I agree with all of what BI shares in (his or her)post.  I apologize for the inappropriate use of slut, as I do get that point.  Beyond that, I think we agree.  The problem is that once acknowledging that we are all victimized by this situation and the paradymes that have been handed down to us, what is to be done?  Do we continue to dress up our daughters in clothes designed (my opinion, of course) to appeal to the erotic interests of men, and then condemn or prosecute those same men for leering, inappropriate (harassment) remarks, etc., or do we say “No, hell no.  We are going to stop this vile perpetuation of sick cultural fashion dominated reality, and come up with a new scheme?”  I say we are better off turning onto a new road even if it is without map or light and forge ahead.  Same thing for the Arabs.  I hate the site of those damn veils and burkha outfits, on women.  If that goes in Riyadh, fine, there’s not much we can do about that.  But this crap of these scarves and coverings up here seems to me to be a smack in the face to the whole history of the American experiment with freedom, democracy, and lack of theocratic dictatorships.  It is not that they do not have the right to cover their whole body with cloth if they want to, it is rather that with the super-charged political climate that currently exists, to dress like that is not so much as a desire for modesty or religious piety, it is clearly more of a political slap in the face to the entire western culture.  It that’s so fine, we can take it, but what in the hell are you doing over here then?

While I appreciate jeff’s comments, I think beginning them with “DL clearly misses the point…” can cause some defensiveness. I disagree. I think DL is just making another point. A point I think that should be considered. Sex is shameful- so we have been bombarded with again and again. It should be procreative and within a marriage to be acceptable- everything else vilified. No need for politicians and police- citizens are well versed in how to monitor others now. What bothers me the most about this article and others comments is the “slut” references.
“Nevertheless, there’s a fine line for girls between being sexy and being slutty.” (Ellen) Who is drawing this line?
“Paris can choose to dress like and act slutlike thinking that she is being creative and rebellious and cool” (Jeff)
Who is defining slutlike for us all? What does it mean? When I hear 12-13 year old girls refer to each other as sluts because of an item of clothing, it breaks my heart. Especially when we have been dressing them this way since before they could walk. (thanks BabyGap) Or entering them in pageants that encourage them to smile and maintain eye contact with the adult male judges. Who’s to blame really?
I get it- the whole scanty Halloween costumes, the veils, the commercialization of sex and all that we sacrifice as a result, the desire I have to lop of my nose and purchase a new one. Sure, I’m a victim, DL is a victim, Jeff is a victim, Ellen is a victim- but maybe we can try to stop policing everyone else, accept the fact that the veil is more comfortable for some, that Paris feels creative, that it is ok to allow people choice, whether we think it’s really a choice or not. In the meantime, start a new revolution- as we are in dire need.

It’s interesting that there is almost a defensive feel to Kim’s post.  I don’t think any of the posts, certainly mine, meant to be finger pointing in any way.  It is not that my perspective is less perverse than others…I feel that we are all caught in a sticky web from which there is no real escape.  However, theoretically there is escape and there is a rich long history where you can move from Marx to Derida, from Kant to Sartre, From Simone de Beauvoir to Germain Greer to Susan Faludi and you do get at least a theoretical freedom that lets you perceive and critisize from an open position.  Now, here is the disclaimer and this is of critical importance.  I don’t have a holier than thou position.  I am just as caught in the real world situation as you or the rest of us.  My dress is still based on a spindly kid from Hibbing, Minnesota when he hit the streets of NY in the early 60s wearing nothing but jeans and work shirts and boots.  It taught us all at that time that we could define our own look.  I think that was truer then than it is today but if you look at me, my look is still some type of morphing of that one from 1962.  Jeans, workshirts, boots, are all big business now.  But, we all have to live and wear something.  Go to India, go to Russia, and even to some extent in the new china:  what do you see but jeans, tee shirts, adidas logo crap, tennis shoes.  Go to the arab world and it’s different but there it is straightforward the male clerics that decide cultural issues.  So, I’m not critisizing modern women Kim, far from it: I love to look at the current fashion myself as I think it is definitely a turn to eros and pleasant and exciting.  I just don’t deceive myself as to what lies down there at the end of the fork when we take away the ketchup and mustard and salt and pepper and batter and oil and find what we are actually eating (to paraphrase Mr Burroughs about his “Naked Lunch”).

Call me brainwashed, but if, as you say, our values and preferences are constructed through the cultural-powers-that-be why are your values inherently better than someone else’s? Do you think your position is not a product of a particular niche-market?

I recall a news item in the 50’s. It seems a woman was arrested for wearing a bikini in her own back yard. She was arrested for corrupting the morals of the neighborhood men peering over the fence.

Ellen - You are so totally right.

Interesting commentary.

