"Women must 'cover up'" - must be the Taleban again...

...or perhaps not:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4039461.stm

There's only one kind of fundamentalism, the bad kind .

Michael.

 

I'm not sure I understand. An 'anti-exploitation of women' view is 'talibanesque'?

Paul

 

Saying that women (even on a poster) can't bare their shoulders or show a bit of leg is talibanesque. It's bordering on absurd to suggest that SJP wearing quite a decent dress (by film premiere standards) in an advert for which she's getting paid a bucketload is "exploitation of women".

In any case, the view was not taken from an "anti-exploitation of women" standpoint. If you read the article:

I hardly think the feminists of the world will be cheering that kind of support.

Michael.

 

Fundamentalists, whatever the religion, are all as bad as each other IMO.

 

Does that apply as well to the kind of fundamentalism to the HOBBY?

 

well, not really because hobbies dont negatively affect the lives of many people, unlike the actions of most religious fundamentalists.

 

For Millenia it seems that women have exploited their own sexuality to attract the interest of male counterparts. Why should they be forced to stop now? That seems fairly harsh on women to me.

 

Maybe because it got to do with some MEN have a weakness and have an in-built gene that make them need to dominant and control everything that they don't understand fully.

 

Where is your proof?

 

null test, null test, i demand a null test

 

I cant understand why they left her head uncovered??

 

I agree, there's a current poster for the same product on the Tube which show SJP in a most ridiculous and unflattering position. Probably the worst looking one out of the SITC bunch, for me anyway.

 

Personally, I am a bit old fashioned, I think women ought to dress unprovocatively, it makes women who don't have it feel inadequate and worthless, and even ugly.

 

Of course this entire thread will become illegal in the near future...

Paul

 

Quite. Charlotte (played by Kristin Davis) was my fave

Why does it? If they were insecure perhaps it might but that's not the fault of the person dressing provocatively. If you see a bloke with a perfect 6-pack stomach does that make you feel inadequate and worthless? If you see someone driving a Ferrari does that make you feel poor and worthless?

Michael.

 

Yeah, because thats what they are.

These things happen. Most blokes are probably better looking than me, being a rough looking fat skin head means I'm not a fanny magnet, but it doesnt bother me in the slightest to see some bloke in designers and all that crap. Besides, I've come to the conclusion that most blokes who are better looking than me are obviously gay!

 

If someone feels inadequate, worthless and ugly, it indicates an insecurity on there behalf for which there can be many reasons. Its not a justification for suggesting all women should cover up.

I don't look as good as I did 15 years ago, but good luck to the kids in their prime. Make the most of it.

 

:respect: :ffrc:

 

To force women to dress down and cover up would deprive them of the one advantage they have in the battle of the sexes. It would be oppressive to the very people the loony PC brigade seek to protect.

 

The alternative point of view would be why should women be allowed to use sex as a means to manipulate men? when for men to do so would be illegal?

There is only one kind of equality and that is where exactly the same rules apply to all parties, with no clauses or exceptions. You either believe in true equality or you don't.

GTM