What cost vanity? "Toe Cleavage"

[Icingsugar]

Wow. This got infected pretty damn quick.

Chipping in my 2c and leaving...

Yes, the female beauty ideal is mostly created by men. And yes, this causes sense of inferiority (against that ideal) in many women, which quite often leads to such unnatural things as eating disorders and plastic surgery.

But can we please resist simplifying matters?

The same thing that drives women to alter their bodies also drives men. We all want the attention of the other (or in some cases, the same) sex, and we all tend to go to extremes to achieve that.

If I were to follow the simplification of your argument, then men damaging their health by eating steroids to look muscular are womens fault?

I know, the presure on women (and I'll narrow my arguments down to women in the western world I live in) is harder than it is on men to be physically perfect. (A man can more easily compensate with economic and social success, to still be a catch.) I'm playing a bit of the good old devil's advocate here. But only a little bit.

/Ice - avid dismisser of all things polarized

ps. Is pre-teen waists a part of the female beauty ideal? Eww! There must be some different versions of ideal out there.

 

[Quasimodem]

I have had one experience which feelingly impressed upon me the tyranny of unfeeling fashion.

If you are not old enough to remember the early seventies, take my word for it, sensible men's shoes were not to be had. It was far easier to purchase shoes with taller than four inch soles, than it was to purchase a pair with lower than two inch soles. No matter how hard I looked, the best I could find was a pair – almost flats – with only an inch and a half of sole.

As that was all I could find, and barefoot was no option, I bought a pair. Whenever I wore them, I fell down a lot, especially ass ending stairs.

I finally had to spend ten times the normal price for a pair of orthopaedic shoes. During the rest of that time when platform shoes were a fashion, no one questioned me about my unfashionable shoes.

In fact, I discovered that it is no putdown to describe a man as wearing "sensible shoes." The same, however, is not true for a woman.

If a man dresses sloppily, he's a "slob," perhaps even "a good-natured slob!" Similarly attired, a woman is a "slut," and nary any comment is made about her "nature."

Far greater pressure is placed upon a woman to maintain an acceptable appearance, and a far more active merchandising industry exists to dictate what is, and is not, acceptable.

If someone such as Mr. Black were capable of inflicting as much heart burning in a man, as he habitually does to highly-visible women, he would find his fashion pronouncements eclipsed by news stories about the beating he took from someone unfavourably mentioned in his ten worst-dressed list.

As it is, there is a certain cachet of approval a man receives from his peers from gaining that effete twit's notice.


Surgery to fit shoes, is still – in my estimation – going too far, but I can understand the impetus.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quasimodem said:

I have had one experience which feelingly impressed upon me the tyranny of unfeeling fashion.

If you are not old enough to remember the early seventies, take my word for it, sensible men's shoes were not to be had. It was far easier to purchase shoes with taller than four inch soles, than it was to purchase a pair with lower than two inch soles. No matter how hard I looked, the best I could find was a pair – almost flats – with only an inch and a half of sole.

As that was all I could find, and barefoot was no option, I bought a pair. Whenever I wore them, I fell down a lot, especially ass ending stairs.

I finally had to spend ten times the normal price for a pair of orthopaedic shoes. During the rest of that time when platform shoes were a fashion, no one questioned me about my unfashionable shoes.

Quasi, are you referring to the same seventies as I remember? The reason I ask is that I bought many pairs of shoes during that decade, wingtips and oxfords and sneakers and canvas shoes with crepe soles and I don't remember what all. I bought them at Macy's or mail order from Stuart McGuire or Shoe Fair or any place I wanted to get them. I did see some platform soles and I just laughed at them and marveled that some men would wear such silly things and bought the cloth or leather shoes I wanted. I just wasn't a slave to fashion.

Quasimodem also said:

If a man dresses sloppily, he's a "slob," perhaps even "a good-natured slob!" Similarly attired, a woman is a "slut," and nary any comment is made about her "nature."

Far greater pressure is placed upon a woman to maintain an acceptable appearance, and a far more active merchandising industry exists to dictate what is, and is not, acceptable.

If someone such as Mr. Black were capable of inflicting as much heart burning in a man, as he habitually does to highly-visible women, he would find his fashion pronouncements eclipsed by news stories about the beating he took from someone unfavourably mentioned in his ten worst-dressed list.

