Men in the West are dressed in full; women are dressed half , quarter or less

[Wirey]

Yes, by all means, boys, take off your shirts while you're at it.

Alright, you asked for it! And that's not a sweater!

 

[Falvlun]

i think you did misunderstand his conclusion.

He meant to say,i think,that cheating increased (infidelity) because men are attracted to other women using sexy dresses to attract them.

i think that is true to some degree,men maybe are easily attracted by sex drive,not a general concept,but to some it is very true.

Attraction does not equate to cheating, and cheating does not equate to divorce. This is a problem with the OP's argument as well. The argument is missing a whole bunch of factors:

1. First you have to prove that less clothing produces more cheating.
2. Then you have to prove that the cheating that is caused by less clothing is also causing the rise in divorce rates.

(Never mind that the OP has never substantiated his premise that women in the west are half-dressed in comparison to men.)

I suspect that Victorian men cheated on their wives and girlfriends just as much-- if not more!-- than men do in the current age. Women were not as free to divorce back then, so cheating may not have resulted in as many divorces back then.

In addition, there are a myriad of reasons for why divorce occurs (see table 1), and cheating only accounts for some of the pie, not the whole thing. In general, women are much more able to leave an unhappy, unproductive marriage than they would have back in earlier ages.

In summary, it is incredibly silly to make such an unsupported tenuous claim as "women wearing less clothes is causing the rise in divorce rates." Correlation does not equal causation, and here, there isn't even all that much correlation.

 

[beenie]

So what is your opinion as a muslim woman.

Should my opinion matter more because I'm a Muslim woman? :sarcastic

Do you agree that woman are free to wear a sexy short dress in public if she wish,but men should lower their gaze.

Assuming we're talking about the same thing, I PERSONALLY don't feel comfortable wearing a "sexy dress" (again, a very subjective, relative term), but I do feel that a woman should be able to wear such clothing without judgement or ridicule of men.

I see a few things here, ie., this are my thoughts:

a) Since the beginning of time, we have given men a "free pass" with their behavior; it's not just an American culture thing, it's worldwide. The idea of going after women is something that we applaud all the time. We often turn the other way, saying "boys will be boys", and rarely do we hold them to any responsibility.

b) We call a girl a "****" or a "whore" if she has multiple partners, but we applaud a man who has "banged" an exorbitant number of women. He's a "stud" and a "lady's man". We're so contradictory to what we promote that we have lost all sight of what it truly means to be a man AND a woman.

c) Instead of dealing with the core issue of (some) men not behaving well and our letting them have this free pass, we instead take the easy way out: we punish and limit the women. Isn't it easier to hide or clothe the women than do deal with a centuries old problem with the men? Religious text even indoctrinates men by its repeated "temptation" of women. Hide them behind burqas, hijabs, robes, doors...keep them inside...that's so much "easier".

When do men take responsibility and stop worrying what women are wearing/doing? Why are men so obsessed with this? I think it's because societies have allowed them to become too involved in women's matters.

 

[FearGod]

Should my opinion matter more because I'm a Muslim woman? :sarcastic

Whats the problem in asking you from muslim perspective which you represent as a muslim woman,i may ask a hindus whats your opinion as a hindus woman,whats wrong with my question.

Assuming we're talking about the same thing, I PERSONALLY don't feel comfortable wearing a "sexy dress" (again, a very subjective, relative term), but I do feel that a woman should be able to wear such clothing without judgement or ridicule of men.

I see a few things here, ie., this are my thoughts:

a) Since the beginning of time, we have given men a "free pass" with their behavior; it's not just an American culture thing, it's worldwide. The idea of going after women is something that we applaud all the time. We often turn the other way, saying "boys will be boys", and rarely do we hold them to any responsibility.

b) We call a girl a "****" or a "whore" if she has multiple partners, but we applaud a man who has "banged" an exorbitant number of women. He's a "stud" and a "lady's man". We're so contradictory to what we promote that we have lost all sight of what it truly means to be a man AND a woman.

c) Instead of dealing with the core issue of (some) men not behaving well and our letting them have this free pass, we instead take the easy way out: we punish and limit the women. Isn't it easier to hide or clothe the women than do deal with a centuries old problem with the men? Religious text even indoctrinates men by its repeated "temptation" of women. Hide them behind burqas, hijabs, robes, doors...keep them inside...that's so much "easier".

