Wednesday, December 10, 2014

A Modesty Proposal

Remember when some folks got all worried that somehow someway the secret Muslims would impose Sharia law on us all and make us live up to the strict moral codes of Islamic law?  They were sure that we would be told what to wear and how to act and be forbidden to do lots of other things that would destroy our very way of life.  Laws had to be enacted to protect us against such a terrible fate.

But it looks like it’s too late.  Sharia law has taken over the Montana state legislature.

Some female lawmakers have criticized the Montana Legislature’s new dress code as unfair to women.

The new code, in addition to calling for women to wear suit pants, dresses or skirts, tells women to be “sensitive to skirt lengths and necklines,” according to Helena news station KXLH.

I’m impressed that they still allow women into the capitol building.

3 barks and woofs on “A Modesty Proposal

  1. As long as men are required to wear jacket and tie to do capital business, I see nothing wrong with requiring a similar severity in female attire. It is ridiculous to equate a dignified dress code with sharia law.

    • Indeed. Men are accustomed to covering up: pants and sleeves are expected in most situations, and more is commonplace. There’s a consequent lack of sensitivity to this from that half of the population – especially as women’s necklines and skirt lengths have historically been less about comfort or style and more about what men find attractive. Consider the stereotypes: women like men in suits because the suit says “power”; men like women in revealing dresses because the dress says “sex”. The Montana dress code is all about control, and about demanding modesty (and presumably, either wholesome virginity or domestic fidelity) from the women in the chamber, which is an attitude that has everything to do with subordinating women and nothing to do with women’s skills or professionalism.

Comments are closed.