Uncovering the Past: Why Cultural Nudity Was Never About Feminism

Modesty and nudity—two concepts that have shaped human societies for centuries. While some cultures once embraced the natural state of the human body without shame, others draped it in layers of cloth as a marker of morality or status.

Today, as the global conversation around feminism continues to evolve, some may wonder if these cultural practices of nudity or minimal clothing were early acts of female liberation. But were they truly about feminism, or simply reflections of different values and environments?

Hello deer, this is Seri 🌸

I’m deeply passionate about social sciences, and it’s frustrating to see people equate disagreeing with religious practices with being “feminist.”

My perspective doesn’t stem from feminism but from a genuine interest in understanding cultural and social dynamics.

Studying social sciences has opened my eyes to the complexity of human cultures and taught me the importance of cultural relativism. Instead of judging practices through the lens of my own upbringing, I’ve learned to view them within their own cultural contexts. This perspective has not only made me more open-minded but also more subjectivist, allowing me to see that what’s considered 'right' or 'wrong' is often shaped by deeply rooted social, historical, and cultural factors.

There’s been a big debate "recently" about how women should dress. For some, dressing modestly feels empowering and freeing, while others find liberation in wearing minimal clothing. What many don’t realize, though, is that the idea of modesty is actually a social construct created by society — especially shaped by men — rather than something natural or fixed.

This is what my post will talk about today :

When did humans start to wear clothes? 👗

The earliest evidence of clothing comes from indirect clues like tools used for scraping hides, estimated to be about 100,000 to 500,000 years ago.

The oldest actual clothing fragments are rare, but some textiles and sewing needles found date back around 30,000 to 40,000 years.

Clothing likely started as practical protection against cold, sun, insects, and rough environments rather than fashion or modesty.

The idea of decorative or symbolic clothing came later, as humans developed culture, social status, and identity markers.

Clothes weren’t “invented” at a single moment but evolved gradually with human needs and culture.

When clothes started to be used for modesty? 🧕🏻

Clothes started being used specifically for modesty—that is, to cover the body according to social or religious rules—around 5,000 to 3,000 years ago, as ancient civilizations developed complex cultures and belief systems.

Before that, clothing was mainly for protection against the environment. But as societies grew, ideas about which parts of the body should be covered for moral, social, or religious reasons took shape, especially with the rise of early religions and social hierarchies.

So modesty-driven clothing is a cultural invention tied to ancient civilizations and religious teachings, not something from the very start of clothing itself.

🌏Examples of cultures :

Many cultures had very different ideas about nudity and modesty; some embraced nudity or wore minimal clothing without shame.

Here are a few examples:

👉 Indigenous peoples of the Amazon and other tropical regions often wore little or no clothing because of the warm climate, and nudity was normal, not shameful.

👉Many Indigenous Australian groups traditionally had loose ideas about covering the body.

👉Pacific Island cultures like Hawaiians or Samoans traditionally wore tapa cloth or skirts that covered only parts of the body, with nudity not seen as immodest.

👉Ancient Greeks and Romans often celebrated the beauty of the naked body in art and sport; gymnos (naked) exercise was common for men, and nudity wasn’t always linked to shame.

👉In parts of Africa, traditional clothing varied greatly; some tribes used minimal covering, and nudity was often natural and accepted.

In these cultures, clothing wasn’t mainly about modesty or shame but practicality, climate, or cultural meaning. Modesty norms as we think of them in Abrahamic contexts didn’t always apply.

✊🏻Is nudity a feminist movement?

It was purely cultural not feminist.

These cultures weren’t embracing nudity or minimal clothing to make a statement about women’s rights or gender equality. Instead, their norms were shaped by:

🌡️Climate: Hot, humid regions made minimal clothing practical and comfortable.

🎑Tradition: Nudity or minimal clothing was simply a part of their way of life, with no negative or sexual connotations.

🧎🏻‍♀️Spirituality: In some cultures, the body was seen as natural and sacred, not something to be hidden.

