Ingraham praised a Utah high school for not letting several girls attend a homecoming dance because their dresses were “immodest.” Ingraham stated that the teens looked much older because of their clothing choices, and in order to prevent things like objectification and date rape, we should “start with the way we appear in public.”
“These are still girls. There are probably young women, probably 9th or 10th grade. And at the same time we’re worried about date rape. At the same time we’re worried about misogynistic behavior or making comments about peoples’ appearances and bullying and all these other things. How about start with the way we appear in public. The way we treat people. How we speak to them. The language we use. And I’m sure a lot of these girls that dress this way, I’m sure they don’t know any better.
If we are trying to remind people that it’s what’s inside that counts, your heart, your spirit, the whole person. Let’s really ensure that the first thing a young boy sees in a girl is not her cleavage, or, you know, her pubic area because her skirt is so short.”
29 comments
Would have been so much easier and faster to just say "she was asking for it". An argument which is always triply depressing to see coming from women.
The girls were wearing dresses. Not attempting to run naked through the auditorium with only belts of condoms wrapped around their chests like ammo. It's not on them if some asshole decides to fucking rape them. Rapists do not have a union. They do not have some standard checklist of requirements that a potential target has to meet in order to qualify for attack. Their only requirements are that they be horny and their target be vulnerable. You could be wearing sweatpants and a parka and you'd be at just as much risk.
Do we go to great pains making sure every male is well-covered-up?
Rather than jeopardising people's freedom to wear what they wish, why don't we do something effective like telling everyone that rape is not a good thing? Or like telling women that it's not their fault that they were raped?
@#1715996
Goomy pls
"Or like telling women that it's not their fault that they were raped?"
Or teaching them Krav Maga before that happens?
Regards & all,
Thomas L. Nielsen
Luxembourg
Laura Ingrahm: "Let’s really ensure that the first thing a young boy sees in a girl is not her cleavage, or, you know, her pubic area because her skirt is so short."
Someone else: "Plus, we should encourage parents of boys to raise them to think that no matter how revealing a girl's outfit, she still deserves respect; it's NOT OK to treat her like a walking sex toy!"
Laura Ingrahm (outraged): "Demand of parents that they EMASCULATE *their own sons*???? Most certainly not!!!"
Whats up with religion and covering up women? It still amazes the fuck out of me why ANY self respecting women would believe in the major monotheistic religions.
Religion says, women are dirty when they have their periods, they're supposed to submit to their husbands, they're supposed to be virgins to their husbands, they're not allowed to hold positions of power, etc..
While men can go around looking like almost whatever they damn well please. And even if some men dress a certain way people get butthurt.
People just need to calm down and stop caring about this shit that doesn't really matter, if somebody wants to dress half naked then let them dress half naked, if someone wants to cover their entire body then let them. Its not that hard ffs.
Aside from the obvious sexism of the whole thing, as usual, Ingraham is talking out of her ass without knowing the facts. The girls weren't wearing particularly short or revealing dresses; the real outrage came from the fact that the "code" was not equally enforced; some girls were sent away while others with equally or more revealing dresses were allowed to stay.
Article:
http://news.msn.com/us/dress-code-enforcement-draws-parent-student-ire
My mother was in her Navy nurse uniform when she was sexually abused by a co-worker. Was that uniform too "immodest"?
How about when she was nine years old and was molested by a priest (a trusted pillar of her community, by the way, who extorted her into not telling her parents about his crime until she was 38 and had children of her own, while he continued to serve the community until he died)? Was she wearing a slutty outfit then, too?
The only thing I hate more than rapists: rape victim-blamers.
If it were up to me, I'd ship all the rapists (and their apologists) to some remote island, where their victims get to hunt them (like the animals and lesser life forms they are) on the backs of elephants.
I hate to say it but, particularly when compared to some other things that Laura Ingrahm has said, this isn't especially fundamentalist. I'm all in favour of a reasonable dress code in schools.
Now if what people are saying in the comments is true, and the girls weren't dressed especially revealingly--or worse yet, the code wasn't evenly applied--then there's clearly a problem with the staff at the school. But the comment itself doesn't strike me as especially bad.
"If we are trying to remind people that it’s what’s inside that counts, your heart, your spirit, the whole person. Let’s really ensure that the first thing a young boy sees in a girl is not her cleavage, or, you know, her pubic area because her skirt is so short."
If you're trying to remind people that it's what's inside that counts, then the first step should be... to teach people that it's what's inside that counts. Trying to force people's outer appearance to conform to what you've arbitrarily decided is acceptable is the exact opposite of your stated intention.
No school board, it's your job to ensure rape doesn't happen by creating a secure environment, not blaming it on the girls dress. I absolutely hate adults who blame their failures on damn children. Get off your ass, do your fucking job, and we wouldn't need to worry about this problem!
Ms. Ingrahm, your argument insults both women AND men; the former because of you imply that dressing 'scantily' is asking for sexual harassment, and the latter because you insinuate they're mindless beasts that lose all decency and self control as soon as they see bare skin. And you have the gall to say you believe 'what's inside counts?'
Obviously, the rapist or harasser is always guilty, because they are the one committing a crime and hurting people out of a lack of self control. Case in point; if you are wearing a diamond necklace on the street and get attacked by a mugger, are you to blame for flaunting such expensive jewellery in public? If yes, should people just not bring any valuables outside at all so no one feels compelled to steal?
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.