Recently I was hanging out with a group of friends discussing the finer points of the Fifth Amendment and whether failing to contest an assertion should be considered evidence of acquiescence in civil cases when suddenly I noticed a female friend of mine glance down at her breasts and then tug her tank top up another inch or so.

I’d seen this exact scenario play out innumerable times before, of course – like most heterosexual males I consider myself somewhat of a cleavage connoisseur – however, I’d never before given any thought to the implications behind such an casual phenomena.

Luckily, an entire lifetime of practice allowed me to continue surreptitiously watching the subject and take careful mental notes as we continued to discuss the words of Justice Brandeis. Over the next hour she needed to adjust her tank top four more times.  She was particularly well-endowed in the upper torso, and it was almost as if her breasts had a mind of their own and were desperately trying to claw their way out from beneath her shirt to freedom.

Most interesting was the contradiction at play. It was clear that from time to time the shirt slipped low enough that an immediate correction was called for. It was also clear that regardless of what corrections took place, some cleavage was always visible. And most obviously, the subject had deliberately chosen to wear a shirt that showed some cleavage – but occasionally too much. Why?

Obviously different woman have different ideas of what is acceptable. I’ve seen shirts so low-cut they could double as a belt and I’ve seen women in shirts resembling burquas. Clearly, each woman is forced to consider the ethical, sexual, spiritual, and ecumenical implications before arriving at what I like to call an Acceptable Level of Cleavage. Once each woman has searched her soul and, in some cases, consulted her church elders, she then purchases clothing that fits that ALOC. This is done by everyone, even women who are unaware of what they are doing but are still subconsciously aware of their personal Acceptable Level of Cleavage.

And here was the contradiction. The subject was willingly choosing to wear a shirt that, from time to time would fall to an unacceptable level. Why? What is the purpose of wearing a shirt that requires constant adjustment to maintain one’s high moral standards? Why not simply purchase clothing at a morally acceptable level? Did the subject unconsciously enjoy the attention her plunging neckline brought but was unable to consciously accept this due to her high moral standards and/or dogmatic guilt, so she rationalized her misgivings by adjusting the shirt whenever she noticed it had fallen too low? For that matter, how, precisely, did she arrive at her own Acceptable Level of cleavage? Why was just a little bit acceptable but a little bit more…not?

After further research, I discovered that it can be difficult to buy shirts that do not require constant adjustment, especially when one is divinely blessed in the front upper torso. This, I feel, explains some of the phenomena, but not all of it. As previously stated, one so blessed could purchase clothing that does not show any cleavage if they so desired, and thus would never have to encounter the problem at all.

But at any rate, it is clear to me that further research is called for – preferably a peer-reviewed double-blind study into the minutiae that goes into acceptable levels of cleavage. Where they will find scientists willing to investigate such a tedious and thankless topic, I’m sure I don’t know.