Get E-Mail Updates

India's Women Stand Up to Religious Bullies

At the end of January in Mangalore, India, a group of right-wing extremists, the Sri Rama Sena, entered a bar and assaulted the women there. This pro-Hindu group is known for its moral policing and told the authorities that they attacked the women "because of the attitude of the young women." They accused the women of "involving themselves in immoral activities, including consuming alcohol, dressing indecently, and mixing with youths of other faith.'' These men used their religion and personal conception of Indian culture as excuses to violently lash out against those whose lifestyles they disagreed with. The attack, which involved the men beating, chasing, and kicking the women who fell down, was caught on tape and aired on Indian television to a shocked public.

Related Reading

Take Action on This Issue

Tell the Senate: Don't Cut International Aid

Please join us in telling the Senate: Protect foreign aid programs that help the poor and the needy. 

The response from women was swift. Since the Sena also threatened to attack any couple they found celebrating on Valentine's Day, a campaign was created asking women to stand up against extremism and bullying on February 14. Supporters were asked to send the Sena pink chaddis (Indian slang for underwear) and to deliberately go to pubs on Valentine's Day. A group called the "Consortium of Pub-going, Loose and Forward Women" formed on Facebook and in about a week's time grew to over 50,000 members (one of the fastest growing groups ever). The Sena has yet to comment on the protest and consortium members are moving forward in a new campaign to help assert the diversity of Indian culture.

I applaud these women for taking a stand against those who would use violence to control them, but it was a sobering reminder of the ways religion is used to bully women. Perhaps women aren't always being brutally attacked in the streets, but they still have violence perpetrated against them. Violence also consists of emotional insults used to belittle and demean, as well as manipulative strategies employed to exert control over others.

I've been a part of Christian culture long enough to hear my fair share of violent talk from men attempting to bully me into their vision for the world. I've been condemned for the same "immoral activities" the Sena attacked the Indian women for. As a student at a Christian college, I constantly read fliers or letters in the student newspaper about how indecently the girls on campus dressed. We were told that it was our fault for causing the men to stumble and that if we were good Christians we would dress differently. Looking back, I know that in that conservative Midwestern environment we actually were extremely modest in our dress, but had been manipulated into feeling sinful and guilty by those wishing to control us and abdicate their personal issues onto us.

This same violent manipulation is used by those who blame women for getting raped because of their appearance or who tell women that they deserve to be hit by their husbands. Choosing to emotionally terrorize women and force blame onto women for the sins of men is simply just another form of violent control. And using religion and cultural ideology as rationales for the violence makes its impact all the more damaging.

So I find campaigns like the pink chaddis to be inspiring. These are rallying cries that bring together women in order to overturn the manipulation and control. The violence and bullying can easily continue controlling women unless an effort is made to take a stand. These women are telling the world that they have a right to not be humiliated, guilt-tripped, or terrorized by ideologies. They will not let fear permit the strong arm of violence to destroy their lives.

And unlike in ages past where women were bullied into silence, thankfully these days it is difficult for women's voices not to be heard. We just have to speak up.

Julie Clawson is the author of the forthcoming book Everyday Justice (IVP 2009). She blogs at julieclawson.com and emergingwomen.us.

Sojourners relies on the support of readers like you to sustain our message and ministry.

by: LilPixy

02-27-2009 @ 6:32am

Some say the busy body neighbors who press their faces into someone elses window should sit down and find a mirror. Privacy in private for actions and ways are just that. People are as God made ,society and how raised playing factor to being. The absurd complaint then return as if pride for being lowclass and lewd women,forward ,against the grain of a society, time and place for everything, if you do not like something, do not go looking for it either. If someone inappropriate tries to be rude on purpose against established ways, I am on the Sena side to correct the wrong.

by: BuckeyeDon

02-27-2009 @ 1:34pm

Based on this person's previous comments posted on this blog, it seems, Marie, that we've attracted an ultra-legalist to this forum.

Unbelievable.

by: BuckeyeDon

02-27-2009 @ 11:34am

Based on this person's previous comments posted on this blog, it seems, Marie, that we've attracted an ultra-legalist to this forum.

Unbelievable.

by: WaveTossed

02-23-2009 @ 4:41pm

Great article and I also admire the women who resist this Hindu fundamentalist pressure.

As I recall, the Sena (and other Hindu fundamentalist groups) have been responsible for caste-based violence. I've read about entire Dalit ("untouchable") villages being burned down because a Dalit wanted to marry a non-Dalit. Other incidents of violence and lynchings against Dalits have occurred when Dalits have "dared" to drink from common water-wells used by higher-caste people.

A few years ago, a film was released in India, a fantastic film directed by a woman, Deepa Mehta. It was done in English and available on DVD: the name of the film is "Fire" and it is about a Lesbian relationship. When the film opened, Hindu fundamentalists groups went on a rampage against the theatre that was showing the film, vandalizing the theatre. Traditional Indian society is not just very patriarchal, it is also very homphobic. The fundamentalists demanded that the film be officially censored by the government censoring board. To its great credit, the film board refused to cave in to this fundamentalist pressure and refused to censor the film.

