posted
A few months ago, I was on an outing with my Orthodox Jewish cousins. I mentioned that I was in choir, and asked my oldest female cousin if she was still singing (as that side of the family has always been very interested in music). She just said, "No." flatly, and left it at that. I was a little surprised, considering I remembered the days when she and her sisters would run around the house singing loudly and we couldn't get them to stop! When I asked my younger cousin if there was any particular reason why she had stopped singing, she said thoughtfully, "Well, there's a rule in old Jewish laws that women shouldn't sing or perform in front of men because they might attract 'attention' from men. I personally don't believe in it, but I guess she does." I was incredulous, but there are a lot of things though taboo because they could attract sexual attention. Post any you've heard here.
------------------ "Your Honor, we find the man who stole the mare not guilty." -Welsh jury verdict
posted
Well, it may seem a little absurd that singing is prohibited because it may attract sexual attention, but that makes perfect sense.
You may now be under the impression that an activity shouldn't be banned simply because it attracts sexual attention. Doubtful though, since I'm quite certain you don't support exotic dancing at churches. It's all quite relative.
posted
Music can be very sexy, or sad, angry, joyful, beautiful, or just about anything else humans can be. And just because it's one thing sometimes doesn't mean it always has to be. Of my two most favourite bands, I'd consider one quite sexy, and the other most definitely not, though, strangely enough, the latter band sings about sex a lot more. I don't mean to be offensive, but I don't see the ban on music for women as fair in the least (how can anything so unrelated to gender that's still discriminated on that way be?). I also don't understand the singing/stripping comparison, especially since one activity is designed to attract sexual attention, and the other isn't, and besides, not everyone find the same things appealing. xprocessor, you express your opinions, and not necessarily those of the rest of us (most certainly, not mine), so please don't phrase your comments as though you do.
Posts: 5122 | From: I *came* from the land of ice and snow | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've heard of many things like this, ranging from the burqa to the idea that women shouldn't wear miniskirts because it supposedly makes her look as though she's after sex.
There are really two issues to be looked at here. Firstly, one has to consider the way in which activities, body parts and objects that are not intrinsically sexual are ascribed a sexual nature and consider the purpose of doing this. Often, I think, it is used as a means of controlling others (usually women, but not necessarily) through their sexuality, by saying that the responsibility for ALL sexual feelings lies within the features of one half of the party. While I don't want to deny that this could happen to men, throughout history it has often been the case that women are held responsible for the sexual reactions of men, but not vice versa, and as such womens' activities and bodies are hidden.
Secondly, why is it that some people consider it wrong to illicit a sexual response anyway? So long as that response is handled appropriately by the person who is having it (ie, they don't harrass or embarrass anyone), I really don't see a problem with it, as it is completely natural. Teaching that sexuality is shameful only makes problems like this worse.
posted
This reply is simply to Milke. Any assumption you make about how I "phrase" things is your assumption. I don't presume to represent the opinions of the general population, or yours.
Posts: 9 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Stating that something 'makes perfect sense' suggests that it is fact, not opinion, x.
Posts: 5122 | From: I *came* from the land of ice and snow | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
When I use the term "makes perfect sense" in that context, I only mean it literally. I'm not saying that my opinion is the correct one. I'm not saying that it's fact. I'm ONLY saying that it makes perfect SENSE. I'm saying that it is LOGICAL to assume that such a ban would be in place, despite the apparent absurdity.
Also, this is only my assumption, but you may have misunderstood where my opinion stands. Nowhere in my original post did I state that such a ban is correctly in place, or that I agree with it being there. I simply explained how (in my opinion), it makes SENSE that such a ban would be in place. NOT that it is RIGHT for it to be there.
I do not believe, nor have I ever believed, nor have I ever STATED that I believe that an activity should be banned simply because it attracts sexual attention.
posted
"Well, it may seem a little absurd that singing is prohibited because it may attract sexual attention, but that makes perfect sense."-- xprocessor
It makes sense that you should prohibit singing because it might attract sexual attention, but you, xprocessor, do not believe, nor have ever stated that you believe an activity should be banned simply because it might attract sexual activity. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't prohibited and banned synonyms?
