Should women be covered up more?

[Philothei]

I've always found modestly-dressed women TRULY attractive, while scantily-clad women are UNattractive. A woman in a nicely-tailored conservative suit (with a SKIRT!) is the height of sophistication. A nice, long-sleeved, past-the-knee dress is nice also. For our wedding, my wife had the doggonedest time finding a proper gown. Everything was all bare-armed, bare-shoulders, bare-neck and throat. TOTALLY nonromantic. FINALLY she found a classically ultra-traditional orthodox bridal gown with long sleeves, high collar riding all the way up her neck and throat, and tons of beading and lace. Couldn't have been more beautiful!

Again though I think that proves that what you consider modesty is "subjective" and in this post of yours it is proven ...you find it 'attractive' so still even if a woman is covered that by itself can be a 'temptation' to men. If you find women dressed from their head to toe attractive too that proves that still for example a burqua would not "keep them safe" from men not to see these women with lust. *I am not saying you personally do...I am speaking of men in general...* And I just using your example. I am sure that most men are civil among women who they find attractive and all. And also to be attracted to your wife is certainly the most natural thing.

So IMHO what is the point? I am not saying that modest is bad...it is just no measure for 'protecting' women from men that's all.... Because as people culturally and personally we have different standards likes and dislikes.

 

[awakened777]

Modest is hottest...hahaha

 

[Montalban]

please don't get caught into the feminist trap of thinking that simply because a woman is to be submissive and is under authority that she is inferior.

Perhaps you don't understand the issue so let's try again.

Islam says women are inferior to men. It says men have been made to excel women, and therefore to be their maintainers.

At the same time it commands women to be covered in order to protect men from their own lusts.

Into this you offer a relativist argument that Christianity is just the same.

YOU claim that the Bible says the same thing about women.

YOU claimed that the Catholic teaching on women being covered when having the Eucharist is relevant to that.

I've asked you to show how they're connected - that it's Catholic teahcing that women are inherently inferior

INSTEAD of showing this you're now going on about me being in a trap of feminist thinking on the issue.

In other words you've not been able to back up your statement that Chrisitanity also views women as inferior and the two replies subsequent to that you've also not been able to show this.

And likewise nor is a woman inferior because a veil is a symbol of her submission and obedience to God's authority and her husband's. Human dignity and worth is not related to authority in any way.

Then how is that like Islam?

 

[Montalban]

For me... God, definitely, but I don't see what it has to do with submission to a husband... but I guess it's different for us cuz we usually start wearing a headscarf quite some time before marriage (average age around 12) and it's completely unrelated to marriage.

Side info.. the Qur'an also allows for women who are older to be more lax in their covering, but says it is still purer for them to cover as much as they did when they were younger.

The Koran says that men have been made to be superior to women.

 

[Meepy]

Perhaps you don't understand the issue so let's try again.

Islam says women are inferior to men. It says men have been made to excel women, and therefore to be their maintainers.

At the same time it commands women to be covered in order to protect men from their own lusts.

Into this you offer a relativist argument that Christianity is just the same.

YOU claim that the Bible says the same thing about women.

YOU claimed that the Catholic teaching on women being covered when having the Eucharist is relevant to that.

I've asked you to show how they're connected - that it's Catholic teahcing that women are inherently inferior

INSTEAD of showing this you're now going on about me being in a trap of feminist thinking on the issue.

In other words you've not been able to back up your statement that Chrisitanity also views women as inferior and the two replies subsequent to that you've also not been able to show this.




Then how is that like Islam?

I never said that Christianity thinks women are inferior, nor Catholic teaching. Nor do I believe that Islam thinks so either. Men excelling women in certain things means that men are simply stronger in some things over women, like physical strength, and thus are more prone to leadership issues.. You got confused when I said that the hijab came from christian/Judaic tradition. And it did come from it. 1 Peter 3:7 calls woman the "weaker vessel". So is St. Peter a misogynist too?

And you are getting caught into the trap of feminist thinking. Whenever I brought up things like authority, submission, and the veil you immediately think "inferior".

 

[.Iona.]

