Saturday, October 31, 2009

Women's Dress Codes

It looks that Cons are too much obsessed with this burqa thing these days. They are not missing any opportunity to demonize a culture which does not fit their values. Keep in mind Cons are known to be secretive in every facet of their lives and camouflage every aspect of their lives. Then you have people like Sanford of South Carolina and Ensign of Nevada who promote moral and family values, yet when it comes to their personal lives...

We of course have those kinds aplenty in Canada – holier than though types.

Now let us look at the Muslim burqa thing. In the picture above we see mini, mini skirt and skimpy dress which our fashion shows promote. Quite frankly that cheapens women as sex objects and also motivates men with lust; some carry out that lust with disastrous results including rape and other crimes. Nuns are close to burqa, that is a religious thing and Cons do not object to that. Then you have Muslim dress which, with the exception of fundamentalists like in Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia where they go overboard, encourage covering the body and use headgear in the interests of modesty. Now what is wrong with that? If the women are coerced to wear that dress then it is wrong but if that is their belief then leave them alone – a belief like nuns in Catholicism which encourages covering the body and also headgear.

On the other extreme look at Hooters. Aren't these women obligated to wear very revealing dresses? If they don't they lose their jobs. Is that not coercion? Is that not demeaning and exploiting of women? Should the Cons not concentrate on that? It looks hypocrisy is the religion of Cons.

Recommend this post

41 comments:

  1. Liberals are constantly boasting about how low the Conservative poll in Quebec. Quebec is a Liberal province they claim. Quebec is leading the charge against burkas, face coverings and any other ourward show of religion.
    Try to be balanced in your comments; Liberals are against the things you claim to be Conservative aversions.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Tom, you're primarily saying Quebec=Liberals. I am not so sure about that.

    I wrote this post after Conservative blogger after Conservative blogger were critical and sarcastic about veil and how bad it is. One equated it with a scary Halloween mask.

    It is conservative elements in Quebec who are involved in this kind of smear campaign.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well the RCMP stopped wearing their hats because some immigrant Indian had to have his religious head wear and Canadians are so stupid we let them do that.
    Nuns are select group of Catholic worshipers not the general Catholic, they wear that outfit or used to, as part of their particular sect. The Burqua is ordered by muslims to be worn by all woman.
    In a muslim country do you want in this country leave if you don't like it. You came here freely you can leave freely through the same door you entered.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hooey, we live in a global village and multicultural world. If you want to live in your own little hole then that is your problem.

    We are all immigrants with the exception of natives. May be you should leave for some original hole you or your forefathers came from because you sure don't belong in the modern and enlightened world.

    As far as coercion is concerned it is wrong all around including Hooters.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Quite frankly that cheapens women as sex objects and also motivates men with lust; some carry out that lust with disastrous results including rape and other crimes."

    There are rapists in every country including Islamic countries where the woman wear the burqa. It has nothing to do with the women and everything to do with the sick twisted man.

    "On the other extreme look at Hooters. Aren't these women obligated to wear very revealing dresses? If they don't they lose their jobs. Is that not coercion?"

    Absolutely not. these woman excepted the job with those conditions if they do not agree they can go find another job.

    I agree that on an every day basis woman who choose to wear the burqa should be left alone to make thier own choice but when they want to take part in what our country has to offer like, soccer, swimming,(both of these issues were raised in Quebec) voting, getting a driver's licence, joing our military or RCMP etc. etc. they, and all immigrants, need to leave any conflicting parts of thier culture at the door or do not join. We have got to the point where we do not have any of our Canadian culture that we will not throw away for the sake of multiculturism.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Austin, no question about it that sick twisted minds exist in every society. However, in 1990's a UN research showed that highest incidence of such cases was in US and partially it was blamed on TV which constantly displays sexual images.

    Now war torn areas like Afghanistan may be an exception to that and so are some African nations where there is an ongoing war such as Darfur, Sudan.

    Hooter discussion is ongoing. The women who object were fired in the past. It is a blatant display of women bodies with sexual overtones such as excessive display of breasts and legs to attract customers.
    look at this picture. Multiculturism is not a Canadian experience alone. It is a universal phenomenon. I don't see anything wrong with it as long as a custom is not injurious to individuals or society. Some objections to multiculturism are plain intolerance and nothing more.

    As a matter of fact some eastern cultures are more westernized than vice versa. We try to impose our cultural values on other societies by force (through war) and opposite is not true.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Hooey, we live in a global village and multicultural world"

    oh yeah I forgot Hillary Clinton said so, so it must be true.