Let us hope that resistance continues against repressive and oppressive fundamentalist groups.

by: kevin47

02-23-2009 @ 5:03pm

"This same violent manipulation is used by those who blame women for getting raped because of their appearance or who tell women that they deserve to be hit by their husbands."

No it isn't. Saying women should dress modestly is biblical. Saying that men will be more likely to lust if women are dressed in skimpy clothing is a biological observation. Unless the same people behind the flier were not also telling men to guard their heart on this issue, then evoking a defense of rapists and wife beaters is inapt, not to mention lacking a dose of proportionality.

I don't agree with the tactic of addressing the issue with fliers, but in college, everything is fliers.

by: LilPixy

02-27-2009 @ 6:32am

Some say the busy body neighbors who press their faces into someone elses window should sit down and find a mirror. Privacy in private for actions and ways are just that. People are as God made ,society and how raised playing factor to being. The absurd complaint then return as if pride for being lowclass and lewd women,forward ,against the grain of a society, time and place for everything, if you do not like something, do not go looking for it either. If someone inappropriate tries to be rude on purpose against established ways, I am on the Sena side to correct the wrong.

by: WaveTossed

02-23-2009 @ 5:15pm

"No it isn't. Saying women should dress modestly is biblical. Saying that men will be more likely to lust if women are dressed in skimpy clothing is a biological observation. "

Saying that men have no control over their "biological" urges is very sexst -- against men. Men (as well as women) have brains; God gave men brains as well as conscience, to exercise the same sort of self-control that women are capable of.

by: SisterMarie

02-23-2009 @ 5:29pm

"Men (as well as women) have brains..."

Well, we now know where Kevin's brain is.

by: neuro_nurse

02-23-2009 @ 7:29pm

"in college, everything is fliers"

I don't know about that, but I'm a grad student. (although, not for much longer!)

Fortunately, the School of Public Health is off the main campus, and there are few, if any, undergraduates in the halls of the downtown campus. I ride my bike across the Uptown campus on my way downtown, and it is a struggle to guard my eyes on warmer days (I haven't fallen off my bike yet).

It seems to me that grad students tend to dress more maturely than undergrads, although I have had to change seats in class to avoid having some young woman's legs in my line of sight.

There are some women I know for whom I have to acquire a self-imposed inferior hemianopia when speaking to them

by: Eric77

02-23-2009 @ 7:52pm

That's a good point you make about trying to influence other cultures. It's a tough line to draw. Forcing western values onto other cultures has resulted in a backlash against western nations by traditionalists in those cultures. But we also can't just sit by and watch women be beaten and abused. It takes incredible tact and knowledge of a culture to be able to work constructively to bring about change and not be seen as the heavy hand of a western nation trying to impose our ideas of how people should structure their societies.

I hate the sexualization that is ever-present in U.S. culture. It can only be worse for someone in India or Iran who views it. I might get shouted down for saying it, but it's very easy for me to understand the minds of people who don't want their traditional society to end up like western culture 50 years from now. I understand how they see women's freedom as something that bring about the Britney Spearsification of their culture. I don't agree with it, but I understand it.

by: neuro_nurse

02-23-2009 @ 8:21pm

Thanks,

I hesitate to bring this up, but when I was working in Ethiopia, I watched one of our docs lecture our Ethiopian staff on female genital mutilation. She pretty much got blank stares in return. (to my knowledge, FGM was not widely practiced in that part of Ethiopia

by: SisterMarie

02-23-2009 @ 8:43pm

"Britney Spearsification"

I like your use of that term and I think that it's very appropriate to describe what our society has devolved to.

But as much as I lament the way our society has cheapened sex and the way that women are regarded, I think that if we look at the whole spectrum, it's really hard to make a general statement about where we have ended up.

When I was growing up, there were Blue Laws that prevented stores from operating on Sunday, and we dressed more modestly than what is the practice today. Then along came the Beatles and all that changed (no not really). But that ideal environment in which I matured also practice overt racial discrimination and its treatment of women was at times shameful.

So although we have a tendency to objectify the change in the person of Britney Spears and others, it really boils down to a matter of individual responsibility. Would any of these Hollywood stars be where they are today if we did not go to their movies? Would pornography make millions of dollars per year if people didn't buy it? Some of the most heinous crimes against women occur in Muslim countries where women's bodies are totally covered.

That is why I place the blame for these crimes in India totally on the perpetrators. We are not animals. Theoretically, these women should be able to walk down the street stark nekkid and remain unmolested.

by: Eric77

02-23-2009 @ 9:16pm

I completely agree. That's why I said I don't agree with it, but I understand their way of thinking. People in other cultures see the rise of gender equality tied directly to the hyper-sexualization of our culture. I think they're wrong to make a direct link, but I understand why they do.

by: neuro_nurse

02-23-2009 @ 9:30pm

"...these women should be able to walk down the street stark nekkid..."

Okay, that would probably make me fall off my bike!

by: kevin47

02-23-2009 @ 9:40pm

"Saying that men have no control over their "biological" urges is very sexst"

Fortunately, I didn't say that.

by: kevin47

02-23-2009 @ 9:40pm

"Well, we now know where Kevin's brain is."