When do men take responsibility and stop worrying what women are wearing/doing? Why are men so obsessed with this? I think it's because societies have allowed them to become too involved in women's matters.

So in few words you PERSONALLY don't feel comfortable to wear sexy dresses,
May i ask you why it did make you feel so.

So again from muslim perspective as a muslim woman is it ok to wear sexy dress for muslim woman according to Islam and do you reject what god asked woman in the quran what to wear.

 

[beenie]

FearGod, what did God ask women to wear in the Qur'an? Qur'anic text only, please...no parentheses, no tafseer.

 

[paarsurrey]

FearGod, what did God ask women to wear in the Qur'an? Qur'anic text only, please...no parentheses, no tafseer.

I think I should help here. I quote from Quran:

[7:27] O children of Adam! We have indeed sent down to you raiment to cover your shame, and to be an elegant dress; but the raiment of righteousness — that is the best. That is one of the Signs of Allah, that they may remember.

The Holy Quran Arabic text with Translation in English text and Search Engine - Al Islam Online

 

[beenie]

Exactly. Allah doesn't specify exactly what to wear, meaning that modesty and "elegant dress" is subjective. Allah gave us brains and the ability to decide for ourselves.

 

[paarsurrey]

Exactly. Allah doesn't specify exactly what to wear, meaning that modesty and "elegant dress" is subjective. Allah gave us brains and the ability to decide for ourselves.

I don't fully agree with what you have derived from the verses of Quran.

Men and women have been:

1. Given raiment as a bounty from one true attributive creator God
2. And they have been equally and equitably directed to wear them ;
3. They are to cover their body parts so that they are not considered naked.
4. so that they don't arose/inflame the sexual desire of the opposite gender in the society except those who are their lawful spouses
5. The dress should not divert one’s attention from the righteousness; which should always remain in focus.

Etc.. and etc..

Within the above reasonable limits men and women could choose their dresses happily, in my opinion.

 

[Wirey]

God cares how I dress? Really? Then why did He make me naked at the start?

 

[FearGod]

God cares how I dress? Really? Then why did He make me naked at the start?

So is that a reason to walk naked in public because we were born naked,what is your logic ?

 

[FearGod]

FearGod, what did God ask women to wear in the Qur'an? Qur'anic text only, please...no parentheses, no tafseer.

How do you explain this verse which identify who is allowed to see the attraction and adornment of women.

Al-Noor

And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their adornment only that which is apparent, and to draw their veils over their bosoms, and not to reveal their adornment save to their own husbands or fathers or husbands' fathers, or their sons or their husbands' sons, or their brothers or their brothers' sons or sisters' sons, or their women, or their slaves, or male attendants who lack vigour, or children who know naught of women's nakedness. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And turn unto Allah together, O believers, in order that ye may succeed. (24:31)

 

[Falvlun]

How do you explain this verse which identify who is allowed to see the attraction and adornment of women.

Al-Noor

And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their adornment only that which is apparent, and to draw their veils over their bosoms, and not to reveal their adornment save to their own husbands or fathers or husbands' fathers, or their sons or their husbands' sons, or their brothers or their brothers' sons or sisters' sons, or their women, or their slaves, or male attendants who lack vigour, or children who know naught of women's nakedness. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And turn unto Allah together, O believers, in order that ye may succeed. (24:31)

Basically, that just tells women to cover up their boobs, and not to make them shake.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Several Middle-Eastern countries are in a state of turmoil — some even having ongoing civil wars — in addition to problems of poverty, lack of education, poor healthcare, and unstable economic conditions, yet we're placing such significance on the debate of what women should wear when they're walking down the streets?