--Haruka
------------------ "I never said I was a boy." - Tenoh Haruka, episode 92, Bishoujo Senshi Sailormoon
posted
I guess dress codes at school is a really big one. Also, there's this whole dancing issue, like certain types of dancing aren't allowed. And things like gender seperate bathrooms and locker/changing rooms I think exist because of this sort of thing. It pretty much permeates every aspect of life, as creepy as that is. People really aren't supposed to do or say things that perhaps could attract sexual attention, and that has to do with everything--it's the way we live our lives.
I wonder what the world would be like if this weren't the case.
(I love the heading of this post; I am still laughing.)
Posts: 356 | From: Phoenix--name that plurally | Registered: Dec 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gaffer: I guess dress codes at school is a really big one. Also, there's this whole dancing issue, like certain types of dancing aren't allowed. And things like gender seperate bathrooms and locker/changing rooms I think exist because of this sort of thing. It pretty much permeates every aspect of life, as creepy as that is. People really aren't supposed to do or say things that perhaps could attract sexual attention, and that has to do with everything--it's the way we live our lives.
I wonder what the world would be like if this weren't the case.
(I love the heading of this post; I am still laughing.)
Thanks! Anyway, I know what you mean about dress codes. While I don't exactly think people should be wearing certain things to schools, the other day a friend of mine got yelled at because her shirt lifted up slightly and showed her stomach. After they finished, I told her sarcastically, "Yeah, that's dangerous because anyone that sees your navel will be overcome with a violent urge to make passionate love to you!" They go a little too far sometimes. As for gender separate locker rooms, we had an incident at choir camp (stop making fun of me! ) where one of our gay choir guys wanted to stay in a girls' cabin, just because he had lots of female friends and felt more comfortable there. They decided against it, because there could be a scenario where heterosexual guys were saying that just so they could get into girls' cabins. I didn't agree with that, but I guess they were just trying to be safe. ::Sigh::
------------------ "Your Honor, we find the man who stole the mare not guilty." -Welsh jury verdict
posted
TenohSetsuna your getting the wrong end of the stick.
Xprocessor was merely considering the thought processes of THOSE who do not want "sexual attention." He has not shown any view one way or the other, all he has done is explain why THEY decide to ban singing and dancing.
------------------ 'An Anarchist is a Liberal with a bomb' Trotsky
Posts: 711 | From: England | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hate to be a pain in the butt, but can we please get back on topic here ... The topic is banning things that attract sexual attention, not debating what a user meant when they said something.
Please, and this is for all of us, be more clear in your posts and use "I" statements when saying what you feel. If you don't necessarily feel that way, say so. Saying what's right or wrong is generalizing and making moral value judgements, which we don't do here.
Copyright 1998, 2013 Heather Corinna/Scarleteen
Scarleteen.com: Providing comprehensive sex education online to teens and young adults worldwide since 1998
Information on this site is provided for educational purposes. It is not meant to and cannot substitute for advice or care provided by an in-person medical professional. The information contained herein is not meant to be used to diagnose or treat a health problem or disease, or for prescribing any medication. You should always consult your own healthcare provider if you have a health problem or medical condition.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Anyway, I know what you mean about dress codes. While I don't exactly think people should be wearing certain things to schools, the other day a friend of mine got yelled at because her shirt lifted up slightly and showed her stomach. After they finished, I told her sarcastically, "Yeah, that's dangerous because anyone that sees your navel will be overcome with a violent urge to make passionate love to you!" They go a little too far sometimes. As for gender separate locker rooms, we had an incident at choir camp (stop making fun of me! 
) where one of our gay choir guys wanted to stay in a girls' cabin, just because he had lots of female friends and felt more comfortable there. They decided against it, because there could be a scenario where heterosexual guys were saying that just so they could get into girls' cabins. I didn't agree with that, but I guess they were just trying to be safe. ::Sigh::
Printer-friendly view of this topic