Breasts, buttocks (buttock crack and buttock curve), genitals, nipples (female nipples, not male nipples), thongs are banned at Grammys.
I will never ever dress like Lil’ Kim to go outside my house. But if a woman wants it, I will not say, no. It is her wish to wear whatever she likes.
Really? But I am totally against the burqa.
I am probably thinking that the dresses are not objectionable if female nipples are covered. But again, I am curious to know if men could have big breasts and women were flat chested, would men have to hide their nipples?
Taslima, why do you not look beyond only sex? Only breast, buttocks, genitals, nipples, vegina etc in the so called name of reforming women of the world by you ? Currently you are living in a civilized country, What message you are giving to Indians and what gains you are getting -only your sexy approach and attitude? Perhaps it appears that you are sex-starved ! Why do you not talk of intellect, intelligence, education, social evils etc for reforming the society in the globe? You are a good writer-perhaps you are willing to spread sexism in the world by making women commodities! kksingh
I ‘do not look beyond only sex?’ You are a pathetic dickhead, K K Singh. You see sex in everything.
Rock on, Talisma. <3
I will never ever dress like Lil’ Kim to go outside my house. But if a woman wants it, I will never say, no. It is her wish to wear whatever she likes.
agree
But do the organisers of the Grammys have the right to say what people can wear in their ‘house’?
Yes, they have the right to say that breasts and buttocks are not allowed. And people have the right to enter the house by breaking the house rules and then they all have the right to fight verbally, but without violence.
I will be very disappointed if I don’t see someone deliberately breaking these rules. Double points for the double standard if it is by a man, or men!
C’mon guys, I want to see a cool sheer black shirt with visible thong straps above the pant line…
That is one gorgeous outfit.
You’ve got to hand it to her. Most people could not find an appropriate breast sticker that would accessorize her lavender hair.
I was under the impression that it was CBS behind the restrictions, not the Grammy organizers. Sounds more like the TV people are trying to force their views onto everyone. I, too, would love to see the stars ignore those prohibitions and wear the most flamboyant and sexy clothes they can find. If the uptight drones sitting at home don’t like it, they can turn to other channels, like watching grown men inflict concussions and broken bones upon one another in a sports arena, or watching a movie star slaughter dozens of extras in graphic 3D.
As for me, I won’t be watching the show anyway, so I don’t give a damn what they wear.
I agree! And the one the girl’s wearing ain’t too shabby, either.
Lil’ Kim looks gorgeous there.
I really resent the idea that the existence of nipples, which, barring some sort of trauma, all humans have, is considered obscene, and something that must be concealed. It seems so ridiculous. And is reflected in the fact that every damn bra out there has tons of foamy crap to make sure nobody knows that *gasp* there’s a nipple on that breast!
Recently I’ve been puzzled about this: in many mammal and bird species, it is the male that exhibits the secondary sexual characteristics and the females are rather plain. And I think (I’m no biologist) that that sex that exhibits tha secondary sexual characteristics is the dominant. So, if women exhibit at leas some of the secondary sexual characteristics, like exaggerated breasts and buttocks, they probably had at least some dominance in the beginning. Then I ask myself: isn’t it why all the patriarchal regimes are always so obsessed with covering up women’s sexual secondary characteristics? To take away their power…
i think your onto something dude
I’m surprised no one is covering the Woman that was burned at the stake in New Guinea for being a witch. I have looked all over FTB’s and nothing. Taslima you have got to see this. I know dropping blog links isn’t cool, but I think FTB’s should have this all over the place.
http://taimatheist.wordpress.com/
Even the women who think it’s ok to wear something like this, or the women who support their “right” to wear whatever they want, would not even think of wearing something like this to certain occasions, a funeral for example. Women know this kind of clothing is unacceptable, just like to draw attention to themselves.
Also, funny how a “feminist” like Miss Nasreen has no problem with what women wear, as long as they don’t choose to wear Islamic clothing. What kind of feminist is that?
I am against sexual objectification of women. But ‘it is my body I love it I show it’ is better than ‘it is my body I am ashamed of it I cover it’.
Who said it’s appropriate to wear something like this to a funeral? A funeral is an occasion that is about the deceased person and their family’s grief, same as a wedding is about the happy couple and NOT ABOUT YOU (unless you’re one of them) .
The Grammy’s, on the other hand, is actually about getting as much attention as you possibly can.
And why on earth shouldn’t women wear something like that?
Give me one reason that doesn’t boil down to:
A) God saidit
B) Womenz bodiez are icky
C) Menz are brute beasts who cannot control themselves if they see a woman’s body
Which are, coincidentially the three arguments in favour of muslim garb
That is not why a woman would not wear something like this to a funeral. The reason is because it would be considered undignified, not because the funeral is about the deceased person. Same reason this would be considered unacceptable for a teacher to wear to school. Islam wants BOTH men and women to be dignified for every occasion. This is why a woman shouldn’t wear something like this. It is an insult to women. The more women wear these kinds of clothing, the more they are thought of as sexual objects.