She had me at pink underwear.

by: BuckeyeDon

02-23-2009 @ 10:05pm

That almost happened to me one morning last summer! Only the woman was on the bike (a motorcycle), not I, and I had just stepped off the bus, along with another passenger, and was waiting to cross the street. The light was turning red at the corner, and the woman in question had nothing on above her waist. She stopped at the red light and quickly made a right-on-red turn. This was in downtown Columbus, right at Statehouse Square.

The passenger who got off the bus with me (who is female, BTW) turned to me with a "did you see what I just saw?" look, and I responded, yes I saw. We discussed whether she was in violation of any public decency laws (turns out that she wasn't), and then we shrugged our shoulders and went our separate ways.

If it hadn't been 7 AM, I might have thought the woman was drunk. After thinking about it, I my hypothesis is that she may have lost a bet. You know, "if I lose, I ride my motorbike topless around Statehouse Square."

One never knows.

by: squeaky

02-23-2009 @ 10:07pm

She didn't break any public decency laws? You Buckeyes are racey!

by: BuckeyeDon

02-23-2009 @ 10:40pm

Maybe so. The laws were changed rather recently--maybe four years ago--not that there has been a rush of people changing the way they dress, or rather undress, in public.

I never found out the rationale for the change, either.

by: squeaky

02-23-2009 @ 10:51pm

I suppose, if you think of it...since men can run around bare-chested...I'll stop there before this conversation devolves any more than is necessary...

by: kevin47

02-24-2009 @ 12:05am

Women used to complain that full frontal nudity only resulted in an 'R' rating for women, but 'X' for men. I guess I have those women to thank for my experience watching The Reader, though that film is indefensible on many levels.

by: neuro_nurse

02-24-2009 @ 12:13am

LOL

by: Lord_Voldemort

02-24-2009 @ 6:03pm

I have to disagree with you on this Kevin -- there's a lot of space between saying that women should dress modestly and that women who fail to do so deserve what they get if they are raped or assaulted.

It's true that male sexuality is a difficult thing to get under control, and if a woman is uncomfortable with the leering looks of men around her, well maybe she should wear her skirts a little longer or show a little less cleavage or both. But I think nearly all men should have enough self-control where they can stop themselves somewhere short of sexual assault, even if the woman in question is marching around in lingerie.

LV

by: JamesM

02-24-2009 @ 6:22pm

The Taliban couldn't agree more, Kevin.

by: kevin47

02-24-2009 @ 6:34pm

Thank you for your meaningful contribution. You've clearly thought this through.

by: kevin47

02-24-2009 @ 6:39pm

I'm not sure I am seeing the disagreement. We both seem to be saying that women ought to be accountable for how they dress, which is a biblical concept (whether the Taliban agrees with it or not). We both seem to be saying that it is ludicrous to compare the concept to the "she was asking for it" defense.

by: JamesM

02-24-2009 @ 6:46pm

Why thank you. Your comments are always refreshing-- unlike so many knee-jerk, reactionary fundamentalist ones that others make. Keep up the good work.

by: kevin47

02-24-2009 @ 6:54pm

You don't even know what a fundamentalist is, or why that insult has (or does not have) any merit.

Comparing a biblical precept (that women should dress modestly), with which just about everyone in the nation agrees, to the Taliban's oppressive, sexist regime is flatly stupid.

I called you on it, and your best response was "I know you are, but what am I?"

Keep up the good work, indeed.

by: JamesM

02-24-2009 @ 7:13pm

You're probably right. I probably don't even know what a fundamentalist is.

Keep on writing, though. Your highly enlightening posts continue to reaveal fascinating facets of fundamentalism of which I was not aware until now.

by: MasterofCeremonies

02-24-2009 @ 7:50pm

Congrats James! You've been nominated for another Conversation Killer Award!

Conversation Killer Award - This award is given to a person who, in the course of a discussion makes a comparison to something so distasteful or wrong-headed that it sends a decent conversation downhill. Examples include comparing something to Nazism/Hitler/Holocaust, Communism, apartheid, flat-earth theory, etc.

by: Lord_Voldemort

02-24-2009 @ 9:14pm

Okay. I was a little confused. My main gripe isn't that the women were wrong, but the casual assumption that any group of religious nitwits can be labelled "right wing".

LV

by: letjusticerolldown

02-25-2009 @ 3:12am

Mr. Kevin and Mr. James--How about if you both just make the most thoughtful and compassionate and wise responses you can muster and leave it there. You are both fully able and responsible to do so.

by: squeaky

02-25-2009 @ 3:48am

Hear-Hear!

by: BuckeyeDon

02-27-2009 @ 1:34pm

Based on this person's previous comments posted on this blog, it seems, Marie, that we've attracted an ultra-legalist to this forum.

Unbelievable.

by: JamesM

02-25-2009 @ 11:11am

Kevin, I think I went over the top with you on this. My apologies.

by: WaveTossed

02-23-2009 @ 4:41pm

Great article and I also admire the women who resist this Hindu fundamentalist pressure.

As I recall, the Sena (and other Hindu fundamentalist groups) have been responsible for caste-based violence. I've read about entire Dalit ("untouchable") villages being burned down because a Dalit wanted to marry a non-Dalit. Other incidents of violence and lynchings against Dalits have occurred when Dalits have "dared" to drink from common water-wells used by higher-caste people.

