Sunday, July 17, 2011

Aesthetics and morality . . .

PERUSING THE SUNDAY NYT, ran across an ad for "Muslim Swim Wear". Such a disturbing denial of feminine freedom, and an insight into the cultural oppression the Umma has to contend with as it lurches further into the 21st century. Contrast that nasty, neurotic mindset with the exquisite Rosie Huntington-Whiteley, with sloth, from last year's Pirelli calendar, a classic sprite tenderly holding one of God's critters. That is one happy sloth. On the left, the daring Alsharifa Laguna, on the right, we have the Alsharifa Sportiva. Oh joy.


Smartpatrol said...

Sorry to do this Ed, but being cruel to be kind. One for you to chew on before your next cringe-inducing "anti-PC" rant. It's Amanda Marcotte over on Pandagon. Title: "When the Mask Slips". Emphasis mine.

"I think [the mask has] been cracking lately, is my point. There's a number of reasons for this, but one of them is the rapid expansion of the internet means that conservatives who aren't potty trained have more access to a national platform, simply because it's that much harder for the party leaders to filter them out. That, and as we all know, this Tea Party stuff is emboldening to the non-potty-trained. They've been trained to hate "political correctness" that keeps them from saying what they really think, and by god, they're not going to take it any more."

Just sayin'.

Steve said...

The biggest world wide cultural event of this year is the last Harry Potter Movie. I hope it has the same effect as Gulliver's Travels. I is a unabashed progressive anthem.

Edstock said...

Smartpatrol, don't be sorry, but also, please, do not be obfuscatory.

Maybe you have comprehension problems, because as far as I know, I wasn't writing a ""anti-PC" rant", I was reporting on how morality really causes a distortion of people's sense of aesthetics — and you obviously got a PC wedgie, lol.

Niles said...

There are unabashed Christian equivalents to the 'moral' swim outfits in your article and websites to support the fashions.

To my knowledge there are also sex-segregated beaches in Israel. All of them heed religion based 'modesty'.

Sexism abounds when it comes to controlling the wimmins and fashion is a classic target, but it's always damned if you do and damned if you don't for women.

Step outside whatever local 'modest' bounds are and the message is 'men will have the *right* to assault and physically hurt you'. But should a woman dress 'modestly' in public where the bounds are looser, then she comes in for criticism for not opening her body up to view for sexual gaze from strangers. But just to be perverse and show the moving goalposts even in a 'permissible' culture, should she then dress in a fashion that moves past the invisible allowable line of the moment, then she gets comments like I heard this week during Stampede, "Why does Stampede bring out the skank in so many women?" (This while guys are strolling the fair grounds topless and barely breeched)

The muslimah outfit could even be commended for being skin safety in a world where we are bombarded with even MORE helpful messages about avoiding sun exposure -- where we are TOLD to wear long sleeves, a head covering, etc. It's certainly much more revealing than the daring and racy outfits 'normal world' women were allowed to finally wear in the Victorian era, the time when modern public swim time for women started being acceptable.

It's guaranteed that some sexual gaze will find the more clothed women 'exciting' enough anyway (especially wetted), but honestly, that happens when women are wearing parkas and sackcloth.

On the opposite end of the scale, even if they were nude ala the sloth lady, there is plenty of internet evidence some sexual gazers would loudly and disgustedly decry their bodies as unacceptable for futtering and tell them to cover up to avoid upsetting the gazers' digestion. Because that's what matters of course.

If the young women in the pictures of the article have a choice between being shut up at home because they aren't allowed to wear bikinis as juveniles or wearing a thin cloth covering that still shows separate limbs and doesn't impede them so they can get out and swim for exercise and social fun, option B baby, every time.

The 'exposure' of being out in the wide world and its multiplicity of views will manage a heck of a lot more positive results for them, if not for their sexual gazers.

sunsin said...

Don't make fun of them and drive them into a corner, and these absurdities will be history in a generation or two. The only way they'll survive is if the members of the community develop a fortress mentality and try to shut out the outside world. Let's not do anything to encourage that.