I think dressing fairly modestly is good. By that I mean not going out in the shortest skirt, and just a bikini top etc. I have never been one to want to flash my body around - you can look nice and attractive whilst covering up a little more!

I feel there are two extreme ends of the scale - the one end where women go out dressed in almost nothing, and at the other end women (such as in Islam) who cover everything.

I have nothing against skirts, or even low cut tops - my problem with the clothes some girls wear is when it becomes distasteful, and clothes begin to indicate 'sex' and have sexual connotations. I don't like that.

There was a story once, about how women who go out dressed in revealing clothes are 'asking to be raped'. I don't know what views people have on that.

 

[vajradhara]

Namaste meepy,

i realize that this isn't addressed to me however i hope you don't mind if i jump in and address a few points you've raised.

I never said that Christianity thinks women are inferior, nor Catholic teaching. Nor do I believe that Islam thinks so either.

leaving aside the christian question (though you can certainly find passages to support both sides of this issue) and focusing on Islam, i would suggest a more thorough reading of your Al Qur'an to form a more complete view of Islams' view of women. you will discover, to your dismay, that women are viewed in a manner like chattle.. camels or other valuable objects to be bartered and traded.

Men excelling women in certain things means that men are simply stronger in some things over women, like physical strength, and thus are more prone to leadership issues..

this is a gross and stupid over generalization. i'm pretty sure that i'm stronger than most of the men that i meet and i'm certain that i can find stronger women than all but the most strong of men.

men are not stronger or, as i think you mean the term, more apt in any particular area. some *beings* are more apt and able than others in any manner of ways and this has nothing... nothing to do with gender.

women and men can and do make equally effective leaders. leaders aren't born, they are made and some beings have more talent for it than others.

You got confused when I said that the hijab came from christian/Judaic tradition. And it did come from it. 1 Peter 3:7 calls woman the "weaker vessel". So is St. Peter a misogynist too?

montalban has demonstrated his ability to speak for himself.. i would suggest, however, that his responses have demonstrated his understanding of the subject under discussion whereas yours are a bit wandering at times. Christian tradition and Jewish tradition are *not* the same Jew=/=Christian. nevertheless, the wearing of headgear by desert tribes is something which existed long before the foundations of the Abrahamic faiths. yes, weaker vessel is demonstrable sexist.. so what? him being a product of his times doesn't invalidate his writing or his teaching, does it?

And you are getting caught into the trap of feminist thinking. Whenever I brought up things like authority, submission, and the veil you immediately think "inferior".

that is the subtext of the conversation we're all having here, after all. if you were on the receiving end of "authority" "submission" and "veiling" then you, too, would feel as if you are being singled out. if you were in a culture where women were treated as chattle this singling out would inescapeably induce you to conclude you were inferior... perhaps not even regarded as a fully sentient being.

of course this sort of behavior isn't particular to bronze age war god worshippers, black rock circumabulators or any other culture or creed as it turns out.

think i'm wrong? go to a college theater department and have them make you over as a female and then go about some of your normal tasks and you'd discover, for yourself, what it's like to be a second class citizen even in a post modern western country..... but then i'm sort of going off target a bit here

metta,

~v

 

[razeontherock]

Side info.. the Qur'an also allows for women who are older to be more lax in their covering, but says it is still purer for them to cover as much as they did when they were younger.

Ok this is interesting; any guidelines for this age, "older?"

 

[vajradhara]

Namaste rasa,

thank you for the post.

I think dressing fairly modestly is good. By that I mean not going out in the shortest skirt, and just a bikini top etc. I have never been one to want to flash my body around - you can look nice and attractive whilst covering up a little more!

hmm.. interesting choice of words though, don't you think? you think being more modestly dressed = good whereas less modestly dressed = bad. i note you are a Catholic and if i misascribe any of your beliefs please pardon and correct me as a Catholic there are more nuanced positions to take with regards to the good/bad dichotomy but we'll stick to those for now unless you strongly object.

good has a positive moral connotation so more modestly dressed people are more moral people whereas the converse is equally true.

do you agree that a person could be very moral yet dress in a way which would seem otherwise? do you agree that a person could be very immoral yet dress in a way which would seem otherwise?

