Western women are ho's but boy are we happy.
2007-03-17 19:39:48
·
answer #1
·
answered by knowitall 3
·
2⤊
9⤋
I don't think it is actually "women's rights" anymore. It is called equal rights. Depending on culture,religion and morals some women feel free to do what ever they want were some women chose not to. Just because some women choose to live in a culture and abide by its beliefs, it doesn't mean they have no rights. You know yourself if you were not happy you would try to leave.
Our society has just advanced faster in the knowledge that women don't need men for protection and someone to answer too.
2007-03-18 02:51:22
·
answer #2
·
answered by mistress tiger tat 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
Women's rights have nothing to do with clothing, rather they have to do with education and the fact that women can engage in business, own property, divorce and still be mothers to their children, vote and hold office. Women are still women in the West, but they can and do function as equals in society. Unfortunately, sleazy celebrities are seen as role models, which they aren't. They are the people who act outrageous to get face time in cheap magazines. Some girls and women think they want to be like that, most don't want that.
I think that in Japan women have rights. China is the same. Girls are given equal education to boys there. All cultures are different and the roles of the sexes are part of culture.
Women's rights include: education, medical care,
ownership of property and political voice in their governance. Women are human beings not property of men.
2007-03-18 02:55:14
·
answer #3
·
answered by Susan M 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I'm Muslim and don't expose half my chest for anybody. I make sure I wear modest clothing and hijab when I go outside because I don't want to look like a tramp or invite people to come rape me. Seriously a woman exposing her flesh is not a part of women's rights. That's just sad that some women think they need to dress lewd for strange men to goggle at.
2007-03-18 13:06:55
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Well there are two sides to this story, men have lust problems and a oerson can't always walk up to another women and tell them how to dress either. You can't tell a lustfull man to look away, even though he should and a relgios women can't tell a nonsaved person how to dress in church (if she wants the person to come back to church that is) However, with all this skin showing, I went on a missionstrip to Romania, our women dressed appropriately, but the romanian women in the city, who had been exposed to ur soap operas and MTV CRAP! all exposed their belly and dressed like Ho's, so I wish more women in our culture would cover themselves up, not like a nun or a Muslim, but for heaven sakes, stop dressing like Britney Spears who is messed up anyways and dress like your not an object, there are men with lust problems who will not look away even though they should.
2007-03-18 11:24:15
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The ability to expose skin shouldn't be considered a major victory for the women's movement. It should be referred to as the ability to wear traditionally "female" clothes, which are defined differently depending on the culture. I like showing a little skin here and now, but I also like being able to cover it up with a business suit.
2007-03-18 13:48:58
·
answer #6
·
answered by Rio Madeira 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
American women still have THE CHOICE to either cover it up or expose it, the other ladies you listed DO NOT. I wonder what you actually consider to be "exposing flesh". My definition is someone who exposes their breasts, butt, or private area, I do not consider anything else as "exposing flesh". American women have the right to wear shorts and tank tops on hot days if they so choose, they also have the right to swim in the ocean unencumbered by clothing, because they have the right to wear a bathing suit. Most American women like dressing according to the weather, and most do not have bad intentions when it comes to what they choose to wear.
2007-03-18 03:17:56
·
answer #7
·
answered by Bonzai Betty 6
·
5⤊
1⤋
Women expose only the flesh that gives them the maximum amount of power over men. Women don't go completely nude because it would not achieve maximum power.
2007-03-18 16:21:20
·
answer #8
·
answered by Brian J. 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Putting limits on what women are allowed to do is exactly the opposite of women's rights. The whole point of women's rights is the right for women to decide for themselves what is appropriate...not having men decide that for them. Women are not children. We are capable of making informed decisions.
They say it's to "protect them"? Protect them from what? Men? If that's the case, it's the men who need to limit their own behavior and learn some self control. It has nothing to do with the woman if a man can't control himself.
2007-03-18 03:32:26
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
1⤋
some flesh like legs/stomach/shoulders/some cleavage yes, but there are way too many women out the that show so much its vulgar. and yes i think it is part of a womans rights. men have been able to show flesh since the dawn of time, why shouldnt women be able to too?
2007-03-18 06:07:55
·
answer #10
·
answered by Katt 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
The rights aspect is the fact that american women have the RIGHT of CHOICE. I am american and choose not to show off my flesh, I prove my worth through my mind not my body. Sorry miss britney spears and paris hilton your media brainwashing had no effect on me :)
PS: Most american women are a bad example of this "right" They dont see the implications behind what dressing and acting like a ho really means, and what it can do to little girls starving for a true female role model. I had to look for years to find one- luckily, I finally did. Her name is Ani Difranco.
2007-03-18 04:16:16
·
answer #11
·
answered by gaga_chick 2
·
2⤊
2⤋