It's amazing, for someone who claims to love freedom and yet demonstrably argues against it because of what it can do to you.

"Recommended guidelines" (not "laws") indeed, I bet you would love to see these guidelines become almost universal custom, wouldn't you Boazy? Problem is, universal customs have a habit of becoming laws, to make them enforced.

I guess a lot of rabble rousers use the same insidious techniques.

Dear Polycarp,

You're right up to a point, when you say
that women are influenced by the fashion
industry. And, as I pointed out in my first
post - certain magazines do present certain
images that women are expected to adhere
to. However, that doesn't mean that all
women do.

You've got to give women more credit.
The key word is - SOME women will be influenced
by these trends. But not all women will be.

We're all individuals, and we don't think alike,
act alike, or dress alike, just as neither do
all men. Age, education, upbringing, income,
fashion sense, are only some of the factors
that affect our choices.

Generalisations such as the ones you present are
just that - generalisations. They don't present
the true picture. And as they say, "Beauty is
in the eyes of the beholder," well so is the
"sin" or "evil of the flesh," that you're seeing.
As I said in a
previous post - the sin is not on what someone
has on their backs, in what's in your mind,
that influences your perception.

Don't underestimate women either, as far as the
fashion industry is concerned. Designers over the
years have learned at their expense that they've
done the wrong marketing - when women have often
rejected the trends that were being hoisted on them.

Some things work, others don't. But ultimately it's
women who decide what they will or won't accept.
Very few women I know are slaves to the fashion
industry. We make our own choices as to what we
wear.

Threads like this one however, only goes to prove
that women still have a long way to go with some
men, towards achieving gender equality.

It's a bit late to come with the injured innocence schtick, Boaz.

>>Dear Pericles... that was a cheap and low shot, and I think everyone will recognize it to be utterly contemptable.
Once again.. a-gain.. you seek to turn a serious thread into beligerance and mockery against a person.
Cheap...low.. shabby.. etc etc etc.<<

Serious thread, Boaz? Surely, it is just another vehicle for your religious evangelism.

You were given a number of opportunities to find a more acceptable level for the discussion, but didn't take the hints. Until finally you decided that insults were the way to go.

>>WHY would they want to flagrantly go against the known dress standard of the day? aaaaah.. me thinks I smell 'wanton-ness'?<<

Given this little gem, I consider my observations to be totally in keeping with the standard that you yourself set.

>>Let me expand on your (barely) contribution to the topic (rather than sink to the bottom feeder/creeping thing level of constantly reminding people about things they themselves freely disclosed oh.. about 2 or 3 yrs ago?)<<

Whenever it was, it was memorable indeed.

As I recall, you tried to make a virtue out of corporal punishment administered to a teenage girl.

Do I understand now that

i) you regret trying to make a virtue of beating your daughter
ii) you regret telling us about it or
iii) that you regret that you ever indulged in it?

I'd really like to think iii), but I suspect ii) is closer to the truth.

Sigh!! There really is no hope for you is there Poly. :)

Women having to cover up in Church or anywhere else because men cannot control their urges is a bit rich is how I am understanding your comments. Shouldn't we give men a bit more credit.

Surely your devotion to prayer in Church should provide you with sufficient distraction from ogling unsuspecting female parishioners.

History shows us that coverage makes no difference to a woman's safety and a woman is just as likely to be raped wearing a head-dress or covered from toe to neck, as not.

We are born naked, some cultures run around almost totally naked and do alright. It is what you are used to? I would rather be in a society that accepts the body freely than one that covers it up with all the seething and festering undercurrents that it tends to arouse.

Dear Polycarp,

It would appear that
you really do have quite a bit in
common with Muslims in your desire
to cover women up.

Interesting...
And all because men can't control
their erections in some cultures...

Dear Polycarp,

Did you ever think that underneath our clothes we are all naked? We are born naked. Every time we see a person we can think, "That person is a result of a sex act!" (with the exception of in-vitro fertilisation and similar exercises)

When Linnaeus (1707-1778) expressed the idea that flowers are sex organs he was criticised as dirty-minded by the wowsers of his day.I feel great joy in seeing the colourful display of uncovered sex organs in my garden. The sexual organs of the monocots like the lilies have multiples of three petals, and the sexual organs of the dicots like the roses have multiples of four or five petals.

I am happy that your parents felt lust for each other. Otherwise you wouldn't be here, and we wouldn't be able to interact with you. I am glad they occasional didn't engage in sexual outercourse.

Men and women are built differently. That is one reason they wear different clothing. Most men like to be attractive to women, and most women like to be attractive to men.

We are surrounded by sex, and I would rather enjoy it than deny it.