A few years ago, a film was released in India, a fantastic film directed by a woman, Deepa Mehta. It was done in English and available on DVD: the name of the film is "Fire" and it is about a Lesbian relationship. When the film opened, Hindu fundamentalists groups went on a rampage against the theatre that was showing the film, vandalizing the theatre. Traditional Indian society is not just very patriarchal, it is also very homphobic. The fundamentalists demanded that the film be officially censored by the government censoring board. To its great credit, the film board refused to cave in to this fundamentalist pressure and refused to censor the film.

Let us hope that resistance continues against repressive and oppressive fundamentalist groups.

by: kevin47

02-23-2009 @ 5:03pm

"This same violent manipulation is used by those who blame women for getting raped because of their appearance or who tell women that they deserve to be hit by their husbands."

No it isn't. Saying women should dress modestly is biblical. Saying that men will be more likely to lust if women are dressed in skimpy clothing is a biological observation. Unless the same people behind the flier were not also telling men to guard their heart on this issue, then evoking a defense of rapists and wife beaters is inapt, not to mention lacking a dose of proportionality.

I don't agree with the tactic of addressing the issue with fliers, but in college, everything is fliers.

by: WaveTossed

02-23-2009 @ 5:15pm

"No it isn't. Saying women should dress modestly is biblical. Saying that men will be more likely to lust if women are dressed in skimpy clothing is a biological observation. "

Saying that men have no control over their "biological" urges is very sexst -- against men. Men (as well as women) have brains; God gave men brains as well as conscience, to exercise the same sort of self-control that women are capable of.

by: PASTOR JEFF

02-25-2009 @ 4:06pm

James: I don't intend to reignite you but I think I may be able to see why Kevin's assertion about "Biblical" modesty pushes your buttons. Women's dress is entirely cultural and has nothing to do with "natural male urges" or Biblical world view. How do tribal Africans "dress modestly"? What would these verses mean to them? Scripture is often used/abused by those appealing to their (the Scripture's) authority in the maintenance of the ruling cultural mores. In this sense, the Taliban, the Sri Rama Rena and certain elements of western fundamentalism seek to keep women and others in their place. I haven't seen that strain of fundamentalism in Kevin though. His comments are usually dealing with intellectual integrity through the lens of conservative (Biblically and politically) thought. Thank you for your apology to him. It speaks volumes to your own character.

by: SisterMarie

02-23-2009 @ 5:29pm

"Men (as well as women) have brains..."

Well, we now know where Kevin's brain is.

by: neuro_nurse

02-23-2009 @ 7:29pm

"in college, everything is fliers"

I don't know about that, but I'm a grad student. (although, not for much longer!)

Fortunately, the School of Public Health is off the main campus, and there are few, if any, undergraduates in the halls of the downtown campus. I ride my bike across the Uptown campus on my way downtown, and it is a struggle to guard my eyes on warmer days (I haven't fallen off my bike yet).

It seems to me that grad students tend to dress more maturely than undergrads, although I have had to change seats in class to avoid having some young woman's legs in my line of sight.

There are some women I know for whom I have to acquire a self-imposed inferior hemianopia when speaking to them

by: kevin47

02-25-2009 @ 5:21pm

Apology accepted

by: Eric77

02-23-2009 @ 7:52pm

That's a good point you make about trying to influence other cultures. It's a tough line to draw. Forcing western values onto other cultures has resulted in a backlash against western nations by traditionalists in those cultures. But we also can't just sit by and watch women be beaten and abused. It takes incredible tact and knowledge of a culture to be able to work constructively to bring about change and not be seen as the heavy hand of a western nation trying to impose our ideas of how people should structure their societies.

I hate the sexualization that is ever-present in U.S. culture. It can only be worse for someone in India or Iran who views it. I might get shouted down for saying it, but it's very easy for me to understand the minds of people who don't want their traditional society to end up like western culture 50 years from now. I understand how they see women's freedom as something that bring about the Britney Spearsification of their culture. I don't agree with it, but I understand it.

by: neuro_nurse

02-23-2009 @ 8:21pm

Thanks,

I hesitate to bring this up, but when I was working in Ethiopia, I watched one of our docs lecture our Ethiopian staff on female genital mutilation. She pretty much got blank stares in return. (to my knowledge, FGM was not widely practiced in that part of Ethiopia

by: SisterMarie

02-23-2009 @ 8:43pm

"Britney Spearsification"

I like your use of that term and I think that it's very appropriate to describe what our society has devolved to.

But as much as I lament the way our society has cheapened sex and the way that women are regarded, I think that if we look at the whole spectrum, it's really hard to make a general statement about where we have ended up.

When I was growing up, there were Blue Laws that prevented stores from operating on Sunday, and we dressed more modestly than what is the practice today. Then along came the Beatles and all that changed (no not really). But that ideal environment in which I matured also practice overt racial discrimination and its treatment of women was at times shameful.

