OK, I figured that title would get peoples' attention! I think this is an interesting topic and I debated posting it to the non-swimming related forum, but it is swimming related.
Anyway, here's the story. A woman in Seattle has been fighting the rule that women need to wear tops while swimming in Seattle pools. She had a double mastectomy and her contention is that the suit rubbing against her scars is very uncomfortable. The city Parks & Rec department finally decided she can swim topless--but only her:
seattletimes.nwsource.com/.../2018485244_swimmer.html
Former Member
Why on earth should she have to wear anything if she has no breasts, and why does it bother ANY of you? The prohibition against bare breasts is codified by law most places, she now meets the same criteria as a male swimmer.
If someones scars make you uncomfortable, that is your issue, not theirs. As far as "special treatment" goes, there isn't any being afforded, she simply meets the male standard now.
All this puritanical crap is irritating.
THANK YOU!
I am somewhat baffled that people on here would actually have an issue with this.This woman is athletic,wants to train,and has found that swimming gives her an outlet after going through the ordeal she endured.But having a double mastectomy traumatizes nerves and tissue-often times for ever.And thus wearing anytype of suit that fits snugly on the body,would agravate her pain.I aplaud her for persevering and finding something that gives her purpose-and seing her body should be no worse then a swimmer entering the pool with missing limbs.
Consider this-your discomfort in seing her without a full suit is going to be a fraction of what she has had to deal with in fighting cancer.
OK I have to take issue with the previous comment that a woman with a mastectomy is "not a pretty sight". This woman looks beautiful to me, and strong.
She had an excellent aesthetic result (and hopefully addressed the cancer as well) compared to what I have seen in the past (nurse).