So, I see your argument boils down to C) Menz are brute beasts.
If you can no longer respect a woman because you saw some of her tits, that’s your personal problem. Other men are actually grown up and mature enough to be able to see a woman as a person no matter how much they have seen of their body or have even touched.
Also, if men were actually really unable to see a woman as anything but a sex-object, the onus to do something about it should still be on men.
It does not boil down to men are brute beasts. It’s something called human dignity, that’s why you would NEVER see a woman dressed up like that as a teacher. Are all the students and faculty beasts? Clothing is a part of human dignity. That’s why you get dressed up properly for a job interview, for example. Are all the hiring managers at every company immature?
So, who said that people should dress up like that as a teacher. You seem to be unable to understand that appropriateness depends on the occasion. School is about learning, a funeral about mourning, a wedding about the happy couple (and if they want to be bloody naked, more power to them) and a social event like the Grammy’s about see and be seen.
Why?
Last time I looked we’re all born naked. Unless the baby is severely defect in their naked form I don’t see why I need clothing to have dignity. There’s nothing shameful about the human body, neither the male nor the female. Again, if you are unable to see a naked body without going on sex-autopilot the problem is with you.
Yawn. Again, a job interview is about qualifications. Not about displaying your body.
But I still expect a manager to be able to concentrate on their job, no matter how attractive they find the person they’re interviewing.
I understand perfectly well that in secular/non-religious societies appropriateness depends on the occasion. In fact, that’s my exact point. In Islam, you have to dress appropriately for EVERY occasion. Think about what you’re saying for a second. You agree that this type of clothing is not ok for school since it’s a place for learning. You agree it would be a distraction in school. That’s what I’m saying too. It’s not about being ashamed of our bodies, or male domination, or men not being able to control themselves or anything like that. Where we differ is you’re creating some artifical boundary in society where in some places it’s ok for women to show their bodies and not so in other places. Images like the one above hurt women more than anyone else.The more images like this one are made public, the more it affects people on a subconsious level in terms of how women are viewed in society(especially amongst the youth). That’s why people are secretly taking pictures of a topless Kate Middleton, they know that society thinks it’s perfectly ok to view any naked woman and now the poor girl will never be viewed the same way again.
Does not compute. In fact, you’re contradicting yourself. You acknowledge that in secular society you have to be dressed appropriately, too and then you contrast it with Islam. The difference is that we actually have different standards for different occasions. Oh the horror people being able to navigate different social situations.
Yeah, and since nobody talked about school but about the Grammy’s, I don’t see your point.
So, what is it then?
Artificial as opposed to what? Dressing up in bedsheets isn’t actually natural.
Yeah, I’m saying that culture is a vast complex thing that changes a lot over time and from place to place. And I understand enough about history to realize that what is “appropriate” depends largely on society’s views of men, women and human bodies. So, yeah, parts of my culture and society say it’s totally OK for a woman to dress in a revealing outfit if she’s happy to wear it, since there’s nothing bad or icky about her body. The important thing here, and that’s going to come back in a minute is if she’s happy to wear it.
It’s about agency and freedom.
This has so much wrong I hardly know where to start.
A) You’re back again to “people just can’t control themselves”
B) There is a really, really big difference between Lil’ Kim’s boobs in that picture and topless Kate Middleton and it’s the one and important difference: Consent and agency.
Pictures of Kate Middleton without a bra aren’t taken because it’s actually her tits that are so important. If it was tits people were after they could just look at the one billion pictures avaible of naked female breasts. Those pictures are taken because they want to hurt her and shame her and disrespect her agency and boundaries. It is absolutely unimportant which body-part society fetishizes and how much women are covered up. Make a big deal about legs and ankles as Victorian England did and men will try to get views of a woman’s legs and shame her if they succeed. Fetishize hair and they will try to get her with her hair uncovered. Because it’s not about women’s bodies, it’s about control over women’s bodies. For a long time in western history (and for many cultures around the world) female breasts were actually NOT seen as sexualized, so there is no big deal seeing them and subsequently people don’t go out of their way to do so.
C) It IS perfectly OK to view a naked woman. WOMAN. Kate Middleton is an adult WOMAN, not a child. It’s you again showing your prejudice against women, why else would you call an adult woman by a term reserved for children? Again, the question is CONSENT. Lil’ Kim fully consents to you viewing her like this, Kate Middleton didn’t. That’s the same difference there is between sex and rape. So unless you think that because one woman consented to having sex means that another woman can be raped or causes another woman to be raped, your doing special pleading.