So although we have a tendency to objectify the change in the person of Britney Spears and others, it really boils down to a matter of individual responsibility. Would any of these Hollywood stars be where they are today if we did not go to their movies? Would pornography make millions of dollars per year if people didn't buy it? Some of the most heinous crimes against women occur in Muslim countries where women's bodies are totally covered.

That is why I place the blame for these crimes in India totally on the perpetrators. We are not animals. Theoretically, these women should be able to walk down the street stark nekkid and remain unmolested.

by: Eric77

02-23-2009 @ 9:16pm

I completely agree. That's why I said I don't agree with it, but I understand their way of thinking. People in other cultures see the rise of gender equality tied directly to the hyper-sexualization of our culture. I think they're wrong to make a direct link, but I understand why they do.

by: neuro_nurse

02-23-2009 @ 9:30pm

"...these women should be able to walk down the street stark nekkid..."

Okay, that would probably make me fall off my bike!

by: kevin47

02-23-2009 @ 9:40pm

"Saying that men have no control over their "biological" urges is very sexst"

Fortunately, I didn't say that.

by: kevin47

02-23-2009 @ 9:40pm

"Well, we now know where Kevin's brain is."

She had me at pink underwear.

by: BuckeyeDon

02-23-2009 @ 10:05pm

That almost happened to me one morning last summer! Only the woman was on the bike (a motorcycle), not I, and I had just stepped off the bus, along with another passenger, and was waiting to cross the street. The light was turning red at the corner, and the woman in question had nothing on above her waist. She stopped at the red light and quickly made a right-on-red turn. This was in downtown Columbus, right at Statehouse Square.

The passenger who got off the bus with me (who is female, BTW) turned to me with a "did you see what I just saw?" look, and I responded, yes I saw. We discussed whether she was in violation of any public decency laws (turns out that she wasn't), and then we shrugged our shoulders and went our separate ways.

If it hadn't been 7 AM, I might have thought the woman was drunk. After thinking about it, I my hypothesis is that she may have lost a bet. You know, "if I lose, I ride my motorbike topless around Statehouse Square."

One never knows.

Comments sorted by highest rated. After voting you must refresh your page to see the sort order change.

by: WaveTossed

02-23-2009 @ 4:41pm

Great article and I also admire the women who resist this Hindu fundamentalist pressure.

As I recall, the Sena (and other Hindu fundamentalist groups) have been responsible for caste-based violence. I've read about entire Dalit ("untouchable") villages being burned down because a Dalit wanted to marry a non-Dalit. Other incidents of violence and lynchings against Dalits have occurred when Dalits have "dared" to drink from common water-wells used by higher-caste people.

A few years ago, a film was released in India, a fantastic film directed by a woman, Deepa Mehta. It was done in English and available on DVD: the name of the film is "Fire" and it is about a Lesbian relationship. When the film opened, Hindu fundamentalists groups went on a rampage against the theatre that was showing the film, vandalizing the theatre. Traditional Indian society is not just very patriarchal, it is also very homphobic. The fundamentalists demanded that the film be officially censored by the government censoring board. To its great credit, the film board refused to cave in to this fundamentalist pressure and refused to censor the film.

Let us hope that resistance continues against repressive and oppressive fundamentalist groups.

by: WaveTossed

02-23-2009 @ 4:41pm

Great article and I also admire the women who resist this Hindu fundamentalist pressure.

As I recall, the Sena (and other Hindu fundamentalist groups) have been responsible for caste-based violence. I've read about entire Dalit ("untouchable") villages being burned down because a Dalit wanted to marry a non-Dalit. Other incidents of violence and lynchings against Dalits have occurred when Dalits have "dared" to drink from common water-wells used by higher-caste people.

A few years ago, a film was released in India, a fantastic film directed by a woman, Deepa Mehta. It was done in English and available on DVD: the name of the film is "Fire" and it is about a Lesbian relationship. When the film opened, Hindu fundamentalists groups went on a rampage against the theatre that was showing the film, vandalizing the theatre. Traditional Indian society is not just very patriarchal, it is also very homphobic. The fundamentalists demanded that the film be officially censored by the government censoring board. To its great credit, the film board refused to cave in to this fundamentalist pressure and refused to censor the film.

Let us hope that resistance continues against repressive and oppressive fundamentalist groups.

by: kevin47

02-23-2009 @ 5:03pm

"This same violent manipulation is used by those who blame women for getting raped because of their appearance or who tell women that they deserve to be hit by their husbands."

No it isn't. Saying women should dress modestly is biblical. Saying that men will be more likely to lust if women are dressed in skimpy clothing is a biological observation. Unless the same people behind the flier were not also telling men to guard their heart on this issue, then evoking a defense of rapists and wife beaters is inapt, not to mention lacking a dose of proportionality.

I don't agree with the tactic of addressing the issue with fliers, but in college, everything is fliers.

by: kevin47

02-23-2009 @ 5:03pm

"This same violent manipulation is used by those who blame women for getting raped because of their appearance or who tell women that they deserve to be hit by their husbands."

No it isn't. Saying women should dress modestly is biblical. Saying that men will be more likely to lust if women are dressed in skimpy clothing is a biological observation. Unless the same people behind the flier were not also telling men to guard their heart on this issue, then evoking a defense of rapists and wife beaters is inapt, not to mention lacking a dose of proportionality.

