Steel, there isn't a connection between sexualisation and pedophilia, except for an over-emphasis on the word “girl”. Substitute “young woman” or think about “girl” in a more generic sense. I’m not making a link here and I apologise that my choice of words was misleading, it was unintentional. My links on sexualisation have a healthcare slant, with a focus on teens.

Women tend to go topless when they think they are in a zone of privacy, like at the beach while lying on the little piece of sand that is staked out, temporarily for private use, by a beach towel. Tops go back on when they get up and go for a swim, in the “public” domain. Breast-feeding, which has a less exhibitionist and more functional purpose, may be more socially-acceptable in public but still attracts disapproval, see Kirstie Marshall's experience:

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/02/26/1046064087977.html

Women being topless in public all the time is linked to primitive cultures: an outward display of the sexual availability of the women to all the male members and the feeding accessability for the children of the group. And before the incidence of holes in the ozone layer, skin cancer and Western European migration to the hot zones, there were fewer environmental reasons to cover up.

Thanks Stickman! It is not our legal system, our moral police, or our “secular” police force which keep our tops on, even if the law can be heavy-handed in preventing public displays of toplessness from time-to-time:

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/02/27/1077676971584.html

By and large, the problem is self-regulating.

Fractelle: Reactivism to criticism is also a matter of degree. I have only attempted to provide a context and asked for the courtesy of disciplined exegesis. When a Christian refers to the Bible, it is in the context of the whole work. Heresy and schism result from selective quoting and it is worthwhile to exercise caution or care when calling on biblical authority. However, it doesn’t take any courage to sling mud at the bible (the inquisition was always unbiblical), and that is a beautiful thing.

I am a feminist and concerned about women who feel they must cover themselves to be modest. I agree wholeheartedly with the posters who state that male sexual responses are the responsibility of men and not of women. I also agree that no religious tradition can claim the high moral ground when it comes to the treatment of women, they all relegate women to second class status and expend a great deal of their energy pontificating about what women should and should not do, say or wear. That's why I believe they are all clearly man made.
Modesty is not about hiding or erasing your physical presence, in essence it is about something much more important than that - humility. Interestingly, a naked human is probably more likely to be closer to their humility -their lack of individual grandeur - than any such human clothed.
When I hear the argument that women incite men to rape them simply by displaying their natural shape, I hear a breathtaking lack of logic. Does Islam - or any other religious tradition - therefore claim that the rich incite the poor to rob them and that the wealthy must therefore hide their riches to avoid inflaming the poor? No, they do not, in fact, they do just the opposite. The thief is always the wrongdoer, no matter how flagrantly the richer victim may have flaunted their wealth.
Mind you, while I am disturbed by the rationale behind wearing the veil ( what, after all has"purity" got to do with virginity, surely one can be a virgin and black hearted, cruel and rotten, and as sexually promiscuous as all get out and kind, generous, honourable and charitable) and would vigorously - but respectfully - argue with anyone who wore one, given the opening, that does not mean I condone banning it, ripping it off the heads of the wearer, or abusing women who wear them.
Women, like men, have the right to wear, say and believe whatever they like and I, like everyone else, have the right to argue with them about it.

Well we better strip the scarves off the nuns, the catholics who see the pope and all the other people who wear a scarf for fear the poor little darlings don't have a mind of their own.

The Afghan, Pakistani, Iranian and Iraqis I know who are muslims are the least oppressed women I have ever met.

I just don't care what they wear you see unlike you men who get your balls in a knot over a piece of material.

That says a lot more about your tiny minds than the women wearing the scarves.

And Logic, I am aware that it is a small minority of Jews who behave like that, the Haredis among them.

Katie

I am far from the first person to use examples from texts such as the Quran, or the Torah or the bible. I note that you don't take issue with my referencing the Quran, only the bible. In addition, Boaz David quotes (cherry picks) from the bible relentlessly and yet you don't criticise him.

While Australia remains a democracy with freedom of speech I will continue to illustrate my POV with appropriate quotes from any book I deem relevant. Such as the following from the NT:

"Corinthians 11:3-10

But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.

4 Every man who has something on his head while praying or prophesying, disgraces his head.

5 But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying, disgraces her head; for she is one and the same with her whose head is shaved.

6 For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut off; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, let her cover her head.

7 For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man.

8 For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man;

9 for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake.

10 Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. "

...which is the best evidence yet we should take the new testament with just as much a grain of salt as the old one.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:

Do you see any irony in a thread that criticizes women for 'covering up',- and another that criticizes women because they don't?

:<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<