I’m gonna start walking around with my fly open.
Marcy is usually a blabbering idiot but, if one takes the full context of her comments into account, makes, for her, unusually good sense.
I dunno about “inviting sexual harassment” but a woman who’s dressed up to look “hot” should reasonably expect that people are going to notice and likely comment on it.
Democrat Talaban!
Kaptur is an odd duck in the Democrat lineup. She is reliably leftist when it comes to a vote, but over the years she has occasionally said things that were not 100% PC.
I am not sure I entirely disagree with this.
We used to handle such things through social stigma. The problem is that now there are almost no commonly accepted taboos in matters of male female interaction.
When deliberately appealing to another’s base desires, do not be surprised at corresponding base reflexes.
Harassment & abuse is not excused, but if you don’t want trouble don’t invite it.
Modesty (in this context) is a Christian virtue for a reason.
I don’t know if invite is the best word, but dressing in a provocative manner certainly puts one at risk. Women instinctively know this. They certainly are well aware that dressing in a provocative way has the desired effect of “provoking” attention.
Good for this woman to speak the truth.
She’s not wrong. I don’t agree with her stances on anything else I’ve read, but she’s not wrong about this. That it was even controversial is a sign of how stupid women have gotten.
If Marcy wore a thong only it would cause eyes to avert.
I’m all for putting burqa’s on the DemoRat wumins. It would be an environmentally friendly plus.
She’s half-right. She’s wrong to say that wearing revealing clothing invites harassment. That blames the victim. But she’s right about the value of a dress code.
are you sating tha clothing syles have go back to the victorian era>
LMAO!
I clicked on the link and one of the first things I see is an advertisement that reads, “Meet Attractive Russian Singles Here” with a photo of a hot Russkie babe!
Wearing sexualized clothing only objectifys women. it has to do with our society and the fashion industry among a number of other industries all peddling attractiveness and sex. You only need to go to a high school and see what the kids are wearing to know that sexy sells.
Manners, modesty, tastefulness good virtue. Virtue is not in vogue.
Girls’/women’s clothing has been getting increasingly more reavealing, IMHO. I started calling this particular style “slutwear” in the ‘90’s.
“Maybe I’ll get booed for saying this, but many companies and the military [have] a dress code,” Kaptur reportedly said. “I have been appalled at some of the dress of … members and staff. Men have to wear ties and suits.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If, as a woman, you’re flaunting your assets with super short skirts, cleavage hanging out, off the shoulder tops/dresses, clothing that looks like lingerie, I DO think you are inviting a certain type of ‘attention’ .... some men just look, others might whistle or make a comment & some even act on what looks ‘inviting’. If you find these reactions offensive or can’t handle it, or consider it ‘sexual harassment/assault’, don’t (un)dress that way.
I’m going to date myself here, but when I was in ‘business’ & working for a financial institution, ‘we women’ had a dress code ... it was just understood that you wore sensible (not stiletto) heels or dressy flats, hose (no bare legs), a nice business suit (skirts only at first, but pants became acceptable before I left), a decent blouse with a high neckline/collar, & minimal, classy jewelry. There were affairs at work (caught a couple in the parking deck myself!) & I’m sure there was some harassment, sexual & otherwise (I had my own experience with the ‘otherwise’ variety). Sexual harassment was just hitting HR as something the employees had to be ‘educated’ about & at the time, it was used mainly as a weapon by upper management to get rid of people they didn’t like and couldn’t fire any other way; however, dressing as we did (men in suits/ties of course), it set a certain tone in the office .... actual ‘business’ was the business that was being conducted and very little of anything else.
Anita Hill?
Sure, that'll be good for wide-spread (partisan) participation.