Yeah, it seems to me that we still have some ways to go yet before we even start getting anywhere close to progress.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Several Middle-Eastern countries are in a state of turmoil — some even having ongoing civil wars — in addition to problems of poverty, lack of education, poor healthcare, and unstable economic conditions, yet we're placing such significance on the debate of what women should wear when they're walking down the streets?

Yeah, it seems to me that we still have some ways to go yet before we even start getting anywhere close to progress.

Understood. We have some similar craziness here. A very unstable economy, troops still in Afghanistan, education is in the toilet after 5th grade in most parts of the country, health care crisis, and part of the cities are experiencing crumbling infrastructure, and yet a good number of people are wanting to put a lot of focus into why there should not be same sex marriage.

Crazy, isn't it?

 

[FearGod]

Several Middle-Eastern countries are in a state of turmoil — some even having ongoing civil wars — in addition to problems of poverty, lack of education, poor healthcare, and unstable economic conditions, yet we're placing such significance on the debate of what women should wear when they're walking down the streets?

Yeah, it seems to me that we still have some ways to go yet before we even start getting anywhere close to progress.

Because this is the RF and not science or politics forum.

 

[Wirey]

So is that a reason to walk naked in public because we were born naked,what is your logic ?

Yes. Are you saying that God erred when He made man? God forgot to clothe us?

 

[Debater Slayer]

Because this is the RF and not science or politics forum.

Sadly, this isn't just about RF, FearGod. I've seen many, many TV programs, social media pages, newspapers, and other media outlets talk about this very topic and discuss it at length. It's something that I think has been getting way too much attention.

Instead of presenting yet another TV program talking about why women shouldn't dress this or that way as to not "subject themselves to sexual harassment," why not educate more men and teach them to control themselves and their sexual desires?

Instead of labeling women who wear something you don't agree with as "sluts" or "whores" (excuse the language; I also loathe those two labels in particular), why not try to engage in civil discussion and ask them to elaborate on why they do what they do — if you feel that you really have to find out — and if you really think that your viewpoints have a solid logical and rational backing, why not argue your viewpoints without stigmatizing your opponents or resorting to name-calling (e.g. "****" or "whore")?

The way I see it, some people just don't want to bother with discussion or debate; they mainly want others to listen to and obey them just because they speak the "truth." Sorry, but if someone believes that they indeed have the "truth" with regard to any specific topic, then I think it should only stand to reason that they would be willing to defend their position through rational discourse. Otherwise they'd just be demanding blind obedience, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[FearGod]

Yes. Are you saying that God erred when He made man? God forgot to clothe us?

Yes if we got no minds to think similar to known animals,then god can make to you a nice fur to keep you always clothed.

 

[paarsurrey]

Sadly, this isn't just about RF, FearGod. I've seen many, many TV programs, social media pages, newspapers, and other media outlets talk about this very topic and discuss it at length. It's something that I think has been getting way too much attention.

Instead of presenting yet another TV program talking about why women shouldn't dress this or that way as to not "subject themselves to sexual harassment," why not educate more men and teach them to control themselves and their sexual desires?

Instead of labeling women who wear something you don't agree with as "sluts" or "whores" (excuse the language; I also loathe those two labels in particular), why not try to engage in civil discussion and ask them to elaborate on why they do what they do — if you feel that you really have to find out — and if you really think that your viewpoints have a solid logical and rational backing, why not argue your viewpoints without stigmatizing your opponents or resorting to name-calling (e.g. "****" or "whore")?

The way I see it, some people just don't want to bother with discussion or debate; they mainly want others to listen to and obey them just because they speak the "truth." Sorry, but if someone believes that they indeed have the "truth" with regard to any specific topic, then I think it should only stand to reason that they would be willing to defend their position through rational discourse. Otherwise they'd just be demanding blind obedience, as far as I'm concerned.

There has been no name calling like this in this thread, in my opinion.

 

[paarsurrey]

Yes if we got no minds to think similar to known animals,then god can make to you a nice fur to keep you always clothed.

A good point.