There was a story once, about how women who go out dressed in revealing clothes are 'asking to be raped'. I don't know what views people have on that.

that's disgusting.

does a bank asked to be robbed because it has alot of money in it? if a man goes to a beach and leaves his stuff on the sand when he goes swimming is he asking for his stuff to be stolen?

this is simply one being trying to shift the consequences of their own actions onto some other being. each one of us is responsible for our own actions, thoughts and words. no being asks to be raped. to suggest such a thing is beyond the pale. i'm horrified that such thoughts are still to be found yet the most terrible part of the whole thing is that there are people on this very forum that will offer their assent to your proposition.

it's typically egocentric for men to think that women are dressing to impress or attract them, i assure you i have no such thoughts in mind when i put my clothes on... in fact, quite often it's the case that i change my mind about what i'd wear based on the subtle fear that some man will think i'm trying to attract him. i wear what i wear because i like it.. no more, no less really. i also tend to wear things that keep me warm as i live in the mountains and it's cold here in the winter!!!! and in that case, i often don't care what it looks like

metta,

~v

 

[razeontherock]

There was a story once, about how women who go out dressed in revealing clothes are 'asking to be raped'. I don't know what views people have on that.

I think this question is actually on topic for this thread. I find it disturbing that whatever Muslim statement about cat and meat, and it not being the cat's fault, pops into my head when I just read your words here :o Just shows how powerful words can be!

Anyway, I would hope we could all agree that a woman dressing in a revealing way is NOT asking to be raped, nor deserving of any such thing, and we would all consider the most tactful way of addressing whatever underlying needs she may actually have. And further I point out this is best spoken to by other women. And I've seen that done the wrong way, that just makes an already troubled person more rebellious.

As a man, I'm amazed at how much protection I can wield with merely a look, focused at a "man" (and I use the term loosely) who appears to be up to no good in such a situation. I think that's mostly effective against those with a guilty conscience though ...

 

[Philothei]

I never said that Christianity thinks women are inferior, nor Catholic teaching. Nor do I believe that Islam thinks so either. Men excelling women in certain things means that men are simply stronger in some things over women, like physical strength, and thus are more prone to leadership issues.. You got confused when I said that the hijab came from christian/Judaic tradition. And it did come from it. 1 Peter 3:7 calls woman the "weaker vessel". So is St. Peter a misogynist too?

And you are getting caught into the trap of feminist thinking. Whenever I brought up things like authority, submission, and the veil you immediately think "inferior".

I will come to second that it has nothing to do with femminism and lotsa to do with the facts. Koran indeed has haddiths and (in he Koran itself) that women are inferior to men. Nothing added nothing taken away. it is just a fact Montalban is not saying this is wrong or right...he is not saying that this is anti-feministic. See that? he is just making an observation on the tenets of the Islam. Christianity on the other hand does not say that in its tenets. Plain and simple. Does St. Paul say that because women are inferior to men should not talk in Church? He does not. He is not saying we are ... Plain and simple he says that men are the leaders when it come to church matters. According to historical realities men were more knowledgable. Prove that Christianity does not say we are inferior is that today most of Sunday school teachers in MOST churches are indeed women.

You still try to paint with a wide brush to call this "feminism" while it is not. it is facts put together not motions of today's standards and societies'
norms....

BTW the Jewish women were covered. The whole middle eastern world were covered also the Ancient Greek women were and the Romans. It is NOT a Christian "tradition" we adapted it from the ancient world.

 

[.Iona.]

hmm.. interesting choice of words though, don't you think? you think being more modestly dressed = good whereas less modestly dressed = bad.

I never mentioned 'bad' in anything I said. You put that word there.

I prefer to dress fairly modestly, when appropriate, but never said anything about it being bad to dress in any other way - I didn't even mention it. You assumed I would mean bad.

i note you are a Catholic and if i misascribe any of your beliefs please pardon and correct me as a Catholic there are more nuanced positions to take with regards to the good/bad dichotomy but we'll stick to those for now unless you strongly object.