And I respond thusly:

If a man dresses sloppily, he is called a slob and being a slob is a big turnoff for women, so most men are not slobs but they also have enough sense that they don't cripple themselves to meet some arbitrary ideal.

Although that is a dictionary definition, sloppily dressed women are not usually called "sluts", at least not in the US. There is another thread that goes into that extensively. I am a pariah there also.

There IS more pressure placed on women to maintain certain standards of attire but the pressure is mostly by other women. A woman might be traumatized by being at a party with another woman wearing the same dress but most men would probably not even notice or, if they did, would consider it to be of no consequence. If two men were dressed identically, it would be a normal thing.

Probably about 99.99% of the women in the US are not even noticed by Mr. Black because he mostly concentrate on actresses. If a woman is successful in business or politics or athletics, and is named to his worst-dressed list, she would probably consider it to be a compliment, as would most men.

I have to agree with Ice that the ideal beauty is largely created by men. Not entirely but largely. Men do admire big tits, to use Svenskaflicka's words, but no normal, straight man would admire a pre-teen waist on a full-grown woman. That would be strictly skinny. I want to emphasize the word "Ideal". I drool over a Playboy centerfold but I love my flat-chested wife. And she is intelligent enough to know this. Beautiful women are nice to look at, but almost nobody with any sense is going to marry a woman based on her looks. I know. I know. A beautiful woman can also be a wonderful person, but she will be appreciated more for that than for her looks.

Ice, when you mentioned eating disorders, I assume you mean anorexia. I can't imagine any man finding a victim of advanced anorexia to be physically attractive.

And, to respond to Svenskaflicka:

"Female circumcision" is a terrible thing, and I believe it is illegal all over the world, and it has never been common in the US, so I won't say any more about it.

Svenskaflicka, I agree that men admire the "babes" but after admiring them, they happily go back to their wives and girl friends. Even if the wives and girl friends are also "babes", men still admire other "babes".

You also said:

It's easy to say that women should just throw off their burdens and go their own way, but the great mass will not do that without support from men!

Believe me, men do not want to see women cripple themselves just to go, on a scale of one to ten, from a 6.8 to a 6.9. If women choose to do so, however, there is not much that men can do. By the way, I abhor judging people on a scale of one to ten like that but it seemed to be a good illustration.


__________________



By the way, Perdita and Destinie, after reading subsequent posts, you may agree that I was right when I said that men would be blamed.

 

[raphy]

I'm just going to offer my opinion as well,
Most grown woman I know don't dress for anyone aside from themselves (an as profession calls for) I really don't care for your generalization because it portrays woman as empty headed paper dolls.

Also your comparison smacks of idiocy, it's like saying despite all the traffic accidents
some foolish people still insist on driving

I would venture to say, Mrs D, that you (and the other ladies that I know of here on AH) are not representative of the female psychological norm in society.

 

[champagne1982]

Steve Martin twists it best...

Cruel Shoes by Steve Martin

Anna knew she had to have some new shoes today, and Carlo had helped her try on every pair in the store. Carlo spoke wearily, "Well, that's every pair of shoes in the place."

"Oh, you must have one more pair ..."

"No, not one more pair...Well, we have the cruel shoes, but no one would want..."

Anna interrupted, "Oh yes, let me see the cruel shoes!"

Carlo looked incredulous. "No, Anna, you don't understand, you see, the cruel shoes are..."

"Get them!"

Carlo disappeared into the back room for a moment, then returned with an ordinary shoebox. He opened the lid and removed a hideous pair of black and white pumps. But these were not an ordinary pair of black and white pumps; both were left feet, one had a right angle turn with seperate compartments that pointed the toes in impossible directions. The other shoe was six inches long and was curved inward like a rocking chair with a vise and razor blades to hold the foot in place. Carlo spoke hesitantly, "...Now you see why...they're not fit for humans..."

"Put them on me."

"But..."

"Put them on me!"

Carlo knew all arguments were useless. He knelt down before her and forced the feet into the shoes.

The screams were incredible.

Anna crawled to the mirror and held her bloody feet up where she could see.

"I like them."

She paid Carlo and crawled out of the store into the street.

Later that day, Carlo was overheard saying to a new customer, "Well, that's every shoe in the place. Unless, of course, you'd like to try the cruel shoes."

