Archive | April, 2017

4 Reasons Modesty Empowers Women and #FreeTheNipple Doesn’t

By Research on April 19, 2017 in Uncategorized

4 Reasons Modesty Empowers Girls and #FreeTheNipple Doesn’t
By simply: Kristen Clark
After a disguising half naked recent image shoot, Emma Watson (the star in the Beauty and the Beast movie) didn’t want to understand why individuals were phoning her a hypocrite.

Because an outspoken self-proclaimed feminist, a lot of people viewed Emma’s photoshoot as quite the conundrum.

They were wondering what sort of woman could stand for “women’s equal rights and female respect, very well while at the same time taking part in the sexual objectification of women.

In response to the pushback that Emma Watson received for fronting half naked, Gloria Steinem (a famous liberal feminist) rushed to her part in defense.

Gloria Steinem unashamedly told the multimedia, “Feminist can wear whatever the *** they want. They should be able to walk down the street nude and be safe. ”

And that, right there, is the illogicality of feminism.
Ladies demand respect. We demand dignity. But then we pose half naked for the cameras and question why we’re being objectified.

Sadly though, as clear as this contradiction may seem to be to some, it can brushed off by our culture as “no big deal. ” Feminism proceeds to promise women that stripping down will in some way empower us. Feminism claims us that sexual freedom will somehow bring about the respect that we desire.

As women, we are told that undressing is empowering for our gender

Sadly though, the results have proven to be not empowering.
A review called The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness explained, “Women are much less happy nowadays despite 4 decades of feminism. Irrespective of having more opportunities than ever before, there is a lower sense of well-being and life satisfaction.

Rather than rolling on board with this culture’s push to undress, Now I am proposing a new way of empowering women. Modesty.

4 Reasons Modesty Empowers Females and Nudity Doesn’t

one particular. Modesty places value on a woman’s body (nudity doesn’t).
Women were created by God to be physically beautiful. To have soft curves and a lovely figure. However, Our god didn’t design the personal parts of this beautiful body to be used by any passerby (Prov. 5: 18-19). When we, as women, uncover and reveal our intimate body parts, we cheapen what God has made valuable.

A sizable precious stone is considered treasured and valuable because really rare and uncommon. Modesty works the same way. By covering our close parts, we boldly express that our bodies are precious, valuable, and not available for common usage.

2. Modesty promotes woman dignity (nudity makes her an object).
Nudity and immodesty have completely backfired on women. Instead of gaining more respect and dignity in the eye of men, we have become objects to ingest. By undressing, we have trained many modern men to view us as nothing more than eyesight candy. We now have thrown our dignity to waste at the false promise of becoming more empowered.

Setting our clothes back on is the first step to regaining some surface. Actions speak louder than words. By dressing reasonably we silently proclaim that we are not purchasable objects. We are sensible girls that value our body, and expect the same from others.

As Jessica Rey stated, “modesty basically about hiding ourselves, really about revealing our self-esteem. ”

3. Modesty requirements respect (nudity does the opposite).
Women desire esteem just like men do. Sadly, nothing has demolished respect for women more than the porn industry. I looked up word alternatives for respect, and We found words like worth, regard, high opinion, appreciation, reverence, and honor. Adult encourages none of those for women. Why? Mainly because porn/nudity turns women into “objects” and objects are disposable and replaceable.

Girls that dress with modesty and decency naturally demand more respect. When we value our own bodies, we encourage the respect, exclusive chance, and admiration from those around us.

4. Modesty draws attention to the facial skin (nudity feasts on the body).
It’s not unusual to be out in public and discover an arbitrary guy carrying out a “once over” on a girl. When ever we, as women, undress and reveal sections of our intimate body parts, we really should not surprised when strangers feast on our body. By dressing immodestly we invite everyone, including creepers, to enjoy what isn’t theirs.

The attention we receive (good or bad) is based on our physical allure, not on who were as a person. By shower modestly we instantly put the creepers in their place. We send the message that our face is in which the focus needs to be. We encourage people to get to know “us” not our curves.

Nudity destroys self-esteem. Modesty promotes respect.
And just for the record, modesty doesn’t mean a woman is ashamed of her body… it means she is valuing what God has already given value to.

I would wish to hear your thoughts in the comment section below.

Do you really agree or disagree with the idea that dressing modestly enables women? Why?
In what ways have you seen nudity negatively affect the female gender?

Join the movement:

https://www.facebook.com/Free-The-Sexploited-247941085564461/app/206429986046631/ #FreeTheSexploited from #GoTopless