I am not, nor ever have been, Catholic.

do you agree that a person could be very moral yet dress in a way which would seem otherwise? do you agree that a person could be very immoral yet dress in a way which would seem otherwise?

I didn't say they couldn't be. I merely gave my opinion on how I like to dress. I never went into detail. If someone is on the beach - I would not say it was inappropriate for them to wear a bikini. If they are in the mall for restaurant, I would find it inappropriate.

 

[vajradhara]

namaste rasa,

thank you for the post.

I never mentioned 'bad' in anything I said. You put that word there.

indeed, that is so. of course the term "good" has absolutely no meaning without it's contra position so i felt that you simply deemed that it was so obvious as to not need saying. alas, i'm often quite pedantic in that way.

I prefer to dress fairly modestly, when appropriate, but never said anything about it being bad to dress in any other way - I didn't even mention it. You assumed I would mean bad.

well.. this is true. you will forgive me, of course, when such a thought came into my mindstream as without it your original statement is meaningless. to say something is beautiful is simultaneously to say that something else is ugly it is, unfortunately, the way of the English language and of most forms of language that i know of. to say something is good it simultaneously say that something else is not good.

I am not, nor ever have been, Catholic.

my apologies! i must have transposed someone elses faith icon in my consciousness when i was talking with you.

I didn't say they couldn't be. I merely gave my opinion on how I like to dress. I never went into detail. If someone is on the beach - I would not say it was inappropriate for them to wear a bikini. If they are in the mall for restaurant, I would find it inappropriate.

i realize that you didn't make those statements... i was asking those questions to see if you agreed with my position that clothing has nothing to do with a beings modesty, and i'm glad that you do agree.

i am curious to know, however, what would be inappropriate about wearing a bikini top, for instance, to a mall? please understand, i won't be doing that, but to my mind i don't see the inappropriateness of it. i can certainly see how some people may have inappropriate reactions but then i can see that in a great many situations and find that to be a poor reason not to do something.

perhaps you mean appropriate in a different sense.. like wearing boots in the snow and a scarf when its cold rather than in a moral sense of "correct actions"?

metta,

~v

 

[.Iona.]

to say something is beautiful is simultaneously to say that something else is ugly it is.

Perhaps it is, if you only see things in black and white.

When I go to an art gallery I might see one painting and say 'that's beautiful', but that doesn't mean that I found the others ugly.

i am curious to know, however, what would be inappropriate about wearing a bikini top, for instance, to a mall?

I would not wear, what I consider to be beach clothes, to the mall. I don't see the need for it, and do not feel comfortable walking around like that.

i can certainly see how some people may have inappropriate reactions but then i can see that in a great many situations and find that to be a poor reason not to do something.

I agree, I do what I feel is right for me. I don't base my behaviour on what others think of it, and hope that others don't either. But, everyone has different opinions in things.

 

[vajradhara]

Namaste rasa,

thank you for the post.

Perhaps it is, if you only see things in black and white.

i'm a Buddhist and i assure you such notions are completely foreign to me. philosophical orientations notwithstanding the language is rooted in a subject/object dichotomy and it's simply the way it is.

When I go to an art gallery I might see one painting and say 'that's beautiful', but that doesn't mean that I found the others ugly.

in a very significant way, though, it does in a non specific manner. this has to do with priority statements and all sorts of other things which are odious to read on forums such as this. it doesn't mean that you singled out some other particular work of art but it does indicate what you consider to be beautiful and all that indicates is a partiality. i am quite partial to Da Da and other forms of post modern expression, especially large scale installation art projects, for instance and find that sort of work to be beautiful. if you know what that is you'd have a very good idea of the sort of work which i don't find beautiful... even though i may appreciate it quite a bit.