    Your "Global Village" is actually being called a "New World Order" now.

    Hillary's man Obuma will be your leader and I will stay in my "little hole" thank you. Just till it's time for me to come out though.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Austin, you consider to read this.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Blanks, you are better off staying in the hole ;)

    Global village is not a Hillary thing. Sociologists and cultural anthropologists have been talking about for decades now.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I started to read your link but I do not take opinions of sexist people living in a delusional world. Sexist(I do not call them feminist because thats just a nice way of putting what they really are) are no better than racist, they only care about thier own kind.

    If anyone does not like that buisness don't support it. Just because some people believe it exploits women does not mean the whole of society should except thier beliefs, try asking the women who take home nice pay checks or the ones who are comfortable with thiers bodies and like the attention. Part of living in a democracy is having to put up with things you may not agree with or like.

    To me you are kind of arguing both sides here. On the one hand you want us to regress back to when woman could be open with thier sexuality and on the other you want us to be enlightened to all things multicultural.

    There is no way that there is more rapes per capita in America than in Islamic nations, women just do not report it because they are usually blamed. With laws like that, I guarantee men are raping women like no ones buisness.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Austin, you amaze me. You're saying paycheque justifies abuse. I trust you're a woman. That is the strangest argument I heard. Some bosses abuse their female employees and women remain silent because they need the paycheque. Does that make it right?

    I mentioned a study while you depend on your guess. That is your privilege.

    "On the one hand you want us to regress back to when woman could be open with their sexuality”.." Did I say that? I said no such thing. “..open with their sexuality” I even don’t know what that means.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I meant ..when women could not be open...

    ReplyDelete
  13. "You're saying paycheque justifies abuse"

    I said no such thing. In those rare cases no it is not right. You are trying to suggest that all women feel objectified, that is not the case. Bottom line, who the hell are you or anyone else to take away someones legal enjoyment because you do not like it. Do not support the buisness if you don't like it but stop trying to label all of these establishments as abusive to women.

    ReplyDelete
  14. No I am not a woman.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Sorry Austin I know is a female. I suppose it is a male name too.

    Just get the internet and google the complaints by women against Hooters. You will be surprised.

    ReplyDelete
  16. No offence taken, Austin is actualy my last name.

    After googleing, yes there are some disgusting things Hooters has been accused of. I did not find any convictions though. No doubt there are some bad owners in that company and a place like that probably attracts a higher percentage of bad owners. But there are a lot of good owners and there are a lot of women who enjoy working in that atmosphere, same goes for strip clubs.

    My point here is if some women take offence to another woman showing some skin they my want to look at themselves for why.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I always laugh when men weigh in on the reasons that women may be offended when it comes to the situation of women.

    Austin are you an American or were you educated in the US? I ask because of your comment "We have got to the point where we do not have any of our Canadian culture that we will not throw away for the sake of multiculturism."Yet you also say "...try asking the women who take home nice pay checks..."

    Canadians don't spell it "checks"...

    That aside, you should know that it's a myth perpetrated by men (and some women) that women can just go get another job if they don't like it - as you write "...if they do not agree they can go find another job."

    It's not always as easy as that - by reducing it to the simplicity of choice you're contributing to the exploitation of women that blames them for being in the position they're in. One that requires them to take a job that pays enough to survive and/or feed their family - even though it's degrading. To say they can just go find another job is a sexist statement. When men are consistently taking the equal responsiblity for raising children (that's consistently relegated to women in our society), or discriminated against because companies are afraid of putting time and money into training fearing they're going to pregnant and require leave, then maybe society can take another look at "choice." Until then, I suggest you take a few classes in sociology and women's studies - your posts undeniably reveal your lack of ability to think critically. A good place to start would be to investigate the povertization of women... just google it.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Sk, well said. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Thanks LeDaro. I'm not sure Austin will actually see it but I felt it needed to be said regardless.

    I'm a fan of your blog and have been a subscriber for quite awhile now. Keep up the good work!

    ReplyDelete
  20. sk, I am Canadian, I have, like many people, the odd brain fart like with "checks".

    When a woman or a man for that matter accepts a job that they think is "degrading" they have no right what soever to complain. THEY CHOSE IT. It is thier fault completely, they have no one else to blame. If they did not like it they should have kept on looking, yes life will get hard without a job but at least they did not sell thier morals.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Sk, thank you for your kind words.