🤼‍♀️ Community norms: Social roles and relationships were structured differently, so covering the body for modesty wasn’t a concern.

Feminism is a modern concept tied to patriarchy, gender roles, and power structures, which wasn’t a framework in these cultures. Their clothing norms weren’t meant to resist oppression or assert women’s autonomy but were simply part of their natural way of life.

Today most cultures are modest. By norm or globalization? 🌏

Most cultures dropped these practices due to cultural contact, colonization, and the spread of major religions that introduced stricter clothing norms.

1. Colonization and Imperialism:

European colonizers imposed their own standards of dress, associating nudity or minimal clothing with “savagery” or “backwardness.”

Indigenous peoples were often forced or pressured to cover up as part of “civilizing” missions.

2. Spread of Major Religions:

Religions like Christianity and Islam brought stricter dress codes that framed nudity as immoral or sinful.

Missionaries played a big role in convincing or coercing people to cover up for “modesty.”

3. Globalization and Westernization:

As Western culture spread, so did Western fashion norms, which became symbols of modernity, progress, and respectability.

Traditional clothing was often stigmatized as “primitive” or “uncivilized,” leading people to abandon it.

4. Urbanization and Modernization:

Moving to cities often meant adopting more uniform, conservative clothing for work, education, or fitting in.

5. Changing Social Structures:

As societies stratified and gender roles became more rigid, clothing became a way to mark social status, gender, and morality.

Why was modesty created? 👗

Modesty was created as a way to regulate behavior, enforce social norms, and maintain social order.

Clothing became a way to distinguish social classes. Covering oneself was often linked to wealth and respectability, while less clothing was associated with lower status or immorality.

Patriarchal societies often policed women’s clothing to reinforce male authority and control over female sexuality.

By dictating how women dressed, men could limit women’s autonomy over their own bodies and sexuality. If women were seen as sexually available, it was considered a threat to male power and lineage control. Covering women up was a way to deny them sexual agency and keep them “pure” for marriage.

In societies where inheritance and lineage were crucial, men sought to ensure that a wife’s children were biologically theirs. By controlling women’s clothing and behavior, men attempted to prevent infidelity and maintain clear paternal lineage.

Of course, many patriarchal societies used religious teachings or moral codes to justify these rules, framing them as “divine” or “natural” laws rather than human-made controls. This made the regulation of women’s clothing seem righteous rather than oppressive.

Lack of clothes were never the problem 🍇

In many cultures where nudity was normal, it wasn’t inherently sexualized or considered provocative.

In some Indigenous societies in Africa, the Amazon, and Oceania, nudity or minimal clothing was simply part of everyday life. The body was seen as natural rather than sexual.

In ancient Greece, men and women bathed and exercised naked, associating nudity with purity, athleticism, or art rather than indecency.

The idea that “it’s because of the way she was dressed” is a learned response, not an innate one.

In cultures where the body is consistently sexualized or covered, people are taught to see certain clothing (or lack thereof) as provocative or inappropriate.

Men in societies with strict modesty norms are conditioned to associate skin with sexuality, making them more likely to blame clothing for their own reactions.

In cultures where nudity or minimal clothing is normalized, the body isn’t automatically seen as sexual. People learn to view it as natural rather than provocative.

Patriarchal societies often shift blame onto women for male behavior to maintain control over women’s bodies. By claiming “she was asking for it,” they justify men’s actions and avoid holding them accountable.

This narrative also reinforces the idea that men are incapable of controlling themselves, which is both dehumanizing to men and harmful to women. It also distracts from the real issue, which is a lack of respect for consent and boundaries.

Blaming women’s clothing is a way to maintain power dynamics, keeping women in a state of fear or shame.

When colonizers imposed European standards of modesty on other cultures, they reframed nudity as sinful and immoral, even in societies where it was once normal.

Over time, these new norms became deeply embedded, and nudity became associated with shame or danger.

