AMEN!!
Such attire is only a shackle, reducing the woman to an object for all men to desire, creating a new form of slavery and robbing her of her personhood.
On top of that: it's cold in the fall and winter, and sunburn material in the spring and summer!
This is freedom? NOT!!!
2006-11-08 13:55:43
·
answer #1
·
answered by MamaBear 6
·
3⤊
8⤋
The body that you were given is not to be ashamed of. I cannot recall a single person that was born with clothes on, ever. To conceal your body is like slapping the Creator in the face and saying, "I am ashamed of how you made me". Man made clothes to protect him from the elements. The sun, the wind, the rain, the snow. That is their purpose.
Men and women were made different of the other. As if the Creator looked down upon his hands and saw he held a rock in one, and a flower in the other.
The woman is only liberated when she is not held down by the ways of thinking of a man. Therein lies freedom, not in the clothes she wears. Man made not only clothes, man made wars, and even though I, myself do not run around scantily clad, I do not judge another person or race if they do. That is wrong.
2006-11-08 14:33:08
·
answer #2
·
answered by windandwater 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Being liberated does not mean a person dresses like a slut! It means women have the freedom to dress as they want. In the 1960's, when women were seeking liberation, they were rebelling against having to wear dresses, nylon stockings, corsets, garter belts and bras not only in the workplace, but in schools, and the community.. These items were considered to be restrictive, [and trust me, they were, ouch] designed by corporate America [men] to keep women in their place, in the home. They were seeking equal rights with men. They wanted to wear slacks in the workplace. Now they do. It took this community until 1972, to allow girls to wear slacks at school. I know, I wore slacks to school on a sub-zero day in 1971, and was told I had to change clothes.
The 1960's was not the only women's lib movement. victorian women petitioned, and won the right to vote. Hemlines rose, and corsets were phased oot then, too.
Your comment about attracting womanizers by our dress is considered to be a sexist comment here. There have always been rapists, there will always be rapists. It does not matter how a woman dresses, woman will always be the target of some angry man. Rape is a sex crime, and a crime of anger.
And I am sorry for you, you are a part of a culture, dominated by males, who believe that it is always the woman's fault when a rape occurs. Trust me, the veils and the long black clothing do nothing to curb that anger, rape occurs in your country, too. If the wearing of those clothes really stopped men from raping, do you not think we would all wear them? I find it difficult to explain this to a man from a society where it is allowed for a man to have a woman for a wife, and keep another for sex. Your culture is not monogamous. Mine is.
2006-11-08 15:02:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by riversconfluence 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
because of the quantity of your generalizing, i anticipate which you're a biased and hateful individual, in all probability a troll - yet i'm going to humor you anyhow. No. the respond is not any. some skimpily dressed human beings ability no longer something approximately maximum persons of ladies right here. on an analogous time as this is genuine that revealing clothing can help in romantic undertaking and strengthen one's self-worth ordinary, this is impossible to declare that this is the main effective clarification for one's gown (this is in itself inspired via many, many factors). regardless of if, I do have faith this is risk-free to declare that 'exhibiting dermis' as you describe (sexually or otherwise), is possibly common sufficient in our way of existence to be a non-situation; what this suggests is that the custom would not have a lot effect except heavily unusual or obscene. human beings are greater mushy and accepting of their bodies than human beings of many different cultures are. Your belittling theory persons is in all probability no longer deserved, a minimum of no longer for this reason.
2016-10-15 13:31:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's called the freedom of choice ... we get it because we live in America, not because we are religious (or not religious, as the case may be).
Perhaps you misunderstand the meaning of freedom in this context. Wearing skimpy clothes doesn't make us free .... we have the freedom to choose to wear what we want.
BTW, I believe in modesty as well ... I'd never go out in my undies (unless the house is on fire or something lol)
2006-11-08 14:01:21
·
answer #5
·
answered by arewethereyet 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
I don't wear the burqua...yet I don't strip down to nothing either.I werar normal,everyday plain t-shirts and skirts,and jeans when I'm riding,and one piece swimmers when I'm swimming,and shorts and a leotard or t-shirt when I'm doing gymnastics.That is not immodest dress.And I hope you know that modest dress doesn't stop assaults.It didn't help me.Although I do agree with you on one point-I don't think that people should dress immodestly.I just don't think that it is necessary to wear the burqua to dress modestly.
2006-11-08 14:14:35
·
answer #6
·
answered by Serena 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is not skimpy clothes that makes us liberated. It is the ability to choose what we wear or don't wear that makes us liberated. I don't wear skimpy clothes at all, I'm a t-shirt and jeans kinda girl.
2006-11-08 13:55:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by Girl Wonder 5
·
4⤊
0⤋
Thankyou!! Finally, someone has seen the light. What will it take for the rest of the women to realize this. Dressing like a tramp will do nothing for you and it's completely degrading to be ogled like a piece of meat. Why can't women respect their own bodies and minds. Once they do, men will follow suit or else all become gay. Respect is the key word here.
2006-11-08 14:00:43
·
answer #8
·
answered by Becky 5
·
4⤊
1⤋
I'd like to know the same thing. Where I live our winters are harsh and the girls STILL insist on wearing skimpy clothing. Just because I, as a girl, wear "normal" clothing I'm some how a lesbian or numerous other names to them.
2006-11-08 13:54:44
·
answer #9
·
answered by spirenteh 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
when i see most of the answers , and they talk that they have to wear what they want and that is the meaning of liberation , the question that comes to my mind ,"so why not the muslim woman that live in the west to have the same liberation and freedom and wear what she wants too she is one of the civilians overall"?!!!
2006-11-08 15:52:38
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Wearing skimpy clothes doesn't make you liberated. Just like wearing a burka doesn't make you liberated. The ability of women to choose makes them liberated.
2006-11-08 13:54:43
·
answer #11
·
answered by mountnrebl 2
·
5⤊
1⤋