    Austin, are you doing this on purpose to be so ridiculous. It sounds you’re not serious. Using your logic if people in Darfur are unhappy they should leave Darfur for California or New York. It is their fault that they are in Darfur. If women in Afghanistan are mistreated they should leave Afghanistan and go to US or come to Canada where they will have more freedom. It is all their fault that they live in war-torn counteries. If life was only that simple. People have to survive and look after their children and sometimes have no choice but to take a degrading job in order to feed themselves and their children. The alternative is to live on streets. Is that what you’re suggesting? If job supply was greater than job seekers then your logic might work, which is not the case, otherwise you cannot be serious.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Your being rediculous. Do people choose to live in the country they are born in? No. That is a rediculous thing to compare it to. It is also rediculous to remove any responsibility from someones own choices. If a woman does not want to put on skimpy clothes and get hit on or flirted with from the male(and sometimes female) customers do not apply at Hooters. If a woman has the body to work at Hooters then believe me when I say she could get a job at just about any restaurant or sports bar because sex appeal sells and that is something that works to a womans favour, they get bigger tips. Do you here men complaining that other men tip woman more then them?

    And don't give me this live on the streets crap, this is Canada we have a great track record of taking care of single mothers who are unemployed.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Austin, I am sorry to say but you're quite a bit crazy and out of touch with real life. I did not say people have choice where to be born but according to you once they are grown up they should be able to move around at will. I am saying it is not that easy.

    Yeah, Mom with children living on welfare is quite an alternative. Where do you live on Mars?

    ReplyDelete
  24. LeDaro, I agree with you totally. Trying to explain the complexities of micro and macro social influences on individuals to somebody that appears to have no education beyond high school is usually an exercise in futility. Sociology should be taught throught mid/high school - I'm not a sociology grad - I have CompSci degree but took social sciences as well.

    Austin, the fact that you say that sex sells and women can use that as an advantage simply serves to validate what point.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Correction, my point.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Oh, I get it. You don't have a problem with Hooters, you have a problem with human nature. Let me know how that works out for you. I am going to go out on a limb here and say, you do not know any women who work at Hooters or as a stripper do you? You continue to get information you should already know from your cookie cutter sociology courses. I will get my social beliefs from actual social encounters. If the majority of women who work at hooters or as strippers read what you had to say, they would tear a strip of you.

    PS not everything you learn in a classroom applies like a cookie cutter to society.

    ReplyDelete
  27. "Yeah, Mom with children living on welfare is quite an alternative. Where do you live on Mars?"

    Excuse me, you might want to watch what you say. I lived that growing up, my daughter who lives with her mother lived that the first 4 or 5 years of her life. This may be a shock to you but happiness can be found on welfare to.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Austin, unfortunately it is you who lives in some make-believe Dubya Bush type world where people can quit jobs anytime and find a new one whenever they want. Real life is much different. Or you suggest that if someone does not like a job he/she can always go on welfare. Some alternative.

    We are not talking about those who are professional strippers or enjoy being hooter employee we are talking about those who don't want it and feel compelled by their needs.

    Also the original discussion was that if Cons are so concerned about women in burqa why not be concerned about women who are forced into stripping, be hooter employee or such other exploitation. Remember the key word is "exploitation". Then may be you will get it. Cons major, major concern is modesty and freedom. Exploitation is not freedom. All you’re saying is that if a person allows exploitation because of circumstances then it is ok. Some distorted logic.

    ReplyDelete
  29. "We are not talking about those who are professional strippers or enjoy being hooter employee we are talking about those who don't want it and feel compelled by their needs."

    If that is the cases, stop saying things like this;

    "Quite frankly that cheapens women as sex objects"

    "Is that not demeaning and exploiting of women?"

    You are labeling the ENTIRE industry. That has been my problem from the begining. Yes a very tiny percentage of strippers might get pushed into it, that is not right and if there are things we can do WITHOUT destroying the whole industry we should. But NOBODY gets pushed into a job at Hooters, because if you do not voluntarily apply they do not call you for an interview. And sexual harrassment is a crime that takes place in all buisnesses and is punishable by law.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Austin, you still don't get it. Woman may not apply but the boyfriend or father may like to make money off of her. It is indeed demeaning to those women.

    If we are going to criticize other societies then we must look inward first. The exploitation goes on all over the place and may differ only in its forms. We must stop playing "holier than thou" in the west. If you don’t mind hooters and strippers then why criticize a women in veil because that is her belief system. What is the big deal about veil? That was the original point remember.

