Quote Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla View Post
A lot of the more revealing woman's clothes aren's just about showing what's there, but also emphasising and teasing (or taunting).
That's the entire point, but not for the reasons that you think.

I guess the easiest way to summarise is accentuating the positive while eliminating the negative; revealing a part of the body we're happy with is a means of taking attention away from those we're not.

Here's what I think though: Women dress to provoke a fairly primative response from men, as a sexualised way of showing off, and they judge each other as sexual competition. That's fine, but it somewhat cuts across the claim that women "want to be appreciated for their mind".
Really? You think we dress to get a response from men? Is this a sweeping generalisation of the female dress code or just in terms of going out dressed "like a slut"?

Everyone wants to feel attractive, regardless of gender, just to varying extents and in different ways; I don't see how the way we might "dress to impress" should conflict with other things, though. A plunging neckline doesn't mean that's all you want to be recognised for.

Yes, I think we can because gender can cut across religion and politics too. Just because not all men think something doesn't mean that men cannot make collective decisions as a group.
But it's still restricted by religion, politics, the media and so on; I wasn't doubting that decisions could be made as a group, but whether they could be followed effectively when there's so many obstacles in the way.

Doesn't mean I agree though :-D
I wouldn't have it any other way.

My concern is that women are being encourage to disregard generations of inbred caution around men and flaunt themselves, just because they think they should be allowed to.

That's akin to me claiming I should be allowed to barge into 10 Downing Street and demand that David Cameron expalin why he has gutted out armed forces and raised tuition fees - and then complain when I get arrested.
While I liked the example, it's not really the same thing, is it? I get that both are centered around the freedom of expressing one's self, but I don't see where the two correlate; British law doesn't restrict what I wear (compared to say, Iran, where I'd have to cover my hair, arms and such), but it does stop me from giving David Cameron a slap. :3