[tshaddox]

You’re using a definition of “naked” that depends on your particular societal views, so that’s a circular question. Most people don’t where clothing over their hands in public, but you probably don’t call that “naked.” What reason is there to cover one’s nipples unless it’s for comfort, protection, or warmth?

[krapp]

>What reason is there to cover one’s nipples unless it’s for comfort, protection, or warmth?

Several thousand years of Judeo-Christian cultural indoctrination teaching that because Eve tempted Adam into original sin, women and their bodies are inherently unclean and can lead men astray, and thus are to be treated as taboo.

[reaperducer]

Several thousand years of Judeo-Christian cultural indoctrination teaching that because Eve tempted Adam into original sin, women and their bodies are inherently unclean and can lead men astray, and thus are to be treated as taboo.

This was going on long before Judeo-Christianity existed, and in almost every single culture on the planet before each made contact with the first Christian.

[krapp]

Nevertheless, as far as the Western world is concerned (and the US in particular,) Christianity has been the primary influence on the nature and culture of sexual morality. Almost all of our gender views and stereotypes can be traced back to the Bible in some form or another, among them the prejudice that female sexuality exists to serve men, and that the female body is inherently more vulgar than the male.

[OJFord]

I might be agreeing with you, but isn't it just under-specified? To me 'naked' alone = 'no clothes whatsoever'; but 'naked breast' is entirely similar to, yes, 'naked hand'. The latter just having less frequent utility as a phrase, shall we say.