 

[destinie21]

Box,

I just want to say reading your post was like being privy to
a 30 second glance into attention deficit disorder as lived in the
vastly exaggerated Bizzaroworld.

I was agreeing with you earlier that woman don't dress entirely for men, they do however dress to impress so to speak (hence long-line bras, girdles and control top pantyhose.) I made mention of your analogy though because seconds later you call a woman who would wear high heels stupid and then go on to say that since we can't burden our pretty little heads with responsibility we just blame men (hence my the pretty little paper dolls comment) In any case men are partially to blame because no matter what you may say it's a fact that it's human nature to compete, you may tell me that folks love Britney Spears based on her voice and not her half naked gyrations but alas I wont believe you, so if I had a man I wouldn't want him looking all over town before he finally meandred his way on back to me.

I know I look damn good but having other people think so too is a kick.


BTW As far as eating disorders are concerned that has everything to do with distorted self image and virtually nothing to do with how others see you.


Ps. Thanks Raph
ya hottie

 

[Guest]

I would venture to say, Mrs D, that you (and the other ladies that I know of here on AH) are not representative of the female psychological norm in society.

There's a difference between the psychological norm and the stereotype. All the women I've known in my life, and I'd say the majority of the women where I work do not fit either of these labels. Women are more conscious than many of the men on the AH seem to attribute them.

Box, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt; I'm thinking now that you need to express yourself better, with more clarity and articulation. Still, trying to read between, over and under your lines is difficult. At the surface level I still find much of what you say grating, if not plainly offensive.

Perdita

 

[Boxlicker101]

Clarification

Well, Destinie, if you had problems folloiwing my last post, I have made some changes in it and it should be clearer now.


I have been looking over my posts and I don't see any reference to "pretty little heads". Can you point out where it was?

I also did not say that wearing high heels is stupid. What I did say, or at least mean, is that wearing shoes or other garments that are very uncomfortable and can cause medical problems is stupid. If you can wear high heels with comfort, then good, wear them. You also said that you have sense enough to only wear them for shorter periods of time. Earlier, I said that there was nothing wrong with the woman who had a bunionectomy, but the others, meaning the women who had pieces of their feet removed to wear fashionable shoes, were silly. I don't think you would disagree with that.

In this society, there are a certain mumber of enablers who say that nothing that happens to somebody is that person's fault; someone else is responsible. In particular, I have read these people offering the opinion that anorexia is the fault of men because men set the standards of beauty and women become anorexic trying to meet those standards. I have always thought that was ridiculous because an anorexic meets nobody's standards of beauty. I'm aware that anorexia is a matter of self image but it usually starts as a desire to lose some weight in order to look better or for other perfectly normal and ordinary reasons and then further weight loss becomes an obsession.

Someone mentioned ass cleavage before. I remember an actress named Vicky Duggan and she was known for wearing dresses that were cut very low in the back and wearing either no panties or very low slung panties,m and actually showing ass cleavage. At the time, it was referred to as "reverse cleavage", because "ass", as part of the body was not ever mentioned. This was in the fifties or sixties.

 

[Icingsugar]

BTW As far as eating disorders are concerned that has everything to do with distorted self image and virtually nothing to do with how others see you.

Nothing for the appearance neurotic had to do with how other see them. It has to do with how they think others see them, which of course is an entirely different matter. In extreme cases, as with anorexia and bulimia, the stress of appearance neurotism have totally collapsed the victim's sense of self and commom sense reasoning. The disorder is dormant in many, but is most often triggered by an extreme lack of appearance self esteem. When in the middle of it, this is often projected upon other things, such as a loathing for food in general, or constant quewstioning of one's character.

I've had to deal with that shit up close more than once (a sister, a cousin, two friends), and I've done some studying of the subject. And I can say that it is not entirely caused by the media pressure (people had the same disorder in past centuries when the ideal were different), but due to the last years of perfectionism and fitness hysteria, it escalated in a sickening tempo.

/Ice

 

[Svenskaflicka]

And, to respond to Svenskaflicka:

"Female circumcision" is a terrible thing, and I believe it is illegal all over the world, and it has never been common in the US, so I won't say any more about it.