My only reflections on the fact that these sorts of discussions take place less and less, is that people just don’t care anymore.

The landscapes of our minds are so riddled with over saturations of the senses and materialism that we just don’t consider these sorts of things anymore.

This saturation is being done of course with steely intention by the powers that be to sway the attention of the masses towards unimportant things, so they can take over the world (and the moon too!). Don’t you just love conspiracy theories??!!

By the way in the meantime we know that it takes a true warrior to remain standing firm once the torrential wind of ignorance has almost blown them to the ground. And even then, they stand alone. And who wants to be alone?

It is an extreme removal from the true self that is taking us farther and farther from seeing anything beyond getting off.

And as far as the Muslim girl, she as well is on the same end, but inside out. She is separating herself so she stands above the rest, thus disengaging herself.

DL clearly misses the point of this excellent article and is a great example of how subtle and cruel the control and manipulation is.  Ratafia really nails the situation pretty well and I would just harken back 40 years or so to add just a bit to that argument.  Ellen Goodman offers the most powerful line in her fascinating article when she says “Have you also noticed how many women believe they are making their own choices when they are actually caught in a cultural vise?”
In the 1960s when the re-energized western feminist movement was led by articulate, politically and culturally astute women who had the will and the capability to probe deeply into issues such as these realized that the forces that molded fashion, eating habits, musical taste, etc. were not artists or humanists but the powerful, controlling clique of a given society.  In the west of course it is the dollar and the men and women who whore for the dollars favor…In Islam it is the mullas and sheikhs and kings who wish their property to stay veiled until when, and if, they choose to unveil it.
For someone like DL it is a case where in the west someone like Paris can choose to dress like and act slutlike thinking that she is being creative and rebellious and cool and a whole damn industry drools at the fashion dollars that will drop down like mana from the sky for every slut like outfit any half ass designer house can pump out for five years or so until the next diva comes along.  This isn’t freedom, it’s free enterprise (cept it’s not free).
I guess when we all first started to realize this shit was after Kent State when the kids had been shot down by their own soldiers for protesting right here in the good old USA and they started having rock stars performing at White House Galas.  Maybe there was a revolution…but guess what?  We lost.  Sad but true.  Anyway, that whole gut wrenching, choking, ensemble of history is tied up in this issue.  Halloween, indeed.  What ever happened to those discussions of control so subtle that the controlled think they are the controllers?

If it only were free choice!!
Then, nobody would make such a freckin deal out of someone’s personal choice.
But as it is, either way, we’re looking at women being used for some larger scheme to benefit Big Business or Big Religion. And the saddest thing is: It goes on mostly by way of brain-washing women into thinking it is their very own wishes. And…and brainwashing the common man into believing that an anorexic Barbie pared down to long hair, legs and boobs on full display is da bomb, or that in other parts of the world brainwashing the common man into believing that he has to ‘protect’ himself from the lust-controlled inferior being called woman by covering her up in public and hiding her away—calling it ‘modest dress’.

Comparing the cruelity of the veil to the fun of a costume seems a far cry, even for a narrow minded feminist.  The costume is voluntary, the veil, not so much.

Why does feminism and sexuality have to be mutually exclusive. Women can choose to dress up anyway they like on Halloween and because we make sexuality such a shameful topic, I am guessing women like to “bust out” (so to speak) once a year. 

So why would you take the position that in order for a woman to make a free choice, she has to agree with you.  Seems a narrow view on the world.  I thought feminisim’s point was Free Choice for women - meaning to choose what they like, including sexy costumes or careers that are not traditional.

Broaden your mind, you may like it.

cheers
dl

I don’t mean to put women down in any way, but from what I can see, they like to be pretty. They like to dress up, put on make-up, shop for shoes, and all that. They don’t go out and shop for these things and read fashion magazines begrugingly. Many (not all) go for a cetain “look” with zeal. They really seem to enjoy doing it. And the last time I checked women weren’t bother about appropriate comments on their appearance.

Maybe in the long run it’s not that big of a deal. No one should be forced to wear this or that, but if someone (adult) choses what she wants, it’s her choice. Once upon a time seeing a woman’s ankle was unheard of. Now it’s nothing. People who want to objectify are going to do it no matter what a woman wears. Appearance will be an issue only as long as women want it to be.

I’ve always wondered if being appreciated for your brain, personality, ect is really any less superficial than being appreciated for your T&A.
Is it any worse to judge on appearance than it is to judge if someone is dumb and boring? People are all people.

Women will not be free as long as their presentation - naked, veiled, fashionably attired - is seen as an important subject. And why should Makers of the Universe (Allah, God et al.) be bothered about women’s clothing? Wizards of Oz, all of them. The self-aggrandizement of frightened men.