I don't agree with the tactic of addressing the issue with fliers, but in college, everything is fliers.

by: WaveTossed

02-23-2009 @ 5:15pm

"No it isn't. Saying women should dress modestly is biblical. Saying that men will be more likely to lust if women are dressed in skimpy clothing is a biological observation. "

Saying that men have no control over their "biological" urges is very sexst -- against men. Men (as well as women) have brains; God gave men brains as well as conscience, to exercise the same sort of self-control that women are capable of.

by: WaveTossed

02-23-2009 @ 5:15pm

"No it isn't. Saying women should dress modestly is biblical. Saying that men will be more likely to lust if women are dressed in skimpy clothing is a biological observation. "

Saying that men have no control over their "biological" urges is very sexst -- against men. Men (as well as women) have brains; God gave men brains as well as conscience, to exercise the same sort of self-control that women are capable of.

by: SisterMarie

02-23-2009 @ 5:29pm

"Men (as well as women) have brains..."

Well, we now know where Kevin's brain is.

by: SisterMarie

02-23-2009 @ 5:29pm

"Men (as well as women) have brains..."

Well, we now know where Kevin's brain is.

by: neuro_nurse

02-23-2009 @ 7:29pm

"in college, everything is fliers"

I don't know about that, but I'm a grad student. (although, not for much longer!)

Fortunately, the School of Public Health is off the main campus, and there are few, if any, undergraduates in the halls of the downtown campus. I ride my bike across the Uptown campus on my way downtown, and it is a struggle to guard my eyes on warmer days (I haven't fallen off my bike yet).

It seems to me that grad students tend to dress more maturely than undergrads, although I have had to change seats in class to avoid having some young woman's legs in my line of sight.

There are some women I know for whom I have to acquire a self-imposed inferior hemianopia when speaking to them

by: neuro_nurse

02-23-2009 @ 7:29pm

"in college, everything is fliers"

I don't know about that, but I'm a grad student. (although, not for much longer!)

Fortunately, the School of Public Health is off the main campus, and there are few, if any, undergraduates in the halls of the downtown campus. I ride my bike across the Uptown campus on my way downtown, and it is a struggle to guard my eyes on warmer days (I haven't fallen off my bike yet).

It seems to me that grad students tend to dress more maturely than undergrads, although I have had to change seats in class to avoid having some young woman's legs in my line of sight.

There are some women I know for whom I have to acquire a self-imposed inferior hemianopia when speaking to them

by: Eric77

02-23-2009 @ 7:52pm

That's a good point you make about trying to influence other cultures. It's a tough line to draw. Forcing western values onto other cultures has resulted in a backlash against western nations by traditionalists in those cultures. But we also can't just sit by and watch women be beaten and abused. It takes incredible tact and knowledge of a culture to be able to work constructively to bring about change and not be seen as the heavy hand of a western nation trying to impose our ideas of how people should structure their societies.

I hate the sexualization that is ever-present in U.S. culture. It can only be worse for someone in India or Iran who views it. I might get shouted down for saying it, but it's very easy for me to understand the minds of people who don't want their traditional society to end up like western culture 50 years from now. I understand how they see women's freedom as something that bring about the Britney Spearsification of their culture. I don't agree with it, but I understand it.

by: Eric77

02-23-2009 @ 7:52pm

That's a good point you make about trying to influence other cultures. It's a tough line to draw. Forcing western values onto other cultures has resulted in a backlash against western nations by traditionalists in those cultures. But we also can't just sit by and watch women be beaten and abused. It takes incredible tact and knowledge of a culture to be able to work constructively to bring about change and not be seen as the heavy hand of a western nation trying to impose our ideas of how people should structure their societies.

I hate the sexualization that is ever-present in U.S. culture. It can only be worse for someone in India or Iran who views it. I might get shouted down for saying it, but it's very easy for me to understand the minds of people who don't want their traditional society to end up like western culture 50 years from now. I understand how they see women's freedom as something that bring about the Britney Spearsification of their culture. I don't agree with it, but I understand it.

by: neuro_nurse

02-23-2009 @ 8:21pm

Thanks,

I hesitate to bring this up, but when I was working in Ethiopia, I watched one of our docs lecture our Ethiopian staff on female genital mutilation. She pretty much got blank stares in return. (to my knowledge, FGM was not widely practiced in that part of Ethiopia

by: neuro_nurse

02-23-2009 @ 8:21pm

Thanks,

I hesitate to bring this up, but when I was working in Ethiopia, I watched one of our docs lecture our Ethiopian staff on female genital mutilation. She pretty much got blank stares in return. (to my knowledge, FGM was not widely practiced in that part of Ethiopia

by: SisterMarie

02-23-2009 @ 8:43pm

"Britney Spearsification"

I like your use of that term and I think that it's very appropriate to describe what our society has devolved to.

But as much as I lament the way our society has cheapened sex and the way that women are regarded, I think that if we look at the whole spectrum, it's really hard to make a general statement about where we have ended up.

When I was growing up, there were Blue Laws that prevented stores from operating on Sunday, and we dressed more modestly than what is the practice today. Then along came the Beatles and all that changed (no not really). But that ideal environment in which I matured also practice overt racial discrimination and its treatment of women was at times shameful.