Women's clitoris were also cut away in many places in Europe, Great Britain, and the USA, especially during the second half of the 1800's. Dr Isac Baker Brown, one of the most sought after gynaecologists in England, seem to have performed this operation primarily as a "cure" against masturbation. Most Brittish doctors thought that his proofs were lacking in convincibility, and around 1865, the procedure had become very uncommon.
But in USA, doctors continued to use it, and over there, they even removed the ovaries. E Wallenstein writes that in the 1870's, thousands of women were put through this type of operations. Doctors claimed that they cured "sexual deviances" like masturbation and "nymphomania" by removing the clitoris. ("it was considered impossible that any decent woman would be able to enjoy sex").
They even claimed that "the genital excitement that is triggered by putting a sewing machine in motion" could make women sick. (Proably women who straddled a horse while riding were also considered threatening.)

After 1880, the number of operations where the ovaries were removed, decreased, but it was still common to cut away the clitoris. The doctors primarily wanted to prevent homosexuality among women - open lesbianism, suspicious tendencies, or plain dislike of men. A surgeon from Boston claimed in 1897 that "a young woman's sexuality is not placed withing her genitals", and that female orgasm was a disease. It was necessary to remove such an organ like the clitoris, because it could become stiff. This procedure was very common in mental hospitals up to 1935.

All the way into the 20th century, american doctors considered doing infibulation [ the most cruel form of circumcision, where the clitoris and the inner genital lips are cut away, and the outer labias are stitched together, sometimes after having been carved out to be thinner, Svenskaflicka's comment ], in order to stop these women from masturbating. In the standard issue Diseases of Infancy and Childhood, by Holt, 1936, it was recommended to stop girls from masturbating by burning or cutting the clitoris away. Fran Hosken, who was the first one to describe genital mutilation on a bigger scale, quotes from an issue of New National Black Monitor from 1982. In a letter from the editor, both clitoridektomi [ medium-cruel form of mutilation, the entire clitoris and parts of the inner lips are cut away, Svenskaflicka's comment ] and infibulation are recommended to prevent american teenage girls from pre-marital sexuality.
A scientist, Lilian Passmore Sanderson, writes that both these procedures exist in Europe and the USA still today.

The War Against Women, Marilyn French




Your turn.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Female Circumcision (Mutilation)

I find it hard to believe the operations you describe were ever that widespread in the United States. There may have been a few quacks who did them (licensed physicians can also be quacks) but I can't believe the operations were ever done routinely.

I also can't believe they are ever done in the United States any more. I know they are illegal and no doctor would ever do them. It might be possible for some misguided parents to take their teenage daughters to some remote place in Africa to have this done. There are crackpots who advocate this, just as there are crackpots who say that masturbation is a sin.

 

[Svenskaflicka]

Box... your country is very, very nice, and has a lot of good things.

BUT, it also has a lot of homeless people sleeping in cardboard boxes, teenagers killing each other over a pair of sneakers, other teenagers drinking and using drugs, religious morons who believe that masturbation is a sin and that women should obey the men, police officers who think that women can suit theirselves if they get raped - they shouldn't have left the safety of their home - or robbed, politicians who cut back on social security while living in luxury, criminals in track suits, criminals in pin-striped suits, TV- and film producers who refuse to show strong independent middleaged women on the white screen, psychos who murder people just for the heck of it, editors who care more about selling papers than printing the truth, bimbos who think they'll never get married unless they remain virgins until their wedding night, women who cut their bodies up and take away or add stuff to it in order to look like over-sized Barbie dolls, men who drool over and jerk off to these Barbie dolls yet act surprised that women would want to mutilate themselves this way, modern-day people who actually believe that if a woman looks sexy, it's her own fault if she gets raped, because she tempted the poor man, double standards that praise male sexuality but sugarcoat female sexuality and insist that it most only exist when justified by romantic notions, illusions of grandeur when it comes to american politics and american virtues, home-blindness when it comes to accepting its own faults but a truly sharp eye for others', some of the world's fattest people, scientist and doctors who actually believe that it's better to mutilate women's genitalia than to embrace and encourage and learn from women's sexuality,
AND people who are in denial.

Which category would you like to include yourself to?

Svenskaflicka
Who Knows The Faults OF Herself And Her Country And WIll Be Happy To Discuss Them On Another Thread, And Concentrate On America In This Thread

 

[Wills]

I would regard myself as a pretty steady person, not inclined to 'blow off' however...

I find it extraordinary that some one can post replies without even check that basic background to their claims.

