didn't seem the newspaper could muster the gumption to say "penis" on the front page. Perhaps you can run a sequel to the implant story with anonymous bylines by three male reporters of various sizes.

Linda Johns, Sheila Sundberg and Pat Mallinson Seattle

. . . I work for a social-service agency that promotes the positive growth and self-esteem of girls and young women. Articles such as these continue the stereotype of women as sex objects. Adult women who should be role models are encouraged to run out and buy self-esteem. I actually feel sorry for them. By buying this product, women are buying into the fact that this is what they must do to attract a man. It's a sad commentary that the bras are selling out . . .

Sabrina Urquhart Seattle

Did I overlook the little "advertisement" warning. . . . Without such warning, the article is one of the most blatantly corrupt pieces of journalism I have ever seen. Feminist issues aside, a slavishly fawning article praising a product sold only through a company (Bon Marche) that has 11 pages of overtly paid advertising reduces your credibility to that of a paid pen.

Alexander Patterson Port Townsend