So although we have a tendency to objectify the change in the person of Britney Spears and others, it really boils down to a matter of individual responsibility. Would any of these Hollywood stars be where they are today if we did not go to their movies? Would pornography make millions of dollars per year if people didn't buy it? Some of the most heinous crimes against women occur in Muslim countries where women's bodies are totally covered.

That is why I place the blame for these crimes in India totally on the perpetrators. We are not animals. Theoretically, these women should be able to walk down the street stark nekkid and remain unmolested.

by: SisterMarie

02-23-2009 @ 8:43pm

"Britney Spearsification"

I like your use of that term and I think that it's very appropriate to describe what our society has devolved to.

But as much as I lament the way our society has cheapened sex and the way that women are regarded, I think that if we look at the whole spectrum, it's really hard to make a general statement about where we have ended up.

When I was growing up, there were Blue Laws that prevented stores from operating on Sunday, and we dressed more modestly than what is the practice today. Then along came the Beatles and all that changed (no not really). But that ideal environment in which I matured also practice overt racial discrimination and its treatment of women was at times shameful.

So although we have a tendency to objectify the change in the person of Britney Spears and others, it really boils down to a matter of individual responsibility. Would any of these Hollywood stars be where they are today if we did not go to their movies? Would pornography make millions of dollars per year if people didn't buy it? Some of the most heinous crimes against women occur in Muslim countries where women's bodies are totally covered.

That is why I place the blame for these crimes in India totally on the perpetrators. We are not animals. Theoretically, these women should be able to walk down the street stark nekkid and remain unmolested.

by: Eric77

02-23-2009 @ 9:16pm

I completely agree. That's why I said I don't agree with it, but I understand their way of thinking. People in other cultures see the rise of gender equality tied directly to the hyper-sexualization of our culture. I think they're wrong to make a direct link, but I understand why they do.

by: Eric77

02-23-2009 @ 9:16pm

I completely agree. That's why I said I don't agree with it, but I understand their way of thinking. People in other cultures see the rise of gender equality tied directly to the hyper-sexualization of our culture. I think they're wrong to make a direct link, but I understand why they do.

by: neuro_nurse

02-23-2009 @ 9:30pm

"...these women should be able to walk down the street stark nekkid..."

Okay, that would probably make me fall off my bike!

by: neuro_nurse

02-23-2009 @ 9:30pm

"...these women should be able to walk down the street stark nekkid..."

Okay, that would probably make me fall off my bike!

by: kevin47

02-23-2009 @ 9:40pm

"Saying that men have no control over their "biological" urges is very sexst"

Fortunately, I didn't say that.

by: kevin47

02-23-2009 @ 9:40pm

"Saying that men have no control over their "biological" urges is very sexst"

Fortunately, I didn't say that.

by: kevin47

02-23-2009 @ 9:40pm

"Well, we now know where Kevin's brain is."

She had me at pink underwear.

by: kevin47

02-23-2009 @ 9:40pm

"Well, we now know where Kevin's brain is."

She had me at pink underwear.

by: BuckeyeDon

02-23-2009 @ 10:05pm

That almost happened to me one morning last summer! Only the woman was on the bike (a motorcycle), not I, and I had just stepped off the bus, along with another passenger, and was waiting to cross the street. The light was turning red at the corner, and the woman in question had nothing on above her waist. She stopped at the red light and quickly made a right-on-red turn. This was in downtown Columbus, right at Statehouse Square.

The passenger who got off the bus with me (who is female, BTW) turned to me with a "did you see what I just saw?" look, and I responded, yes I saw. We discussed whether she was in violation of any public decency laws (turns out that she wasn't), and then we shrugged our shoulders and went our separate ways.

If it hadn't been 7 AM, I might have thought the woman was drunk. After thinking about it, I my hypothesis is that she may have lost a bet. You know, "if I lose, I ride my motorbike topless around Statehouse Square."

One never knows.

by: BuckeyeDon

02-23-2009 @ 10:05pm

That almost happened to me one morning last summer! Only the woman was on the bike (a motorcycle), not I, and I had just stepped off the bus, along with another passenger, and was waiting to cross the street. The light was turning red at the corner, and the woman in question had nothing on above her waist. She stopped at the red light and quickly made a right-on-red turn. This was in downtown Columbus, right at Statehouse Square.

The passenger who got off the bus with me (who is female, BTW) turned to me with a "did you see what I just saw?" look, and I responded, yes I saw. We discussed whether she was in violation of any public decency laws (turns out that she wasn't), and then we shrugged our shoulders and went our separate ways.

If it hadn't been 7 AM, I might have thought the woman was drunk. After thinking about it, I my hypothesis is that she may have lost a bet. You know, "if I lose, I ride my motorbike topless around Statehouse Square."

One never knows.

by: squeaky

02-23-2009 @ 10:07pm

She didn't break any public decency laws? You Buckeyes are racey!

by: squeaky

02-23-2009 @ 10:07pm

She didn't break any public decency laws? You Buckeyes are racey!

by: BuckeyeDon

02-23-2009 @ 10:40pm

Maybe so. The laws were changed rather recently--maybe four years ago--not that there has been a rush of people changing the way they dress, or rather undress, in public.

