http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/montana-lawmaker-moves-ban-yoga-pants-article-1.2111137
David Moore, a Montana law maker, is seeking to strengthen the state's indecent exposure laws. The new law would consider ANY nipple exposure indecent (yes, guys, you have to put a shirt on) and it would outlaw clothing that "gives the appearance or simulates a person's buttocks, genitals, pelvic area, or female nipple." This means tight fitting clothes could be considered indecent exposure, which includes yoga pants. To this Moore said "Yoga pants should be illegal in public anyway." And all of this was started by a bunch of nude bicyclers who participated in an even called Bare As You Dare in Missoula in August. Nice work, guys.
It seems to me that this whole debate about how much clothing people should be wearing stems from the perception that bodies are inherently sexual and should be hidden (this is especially prevalent when talking about women's bodies, but that's a debate for another day.) Say it with me everyone: bodies are not inherently sexual. Why are we so ashamed of something literally everyone has? Why do we see the forms God gave us as disgusting? Human bodies are beautiful. Have you ever watched a dancer? Or stopped to watch someone's hands while they work? Or watched athletes showing off their fitness? People are just as amazing as anything else in nature, and we are a part of nature. Our bodies are no different from the bodies of cheetahs or bears or fish or birds. We're all just built for different things. People need to stop freaking out about tight clothes and worry more about the nude bicyclers, because anyone who puts their bare flesh against a metal contraption moving at high speeds during the hottest month of the year has GOT to be crazy.
I think London has a very good point in regard to the nude bicyclers. They were obviously crazy! I think that making yoga pants illegal might be taking things a little too far because people should be able to decide whether they want to wear form-fitting clothes or not. While I don't usually wear tight clothes like leggings by themselves out in public, I still think I should have the option to wear them if I really want to. I agree that people are too focused on the sexuality of our bodies rather than the amazing things that they can do.
ReplyDelete(London, reading your blogs has to be one of my favorite parts of the week.) I seriously agree with the last sentence! I also think that we shouldn't be banning certain types of clothes-- too much danger of being too specific or offensive if we go there. And God did make everyone beautiful-- not for us to go flaunting, but to show off His creation and reflect His beauty in a modest way.
ReplyDeleteAlright, I agree that the indecent exposure law for Montana should probably be strengthened for people who decide go out into the public TOTALLY nude. But a man's upper body being indecent exposure? That is ridiculous. Guys are going to have wear t-shirts while they swim now? How will basketball teams practice without shirts vs. skins? I may be a bit biased on this part, but this part of the bill is pushing a bit too far. In the summer when it's hot outside, I run shirtless. It doesn't hurt anyone, and it cools my body down. This ties into London's point about bodies not being inherently sexual. This lawmaker's bill is an overreaction to a bizarre and irregular event.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletefor some reason my comment posted twice, hence the delete
ReplyDeleteWell said London! I agree with everything you said, but at least Montana is moving in this direction instead of letting people choose what bathroom they want to use like we talked about earlier this week. Looks like people are crazy to both extremes.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYEAH LONDON. I guess going to Montana to streak is coming off of my bucket list (just kidding... I'm going anyway). On a serious note though, I think this is absolutely rediculous. Human bodies are beautiful, and I think this law should be removed.
ReplyDelete