So most agree that the answer to the question which opened the thread is a resounding NO.

My summary to date
- Women do not need to be more covered, they have the freedom within the bounds of the law to cover or not to cover.
- Cleavage can and should be appreciated without comment, gesture and excessive ogling or it can be ignored.
- Those who choose to flaunt what they have should just accept that others may look and get over it. That does not mean having to put up with moronic behaviour.
- Some of this gets more difficult for teenagers to navigate but openness and healthy attitudes to sexuality work a lot better than guilt and shame based morality.
- Fundies who find that a problem have clear biblical instruction from Jesus on what to do about their problem (but perhaps they should talk to their pastor about how "bible believing" does not really mean bible believing before following that instruction).
- The are plenty of good gender jokes around.

R0bert

hEYYYYYY Romany.....

whats this 'slinky gym gear gives me problems' associated with ME bit?

I didn't say that. grrrrr...

Also fractelle.. I have to say it.. ur thinking is.. fractured mate.

I am yet to see 'non' 'baby out with the bathwater' comment from you on this kind of issue.

WHO the heck said male lust is WOMENS problems ?

What we are saying.. well me anyway..is that when you dress deliberately to PROMOTE the sexy bits.. and lets face it..there are 'sexy' bits to our bodies... its more likely to be thought of as a sex object.

RATIONAL BASIS... is..when the following occurs.

-When the 'mean/norm' of accepted culture is exceeded.

As one poster pointed out, the bare breasted Africans have 'de sexualized' breasts.. thus they arn't a source of unusually high titillation (pun intended) in that culture.

For one Islander group.. bare breasts are ok, but exposed THIGHS are 'not'..to show thighs is considered immodest.

So..YES it is culturally relative... to exceed cultural boundaries is to make a statement.

If a girl 'A' wears shorts covering her buttocks and 30% of her thighs, but girl 'B' wears shorts deliberately designed to expose 30% of her bum cheeks.. welllll thats a different story. You KNOW she has chosen them so she can show off her bum, and.. the message sent is also received.

If bloke 'A' wears 'trunks' (lets say that's the norm) and bloke 'B' wears speedo's .. err.. same deal.

It's not WOMEN who must be covered up..its ALL of us who should be sensitive about our bodies and dress so as to communicate the best message.

This is hilarious :) and Fractelle takes the prize for 'making' the argument.

"What a coincidence, I enjoy looking at a well honed male body - doesn't matter how well covered he is - I can always tell if he is a hottie." (BD Races off to the gym :)

Exactly.. so.. it makes the point that you DON'T have to flash and flaunt for the opposite gender to see/know if you appeal to them.

Its clear enough within the bounds of modesty :) I saw a Muslim woman at tullamarine dressed in all black loose clothing and only the face showing.. and could straight away tell she was appealing.

So, neither 'covering up' or not covering up, makes much difference to the ability of the opposite sex to 'get' what we are like.

So..given this wonderful truth, what does it say about OVER exposure?
Clearly...the message is.... 'of the flesh'...

Ok.. now that we all agree on this.. all I can say is to anyone, either male or female, if you dress to emphasize your sexy bits, don't be shocked if you attract those who simply are interested in a roll in the hay!

"Oh Oh.. I can't find a bloke who has any depth..why do they loose interest after they have had me in the sack for a while...we have nothing in common.. its all about sex..and that's getting pretty boring"(says she in her hotpants and skimpy top:)

Nah.. the absolute, most wonderful, most fulfilling, most enjoyable, most thrilling part of being alive is to find true intimacy of the heart and soul...and sorry, ya don't get that when ya flaunt ur boobs or butt to all and sundry :) but hey..what would I know? What would the Almighty know?
Knowing Him..is to know life and find true freedom.

just how many americans are on these boards? seriously..

nevertheless, boaz is correct. a woman should be responsible for her dress. if she chooses to dress 'provocatively' she has no right to whine about men looking etc...however, it's interesting someone asociated me with some blog they saw in a negative light since i'm pretty much the only proponent of choice here for women with regard to being topless. one person even went so far as to say that women were free to dress how they please...absolutely false... i am *for* the sexualisation of bodies and don't see the problem (they are already sexualised regardless, what rocks have you been living under?). there is always this, "as long as it's not sexualised" rubbish floating about. I simply find that illogical. i also don't agree with how people have a problem with what they *percieve* to be the sexualisation of young people. They can dress how they want for all i care, it's really none of mine nor your business and it's not the governments either. This is even more the case for young people going through puberty-i find it asinine that people want to repress these young people. It's all about private and parental responsibility.

Gibo “In an age when men are being fired up more and more by pornography should women think more carefully about what they wear?”

No!

Quoting the deranged ramblings of a retarded Muslim fundamentalist (who should have been deported when Keating had the chance) - Australian women as being like "uncovered meat", adds little credit to your suggestion.

Your mate who has difficulty with “boosums” sounds like he did not like maths at school, it is spelt “bosoms” and also known as a nice pair or hooters (also a good fast food place, try their buffalo wings and hot sauce, accompanied by a waitress with a nice rack and camel toe).

If a girl wants to flaunt her assets, all well and good, it remains up the observing and delighted males to exercise self control and “take them selves in hand” if “keeping it in their pants” does not work.

Personally I support Vanillas suggestion for those who cannot deal with their own “turgid” appendages

“Maybe women could wear what they like and men could wear blindfolds?”

I always know I am doing something right when Boaz resorts (yet again) to personal invective.

My dear man, there is medical help for what ails you, see link below.

http://littlurl.com/w7cn0

;-D