I never found out the rationale for the change, either.

by: BuckeyeDon

02-23-2009 @ 10:40pm

Maybe so. The laws were changed rather recently--maybe four years ago--not that there has been a rush of people changing the way they dress, or rather undress, in public.

I never found out the rationale for the change, either.

by: squeaky

02-23-2009 @ 10:51pm

I suppose, if you think of it...since men can run around bare-chested...I'll stop there before this conversation devolves any more than is necessary...

by: squeaky

02-23-2009 @ 10:51pm

I suppose, if you think of it...since men can run around bare-chested...I'll stop there before this conversation devolves any more than is necessary...

by: kevin47

02-24-2009 @ 12:05am

Women used to complain that full frontal nudity only resulted in an 'R' rating for women, but 'X' for men. I guess I have those women to thank for my experience watching The Reader, though that film is indefensible on many levels.

by: kevin47

02-24-2009 @ 12:05am

Women used to complain that full frontal nudity only resulted in an 'R' rating for women, but 'X' for men. I guess I have those women to thank for my experience watching The Reader, though that film is indefensible on many levels.

by: neuro_nurse

02-24-2009 @ 12:13am

LOL

by: neuro_nurse

02-24-2009 @ 12:13am

LOL

by: Lord_Voldemort

02-24-2009 @ 6:03pm

I have to disagree with you on this Kevin -- there's a lot of space between saying that women should dress modestly and that women who fail to do so deserve what they get if they are raped or assaulted.

It's true that male sexuality is a difficult thing to get under control, and if a woman is uncomfortable with the leering looks of men around her, well maybe she should wear her skirts a little longer or show a little less cleavage or both. But I think nearly all men should have enough self-control where they can stop themselves somewhere short of sexual assault, even if the woman in question is marching around in lingerie.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

02-24-2009 @ 6:03pm

I have to disagree with you on this Kevin -- there's a lot of space between saying that women should dress modestly and that women who fail to do so deserve what they get if they are raped or assaulted.

It's true that male sexuality is a difficult thing to get under control, and if a woman is uncomfortable with the leering looks of men around her, well maybe she should wear her skirts a little longer or show a little less cleavage or both. But I think nearly all men should have enough self-control where they can stop themselves somewhere short of sexual assault, even if the woman in question is marching around in lingerie.

LV

by: JamesM

02-24-2009 @ 6:22pm

The Taliban couldn't agree more, Kevin.

by: JamesM

02-24-2009 @ 6:22pm

The Taliban couldn't agree more, Kevin.

by: kevin47

02-24-2009 @ 6:34pm

Thank you for your meaningful contribution. You've clearly thought this through.

by: kevin47

02-24-2009 @ 6:34pm

Thank you for your meaningful contribution. You've clearly thought this through.

by: kevin47

02-24-2009 @ 6:39pm

I'm not sure I am seeing the disagreement. We both seem to be saying that women ought to be accountable for how they dress, which is a biblical concept (whether the Taliban agrees with it or not). We both seem to be saying that it is ludicrous to compare the concept to the "she was asking for it" defense.

by: kevin47

02-24-2009 @ 6:39pm

I'm not sure I am seeing the disagreement. We both seem to be saying that women ought to be accountable for how they dress, which is a biblical concept (whether the Taliban agrees with it or not). We both seem to be saying that it is ludicrous to compare the concept to the "she was asking for it" defense.

by: JamesM

02-24-2009 @ 6:46pm

Why thank you. Your comments are always refreshing-- unlike so many knee-jerk, reactionary fundamentalist ones that others make. Keep up the good work.

by: JamesM

02-24-2009 @ 6:46pm

Why thank you. Your comments are always refreshing-- unlike so many knee-jerk, reactionary fundamentalist ones that others make. Keep up the good work.

by: kevin47

02-24-2009 @ 6:54pm

You don't even know what a fundamentalist is, or why that insult has (or does not have) any merit.

Comparing a biblical precept (that women should dress modestly), with which just about everyone in the nation agrees, to the Taliban's oppressive, sexist regime is flatly stupid.

I called you on it, and your best response was "I know you are, but what am I?"

Keep up the good work, indeed.

by: kevin47

02-24-2009 @ 6:54pm

You don't even know what a fundamentalist is, or why that insult has (or does not have) any merit.

Comparing a biblical precept (that women should dress modestly), with which just about everyone in the nation agrees, to the Taliban's oppressive, sexist regime is flatly stupid.

I called you on it, and your best response was "I know you are, but what am I?"

Keep up the good work, indeed.

by: JamesM

02-24-2009 @ 7:13pm

You're probably right. I probably don't even know what a fundamentalist is.

Keep on writing, though. Your highly enlightening posts continue to reaveal fascinating facets of fundamentalism of which I was not aware until now.

by: JamesM

02-24-2009 @ 7:13pm

You're probably right. I probably don't even know what a fundamentalist is.

Keep on writing, though. Your highly enlightening posts continue to reaveal fascinating facets of fundamentalism of which I was not aware until now.