1. Female circumcision was only 'outlawed' by US congress in 1993.
2. Female circumcison is routinely practised as a 'cosmetic' operation in hospitals throughout the US, for the clinical reason of improving orgasm.
3. One hospital in the US has 200 waiting patients, check on Google
4. This months Scientific American contains a leading article titled "New Techniques in Female Circumcision."

Use your head.

Will's

 

[Wills]

Bump

No apologies. Box this is happening now, takes three clicks of your mouse.

Wills

 

[Boxlicker101]

What Am I

Well, I used to be some of those things. I was homeless at one time but never slept in a cardboard box. When I was a teenager, I never killed anybody nor was I killed but I did drink a lot. Never used hard drugs or marijuana though. I am not a religious moron who believes that masturbation is a sin and if I were, I would not be writing on this site. I am not a police officer. I do believe there are women who do foolish things and get raped because of them. This would include things like hitch-hiking at night or getting drunk by themselves in a strange bar and leaving with a man or group of men or foolishly doing other reckless things. The fact that the woman was reckless does not at all excuse the men, but such women should accept some criticism for putting themselves so much at risk.

I have never been a politician, nor will I ever be one but I am drawing social security and it has not been cut back. I am not a criminal in either a track suit or a pinstriped suit although I have worn both these types of clothing at one time or other. I am not a movie or TV producer. I do not watch very much TV or movies but I have certainly seen strong women characters, young, middle-aged or old, while most male characters, especially older men, are portrayed as bumbling idiots. Not all, but most.

I am neither a psyco nor a newspaper editor, and obviously not a bimbo. How can a bimbo remain a virgin? A bimbo and a slut are much the same kind of person except that a bimbo is usually lacking in intelligence also. I never use either term nor do I think about women by either term. I have used the word "slut" in some of my stories but it is a woman asking about herself or someone talking nasty to enhance sexual pleasure.

I know there are women who have breast augmentation or reduction, liposuction, face lifts and other plastic surgery. There are also men who have some of these surgeries as well as men who take steroids to bulk up their bodies. I have never done any of these things and I never will. Now I am reading about women who have parts of their feet removed so they can wear stylish shoes, and these women are extremely foolish and short-sighted.

I have drooled and jerked off over photos of women in Playboy and similar magazines but not for a long time. I'm aware that breast augmentation has been going on since the sixties and before that there were falsies but I ceertainly do not approve of such operations. Actresses and models might have these operations done for professional reasons but otherwise, they probably do more harm than good. Even so, breast augmentation usually produces no real harm but the surgeries described earlier in this thread, where women have parts of their feet removed in order to wear high-heeled, narrow-toed shoes, cause permanent damage. A women with silicone implants might very well attract shallow men, even if they know about the implants. However, I believe that if a man finds out that a woman has crippled herself to wear a certain style of shoes, he will consider her to be a nut case and want nothing to do with her.

I certainly don't believe that looking sexy will cause a woman to be raped although acting sexy might. It wouldn't excuse the man but it might be a contributing factor, like a robbery victim who leaves his windows open. I think of rape as being primarily a crime of violence, perpetrated by men who hate women, and the looks of the victim have little or nothing to do with it, unless the rapist singles out women who fit a certain description.

I don't praise male sexuality; I envy men who enjoy success with women. I realize there is something of a double standard regarding male and female sexuality but it is, fortunately, eroding. Women are the ones mainly supporting it. Most men would really love to have women as freely willing and available to have casual sex as men are, that is, sex for fun, with romance having nothing to do with anything.

I do believe in "My country, right or wrong", but I also know the United States has its faults as well as its virtues. Even so, if I had the choice to live anywhere in the world, I would choose to live right where I am, although in a better house. Since there are millions of people immiigrating into the United States, or trying to immigrate there, I am apparently not alone in this belief. This brings up a question I want to ask now. How many people are trying to immigrate to your homeland?

I'm aware there are some very obese people in the United States, as there are in all developed nations. I am also aware there are some crackpots in the United States, as there are all over, who believe in some of the most inane ideas imaginable. In this country, with its history of freedom of expression, etc., these crackpots are allowed to express their opinions, and they do have a few advocates. Although they nmight do some damage, the authority to stifle dissent would do a lot more harm.

Now, to summarize, although I have been some of the things you mention, I am no longer any of them. Since I am aware that such people and attitudes exist, I am not in denial. Therefore, I would have to say that I am "None of the above".