    ReplyDelete
  31. LeDaro if you go back to one of my first comments I said a woman should be able to wear a veil or burka or skimpy clothes or anything that they choose. A lot of women do not choose to wear the veil and are forced which is also wrong.

    "Woman may not apply but the boyfriend or father may like to make money off of her."

    For those sick twisted men that commit human trafficing they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. But I do not know what you think goes on at Hooters but it is just like any other sports bar and grill except the women wear skimpy clothes. The only way they make money is through tips, tips that are similar to Boston Pizza or Turtle Jacks are you accusing them of the same things? If a man is trafficing a woman he is not making them work at Hooters. You are taking pot shots at an industry and I am calling you on it.

    ReplyDelete
  32. “For those sick twisted men that commit human trafficking (sic) they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.”
    Easy said then done. How long it took to catch criminals like Philip Garrido and Roman Polanski. Those are reported high profile cases then there millions other cases in US and Canada which either go unreported or so low profile that do not get publicity. My point is that exploitation goes on in every society. Before we judge other societies let us look at our own. Is that hard for you understand?

    ReplyDelete
  33. This will be my last comment on this but I thought I'd point out a few things. That the education is "cookie cutter" is hardly what's taught - it's about critical thinking and managing perspectives. Austin, getting your information from "actual social encounters" is what contrbutes to the problem of black and white thinking. If one only sees the world through their own eyes without being exposed to a deeper understanding of how others live they develop an egocentric perspective.

    I support a woman's right to wear a burqua as much as I support her right to be a stripper or work at Hooter's. What I don't support is the social structure that supports either extreme as something that isn't simply a personal choice.

    Choice is a fallacy that people in the West have used to justify their judgment of others. Choice is something made from the options available. Nobody has absolute freedom of choice. We are all consistently limited to a few options from which we can "decide."

    From reading your comments I suspect you haven't done research into such issues, so please in the future refrain from invoking "statistics" such as "Yes a very tiny percentage of strippers..." until you can back it up with qualified references. It makes you look like you don't know what you're talking about and completely invalidates your argument.

    This isn't about wearing a veil or being a stripper, it's bigger than that and that's what we're saying.

    Anyway Austin, it doesn't matter what either I say or what anybody else says to you, I imagine you'll stick with what makes you comfortable, and because of that you most likely won't expand your understanding. I hope I'm wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Sk, exactly. Thank you. I will consider your comment as final word. If after that Austin still does not understand it is his prerogative.

    ReplyDelete
  35. LeDaro, you showed a picture of a woman wearing next to nothing and said "Quite frankly that cheapens women as sex objects" then you tried to throw a blanket statement over the entire corporation of Hooters. This is what I took exception with, to me you were arguing that a woman has a right to wear a veil or burka if she wants but she is likening herself to a sex object if she wants to work as a model or at Hooters. I am glad we have all now said a woman has that right as well.

    As for yours and sk's comment about me being "quite a bit crazy and out of touch with real life" because I did not learn sociology in a CLASSROOM makes you two sound like people who have lived sheltered and pampered lives removed from "real life" to the masses. Sociology AT BEST is an unproven science based upon people's opinions, AT WORST it is social engineering. Believe what you will.

    ReplyDelete
  36. "From reading your comments I suspect you haven't done research into such issues, so please in the future refrain from invoking "statistics" such as "Yes a very tiny percentage of strippers..." until you can back it up with qualified references. It makes you look like you don't know what you're talking about and completely invalidates your argument."

    So I guess it must make you look like you don't know what your talking about when you question someone's "statistics" without backing it up with qualified references?

    ReplyDelete
  37. "...makes you two sound like people who have lived sheltered and pampered lives removed from "real life" to the masses." You are dead wrong again. I will tell you this much that I have a Ph.D from the university of hard knocks. You make too many assumptions and that is your problem. Anyway I think we have killed this topic already.

    ReplyDelete
  38. I made no assumptions, I said "...makes you two SOUND like..."

    But yes we have beaten this debate beyond all recognition.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I wish to thank you all for your participation in the discussion. I do appreciate that discussion remained reasonably civil.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Thank you as well LeDaro. We tend to agree as much as we diagree and I always respect someone who stands behind thier beliefs as you do.

    ReplyDelete
  41. i like women dress Thank you! You often write very interesting articles. You improved my mood

    ReplyDelete