I would not wear, what I consider to be beach clothes, to the mall. I don't see the need for it, and do not feel comfortable walking around like that.
...
I agree, I do what I feel is right for me. I don't base my behaviour on what others think of it, and hope that others don't either. But, everyone has different opinions in things.

well.. indeed, we all have different views which makes dialog so interesting, imo i'm not suggesting there is a need for it... quite likely there is none... i am suggesting that a person should be allowed to wear what they would prefer (some places have laws to restrict the amount and manner of dress). i find myself wearing what i deem to be appropriate clothing as much as possible for that's what i choose to wear.. and by appropriate i mean dressed according to the occasion... cold weather gear for the winter and mountains and beach wear for the beach... and casual wear for just about everywhere else!

i would like, if you're willing, to talk a bit more about " would not wear, what I consider to be beach clothes, to the mall. I don't see the need for it, and do not feel comfortable walking around like that."

are you not comfortable because of how those clothes feel or because of how others will react and interact with you? in my own case, i find that.. to my own chagrin..i often dress in a manner which will not be provocative for the audience where i will be. i don't wear my club clothes to the grocery store, for instance, because of how i will get treated. i'm fairly disturbed to understand this about myself and i'm really working hard to change it but it is, unfortunately, the case.

metta,

~v

 

[.Iona.]

in a very significant way, though, it does in a non specific manner.

I cannot agree.

are you not comfortable because of how those clothes feel or because of how others will react and interact with you?

I don't mind how others react to me, I don't live my life based on others peoples opinions of me. I dress and behave according to my likes and dislikes.

 

[vajradhara]

namaste Rasa,

thank you for the conversation

metta,

~v

 

[Philothei]

The fact that we all agree to some type of 'discent" dress up code as society does not compare IMHO to a "law" that is given to another through religion... Although we as Christian women as encouraged to cover in Church still it is not an abslolute must for us. It is not mandatory we do so. Like Rasa said above we pretty much decide individually what is right or not. Most Christian women do anyways do nowadays.

 

[Supreme]

I will come to second that it has nothing to do with femminism and lotsa to do with the facts. Koran indeed has haddiths and (in he Koran itself) that women are inferior to men. Nothing added nothing taken away. it is just a fact Montalban is not saying this is wrong or right...he is not saying that this is anti-feministic. See that? he is just making an observation on the tenets of the Islam. Christianity on the other hand does not say that in its tenets. Plain and simple. Does St. Paul say that because women are inferior to men should not talk in Church? He does not. He is not saying we are ... Plain and simple he says that men are the leaders when it come to church matters. According to historical realities men were more knowledgable. Prove that Christianity does not say we are inferior is that today most of Sunday school teachers in MOST churches are indeed women.

You still try to paint with a wide brush to call this "feminism" while it is not. it is facts put together not motions of today's standards and societies'
norms....

BTW the Jewish women were covered. The whole middle eastern world were covered also the Ancient Greek women were and the Romans. It is NOT a Christian "tradition" we adapted it from the ancient world.

That isn't to say that just because a few hadith prescribes a certain medieval dress code for women that Islam can't outgrow its cultural baggage. The vast majority of Muslim women, in this country that is, dress in pretty Westernized clothing. That isn't to say it's 'immodest', however- the legs/hair/arms aren't on show. But the Muslim fashion world is a growing industry. Muslim women are beginning to realize they don't have to don a black bin bag to dress 'modestly'.

 

[Philothei]

That isn't to say that just because a few hadith prescribes a certain medieval dress code for women that Islam can't outgrow its cultural baggage. The vast majority of Muslim women, in this country that is, dress in pretty Westernized clothing. That isn't to say it's 'immodest', however- the legs/hair/arms aren't on show. But the Muslim fashion world is a growing industry. Muslim women are beginning to realize they don't have to don a black bin bag to dress 'modestly'.

From personal experince I will say this much though. My in-laws were brought up in a mulsim country namely Turkey and in the most westernized place like Constantinople in the early 70s. The mulsim population back then was predominately much "relaxed" with covering and all the dress code. But when they visit lately like 5-6 years ago they found the city more 'traditional" people making more effort to cover up and the majority of the female population was covered... I see more 'fashions" that are out there about different styles of covering than I see about dressing the 'western way" That is of course my personal experiece. I am not sure if there is any data to point that but I take my in-laws observation since they indeed lived in a Muslim country since their early adulthood.