It’s not just different standards for different occasions, it’s different standards for different women too! For example. if Michelle Obama wanted to wear something like this to a party or just for a magazine shoot, would the President or his staff agree to it? Why do you think that is? Is it because they want to control her? They are unable to control themselves? No. It is because they think it’s undignified and beneath her position. That’s what I’m saying too. You keep saying it’s male domination or I have some sort of prejudice against women and I keep telling you I think it’s about dignity and repsect for women. This is why at work when the male employees make remarks about women, I NEVER join in. I think it’s undignified for me to talk about women like that.
You said it’s ok for people to view naked women if she consents to being photographed nude. This is where the slippery slope begins. They did not take pics of a topless Kate Middleton to disprespect her boundaires, they did it because they know it would sell. If they were to take a picture of her at a grocery store without her consent, it would not nearly cause as much of an uproar even though both cases are disrespecting her boundaries. Once society thinks it’s ok to view naked women, you open the doors for a whole lot of problems. Pornography and all its ill effects ( this is not just my opinion but science as well), companies literally selling women to make a profit (movie ads/posters showing half-naked women to enitce customers), etc. As this pervades through society, all the women suffer because now women are seen as sexual objects. This is why some news companies promote good looking women to anchors, weathergirls,etc regardless of qualifications. I can’t tell you how many times I hear women complain that another woman got a job or was promoted solely based on her looks.
If Michelle Obama were not First Lady, and not married, and wished to wear such a dress, would you claim it was undignified? So much of the problem with clothing is perception, and so much of that is based on archaic modes of thought. At one time in this country the electorate would have been scandalized to see the First Lady wearing slacks, or daring to show an ankle. No such scandal is evident in this more modern world.
Yes, her position dictates, to an extent, just what she can wear without creating a scandal. But if it were her choice to wear the type of dress shown in this post, who is to say that she cannot? As far as I’m concerned, only she has that right, and possibly, depending on their marriage, her husband. And ultimately even he cannot declare it wrong, only make his opinion known.
The pictures of Kate Middleton create such an uproar not so much because her breasts were on display, but because of who she is. Royalty by marriage, and those pictures reveal her to be every bit as human as the rest of us. If she were not a British princess there would be no outrage, because there would probably be no pictures.
Men, in particular, and even women themselves, sexualize women’s bodies because sex is so important to humans. If we stop associating nudity with sex then it doesn’t matter what anyone wears. Clothing would be reduced to its intended purpose of providing protection from the elements. Anyone should be able to walk down the street naked without worrying about their safety or their dignity. Pornography would likely disappear, or be a relatively minor business. Advertisers would have to sell their products based on merit rather than perceived sexiness.
But if people are going to get all worked up over the inadvertent, or even deliberate, display of a woman’s nipple, then other people are going to figure out how to capitalize on their indignity and shock.
@Hamad —
Sorry to say that, but EVERY “boundary” is artificial”, and ENTIRELY ARBITRARY.
Different cultures are defined by different and arbitrary sets of “boundaries”, different sets of “taboos”.
If you ever wondered why ancient greek statues of women show breasts&nipples so unabashed: the “taboos” in the ancient greek society did not apply to the upper torso of women — breasts were looked upon as utterly uninteresting. They were more interested in buttocks in this society — so that’s where the “boundaries” were drawn there.
Other sets of “boundaries” are found e.g. in tribes in the South America, Africa, Oceania, etc. and while every set of those “boundaries” may look “artificial” TO YOU, you may rest assured, YOUR set of “boundaries” looks entirely “artificial” and highly arbitrary to them.
And to some of us, obviously.
@Giliell —
danke. Gleich Dir gebe ich alles, damit unsere Kinder, vor allem die Töchter nicht in den vor tausenden von Jahren gezogenen Grenzen aufwachsen.
Aber die Knaben sind ja ohnehin am verlieren, wenn ich mich so umschaue …
I find it completely ridiculous that women are required to cover their chests all the time while men are not. It is nothing except hypocrisy and misogyny. It is a proven fact that breasts are only an object of fetish ( as in that they remind us of female form only) and not an actual sexual organ. But then, long hair, pretty hands and anything else can be an object of fetish. Hell, people do get turned on by sexy faces. So why banish breasts at all costs. Baffles me.
Don’t forget that this only ever applies to body-parts heterosexual men fetishize. Nobody has ever claimed that men need to hide their butts in a way they don’t give heterosexual women a quick flush of blood to the genitals…
You possibly will not be involved in Entire world compared to. Globe for just about any visitor world. If you opt to enter Globe versus. Globe, you’ll be transferred back to your home world. Only varying your residence entire world employing a globe exchange can change the Planet compared to. Planet engagement. GG http://www.google.com