Wills, I see you agre that female circucision is illegal. As for the operations that you mention, if they are intended to enhance sexual enjoyment, they are nothing like the procedures Svenskaflicka has been writing about, which are intended to eliminate female sexual enjoyment.

 

[Guest]

Re: What Am I

I do believe there are women who do foolish thngs and get raped because of them.

That's it. I will read no further, and am going to ignore you from now on. No more benefits of doubt. You anger and offend me deeply. I force myself now to leave off.

Perdita

 

[destinie21]

Box,

your posts are filled with contridictions.

 

[Wills]

Circumscision, or Female Genital Mutilation is only illegal for minors, under 18, that is why it is being carried out in so many hospitals for 'cosmetic reasons'. Private hospitals in the US perform FGM because people pay them to do so.

You can find lists of 'willing surgeons' some indicating ethnic heritage to ensure the operation is conducted by the right ethnic group. Some indicate their speciality, clitoral hood removal, labia reduction, the only thing that is missing is the price tag.

I too will contribute no more. I just wanted the facts to be correctly stated.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Perdita, you are quoting me out of context.

If a person does foolish things and puts himself or herself at risk, that person is rightly criticized. If I park my car on a side street with the windows open and the key plainly in the ignition, and it is stolen, I will be a victim of car theft but I will be critidicized for making it so easy. If I go to a bar in a sleazy neighborhood and flash a lot of money, and get mugged, I will be a victim but I will be criticized for putting myself so much at risk. If I leave the windows of my house open, and I am burglarized, I am a victim but I will be criticized for making it easy for the burglar. In these instances, the victims are considered to have contributed to their victimhood and they would be soundly chastised by the judge at the trial of the criminals, if such trial ever occurs.

If women do foolish things such as I described in my last post, and get raped, it does not excuse the rapist, and he belongs in prison, but the victim should also be subject to criticism for putting themselves at such risk, just as other victims of crimes are criticized for making it easy on the criminals.

 

[Svenskaflicka]

OK, that's it.

My Ignore List just got another member.

 

[Mhari]

I'm with Perdita and Svenska on this one.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Circumcision

Wills said:

Circumscision, or Female Genital Mutilation is only illegal for minors, under 18, that is why it is being carried out in so many hospitals for 'cosmetic reasons'. Private hospitals in the US perform FGM because people pay them to do so.

You can find lists of 'willing surgeons' some indicating ethnic heritage to ensure the operation is conducted by the right ethnic group. Some indicate their speciality, clitoral hood removal, labia reduction, the only thing that is missing is the price tag.

What you are describing has almost nothing in common with what Svenskaflicka means. She is referring to operations performed on children, usually without their consent, and frequently under unsaniutary conditions. The operations usually involve the removal of the clitoris and much of the labia and the purpose is so the girls will never enjoy sexual intercourse. You are describing minor surgeries on adults for cosmetic purposes and/or to help the women enjoy sex more. I totally agree with Svenskaflicka that this mutilation ius a barbaric practice and should be stopped and outlawed. I don't know what gives her the impression that I disagree with her.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Well, if you're going to blame men for women's fashions, at least blame gay men. They seem to be the only ones who know or care about fashion. I personally don't know many guys who give much of a damn about women's footwear or have any idea of where hemlines are this year. Usually if her clothes are reasonably clean that's good enough. I've certainly never run from a woman because her shoes weren't right on time.

It's a lot more common for a man to catch shit for not noticing women's clothes than for noticing that her shoes are a year out of style.

---dr.M.

 

[destinie21]

If women do foolish things such as I described in my last post, and get raped, it does not excuse the rapist, and he belongs in prison, but the victim should also be subject to criticism for putting themselves at such risk, just as other victims of crimes are criticized for making it easy on the criminals.

Guess I got raped for being too sexy

Jackass.

 

[raphy]

Box, I'd quit while I was behind, if I was you..

Trust me, that's the head of the camel. You're lucky all those women put you on ignore, or you're gonna find the entire fuckin' camel in the tent faster than you can say 'Multiple rapist' and then there won't be no gettin' it back out.

A woman (or a man) should be allowed to wear whatever she (or he) wants without fear of being raped.

So here's a bit of friendly advice for ya. Feel free to disregard at your own risk.

Let it drop. Now.