Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

« KOMO's Follow-Up Interview with Jod… | Hey Journalism, Where's Your Outrag… »

Friday, June 22, 2012

City There Was a Time When Seattle Wouldn't Even Let You Swim In a Bikini

Posted by Eli Sanders on Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 6:00 AM

The Seattle Parks Department, pondering womens swim wear since (at least) 1934.

Seattle Municipal Archives
The Seattle Parks Department, pondering women's swim wear since (at least) 1934.

As Cienna reported yesterday, the Seattle Parks Department is convening a work group to ponder the issue of women with mastectomies wanting to swim topless in public pools. When this group does get together, it may want to study up on a similar demand for relaxed standards that flummoxed the department 78 years ago.

At the time, women wanted to wear what was known as "a bra suit." Today, we'd call it a bikini. And in 1934, according to a page from the Seattle Post-Intelligencer that's stored in the Seattle Municipal Archives, the Seattle Parks Board (after the close studying depicted above) ruled that "a strip of bare anatomy between trunks and tops of a bathing suit, even a nice black satin lastex one, isn't quite decent."

However, the board did allow women to begin wearing white bathing suits ("provided they are wool"), and "to permit men to wear trunks, or shorts, without tops."

"Ah, ha!" said Samuel Martin, president of the Seattle Parks Board, according to the May 10, 1934 edition of the P-I. "Now we're modern at last!"

FacebookShare

Comments (11) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

"People seemed to be content.
Fifty dollars paid the rent.
Freaks were in a circus tent.
Those were the days!"

Posted by Stranger'sWorstNightmare on June 22, 2012 at 6:10 AM

Christ, Eli, if you're going to post a NSFW image like that, put it behind a cut or something. God damn

Posted by Zebes

on June 22, 2012 at 7:00 AM

A wool bathing suit? Christ that sounds uncomfortable.

Posted by JenV on June 22, 2012 at 7:59 AM

The man in that shot is getting an eyeful of tit.

Posted by suddenlyorcas on June 22, 2012 at 9:01 AM

@4, so's the gal standing in front of the hottie standing on the chair, if she'd just turn her head a little.

Posted by Fnarf

on June 22, 2012 at 9:31 AM

@1 Be careful not to spoil your reputation, as that's an excellent insight.

Posted by David from Chicago on June 22, 2012 at 9:49 AM

Goddamn we are a stupid country!

I wish we were more like Germany, where you can drink real beer while laying naked in a public park.

Posted by passionate_jus on June 22, 2012 at 10:06 AM

not 'bikini' in the sense you now know it, but shaped more like what we called a 'two piece' in the '60s,

no belly button showing, fabric up to waist and boy shorts bottom.

bra top would have been more substantial, as well.

Posted by judybrowni on June 22, 2012 at 10:08 AM

@5: She's trying really hard not to go for a motorboat. You can see it in her smirk.

Posted by suddenlyorcas on June 22, 2012 at 10:35 AM

What I keep wondering is, how do they deal with MEN who've had mastectomies? If a transman presents himself in swim trunks only, post-mastectomy but mid-transition, how are they determining if he can swim that way? Checking his testosterone levels? Deciding whether he has adequate facial hair? Peeking in his trunks?

This is such a bullshit policy from so many angles...

Posted by marymc on June 22, 2012 at 10:46 AM

You bet the Attention Whore will be the only one doing this.

Posted by Is her 15 minutes up yet? on June 22, 2012 at 1:56 PM