The myth that men are incapable of controlling themselves 👬

The idea that “men are incapable of controlling themselves” is a narrative often used to excuse bad behavior and shift blame onto women. It implies that men are driven solely by instincts and lack self-control, which is both false and degrading to men.

It portrays men as mindless and incapable of making moral choices, reinforcing the stereotype that they are ruled by uncontrollable urges.

Men are fully capable of self-control.

Many cultures have normalized respect, consent, and personal boundaries, proving that behavior is shaped by socialization, not biology.

But sexual violence always existed, no?

Yes, unfortunately, sexual violence has existed throughout history in various forms and contexts. However, how societies perceive, justify, or punish it has changed over time.

Sexual violence is not about desire; it’s about exerting power and dominance over someone. In patriarchal societies, controlling women’s bodies was a way to assert male authority.

In societies where nudity was normalized, sexual violence wasn’t necessarily more common and, in some cases, it was even less prevalent than in societies that enforced strict modesty norms.

In societies where nudity or minimal clothing was normal, the human body wasn’t automatically sexualized. People grew up seeing naked bodies as natural rather than provocative, so nudity didn’t carry the same sexual connotations.

In cultures where nudity was normal, sexual violence still existed, but the reasons were often different from those in cultures that strictly regulated clothing.

Sexual violence has always been less about sexual desire and more about power, control, and asserting dominance. This is true regardless of whether people were clothed or not because again : sexual violence has always been more about power, dominance, and control than sexual desire or attraction.

Why does sexual violence — specifically — become a tool of power and control, rather than some other form of violence or domination?

The Body as a Symbol of Identity and Autonomy.

The body, especially the sexual body, is deeply tied to a person’s sense of self, dignity, and autonomy.

Sexuality is Connected to Social and Cultural Power.

Violating someone sexually is a way to attack their very being in an intimate and deeply personal way.

Many societies link sexuality to concepts of honor, purity, and family reputation (especially for women).

Controlling or violating sexuality can be a way to control families, clans, or communities, not just individuals.

The Body is an Accessible and Vulnerable Target.

It’s a weapon that doesn’t require tools or weapons, only physical force and coercion.

Sexual violence became a tool of power because it attacks a person in a uniquely intimate, symbolic, and vulnerable way — shattering identity, community, and social order.

Chest fetishization is largely a social and cultural construct.

Different cultures and historical periods have viewed body parts, including breasts, in very different ways, some emphasizing them as sexual symbols, others focusing on their nurturing role, or not sexualizing them much at all.

Media, fashion, and societal norms influence which body parts get sexualized and how strongly.

The idea that breasts are especially “sexy” or an object of desire is reinforced by cultural narratives, advertising, and socialization rather than being purely biological or universal.

Even biology plays a role—breasts are secondary sexual characteristics—but how much attention or fetishization they get depends on social context.

Just like breasts, things like hair, feet, or even hands can be fetishized—and which body parts get fetishized varies a lot across cultures and individuals.

It all comes down to cultural meanings, personal experiences, and social influences shaping what people find attractive or exciting. For example:

In some cultures, long hair is a strong symbol of beauty and femininity, so it can become fetishized.

Feet fetishes might be less common but still well-known and shaped by individual or cultural associations.

These preferences aren’t fixed or universal, they’re flexible and socially influenced, showing how our ideas of attraction

The chest, especially female breasts, became widely fetishized for several intertwined reasons, mostly cultural and biological but shaped heavily by society:

Breasts are secondary sexual characteristics, they signal fertility and sexual maturity, which naturally attracts attention from a biological perspective.

Over time, many cultures started associating breasts with femininity, beauty, and sexuality. Art, media, and social norms repeatedly highlight breasts as a key aspect of female allure, reinforcing their erotic significance.

What gets fetishized is learned socially through media, cultural stories, peer influences, and even fashion. The emphasis on breasts in advertising and popular culture amplifies their sexual symbolism.

So it’s not just biology or just culture it’s a mix. The chest became a powerful symbol because it blends natural signals with cultural meanings that build up over centuries.

👉Biological basis: Humans are naturally attracted to certain physical traits that signal health and fertility—like breasts—because it’s tied to reproduction and survival instincts.

👉Cultural and social learning: But what specifically gets fetishized, how it’s viewed, and how strong the attraction is, that depends a lot on culture, media, and personal experiences. For example, widespread exposure to pornography can amplify and shape desires in ways that weren’t as common before.

👉Novelty and repetition: When people repeatedly see certain images (like breasts in porn), it can create or intensify attraction or even addiction patterns because of how the brain responds to rewards and stimuli.

Nudity in Japan 🇯🇵

Nudity in Japan has a unique history, shaped by culture, climate, and later, Western influence.

1. Traditional Views on Nudity:

Before Western influence, nudity wasn’t inherently shameful or sexual in Japan. It was seen as natural and practical, especially in contexts like:

👉Public baths (onsen and sento): Men, women, and children bathed together naked without embarrassment. It was a normal part of daily life.

👉Work contexts: Fishermen, pearl divers (ama), and laborers often worked nearly or completely naked, especially in warmer regions.

👉Festivals (matsuri): Some traditional festivals (like Hadaka Matsuri) involved partial or full nudity to symbolize purification or spiritual renewal.

2. Influence of Buddhism and Shinto:

Shintoism regards the body as natural and pure, not inherently shameful.

Buddhism brought more modesty codes, especially for monks and nuns, but nudity remained more relaxed for common people.

3. Western Influence and Modernization:

👉Meiji Era (1868-1912): As Japan opened up to the West, Western norms about modesty began to reshape society. Public nudity became stigmatized, and mixed bathing started to decline.

👉Post-War Period: The American occupation brought further pressure to conform to Western standards, making nudity more taboo, especially for women.

4. Contemporary Japan:

Public baths still exist, but they are now typically gender-segregated.

Nudity is accepted in onsen and sento but considered inappropriate in most other public contexts.

Media often censors nudity, but there is also a strong undercurrent of erotic art and adult entertainment, showing the contrast between public modesty and private indulgence.

So, Japan has moved from a relaxed, pragmatic approach to nudity to a more Westernized, modest stance, but traces of the old norms remain in bath culture and traditional festivals.

🌸 Conclusion :

From the forests of the Amazon to the islands of the Pacific, the way societies approached modesty and nudity reveals more about climate, spirituality, and community norms than a desire for gender equality. While feminism today challenges restrictive dress codes and asserts bodily autonomy, the cultural practices of nudity in ancient and Indigenous societies were not driven by such intentions.

The idea that traditional nudity or relaxed dress codes equate to feminist resistance overlooks the complexities of cultural values and social norms. For many societies, nudity was not a statement of liberation but a natural aspect of daily life, shaped by environment, spirituality, and community norms. While modern movements may reclaim nudity as an act of empowerment, it’s crucial to acknowledge that historical practices often stemmed from entirely different motivations. Understanding this helps us appreciate the diversity of human cultures without projecting contemporary ideals onto the past.

Don't hesitate to share this post ✉️

Vocabulary :

Cultural Relativism

Definition:

The idea that a person's beliefs, values, and practices should be understood based on their own culture, not judged against the standards of another.

Key points:

Suggests there is no universal "right" or "wrong" in culture : what's normal in one society may be taboo in another.

Critique:

While it fosters respect, it can make it hard to criticize harmful practices like female genital mutilation or child marriage.

Moral Relativism

Definition:

The view that moral judgments are not absolute but depend on individual or cultural perspectives.

Types:

👉Subjective moral relativism: Morality depends on individual preferences.

👉Cultural moral relativism: Morality is defined by cultural consensus.

Key points:

There are no objective moral truths that apply to all people at all times.

It contrasts with moral absolutism, which claims some actions are always right or wrong.

Critique:

It can lead to moral paralysis, if all moral views are equally valid, it becomes difficult to oppose injustice.