It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sexist Female Oppression? Cleavage In The Workplace

page: 45
24
<< 42  43  44    46  47  48 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Annee
 


and that explains lips too? i think it's just anywhere there's a sensitive spot, is construed as sexual and therefore evil. but we have specific hang ups vs. some cultures that pretty much think the entire female should be off limits, visually and even audibly


Where did this Evil come from? I don't get it.

As my hobby is cultural/social anthropology - - I am fully aware of changes and differences of cultural turn ons over the centuries.

One modern one is the Playboy Centerfold. As we (our society) becomes more health/athletic conscious - - the voluptuous women is being pushed aside for the more lean and physically fit female body.

As intelligence becomes more desirable then pumping out babies - - the interest in wide hips (baby makers) diminishes.

But I've never met a man who wasn't turned on by boobs.




posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Dark Ghost
 


extreme yes, but entire nations are following this stuff.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


And that's because of religion, not misogyny or conspiracies against women.

Pick your battles.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Traydor
 


you said



remember you ARE just a number in the workplace and VERY replaceable so you shouldn't push it.


do i or do i not, fit under the heading "you" in your sentence? if i do, then how should i translate your reference? i don't think you're a number. i wouldn't view you as VERY replaceable. and i wouldn't expect you to not voice your concerns if you thought something was awry, nor suggest that such discussion could result in you pushing yourself right out of a job (as if i didn't have any responsibility in the decision to fire you in the first place.) .



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Brood
reply to post by undo
 


And that's because of religion, not misogyny or conspiracies against women.

Pick your battles.


Thanks. I was gonna mention that.

Religion is a whole different discussion.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Brood
 


no that's a government policy
which is applied at the business level as well.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Brood
 


no that's a government policy
which is applied at the business level as well.


Are you talking about countries who's government is Religion?

That is selective and really does not apply to this particular discussion - - in my opinion.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


moral code = law. we have moral codes/laws too. same old same old. only difference is, our laws are based on many philosophical and religious constructs, not just one



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


Sorry but I find this topic ridiculous. Why is there even a question on whether women should be allowed to display titties in a work environment.

I LOVE breasts, and I enjoy my wife's breasts, or some others their girlfriends' breasts, and if you're single you can always go to a strip club and see some breasts or go to a nudist beach.

But excessive cleavage in a workplace is about as necessary as men wearing Speedos around the office.


Khar



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Kharron
 


define excesssive. begin when ready. take into consideration different views of what is and isn't excessive .now revisit the question of the op.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Annee
 


moral code = law. we have moral codes/laws too. same old same old. only difference is, our laws are based on many philosophical and religious constructs, not just one


I don't get it.

What does that have to do with breasts being sexual - - and disrupting production if overtly exposed in mixed company.

This really isn't a philosophical discussion.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


lips are sexual in perception and nature, to the same degree as breasts. we aren't expected to cover them (yet). so i'm thinking we've just over glamorized boobs. mystified them too much, and this has caused all the stress on the subject.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:36 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Kharron
 


define excesssive. begin when ready. take into consideration different views of what is and isn't excessive .now revisit the question of the op.


Would you define what would be excessive if I wore Speedos to work? You might see my shape? Would that offend you, or perhaps excite you?
Are either of these reactions even a slight bit necessary for us to do our daily jobs?

How about we don't define what excessive is and stick to normal work attire. If any woman wants to display her 'assets' at work or a man show his endowment while at work, I'm sure the Showgirls and the Chippendales are hiring.


Khar
edit on 21-12-2010 by Kharron because: tyops



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by etcorngods

Originally posted by Annee
.... I am not the office gossipy type - - and I go to the bathroom alone. I've actually had women get mad at me because I wouldn't gossip.



You have trouble keeping your mouth shut on this Forum. Never saw a woman who could keep their mouth shut.


This is a forum for discussion. This is not a gossip site.

Your issue with women - - is YOUR issue. That you feel the need to transfer YOUR issue to me - - only reflects on YOUR own self worth or lack there of.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


Again you think this is all about you, where did you get such a large ego? If i was referring to you specifically then i would have done one of the following two things:

A) I would have typed your user name, or:

B) I would have replied to one of your many posts (like i'm doing now)

....so because i did not do any of this is because.....? No, you probably won't get it so i'll spell it out for you. It's because it have nothing to do with you. There. Now that has been cleared up please xplain why you think i was threatening you? You should not be making false accusations against people based on nothing, it's disgusting and makes you out to be a trouble maker and destroys any of your credibility.

Oh and FYI, 'VERY replaceable' means people can be fired from the workplace and someone else is hired to do your job in your place. Before you get angry because i'm not showing you respect is because you lost any respect when you made a false accusation.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Annee
 


lips are sexual in perception and nature, to the same degree as breasts. we aren't expected to cover them (yet). so i'm thinking we've just over glamorized boobs. mystified them too much, and this has caused all the stress on the subject.


Why do you keep deflecting from breasts?

Lips have a function. Both men and women have lips. Of course they can be enhanced to emphasize sexual want - - as can eyes - - hair - - etc.

I know you are going to respond that men have breasts. Yes - - but they do not have monkey butts.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Kharron
 


k, your shape is down there. women have a down there shape too. we aren't talking about the down there shape. we're talking about the chest area, mammary gland cleavage, (men have mammary glands too, they just don''t accept the chemicals from the pituitary that would cause them to increase in size)

i know this subject borders on silly, and that the answer is so obvious for our culture, at this time (keep it covered), it's just such a touchy subject due to the potential abuses involved in curtailing it or allowing it. i've been arguing in opposition to the extreme censoring of cleavage, but even that is interpreted locally by each individual. two different bosses could see the same neckline and have totally different views on its decency, even inside well defined parameters. in the op, she established there was no dress code, so you could interpret it locally for yourself.

it's just a matter of being able to see all sides of an issue (and believe me, i'm an extremely conservative, right wing fundie christian. but i also have some common sense and compassion for other people's situations.)
edit on 21-12-2010 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:56 PM
link   
I was trying to place this post elsewhere, so sorry, new to the site. Must study more.


edit on 21-12-2010 by angelwrangler because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo

i know this subject borders on silly, and that the answer is so obvious for our culture, at this time (keep it covered), it's just such a touchy subject due to the potential abuses involved in curtailing it or allowing it.


I do not see this subject as touchy at all.

I see it as flat out logical. If something disrupts production - - then it needs to be avoided.

There is No Personal - - in producing for profit.



new topics




 
24
<< 42  43  44    46  47  48 >>

log in

join