Research

The naked backpackers in Malaysia were thinking of Las Vegas, not Rome

By Research on April 10, 2017 in Uncategorized

By Jonathan Freedland

The naked backpackers in Malaysia were thinking of Las Vegas, not Rome Jonathan Freedland Today’s travellers are caught between respect for local customs and having the fun they dare not have at home Friday 12 June 2015 15.09 EDT S omewhere between Rome and Las Vegas stands the island of Borneo and its highest peak, Mount Kinabalu. Not literally, you understand. But in the map of our minds, its contours formed by our confused, conflicting attitudes to travel, tourism and the way we are meant to behave when we venture beyond these shores. That confusion saw Eleanor Hawkins, a British backpacker on a postgraduate gap year, convicted along with three others in a Malaysian court today of committing an obscene act on a mountain site deemed sacred by those who live in its shadow. Hawkins was one of a group of travellers who celebrated their scaling of Kinabalu last month by stripping off in near-freezing temperatures and capturing the moment with a photograph. Once the picture got out, the locals were incensed. When an earthquake struck a matter of days later, many saw cause and effect. “We have to take this as a reminder that local beliefs and customs are not to be disrespected,” said the deputy chief minister. He belongs to what you might call the Rome school – as in, “When in Rome, do as the Romans do.” The maxim has endured since medieval times as an instruction to the traveller that is part moral exhortation, part survival tip. For Hawkins and friends, it might have read: if you’re in a holy place and want to avoid trouble, keep your kit on. But the “When in Rome” principle now competes with a newer rule: “What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas.” The ethos it conveys may have originated in weekend benders in the Nevada strip – best captured by The Hangover movies – but it’s not confined to there. Instead it refers to the mindset that says, “You’re on holiday: the usual rules don’t apply.” Hawkins and her fellow naked ramblers were thinking of Vegas when they should have been looking to Rome.

Indeed, 2/3 reactions to the group – judgmental or sympathetic – can be divided into those two broad camps. On the one hand, there are the Romans. They believe travel is about exploration and learning, informed by curiosity and respect for the locals. This group would regard a guidebook as second only to a passport in its indispensability. Though one does not want to be seen clutching such a book too obviously. That would mark one out as – dread word – a “tourist”. The aim is, if not to pass as a local, then to be accepted as a genuine traveller. This kind of visitor wants to avoid all the usual “tourist traps” – a favoured Roman phrase – and find only those backstreets, hidden cafes and bustling markets frequented by locals. For the Roman, joy comes when they don’t see a single person like themselves. The spiritual follower of Las Vegas, by contrast, knows they are a tourist and embraces the fact. They are on holiday to have fun, ideally in the sun, with the foreign locale as mere backdrop. Indeed, foreign-ness is, where possible, avoided. Best if the menu is in your native language and, ideally, offers familiar food. You’re not really interested in the locals so much as seeing other people from back home, albeit in a different, warmer, less inhibited context. The aim is to behave in a way you’d never dare in your own town or city, where too many people know you and you risk shame. Protected by a kind of anonymity, free of the usual restraints, you can give in to pleasure. That’s the true purpose of your trip, not the discovery of a different language or culture. Who cares that you’re in Spain? You’re in Shagaluf. My guess is that you’re thinking this division – between Rome and Las Vegas – is all about snobbery, distinguishing between one class of traveller and another and between a grubby present and a more elevated past. Admittedly, there’s been a fair bit of snobbery in the discussion provoked by the Malaysian case, with plenty speculating that the bareback backpackers would never have got into this mess had they just a copy of the Lonely Planet stuffed into their (abandoned) shorts, as earlier generations surely would have. There’s no doubt that the smartphone has changed travel – making it easy to book tickets or hotels without reading a word about the place you’re about to visit – but the point doesn’t quite apply in this case. Hawkins and friends were Roman enough to have a local guide accompany them on their mountain trek, doubtless informing them of its sacred status. Trouble was, they got all Vegas and did their own thing, stripping off at the top of Kinabalu in a way they’d have never dared at Stonehenge. As for class, that’s not right either. The forerunners of today’s Shagaluf pleasure-seekers were 19th century aristocrats. Trollope is full of gentlemen repairing to Ostend to fight a duel, an act that would have been deemed unseemly at home. Robert Burns’s poem, The Twa Dogs, describes an upper class Englishman on holiday on the continent, who down Italian vista startles / Whore-hunting amang groves o’ myrtles. He later repairs to a German spa, to cleanse himself of the venereal disease he has picked up on his travels.

Christopher Harvie, the co-author of a history of tourism, says the foreign bender was a familiar feature of upper class life, characterised by an arrogant disregard for local sensitivities. When working people began to travel, hedonism became the driving principle for them too. “If they went anywhere by boat, they were able to get totally plastered,” Harvie told me. Trains were different: the lack of lavatories made heavy drinking too risky. But once at sea, they’d get “legless.” The exception were the people in between. It was the earnest middle class who felt a holiday should be about education and improvement, all bracing walks and phrase books. They were curious, if not deferential, to local custom. Harvie recalls that his own mother was so Roman, a family photograph from 1936 shows her visiting a hospitable German family – politely clutching a swastika flag. Things are different now. Jet travel means we can get much further away. Yet technology means we can never quite escape home: thanks to WhatsApp and Instagram, you’re never completely free of the judgment of friends and family, even on the other side of the globe. Meanwhile, even the well-intentioned traveller can let her guard down, assuming that just because there’s a Starbucks on the street corner, the locals have the same attitudes as she does – forgetting that some of them might believe in, say, a link between nudity and seismic activity. Eleanor Hawkins forgot the Roman rule. But in the age of social media, when images can be transmitted worldwide in an instant, the Nevada principle is crumbling. These days, what happens in Vegas almost never stays in Vegas.

Research

Navigation

Archive | April, 2017

Share this:

Share this: